Rock M Roundtable!

(I'm posting this in diaries so as not to interfere with the game thread...was really slow in copy-pasting this one...)

1 - Mizzou over Texas: turning point, or simply proof that when you don't miss shots, you don't lose.

2 - Does Mizzou have a chance against Kansas this weekend with the way KU's playing right now?  Okay, let me rephrase--of course they have a chance...technically they always have a chance.  So tell me why Mizzou has a chance against Kansas.

3 - So Georgia President Michael Adams' proposal for an 8-team football playoff got immediately brushed aside as a "conference issue" by the NCAA Board of Directors this past week...that was kind of expected.  What we don't really know is what will happen when the conference leaders meet in April.  It appears that everybody's relatively open to the idea except the Big 10 and Pac-10, who both think the Rose Bowl is more important than a fairly-crowned national champ.  Is there any chance of progress here, or will people just cater to the Rose Bowl Bloc?

4 - Do the defections of OU's Curtis Lofton and Reggie Smith change your 2008 football forecast?

5 - Prediction time...first of all, Mizzou @ ISU.

Now for this weekend's games...OSU @ ISU.  ATM @ KSU.  Tech @ OU.  Baylor @ NU.  CU @ UT (duh).  KU @ MU.

mizzourobot: 1 - Column A, Column B.  The fact is that we wore them down, that's what I'm most impressed with. 40 minutes of hell is supposed to do that, but you have to have the endurance and talent to do that.  Hitting big shots is important, too, but if we can just get a few more good teams to do that, we can make the tournament.

2 -  Not this weekend. Too good, too fast, too talented, too well-coached. If we can get them in the first or second round of the tournament, though...

3 -  People will cater to the Rose Bowl Bloc (Party).  Even though both conferences are a joke that should be relegated to playing each other in some sort of Division 1 B-League Championship, there's too much history and tradition and blah blah blah for them to change anything. We're not dealing with pure businessmen. We're dealing with businessmen trying to disguise themselves as guardians of academic athletic standards. Which is crap. But that's how it is.

4 -  Our chances keep getting better and better. My actual hope is that Texas gets better (but not better than us), steals a win against OU in the Shootout, and barely sneaks into the Big 12 Championship thanks to another letdown loss by OU in the late season.  Then we get Texas in the Big 12 Championship, beat them like they stole something, win the national championship, and rename 9th Street "Pinkel Street". Done. (Just imagine students checking out French documentaries from "Pinkel Street Video." HA!)

5 - Mizzou 67-ISU 58

OSU 78 ISU 65
ATM 81 KSU 60
TT 71 OU 69
Baylor 68 NU 65
UT 88 CU 73
KU 88 MU 66

The Beef: 1 - Moreso the latter than the former.  But, I fear that discounts the effort and the potential magnitude of the win, so I will play it a little more to the middle.  However, a lot of that gets flushed away with a loss to ISU.  The kU game, rivalry game as it is, is a throw-away game of sorts.  Win it and you are sitting REALLY well, but you are not out anything for losing it.  Starting 2-1 against those three puts Mizzou in a better position, not a great position still, but a better one given how their non-con went.

2 - I don’t believe Mizzou has MUCH of a chance, but they always have a chance against kansas.  I have not seen too much of kansas this season, really only against Arizona in their home OT win.  I am gathering they have played better since then J.  Mizzou has a chance because the game is at home, there should be a good crowd on hand (though I don’t think it is a sell out and there will CERTAINLY be more blue in the arena than we are accustomed to.  But, a win tonight against ISU keeps the momentum going, and Mizzou always has a shot to win if Matt Lawrence goes Miss. St on someone.  If Keon is hitting shots and we don’t turn the ball over too much, we can be right there.

3 - No chance of progress, plain and simple.  I am sure Atch knows more about the why there wont be progress, but there just wont be any.  College football, the conferences, the bowls, all of them, made this bed...kinda like having the babysitter tuck you in and pull the sheets back under the bed, makes it real tough to get out....what...that never happened to anyone else?  Anyway, the presidents feel there is some sort of academic reason holding back a playoff (an argument I like seeing, except it does not fit in football), and the Big 10 and Pac 10 are strong enough to hold this up...and why wouldn’t they?  They make the money and it is as simple as that...well...it is probably more complex than that...but nothing is going to change, especially on the heels of a season that while everyone recognizes as odd, also are now recognizing as a likely outlier.

