RIP, Stephen Hawking

Stephen Hawking, one of the greatest physicists in the entire history of humanity, and one of the most brilliant luminaries that humanity has ever produced, died yesterday. He was 76 years old.

Hawking was born in 1942 in Oxford during World War II. In 1963, when Hawking was just 21 years old, he was diagnosed with motor neurone disease. At the time, he was expected to live only two years. But it turned out that he had a slow developing form of the disease, and he obviously lived many years, for which we should be thankful. Hawking's contributions to human knowledge and understanding of our universe is possibly greater than any other human in history.

Hawking got on the map in 1970, when he teamed with Roger Penrose and used the mathematics of black holes to the entire universe, illustrating that that a singularity, a region of infinite curvature in spacetime, was from time in the distant past, all the way to the Big Bang. 

He continued to work on quantum physics and black holes, expanding human understanding of how time might work. However, he really became very well known to the public with the release of his book, "A Brief History of Time" in 1988. It remained on The Sunday Times bestseller list for well over four years, and became one of the best selling science books of all time, selling more than 10 million copies, and being translated into 40 different languages. Some skeptics, however, suggest that it might just be the most popular book in history that nobody has ever read (I actually read it, or read the words, although admittedly, the concepts and the overall arguments were basically lost on me). 

From that point onward, Hawking became a celebrity. Probably the most famous scientist in the world, he generally was classed along with some other giants in the field of science, particularly Einstein and Newton. 

Still, many of his fellow scientists remember him best for his sense of humor, and his quick wit, as well as his determination. He showed incredible strength in the face of a truly debilitating disease. At first, in the 1960's, he used crutches, but in time, he was relegated to a wheelchair, and eventually, even lost his ability to speak, relying on a distinctive computer generated synthetic voice that, if anything, has become associated almost exclusively with Hawking.

Hawking’s children, Lucy, Robert and Tim, said in a statement yesterday: 

“We are deeply saddened that our beloved father passed away today.  

“He was a great scientist and an extraordinary man whose work and legacy will live on for many years.   

“His courage and persistence with his brilliance and humour inspired people across the world.  

“He once said, ‘It would not be much of a universe if it wasn’t home to the people you love.’ We will miss him for ever.”

Indeed, he will be missed. 

These were the two articles that I used (and borrowed quite a bit from the first, in particular) in writing this particular blog entry:

Stephen Hawking, modern cosmology's brightest star, dies aged 76 by Ian Sample, 13 Mar 2018.

https://www.theguardian.com/science/2018/mar/14/stephen-hawking-professor-dies-aged-76?linkId=49219522

Physicist Stephen Hawking dies aged 76


http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-43396008?SThisFB

Another Nor'easter

Yes, another one.

Those of us living in the Northeast are kind of rolling our eyes now, a bit tired of this routine just lately.

Why?

Well, because this is the third Nor'easter in the span of ten days for us now, and the last one did some serious damage. Up in northern New Jersey, where my son and my parents live, in Bloomingdale and in West Milford, the snow totals, as well as the wind, were both quite significant. In fact, not only did they get pounded by about two feet of snow, but my son and his mom lost power, and it was supposed to last several day. It did not, but many people were without power for several days.

The storm did some damage elsewhere, as well. From what I understand, parts of I-287 were closed for the night, and cars got stuck. It was not moving, and it became a de facto parking lot. Nobody moved for hours, and some had to sleep the night in their cars.

Yes, it was that bad.

Even my home town of Hillsborough, pretty far south of either Bloomingdale or West Milford, nevertheless saw parts that got hit with 19 inches, even though some neighboring towns did not even get half of that. Manville got roughly nine inches, while Somerville did not even get seven inches.

So, it was a strange storm, but it did more damage than most.

Now, we are expecting another one.

To be fair, this one is supposed to be the mildest of the bunch, and most of us are certainly hoping so. After all, it is March, and this is usually the time of the year when you kind of expect to see some springlike days, even though it has felt more like winter than it had in quite some time.

