CanadianChris

Considering everything he's done in the past three years to kill the illusion (Tough Enough, Confidential, etc.), I'm amazed he was able to say this with a straight face.

Yeah, and it was disgraceful then, too.

Research analyst for the Canadian department of health.

When the Constitution becomes like any other law, to be amended or repealed on a whim, the government loses all credibility.

EDIT: Never mind.

But there, you run into problems about two people being legally married (and everything that entails) in one state, then moving to another state and having no status whatsoever. The states WILL get their say if Bush tries to push an amendment through, though. It takes 38 states to amend the constitution, and I don't think Bush can scrape that many together.

Well, ESPN DOES stand for the Entertainment and Sports Programming Network. At least it used to.

The elephant v. midgets pulling contest was hilarious. The midget's trainer had a classic line when giving advice: "Stay low to the ground."

Finally, Ottawa has clawed its way back to the top of the Eastern Conference. Nice win against Carolina and their good goaltending performance tonight. Also, did anyone see the MURDERDEATHKILL of the Flyers by Montreal tonight? Seems that unless it's the Leafs, they don't even bother showing up. EDIT: And the Leafs took it right back. Still had it for a few minutes.

Good recap as usual. Two things (one VERY small): 1. Dr. King's speech really isn't "infamous," but "famous." "Infamous" has a negative connotation. 2. I don't think Goldberg should be the odds-on favourite to win the Rumble at all. I think the last thing Vince is looking to set up is a Goldberg-HHH match at WM, and I think WWE would want to do a very slow build to whatever match is going to be on top by not having the Rumble winner lose his shot in February. I think there are about 4 or 5 guys who could win, Goldberg included, but Goldberg would be the last guy on my list, because I don't think they're going to go that route.

And A-Rod could probably beat that team singlehandedly, if past years are any indication.

I think the Veteran's Committee will vote him in eventually.

I always order it, and this year will be no exception. I think there are three matches on the card that have the potential to be excellent (HBK/HHH, CW title and Los Guerreros), there's nothing that I think will be actively offensive, and the Rumble is as intriguing as it's ever been, with all the rumours flying around about cross-brand matches at Mania and such. I'm actually really looking forward to it.

Jack Morris.

This thread has become every bad romantic comedy I have ever seen in my life. And not in a good way.

From what I remember about Atlanta sports... - They didn't go see the Hawks even when they were good. - The Falcons were in the bottom third of the league in attendance the year they went to the Super Bowl. - The Braves regularly don't sell out playoff games nowadays. - And, of course, they had a team move out (the Flames). Atlanta has always struck me as more of a college town...they always seem to come out for Georgia Tech. And NASCAR, I think. They're like a lot of places in the Southeast.

I'm sorry, I'm going to require some proof. Atlanta has always been a shitty sports city as far as I can see.

That's because of the schedule. The NFL has one game a week for four months. MLB has six games a week for six months. Apples and oranges. 25 teams of 30 drew 1.7 million or more last year, 21 drew 1.9 million or better. The World Series hasn't gone head to head with MNF since I can remember, since the Monday of World Series week is always a travel day. And, of course, there's the small fact that the World Series' average rating outdrew MNF's average this year. Hell, Game 5 (I think it was 5) of this year's ALCS outdrew MNF when they actually did go head to head. Never let the facts get in the way of a good story, eh?

The salary cap has been in place for a decade. Or, to put it another way, when these so-called "dynasties" were happening. Since the salary cap, no team has even been to more than 3 Super Bowls (Dallas), and no teams besides Dallas and Denver have won even two. In fact, since 1991, there have been ten different Super Bowl winners in 14 years. In my opinion, the NFL hasn't really had a down period until now, just because there's TOO MUCH parity. Dynasties can be good for sport -- look at the Chicago Bulls. A bunch of mediocre-to-good teams fighting for a league championship isn't what the public wants to see. They want to see truly great play, and that can only come from truly great teams.

How tight is it in the East? Have a look at the standings: x1. Toronto - 59 x2. Philadelphia - 59 3. Ottawa - 58 4. New Jersey - 55 5. Montreal - 54 6. Boston - 54 x7. Tampa Bay - 49 8. NY Islanders - 47 Oh, have I mentioned how much I hate the playoff seeding rule? Because I do...a lot.

Official according to who? I checked all the major sports news sites, as well as the MLB and Expos official websites, and I see nothing That's what I was wondering. This would've been front page news in Canada, but I haven't heard a thing.

You've got to be kidding me. Jauron wasn't a horrible coach, but when you have a losing record as coach and no playoff wins after five years, it's time to go. Plus, his offensive schemes were pitiful.

What an unbelievable performance. Give her another five or six years to go out and learn how to beat people senseless, like Tiger did, and she could be on the big tour.

I played blackjack with Mats Sundin at the casino here in town.

The fact that she's good enough that a sponsor would want to give her an exemption tells me all I need to know.