Anybody wanna buy some chicken wings?

Seems a little strange on the surface. Of course, Harvey School District 152 is following their regular pattern, where they hide, say no comment, and have board members fall in line to not ask questions and repeat the company line. If they didn’t have a list of shenanigans like this, you all wouldn’t have to hear from me 😉.

Chance Poore

Haven't heard whether he's returning but saw we just got a transfer K from Fordham and transfers don't expect to sit. I was excited when CP signed but he's never really been counted on for anything other than kickoffs which he's darn good at. Curious with all the problems we had last year (and other years, too) that he hasn't had many opportunities to kick FG or XPs. Must not be very accurate or kick a really low ball is all I can think of.

Wheeler and Wallace by the #s

11.35 ppg
76 rebs
76 assts.
43 steals
TO 38
651 min

7.65 ppg
46 rebs
17 steals
114 assts.
TO 39
573 min

Wheeler has almost 40 more assts in almost 80 fewer mins.

Thats the biggest take away from those stats by far!

Wheels is twice the disher that Wallace is.
This needs to be our S5:


Thats an NCAA Championship Rotation

Were The Beatles a 'rock' band?

Had an interesting back-and-forth with a friend of mine about The Beatles. I'll turn 60 this year so they were just about broken up before I knew who they were. Plus, the era from which they sprung didn't have all the sub-genres we have now where every group is subdivided into some category three levels down from 'rock'. So, all that has to go into the original question: were The Beatles a 'rock' band or a 'pop' band?

I'd argue, from about Revolver onward, they were a 'pop' band. Even McCartney stated that their music sprung from a lot more influences than some of their contemporaries (Stones, Who, Animals, Kinks, et al). You can definitely hear more Tin Pan Alley and Broadway (chord voicings, harmonies, chord progressions, etc.) in their Revolver+ music than you do in others from the same era. Certainly, many of their British Invasion cohorts had plenty of 'pop' songs early in their career, too, but most went more towards 'rock' than 'pop'. For my taste, The Beatles produced too many novelty songs, nonsense songs and songs that incorporated weird sounds and effects just because they liked to experiment. The Stone's Her Satanic Majesties album was a complete ripoff of Sgt Peppers and a complete fiasco of non-songs and weird sounds. From Jumpin Jack Flash (1968) onward, though, they didn't produce a lot of pure pop songs although influences like country, soul, gospel, etc. creeped into many songs alongside the blues influences which were very obvious. The Who were pretty much the same. The Kinks sort of followed The Beatles, imo, road in that they started as a 'rock' band but evolved into more of a 'pop' band for a while before going more rock later.

Of course, categorizing them now is difficult as there wasn't much/any difference to the audience in the early 60s regarding rock vs. pop - it was basically all lumped together. And The Beatles certainly had some later songs that were definitely rock. Overall, though, their work once they stopped touring was more what I would classify (with a great deal of looking backwards vision) as pop.


The problem with high assist numbers

If one dude is constantly putting up big assists numbers, especially compared to the rest of the team, that means the ball is in that one guy’s hands way too much. It also means that the ball is in his hands late in the shot clock and he just has to pick someone to throw the damned thing to (sometimes that person scores).

I understand that every now and then a player has a great night passing the ball. I also understand that there are great NBA level point guards that have exceptional speed/handle/court awareness/decision making abilities, but mostly one guy should not be putting up large assist numbers every time he plays. Teams as a whole should be moving the ball more than that.