Indeed, this has been an odd winter season. I say that, because in the beginning, at the very tale end of the late fall and into the early winter, it appeared like this might be a killer season. We had several snowstorms with measurable snow, and we also had some seriously frigid days, with record cold temperatures. We did not seem to go more than three or four days without one of those kinds of measurable snowstorms, for that matter. One plus was that we had our first white Christmas in a long, long time. I think the last time that I had seen one was all the way back when I was a kid!

Then, there was a surprisingly long lull. At some point in January, the weather suddenly calmed down, and there really were no significant snowfalls, or ice storms, or much of anything. There were a couple, but no major ones, and this quiet time stretched on from just days into weeks, and then into a month, then two.

Now, it had been roughly two months without anything major, and then suddenly, we have a return to a more serious winter, just as we were expecting the arrival of spring. Many were hoping that we would get away with a quiet, mild winter (although on some level, I understood that mild winters are not supposed to be the norm, and might not be a good sign in terms of confirming climate change), but those hopes have been dashed as we have had to deal with some more serious winter storms and the inconveniences that they bring on, all within the last couple of weeks.

So, let's see how this one goes. Let's get through this one, and then see what is on the horizon, if there is possibly still yet another storm looming near.

In the meantime, for those of you living in the northeast, just be careful and be safe. 

It might be hard to believe now, but spring really is just about here!

Daylight Savings Time: Why So Much Debate Recently?

Yesterday was, of course, Daylight Savings, when the clocks go ahead one hour for the spring season, and the warmer season to come, as winter recedes.

However, it is not without controversy. A lot of people are complaining about it, not seeing any logic, and desiring it to end.

Many others are complaining, more lightheartedly, that they are tired. Hell, I feel admittedly exhausted while writing this, but will nonetheless push forward.

As the years go by, it seems that there is more debate than ever before about daylight savings, which is admittedly just something that, until recently, I simply took for granted.

What has surprised me is the vehemence with which this issue is met. 

Yesterday morning, while listening to "Breakfast with the Beatles" on New York's Q-104.3, disk jockey Ken Dashow sounded off on it, as he has done in the past. Basically, he suggests that it makes no sense, and makes it quite clear that he resents losing that one hour of sleep. And he has gone off about it in the past, because I am a regular listener to that show, and have heard him do so. He thinks it is stupid.

Yet, he is hardly the most aggressive opponent of it. I have met a few people who seem to truly hate it, and speak against it with a vengeance. One guy, a coworker, sounded unforgiving and truly angry about it earlier today, saying,

"It's stupid! They should get rid of it!"

He has spoken ill of it before, in the short time that I have known him, and every single time, he sounds seriously angry about it. And in recent years, I have heard similarly angry views on it, which always surprised me. After all, it is one day of the year, and one hour of sleep. Not a full night, and not several days of the year. In fact, you get one extra hour of sleep in the autumn as a result.

So, why do people hold such damn strong views on this issue?

And so, I decided to go ahead and explore this issue a bit further for myself.

Indeed, this issue is a  bit thorny, because it grows complicated. Mostly, this is due to political considerations. How so? Well, daylight savings time here in the United States comes weeks before it is recognized in Europe, which might cause some measure of confusion and possible complications, particularly in terms of business, flights, personal calls, and surely with computers. Also, some incdividual states do not observe it. Hawaii and Arizona do not observe it, and Florida is debating whether to keep or scrap it right now with HB 1013, also known as the "Sunshine Protection Act." If it passes, it would actually make the time change that we see in spring, with time moving up by one hour, permanent. It still would need Congressional approval to "amend the federal Uniform Time Act of 1966 to allow Florida to join Arizona and Hawaii in the list of states which do not observe daylight saving time."

Hmmm...interesting idea, to simply move the clock up one hour and make this change permanent, year-round.

So, what are the advantages and disadvantages to daylight savings?

Here are some that I thought of, and also found in a recent article on the Washington Post. You can probably think of some of your own, and please do share if you are so inclined to do so!