4 - They do not change my forecast, which was OU at #1 until we beat them...but I think it narrows the gap a LITTLE bit.  However, only losing one WR (and no one from the Oline), getting a healthy RB back and Bradford returning does not change their offense barely at all, and I have to believe their defense has some people waiting to fill the gaps.  And while they will not FULLY fill the shoes of those guys, they will fill them enough that I see OU still being picked ahead of us in most cases come the preseason.

5 - I will take Mizzou over ISU....I know ISU has young guards, so as long as Hannah does not pick up ticky tack fouls early, we should be OK against them....this team HAS won up there, so that is good as well.

Will take OSU, who surprised me, even at home over ISU...will take aTm over kSU in what I think will be a great game between those bigs down low, will take OU to bounce back at home, will take Baylor on the road, will take UT and will take kU over MU.

rptgwb: 1 - I think that remains to be seen. Had the game been in Austin, I would almost certainly lean towards turning point, but Mizzou has always had the capacity to catch teams off guard when they come to Columbia. If anything, the game just confirmed what we already suspected - that without a lot of inside presence and "free" points, this team is in trouble if shots aren't falling. Those shots were falling at an alarming rate, and it just happened to be Texas that got burned. What they do with this newfound confidence and momentum will tell the story of the season.

2 - Why does Mizzou have a chance? Because each team is putting five men on the floor, I guess? I really don't have a good feeling about this one - Kansas is in another league right now, and if they survive a tough trip to Reed Arena in College Station, I think KU has a legitimate shot to go undefeated. Mizzou's best weapon against Kansas this weekend? Home court. Mizzou Arena needs to be packed, loud, and ready to go. That said, even with the sixth man behind Mizzou, I still don't like the Tigers' chances. It sounds ridiculous, but 6-on-5 may not even be enough to slow that KU machine.

3 - The only way progress will be made is if the other conferences align to get something done, and if the Pac-10 and Big 10 sit out and pout about the Rose Bowl, then you let them leave the money at the table. The idea would likely create split national championships for a few years, but if the big guns - USC, Ohio State, and Michigan - all start getting ignored for title shots in Playoff because they're tied to the Rose Bowl, don't you think the conferences would start to listen after awhile? When the conferences are leaving money and the athletic departments and university presidents begin to feel like their best interests aren't at the conference's heart, that's when the real drive for change can occur. But just sitting here trying to get everyone on board with the 8-team idea is a lesson in futility with the Rose Bowl Jihadists acting the way they are.

4 - Curtis Lofton's loss is huge for the Sooners, and Reggie Smith - despite his complete lack of common sense returning punts - was one of the premier corners in the Big 12 South. I'd say this changes my outlook, but here's the thing: Oklahoma just reloads. Behind Smith and Lofton were likely just more highly rated, highly decorated, highly athletic young guys raring to get their shot. What's amazing is that last year was supposed to be OU's off year. Sam Bradford will continue to improve, the offensive line hasn't gone anywhere, the running game will still be stout, and the defense will be fast and physical.

5 - No scores because, well, I have no idea.
MU > ISU
OSU > ISU
ATM > KSU
TT < OU
BU > NU
CU <UT <br>KU > MU

Here's something else I wanted to throw out:

There's been a lot of Tigerboard talk and random smoke-blowing on the boards about potential changes in uniforms (mmm... offseason). Where would you all stand on any changes to the uniform? Plus, if you had to make a change and have to make a suggestion for both a subtle change AND a radical change for consideration, what you say?

The Beef: Wow...I cannot believe we are going to engage in this one :-)

First things first...let me tell you where I stand on uniforms as a whole.

Penn State have the best uniforms around.

With that in mind, I don't know what you change.  I like where they have come, both from a design standpoint and a merchandising standpoint through Nike.  So I would be against changing the uniforms.

As for small or large changes....I don't really know.  The only thing I would love to do is match the gold on the helmets to the gold everywhere else, but I know that will never happen.  If I HAD to make a change...I guess I would not change the helmet, because reversing the black and gold would make the fact that our golds don't match REALLY obvious.  The only change I could suggest then would be gold jerseys, which again, would accentuate the fact that our colors are not the same.  I am fine with the switching around of black and gold pants with white and black tops.

So in the end, I am going to answer your stinkin question....so there!!

mizzourobot: GOLD PANTS

Don't care how ugly they are. Our winning percentage along justifies them.

