Did you watch them play the Lions, now officially the Worst Team In The League? It looked like a rout early on, but there were the Lions, 3 yards from paydirt trailing only by 10 with some 5 minutes to go. Man was that a bad game. I wouldn't count on the Vikings beating the Packers, and certainly not the Jets.

The sooner the better. And take Hannity with you!

Here's my wish list:

• Yuda is right! Show us the game. Forget the "multi-taskers" (which is just a fancy way of saying "no-attention-span") and their fantasy leagues and video games. Forget the celebrity interviews (ESPN). I want to see the game. Show us the play start to finish; but then don't cut away (ESPN is especially bad about this); and don't show a replay unless one is warranted. Show us instead: What is the offensive team doing? Is it bringing in substitutions? Playing no-huddle? Is the defensive team matching them?
• Let us hear the game. I love the sounds. I understand teams don't want us (and their opponents) in the huddle with them, but at least let us hear the rest. Announcers shouldn't endlessly state the obvious. Let the game speak for itself. (Chris Collingsworth isn't half bad; if he said less, he would approach the ideal.)
• Less "Fruit Salad" on my screen. Some of the on-screen graphics, like the "first-down" line, have greatly enhanced the viewing experience. But broadcasters are now cluttering up the screen too much.
• Fewer commercials! How many of you hate the two breaks between a score and the next possession (score - break - kickoff - break - next possession)? A few years back the NFL actually did something about games that were going on too long because of too many breaks. Unfortunately, they dealt with it by changed the clock rules to shorten the game. This resulted in a substantial reduction of actual plays during a game, so we are left with relatively less football and more commercials.

EDL writes:

But that's not really my point. My point is simply that it's a little strange and even disquieting to see Americans polled on a life-or-death issue that is nuanced beyond most Americans' ability to meaningfully understand it.

To our everlasting shame, we took this attitude when those who supposedly had the ability to meaningfully understand "it" took us to war. The Decider knows best. We shouldn't question him. And so now we find ourselves in this big mess.

One of the myths perpetrated by the powerful elites is that what they do is complicated and beyond the comprehension of the unwashed masses, "nuanced beyond most American's ability to meaningfully understand it." The result? Policies that not only are not in our best interest, but do us (and others) great harm.

Americans got it right —finally— last November. We have done no good and have in fact done great harm in Iraq. This simple, indisputable fact is not so nuanced that it is beyond the grasp of any average, decent, moral person. And remember: We are still a democracy. We are ultimately responsible for the crimes perpetrated by our "leaders" in our name. We cannot evade this responsibility by claiming ignorance. To take the stand that it is "disquieting" for Americans to take part in our most important decisions goes against all our democratic principles and obligations.

According to the Spanish daily El Mundo (http://www.elmundo.es/elmundodeporte/2007/01/11/futbol/1168525810.html) Beckham's compensation will be the equivalent of just over 2.5 Million Euros yearly for five years. In addition, he retains 100% rights to his name, image, etc. for marketing purposes in the US, estimated to be worth something like $30M Euros annually. I don't believe MLS could, or should, pay $250M for any single player, no matter how good.

That said, soccer still requires 11 good players working well together on the field for a team to have any hopes of competing. Beckam's current team, nicnamed Los Galacticos because of their star power, are not doing as well as they could, chiefly because of a lack of cohesion on and off the field. And he can't even make Real's starting lineup reliably. His new team, the Galaxy, were pretty woeful last year. We'll see how Beckham + 10 measure up to teams like DC United, who are solid at almost every position and play well together.

It is my understanding that under the new Designated Player rule (see link at end), the MLS is only on the hook for $400,000 of the player's yearly salary. The team's owner/operator is supposed to pony up the rest(in the LA Galaxy's case the owner is AEG; www.aegworldwide.com/home.html).

MLS is a single-entity league. Players are all paid by the league and allocated to the teams, up to the $2M salary cap. Owner/operators all contribute to the salaries for all players. The Designated Player rule allows owner/operators to go out on a limb, to a limited extent, by allowing them one player where this rule does not fully apply. I see this as a cautious step towards allowing the owners to pay their own players.

The bottom line is that MLS is only going to be out $2M for Beckam for the next 5 years; they needn't have $40M to kick around; only $4.8M per year is needed ($400,000 X 1 Designated Player X 12 teams). Not bad, from the MLS point of view. AEG obviously think that Beckham is worth the balance they are paying him, and they may be right. Other owners may not agree, but under the Designated Player rule AEG's move does not pose much risk to their investments.

For more on how this works, see http://web.mlsnet.com/news/mls_events_news.jsp?ymd=20061111&content_id=78396&vkey=mlscup2006&fext=.jsp