Pros:

- One hour extra of sleep, for one day, at least in fall.

- Perhaps it could be argued that there would be increased stability and less uncertainty, no need to adjust if it were taken away.

Cons:

- One hour less of sleep, at least for one day in spring.

- Most of the nation enjoys an extra hour of daylight. Frankly, I enjoy days lasting later during the warmer months. Why not, after all?

- Quite dramatic change in our schedules, as we have them today. For example, I remember daylight in Seattle lasting comparably long to Parisian daylight in the summer, which is to say late, past 10pm. If we got rid of daylight savings, it would start to get dark shortly after nine in the evening there. In the New York City area, it would start to get dark not much later than eight in the evening. Sunrises would regularly occur before six in the morning from late March until almost October, and would come before five in the morning in and around late June.

So, I am not sure. After all, time is a human construct no matter what angle you think about it, right? We control official time, and so maybe this was a good idea, or maybe it was not. Maybe we should just leave it all alone, or maybe, as they are considering now in Florida, we should just push the hour ahead more permanently, and that would be more beneficial to some, and less to others, on a permanent basis?

I, for one, am not sure. But what I do feel is that this, like so many issues in the United States today, seems to be a bit forced and exaggerated. Really, it does not seem like that big of a deal to me, and it seems to me like it is just people complaining for the sake of complaining.

It would be nice to know what some others think, though. Is this a big deal? Do we need to change it, or is it fine the way that it is? If we change it, do we just keep what we recognize as regular time, or do we indeed permanently push the clocks ahead one hour?

Feel free to share your thoughts - I encourage it, by all means!

Daylight saving time starts this weekend. Here’s how things would change if we got rid of it. By Justin Grieser March 9, 2018:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/capital-weather-gang/wp/2018/03/09/daylight-saving-time-starts-saturday-night-heres-how-things-would-change-if-we-got-rid-of-it/?utm_term=.353a4273bac2

Helpful or not? The Daylight Saving Time debate continues Posted 10:23 a.m. today Updated 10:30 a.m. today   448    5 Reactions By Tony Rice, WRAL contributor/NASA Ambassador

http://www.wral.com/helpful-or-not-the-daylight-saving-time-debate-continues/17408977/

Who Is the Greatest Player In NBA History? Well, Only One Man Truly Stands Out (& It's Not LeBron)

Image courtesy of JM's Flick page - His Airness: https://www.flickr.com/photos/swooshkidjm/3891028331/in/photolist-hAYV4-hAYbu-hAXYS-hAZE4-rb4Edn-qTuLXw-9yRoKk-21R1t6g-62HmRw-62HhT9-5XUMUV-hAZAk-v4FaP4-62Hkeh-fJepxS-a2M5U6-GUoe2z-hAZgz-62Hh55-62CZUi-7LjijN-asY84K-hAXK6-hAXSB-hAYhR-9xVH4B-6VQxan-bpK2Ub-asXEWe-QzRhs9-hB1hk-hAZPm-hAZJN-4mZ1j8-5s8dFK-9jNRLe-4SoDmX-4QFjnR-8MrTkg-o2g7AP-9mFSEU-5F32kx-5HQp4h-5XZ3Nb-2AVcz-nnfP3L-9F1KqV-9CahZ9-hB1cm-hAZZ4

Creative Commons License: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0/

Karl Malone should probably be higher, as should Larry Bird, who only ranks at number 10. Hakeem Olajuwon should also be much higher, probably in the top ten. 

Reggie Miller not even qualifying to be on the list? That seems a bit absurd.

Those are some of the major differences that I had with this list, although I agree with the ultimate top player on the list. 

Indeed, there is little argument, as far as I am concerned, with Michael Jordan being the very best basketball player of all time. That one seems a no-brainer, even if some of the younger generation seem to feel that LeBron James should rank there.