No, I'm not superstitious. Why do you ask?

ZouDave: 1 - It's a little bit of both, but way more on the "don't miss shots, you don't lose" side.  The confidence it will give this team can't be measured, but if we don't at least compete with kansas on Saturday and beat Iowa State tonight and win at least one of the road games next week then that confidence will be lost.  It was a very nice win, and it's great that we're scoring well right now (96.5 ppg last week) but the lasting affects remain to be seen and I'm just still not convinced we're that good.

2 - Mizzou has a chance for the same reason Mizzou had a chance in 1997:  Sometimes your team just wants it that much more.  Is it a good chance?  Of course not.  We're not better at any position, and we're not better in the coaching dept.  Our style of play goes right at ku's strengths.  But Mizzou Arena is going to be going crazy, I'm guessing there will be some kind of "honoring" of the football team before the game (there should be anyway) and it might just be "that game".  We have a chance because we're at home and we know that winning THIS game would be the turning point in the season.  Starting off conference play by taking down 2 ranked teams would be nothing short of magical.

3 - The SEC and Big XII need to speak up and speak loudly.  The SEC carries more weight than anyone in college football, though it is followed closely by the Big Ten and Pac-10.  If the SEC and Big XII powers that be were to band together against the Big Ten and Pac-10, they could pull the ACC, Big East and all of the other conferences together.  They should use the example from this year's Rose Bowl as a reason why the current system just simply can't work, because the Rose Bowl is only in it for themselves and will not be acting in the best interests of the coalition.  But if the Big Ten and Pac-10 stick to their guns, there's no way the other conferences try to do anything without them.  I guess maybe they do carry as much power as they think they do.  I freaking hate the Rose Bowl.  I've never watched that stupid parade and never will, until Mizzou is in it anyway.

4 - Maybe.  It doesn't change my feeling at all on the regular season as far as Mizzou is concerned because obviously we don't play them.  I still think OU is good enough to beat kansas so I don't expect that to change either.  Really, since my expectations for Mizzou next season are to lose no more than 1 game in the regular season and reach the Big XII Title game, I have to reserve all expectations beyond that for when it happens.  There's no way I can say right now that I expect us to beat OU in December of next season when I have no clue what either team will look like.  As long as we're in the Conference Title game again, and are competing for a shot at the National Title again, then we'll have met my expectations.

5 - Mizzou will beat ISU, but it will be close.  It will come down to free throws, and we will hit them.

OSU at ISU - no clue.  Let's go with ISU because they are first in the alphabet.
aTm at KSU - good game here.  Great opportunity for KSU to show they've got what it takes this year.  I'll go KSU in a squeaker, much like their OU win.
Tech at OU - OU in a walk.
Baylor at NU - Baylor.
CU at UT - Texas rebounds nicely.
ku at MU - I think kansas wins by 12-ish.  Not a drubbing, but not close.

The Boy: I've seen this conversation too many times on Tigerboard ("They're wearing gold-on-gold this weekend!  I swear!") to take it seriously, but then again, I'm one of the roughly 12 people who actually really like the black-on-black unis.  Call it "arena league" all you want (and plenty of old-schoolers still do...and still will 15 years from now), but it's sharp.  I don't mind going white-on-gold for the road unis--as Robot said, the record justifies it, lol--but let's not change too much.

1 - The shooting was a little too good for me to think that this was some sort of statement or turning point.  Everything was going in, and while that was fun to watch, I've seen too many poor shooting performances this year to be sold.  But robot's right--Mizzou wore Texas down, and it was strangely enough with a tough zone, not the press.  It proved a lot about Mike Anderson's resourcefulness (he's not married to the press), and that was encouraging too.  As I said after the game, I guess all the win proved to me was that it's a bit more possible to get to 10-6 than it was before.  And yes...a loss at Hilton would completely stuff that momentum.  It would be like breaking your opponent's serve in tennis, then immediately having him break you back.

2 - Corey Tate!  Actually, I'd say that Beef already nailed the key to this game: turnovers.  Mizzou has to force them and avoid them.  KU's guards aren't always on in the shooting department, but they're ridiculous defenders and good at ball control.  If the crowd is uncomfortably loud and MU makes some plays early, that might disorient them a bit.  Then again, last year's game kind of scarred me--Mizzou couldn't have played any better for the first few minutes, and KU absorbed the blow and knocked them out immediately.  That was a mentally stronger team than the ones Mizzou upset in the late-'90s, and their main cogs (in the backcourt, anyway) are back this season.  And they absolutely dismantled a decent OU team the other night.  I actually enjoy this game a lot more when I come in expecting a loss (like last year's game in Lawrence) instead of some statement win (like last year's game in Columbia), so I'm going to say that our chances are minimal at best--their guards are just too good at playing the game we want to play.