The thing is, Jordan completely dominated the league for some time. When he was at his peak, he was unstoppable, and simply dominated like no one else before or since. Nobody could stop him individually and, at his peak, no team could stop the Bulls when he was with them. When he retired briefly for a couple of years, the Bulls dropped off. When he was back and at full strength, once again, all comers were denied the championship. Without Jordan, chances are that Malone, Barkley, Ewing, Payton, and possibly others would have won championship rings. With him, they were completely shut out and their fingers remained empty until the end of their careers.

LeBron James can get his teams to the NBA Final, true. Indeed, what an accomplishment to bring teams to seven straight NBA Finals! However, I think Jordan might also have done just that if he had never retired, as it is entirely possible that he might have gone to, and possibly won, all eight NBA titles from 1991 to 1998. He took over games, and series, and LeBron simply could not match that. After all, he has been to eight NBA Finals, two more than Jordan. Yet, he has not won as many rings as Jordan has, and the two that he earned with Miami were with an incredible amount of superstar talent around him.

So to me, it seems obvious. Michael Jordan still tops this list. There is Jordan, and then there is all the rest. Frankly, I am not entirely certain that LeBron should even be number two, because Kareem Abdul Jabbar changed the game, even dominated the game, in a very long and obviously storied career, becoming one of the most decorated NBA players, and even athletes, in history. 

RANKED: The 32 Greatest Players In NBA History In NBA by Harris Ahmadzai, Jason Fray  /  January 24, 2018:

http://newarena.com/nba/ranked-the-32-greatest-players-in-nba-history/

Donald Trump's Recklessness Already Costing America & Hurting Longstanding Allies

One of the biggest problems in this world would be the many, many people who are not nearly as smart as they think that they are, yet who act like  they are geniuses, and carry around a certain level of impunity whenever things go wrong stemming from their own flawed thinking. Frankly, I think that this is one of the major problems in the United States, and likely one of the main reasons for why the United States has seen such a shocking decline in recent decades. This way of thinking is parasitic, because too many people see others acting in this frankly childish manner, and take this self-assuredness for power, for confidence, and for some kind of a vision for this country's future. In short, when too many people in one nation look up to such shallow values, that country weakens, even while those who subscribe to this false confidence and pretend at wisdom that they do not possess loudly proclaim victory and huge levels of success.

This can be particularly problematic when we get someone in the Oval Office who subscribes to this manner of thinking, and the United States has arguably had several people who fit the bill, even just in recent decades. George W. Bush seemed to fall under this category, and I suspect that Bill Clinton, regardless of the fact that he was actually quite intelligent, reflected these shallow values, because he relied not on wisdom, but on being strategic to advance his own interests. Possibly Obama fit into this bill, because he, too, seemed to focus too much on what made him look good and what advanced his own career and legacy, while ignoring the really tough fights for what would have been good for the country. Ronald Reagan is another man who I strongly suspect of believing that he is smarter than he really was, and certainly, his policies, and especially his popularity among like-minded folks who all felt smarter than they were entitled to feel, in many ways began what would become a very serious decline for the nation, despite the speeches and concepts that appear, at least at first, to be high-minded, and even noble. 

Yet, none of these men can hold a candle to Donald Trump, the man presently in the White House. This man's own opinion of himself is legendary. It is almost shocking that the White House is even big enough for his own ego, and indeed, supposedly he was not content with his surroundings there, as he was more used to the glitz and glamour of his ritzy estates in New York City and other areas, such as Mar-a-Lago. Apparently, this seems to be the case enough that he goes to such extraordinary lengths just to try and go to his Florida home every weekend. He even has the gall to suggest that it is the White House of the South.

Indeed, if there was ever a man who seemed to feel himself a sheer genius, even while actually showing no traces of this brilliance in either words or deeds, then that man is Donald J. Trump. He clearly thinks very highly of himself, proclaiming that he is a "very stable genius," and making bold assertions about his own intellect. He claimed to know more about ISIS than the generals, and suggested that he was the only one who could save this country. Indeed, if you ask the President, he is the biggest expert on almost every conceivable topic. His supporters believe him, too, and thus empower him. 