3 - The Big Ten and Pac-10 have the tradition, but the SEC has momentum.  I don't expect anything to happen this year (these people fear change more than my cat does, and he freaks out and pukes if you go to BED earlier than normal), but sentiment (and plenty of money) is on the side of the SEC, and that's a good thing for playoff proponents.  As Red said, "Geology is the study of pressure and time.  That's all it takes, really."  Both of those factors are on the side of at least a Plus One...it just means we have to deal with a few more years of websites running "simulated playoffs" first...

4 - Let's put it this way: without Smith and Lofton, OU probably wouldn't have beaten Mizzou in Norman this past October.  I know, I know...ifs, buts, candy, nuts, etc.  But this really does set their defense back a notch or two.  And even though their offense remains intact (mostly...I'm not sold on Iglesias as a major threat without Kelly lining up across from him), it was their defense that beat Mizzou twice this year.  By my count, OU will only return 4 starters now, and they'll be thin in the secondary.  These are both very good things for Mizzou.  That said...I don't mind OU being rated #1 in the conference until Mizzou proves they can beat them.

5 - I realize that Mizzou winning at Hilton last year doesn't automatically mean it's going to happen again (after all, ISU won in Columbia last year, and we don't expect that to happen again), but I really do like the matchups here.  ISU's weaknesses play right into MU's strengths, so I say MU > ISU by 8.

ISU > OSU by 6 (I'm picking the home team in every OSU game this season)
KSU > ATM by 3
OU > Tech by 10 (the loss of Griffin REALLY hurts OU, but I really don't think Tech is very good right now)
NU > BU by 4 (BU's taken two steps forward...it's time for one step back)
UT > CU by 100
KU > MU by 12

I will also mention that it appears the biggest sticking point in the playoff discussion really does seem to be that the Rose Bowl Bloc doesn't want seeding to affect it.  So there really might be room for talks to grow if they just, say, allow the Rose Bowl to be Big Ten/Pac-10 and seed the other 6 teams, 1v6, 2v5, 3v4.  If The Rose Bowl Bloc wants to screw one of its teams out of reaching even the semis, that works for me.

mizzourobot: I'd like to nominate that for the "Bill Simmons Award For Best Use Of A Shawshank Redemption Quote In Sports" of 2008.

ZouDave: Ah, the prestigious BSAfBUoaSRQIS.

The Boy: Thank you, thank you...I'd like to start off by thanking Bill Simmons...who has made it impossible to even think of certain movies (Shawshank, Hoosiers, Rocky I-XVIII) without at least subconsciously referencing him in some way...I'd also like to thank Andy Dufresne, for his inspiring trip from poo to glory...

The Beef: Well done...Zero to Poo in 8 responses I think...well done

ZouDave: I'll echo Seth's sentiments here in that the only thing I would change if I were in charge would be to pick a "gold" and go with it.  I don't care if it's the more yellow-ish gold that our GOLD PANTS! are right now or if it's the more traditional old gold that the website says is the official color but just pick one and use that.

I do not WANT to see gold helmets, but about 3 minutes into the 1st quarter I would forget about them until the 4th quarter when we were up by 24 and the game didn't matter anymore.  Gold jerseys rank somewhere around the helmets, in that I don't care to see them but if we have them I will stop noticing after the first score of the game.  Gold pants should continue to be brought out for the Gold Rush at home and then our biggest road game of the year.
Gold pants in Austin this year, for sure.

Aside from that, leave Britney alone!  Our black-on-black uniforms look fine, there's nothing remotely resembling Arena League about them (just like our tiger logo in no way resembles ksu's powercat, despite how many people claim it's a replica).  I think the white-on-white on the road looks really sharp.  But I guess the rumor is that Mizzou is switching to Under Armor from Nike?  I would think that would require a change.

I don't know, just play the damn games.  I'm still more worried about getting our fans to wear our colors.

rptgwb: Poo to glory? When did we start talking about Portland's NBA franchise again?