The rest of us, however, are not so sure about all of that. This is a man who's thinking seems so limited, that he can barely finish a sentence, or apparently a thought, without interrupting himself in the process.

Yet, we are supposed to believe that he is a genius.

He was surprised to learn some simple basic facts which, frankly, most people would believe to be elementary, such as that reforming healthcare is a difficult challenge, or that blacks are not the only ones (or even a majority) who receive welfare.

Yet, we are supposed to believe that he is a genius.

He wants people to believe that he is stable, and that his administration is running like a well-oiled machine, and that there is no White House drama, even though his White House has seemed to more closely resemble a revolving door kind of place of employment, rather than a serious gathering of America's best and brightest.

Yet, we are supposed to believe that he is a genius.

Again, the worst thing about Trump are not so much his policies, or even what he says. After all, George W. Bush also sounded a bit like an idiot at times during his presidency. We can hardly express shock that such a man happened to obtain high office, when we have had men such as George W. Bush as President, Dan Quayle as Vice-President, Sara Palin seen by some for a while as the savior of the Republican party and the promising new direction for the GOP to take. So how surprising can it be that now, of course, we see the king of imbeciles, Donald Trump, at the helm?

No, what is most aggravating, and probably the most dangerous, is just how highly he thinks of himself, and how little doubt he has in his own genius, despite almost no evidence to back up these boisterous claims of being a "very stable genius." Also at least as troubling would be just how convinced his supporters are of the same, and how little they seem to ever question, much less challenge, Trump's claims of superiority in every single way.

Trump claimed that he not only would build that stupid wall, but that he would get Mexico to pay for it. I believe he emphasized this by saying "mark my words!"

Did his supporters take him at his word? Apparently not.

Trump went before the United Nations, and insulted and taunted another world leader, as if the two are vying for popularity in a school yard. He went so far as to threaten to completely destroy that nation, to wipe it off the map, words that you might expect from other world leaders, such as Adolf Hitler, frankly.

Were his supporters alarmed, or did they feel that this was a reckless, and potentially very dangerous, thing to do? Apparently not.

Trump keeps revealing racist tendencies, such as dismissing whole regions as being filled with "shithole countries" and urging immigration from countries such as Norway.

Have his supporters drawn a line and felt that he crossed it, either with blatant racism or with crassness? Nope. They criticize "snowflakes" for whining about such things, even though they seem pretty good at whining and meting like snowflakes under pressure themselves, although no one is as big of a snowflake as their highly sensitive President, who cannot let any slights, let alone blatant insults, go without going on a petty and vindictive tirade with his ridiculous tweets.

Indeed, if there is one word that might fit President Trump to a tee, and describe his entire presidency, if not perhaps his entire life and way of thinking, it would be this: reckless.

Yes, recklessness. This is the trait that I think most of the world sees in this man, which far too many Americans remain blissfully unaware, or perhaps willfully ignorant, of. Trump is a reckless man, one who not only does not seem to carefully weigh his decisions before making bold pronouncements. Indeed, the country might have to suffer the consequences.

The latest such chapter is the trade war, which Trump typically went into unthinkingly, and with the clear assumption that it would go exactly the way he expects and wants. Apparently, Trump suggested that a trade war would be "good" and felt that it would be "easy to win."

Also typically, the White House went into damage control mode, trying to "clarify" the President's words and overall message, as White House press secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders tried to explain it all on Monday:

"The president is very confident that if that’s where we ended up [in a trade war] we certainly would win, but that’s not the goal. The goal is to get free, fair and reciprocal trade and hope that other countries will join in.”  

Naturally, his backers are not questioning his judgement or confidence, even though it seems like the entire world, including members of his own Republican party, are urging Trump to reconsider. The particular issue that fueled this was cheap Chinese steel, although the tariffs that Trump is imposing, and which are slated to take effect in 15 days,  are actually going to hurt our close allies in Europe, more than China. In fact, many feel that China might benefit from this ridiculous trade war, although many people, again including Republicans, are concerned that Americans might lose a lot, all because Trump is convinced that he will win this "easily" and will come out the hero.

Indeed, a trade war might be very bad for the world economy, and could cause a serious and deep recession, even though President Trump would surely scoff at the notion. Trump’s announced tariffs of 25 percent on steel on 10 percent on aluminum, which could get other countries to reciprocate, and possibly start an out and out trade war. And if that happens, indeed, it could be seriously detrimental to the health of the global economy, including the American economy.

Even if this happens, does anyone seriously doubt that Trump will find a way to turn this argument around, and make it look conveniently like it is someone else's fault? And even if the entire world once again easily sees through these lies, and even if a majority of Americans see through it, does anyone seriously doubt that his supporters will believe him and continue to give him their unconditional love and support?

World Trade Organization director-general Roberto Azevêdo, speaking before an assembly of members lf the WTO on Monday. suggested: 

“It is clear that we now see a much higher and real risk of triggering an escalation of trade barriers across the globe. We cannot ignore this risk and I urge all parties to consider and reflect on this situation very carefully.  

"Once we start down this path, it will be very difficult to reverse direction. An eye for an eye will leave us all blind and the world in deep recession. We must make every effort to avoid the fall of the first dominoes."

Yes, Trump's recklessness is a very risky strategy. Gambling, putting all chips on one big assumption, is not a sensible or stable way to govern.

Yet, this is Trump's way. He is a sleazy gambler, and he seems to be addicted to gambling at the highest levels. He also assures us that the country will just continue to win, win, and win some more while he is President.

But if this is a gamble that he loses, will his supporters finally come to their senses and hold him to task?

Don't bet on it.

DONALD TRUMP'S TRADE WAR WILL CAUSE 'DEEP' GLOBAL RECESSION, SAYS WTO DIRECTOR BY NICOLE GOODKIND ON 3/5/18


http://www.newsweek.com/trade-war-donald-trump-recession-tariffs-steel-831499

Seattle's Legendary "Legion of Boom" Defense Being Quickly Disassembled

 Seattle Seahawks

Some years ago, the Seattle Seahawks won a highly controversial game against the Green Bay Packers during the referee strike, when one ref clearly indicated that a play was a touchdown catch, while the other equally clearly indicating that it was not a touchdown. The play generated all sorts of controversy, and was discussed for several days afterward. It got so much attention, that it basically was credited for forcing the end of the referee strike.

I wrote about that, and also thought, at the time, that this might be a premonition that meant that the Seahawks were going to be the team of the decade. 

Why? 

Well, I know that sounds strange. After all, what does one have to do with the other. But again, the Seahawks were clearly a team on the rise at that point, and they were the beneficiaries of a hugely controversial call that was talked about not only for days or even weeks, but even for years afterward. It is no exaggeration to suggest that football fans still remember that call, much like they remember the "Immaculate Reception" that helped lift the Steelers as they won a game they otherwise likely would have lost, and allowed them to rise in prominence to the point that they would eventually become "Team of the Decade" for the seventies. Or, much less controversial but equally as attention grabbing and memorable, was "The Catch" that helped to lift the 49ers past the Cowboys in a game they otherwise likely would have lost, and helped also to let them reach greatness, and they went on to become "Team of the Decade" for the eighties. Or, the snowy playoff game in New England, when the Raiders seemed to sack quarterback Tom Brady and recover the football, but which was instead ruled in New England's favor. That play also received a huge amount of attention, and it is where the "Tuck Rule" came from, but it helped lift the Patriots to glory in a game they likely otherwise would have lost, as they went on from there to win the first of three titles in a four year span, as they also earned "Team of the Decade" honors in the 2000's.