The Boy: Careful about mentioning the Blazers...Beef's been giving me crap about putting Portland links (without appropriate labelling) in the Mizzou Links posts...

(And yes, from now on I'll try to appropriately label my Portland excursions...)

The Beef: The thing is...I remember being around conversations when we went to Nike...the issue with gold is that it is one of few (if perhaps the only) NON uniform color out there.  Meaning, no matter who your provider is (Nike, Adidas, UA, whoever), their golds do not match.  I do not believe Nike carries the same gold as our helmets, and I would hate to have the gold in those replaced with the shade they DO carry.  I could be wrong on this, but I believe that has a lot to do with our issues.

Doug: Damn, I hate getting to these late.  The conversation has always dissolved by the time I get here.

1. Depends on tonight.  Yes, it could very well be a turning point, but as of right now it is simply "shoot 70% in a half, and you're probably not going to lose".  Especially if you're up against Rick Barnes who is just not a very good game coach.

2. Every road game scares me.  All it takes is a couple of quick three's, a turnover, an offensive foul call for the home crowd to get jacked up and the team to go crazy.  That said, I think this KU is about as well built to withstand that sort of thing better than any I've ever seen.  It values the ball on offense, attacks it on defense, gives you headache trying to defend and runs the floor exceptionally well.  Plus, the Jayhawks are not young.  The entire starting five has been through at least one Big 12 road season, as have the top three guys off the bench.  But, ultimately, it comes down to the fact it is Kansas and Missouri and that's all you need to know about what kind of shot the Tigers have on Saturday.

3. The only chance of progress comes when the other conferences decided to leave the Rose Bowl to the Big Ten and Pac 10 and start their own play-off.  That could prove a little challenging, since you would be slicing off some pretty major TV markets with the exclusion of those two conferences, but there would still be a crap-load of money made and within three to four years, you would have significantly marginalized the Rose Bowl.

4. I'll go ahead and say MU, mainly for the reasons Beef mentioned, but look out for their freshman who shot 8 of 10 from behind the arc against Baylor in Waco.

5. Like I said last week, I wasn't sure why I was giving the Big 12 South so much credit... and they came through with flying colors for me.  That said, I'll take, ISU, aTm, OU, Baylor, UT and... hmmm, oh yeah, KU.

Follow up question from me... who has and who doesn't have ESPNU on their TV?

The Beef: I DO have ESPNU, available in STL through Charter Cable and their sports tier.....

The Boy: It will be interesting to see if it gets picked up by ESPN+ for areas that don't have The U...

Doug: Christ, and I thought there were riled up fans when KU wore red jerseys in the Orange Bowl.  Hold on, let me make sure I got that in there.... THE ORANGE BOWL!

Ahem, anyway, I remember when KU was figuring out the official "blue" for the school colors (considering the fact there were sports teams wearing everything from Navy to Royal Blue, not to mention the different departments using different shades of blue on letterhead and logos) and while they did catch a lot of flak, I think it was a smart move.  It makes everything look more, well, uniform.

I don't think it would be too difficult for Nike to make pants using the gold from the helmets, since Adidas managed to make jerseys and pants with the KU blue, even though I'm sure that's not one that was necessarily in their catalog.  Of course, when you're in bed with Nike, you do tend to wind up with their bib jerseys and cookie-cutter pants.

Amd yeah, I'm not sure if it's an NFL Network type of situation or not.

Oh, and pipe down... corporate shill.

rptgwb: I really don't have that much of an issue with our current uniforms. Even though the golds don't match, the black and gold combo worn against Nebraska is a signature look that I don't think most people could confuse with another program, except perhaps maybe Iowa. The all-black looks sharp and it was pretty damn intimidating back when number 16 said "Bd. Smith" above it. The helmet looks outstanding - color, logo, everything.

If I HAD to make changes, here's what I'm looking at:

• If Mizzou switches to Under Armour, I'm not a huge fan of template designs, but look at the red uniform in Pic 1. I'd actually be somewhat excited about the possibility of seeing everything in red become black, and everything in black become gold. With "Mizzou" across the collar and with the black/gold color scheme, I think that'd be pretty intimidating no matter what color pants they wear.
• If I have to make a HUGE switch (and I'm preparing to be skewered by traditionalists), here's what I do (and this is all based on personal preference, not on any modicum of concern about protecting MU tradition or anything). Take a look at Pic 2 at the throwbacks Florida wore last year. I have an unhealthy love of shoulder stripes (a la USC). I'd love to see how that same template would look in black, with white and gold shoulder stripes. Now here's where some people are going to flip out - I'd love to see a mockup of a white helmet (pause for reaction). As a Dallas Cowboy fan (let's not talk about Sunday), I love the simple white alternate helmets the 'Boys have. I'd love to see a mockup of a white helmet with a black stripe surrounded by two gold stripes, and the old time "M" used by the baseball team on the side.