So, I predicted that the Seahawks would benefit like that, as well. Like with the Steelers in 1972, the year that they won that "Immaculate Reception" game, they would not win the title that year, although they were clearly an up and coming team. They had the great defense, and they had explosive potential on offense. It would take another season for them to reach that elite status, but they dominated the NFC in 2013, going 13-3 and earning the top seed before working their way through the NFC playoffs and reaching the Super Bowl. There, they crushed the record-smashing Broncos in the Super Bowl, holding the NFL's most explosive offense in history to a very pedestrian 8 points, and made Denver look inept both on offense and on defense for the first time all season, easily winning their first title. 

Indeed, the Seahawks looked like serious favorites to repeat in 2014, and despite some troubles along the way, Seattle managed to finish 12-4, earning the NFC West title over a surprisingly tough challenge by Arizona. They once again earned the top seed in the NFC playoffs, then convincingly dispatched the Carolina Panthers, before winning yet another highly controversial, attention-grabbing game against Green Bay in the NFC Championship. They went back to the Super Bowl slightly favored to beat New England.

And in a Super Bowl that should be (but often is not) remembered as an instant classic, there were real fireworks in that big game. Both teams played very well, and showed much of why they both enjoyed so much success during that era. It went back and forth, but surely I was not the only one who was surprised when the Seahawks legendary "Legion of Boom" defense game up a seemingly comfortable 24-14 fourth quarter lead, and found themselves trailing entering the final minutes. Still, the Seahawks were able to get into scoring position following a miracle catch by Jermaine Kearse that instantly evoked memories of 'The Helmet Catch" by Dave Tyree, or the incredible catch by Giants receiver Mario Manningham, both of which came against New England, and strongly contributed to the Patriots losing. But the Seahawks gambled, and lost big time, very shortly after the miracle catch. On the now infamous 2nd and 1, Pete Carroll opted to go for a risky pass down the middle, instead of a run by Marshawn Lynch that most assume would have led to a touchdown, and likely a Seattle win. Instead, the risky pass was famously intercepted by New England's Malcolm Butler, icing the game in favor of the Pats.

Obviously, it was a devastating loss, one not easily forgotten or overcome. Frankly, I do not think the Seahawks have ever truly recovered. At the time, I was expecting them to return to the Super Bowl, because their incredible run for those two seasons reminded me a lot of the emerging dynasty Dallas Cowboys in the early 1990's during their first two championship runs. I did not expect the Seahawks to suddenly fall silent, and just to kind of fade away back into the pack the way that they did. But they were not nearly so good the following season, nor the season after that. And this past season, they missed the playoffs altogether.

Along the way, they lost some of the talent that helped them to reach those two Super Bowls, but nothing like what we have seen just in the last few weeks. Michael Bennett is already gone. Now, there are rumors that the Seahawks are looking to get rid of Richard Sherman and Earl Thomas, and that Kim Chancellor may never play football again due to a neck injury.

If those players indeed do depart, and if the Seahawks lose any more talent this offseason, it might start to resemble a little bit how the 49ers were taken apart following the offseason following the 2014-15. In an unbelievable offseason, San Francisco lost almost all of the talent that had made them such a tough and highly competitive team from 2011-2013, when they qualified for three straight NFC Championship Games, and almost won Super Bowl XLVII. But the team was completely taken apart after a disappointing 2014 season, and they only started to really recover late last year, when they won six of their final seven games.

Could the Seahawks be in for a similar crash and burn, one that surely would take them out of the ranks of serious contenders for years to come?

Well, it is not a sure thing just yet. Right now, however, it sure seems like it is a possibility.

Not the way that I envisioned the end of Seattle's "Legion of Boom" coming to an end. I, for one, keep thinking that the now infamous "2nd and 1" call was even more costly than it at first appeared, and everyone knew that it likely cost them a real shot at  achieving a very rare feat: winning back-to-back Super Bowl titles. At the time, I thought it was a brief interruption in what would be a feast of championships for Seattle. Instead, it seems that it was what ended the party prematurely for the Emerald City's football darlings.




Legion of Buh-bye? Seahawks may part ways with Richard Sherman, Earl Thomas. By Des Bieler March 7, 2018:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/early-lead/wp/2018/03/07/legion-of-buh-bye-seahawks-may-part-ways-with-richard-sherman-earl-thomas/?utm_term=.5ddf340a8432

⚽️ Real Madrid 2, Paris Saint-Germain 1 ⚽️

⚽️ ⚽️ Paris Saint-Germain 2, Troyes 0 ⚽️  ⚽️ 

Not the rosy, pleasant news this time around for Paris Saint-Germain that it was the last few weeks.

The big showdown against Real Madrid, what was viewed as a real test for PSG, wound up being a disappointment to the team and their supporters. PSG might be the class of Ligue 1 play in France, but it is not quite ready to take on the true elites of European football.

At least not yet.

My brother explained the game actually rather well. He is a follower of this blog page, and in the comment section for the previous PSG game (when PSG defeated Troyes, 2-0), he posted this commentary about PSG's disappointing results against Real Madrid yesterday:

Some Guy in JerseyMarch 6, 2018 at 4:00 PM Sigh... Real Madrid 2, PSG 1, with Madrid winning 5 to 2 on aggregate. This series was full of "if onlys": if only PSG had managed to defend well enough in the last 10 minutes or so of the first leg to secure the 1-1 draw, if only Danny Alves hadn't rendered himself guilty of a careless pass that ultimately led to Real's first goal in the return leg, if only Marco Verratti hadn't foolishly gotten in the ref's face, which resulted in a second yellow card (and therefore red). And of course, what if PSG had avoided having to face such a daunting opponent relatively early in the tournament. But the inescapable fact of the matter is that they're simply not ready for prime time. They've got a ways to go until they can compete with teams like Real Madrid, Barcelona, Bayern Munich or other major clubs on equal terms. If you didn't watch, you didn't miss much.

That last sentence was in reference to my own stated desire for watching the match, although I did not, because I was working both of my jobs.

However, this seems like a good summary of what was a frustrating game, at least for PSG fans. Obviously, the legions of Real Madrid fans are happy. Real Madrid rank among the bullies, if you will, of European football, along with FC Barcelona, Manchester United, Bayern Munich, Juventus, and maybe one or two others that are not immediately coming to mind. Chelsea, maybe, for example.

For comparisons with North American sports, think of the New York Yankees in baseball, or the Boston Celtics and especially the Los Angeles Lakers in basketball, or the Dallas Cowboys, Pittsburgh Steelers, and Green Bay Packers in American football, or the Montreal Canadiens and Detroit Red Wings in hockey. So, this was not exactly a shocker. But it would have been really nice had PSG been able to produce a shocking upset. After all, everyone seems to like when an underdog actually wins. Look how happy the Philadelphia Eagles made so many people following their Super Bowl win over the New England Patriots last month.

Alas, mistakes plagued PSG. A bad draw. A collapse in the last ten minutes in the first game doomed what had been, up to that point, a commendable effort. A bad or careless pass early in this game allowed Real Madrid to jump out ahead with that all-important first goal. A frustrated player unable to keep his cool, and earning his own ejection from the game, hurt PSG's hopes of a comeback. Whether or not you are familiar with football, or soccer, at all, or even sports, those are the kinds of mistakes and mental errors that everyone knows will doom your hopes of winning, regardless of the sport or game. Careless mistakes, lapses, allowing emotions to run too high, and clearly frustrated expectations, in all.

Just for the record, let me sum up the scoring. Star Cristiano Ronaldo scored in the 51st minute for Real Madrid, although Edinson Cavini was able to tie it twenty minutes laster. However, Marco Verratti's ejection in the 66th minutes did not help matters for PSG, and Casemiro scoring in the 80th minute for Real Madrid proved to be the final nail in PSG's coffin in this game.

That is how PSG's hopes in the Champions League came to an abrupt end in yesterday's game. All of that relatively uninterrupted success against other teams in Ligue 1 was not enough to bolster PSG's confidence enough to overcome one of the most stories franchises in the sport. Real Madrid moves on, as always, while PSG goes home much earlier than expected.