(Attachment doesn’t work)

rptgwb: Sorry - the pics didn't send.

ZouDave: The chances of them sending go up by a factor of 10 when you remember to attach them first...

The Beef: The chances of this getting more and more screwed up increase by 20 when you don't respond in a timely manner

ZouDave: I think he's talking to you, Atch...

The Beef: You think so?  I think I am talking to you there big boy...

The Boy: Yeah, we appear to have an inexcused absence here...YOU MUST CLEAR ALL WEDNESDAY AWAY-FROM-EMAIL ACTIVITIES WITH THE COMMITTEE.

ZouDave: Yes, I know that Gump.  I was attempting to deflect it.  Your subtlety, isn't.

The Beef: Just trying to keep a man honest there... but I believe my email just dinged with Atch's response, so it looks like we drew it out...

By the way...reports are Will Compton announces his decision on Tuesday...predictions?

I say he ends up at Notre Dame to play full back...just because we don't have the position open to him

The Boy: What, Dave?  No picture to illustrate lack of sublety?

ZouDave: Take that!

I am going to believe the talk that Will and his brother want to attend the same college, and his brother is a wrestler so since ND has no wrestling program that rules them out.

I think he remains at NU, just to show that he is his own man and will not be following Gabbert and Kemp like everyone assumed he would.

The Beef: Seriously...where do you come up with this stuff?

Michael Atchison: 1 - Mizzou over Texas: turning point, or simply proof that when you don't miss shots, you don't lose.

I’m not the biggest believer in turning points.  I think there’s good talent on this roster, and I think they played about as well as they can.  It was really a sensational effort, and if they give 90% of that effort the rest of the way, they’ll win 10 or 11 games in the league and make the NCAAs (but it’ll be hard to do that).  There aren’t many nights when D.J. Augustin won’t be the best guard on the floor, but Stefhon Hannah was better than him on Saturday.  As an aside, how about Damion James?  That kid is a beast.

2 - If Kansas plays up to its potential, very few teams in the country have a chance.  Even more than the Texas game, this is one where the Tigers simply have to make shots, because KU’s guards won’t fold under pressure.  Matt Lawrence, time to step up.

3 - The only chance is if the other four big conferences move on without the Big 10 and Pac-10.  Have competing championships for a while and see who blinks.

4 - No.  One football player does not a team make, especially if it’s Oklahoma.  Their great advantage over everyone in the league (except Texas) is the ability to keep rolling great athletes onto the field.

5 - Mizzou  78  ISU  72

ISU  65  OSU 64
A&M  82  KSU  76
OU 74  Tech 59
Baylor  73  NU  62
UT 82  CU 60
KU  89  MU 71

Michael Atchison: OK, so I’ve waded through everything here, and have a couple of responses.

1.  I have ESPNU (Time Warner, Kansas City).

2.  You guys think about uniforms a lot.

And anyone else ever wonder exactly what parts of Seth’s messages consist of "privileged and confidential information" (regarding Seths e-mail signature)?

The Beef: Very little to none of it...other than the fact you should feel privileged to get an email from me...but don’t let anyone know that I emailed you...

ZouDave: Well, I'd have a picture response to that as well but our internet service has gone south so I can't find the picture I need.

And in true IT form, our internet service is down so I'm going to lunch.

(two hours later)

Well, hell, I took a 2 hour lunch and the internet connectivity didn't fix itself.  Now what?

The Boy: Nap time!

The Beef: That is what all good state workers do anyway.

(one hour later)

ZouDave: 3 hours past and still no internet.  It’s like 1993 in here.

The Boy: Sweet...I’m breaking out my flannel and Dinosaur Jr cd’s then!

ZouDave: Didn't we beat Illinois in basketball in 1993?  That's something.  And Larry Smith wasn't even our coach yet.

(two hours later)

ZouDave: oh, uh, by the way...still no internet.  There's some severed fiber some where between Parkville and the Time Warner service provider, and until that is fixed we are SOL.