The Meathead

Took about a half-dozen tries to figger out what my old username was, but I finally got in.

New England: Lobster NE clam chowder Lobster bisque Clambake I'm particularly fond of Nantucket bay scallops, in season now. Keep it simple with lobster and scallop recipies. Lobsters only need to be boiled unless you're doing an honest-to-goodness clambake, in which case they get thrown up under the tarp. Similarly, scallops really only need to be seared a little. My wife sears using bacon fat and mixes in a little maple syrup (real maple syrup... dark amber, not Aunt Jemima) and they really get great flavor this way. On the clam chowder front, the chowder should be meaty enough to have clam in every bite. Make sure the recipe calls for something that will have some bacon or ham flavoring in it. Here's a good one from The Cliff House in Ogunquit, Maine: Note: While the above recipe, from their cookbook, calls for canned clams and bottled clam juice, the recipe can be easily adapted to fresh clams. See the link to Sayle's Seafood and order some littleneck clams. They come in the shell, so probably allow ½ pound of little necks per serving to make a meaty chowder. You can also do a google search to find other recipes. Finally, there are some good frozen clam chowders out there, too. Here's one from The Lobster Guy that's pretty good (it's probably my favorite frozen clam chowder.) Also, while I don't particularly care for Legal Seafoods as a restaurant, they do package a FRESH clam chowder... not sure how how widely distributed it is... that's pretty good.

I agree. A large tourney works for NCAA basketball because a lot more bb-ball games are played, so there's room for a regular conference schedule plus a 64-team field. With only 5 regular-season football games, you're basically looking at the same one or two rivalries every year, plus a few more regular season games. Conferences basically become meaningless. Have to say that I think ol' Sargie was at least on the right track by taking some existing bowl games and converting them to a tourney format, retaining a ranking system such as the BCS to make the seeds. That's probably do-able, but would probably result in an additional 1 to 3 games per season for those teams that advance.

If OU can bet LSU - preferably convicingly - a lot of the "controversy" will quickly become a vague memory. Yeah, there will still be the USC whiners saying they should have had their chance (that is, assuming USC can win convincingly in its consolation bowl). But the real controversy will arise if OU loses to LS-who. In that case, LS-who will be the champeen - and not split with anyone either - but, again, assuming a USC win, the arguments as to why OU didn't belong will look a lot more meritorious than perhaps now. Of course, if USC loses to Michigan, then I don't think anyone can maintain they belonged in the Sugar Bowl. While I would not have placed OU in the Sugar Bowl based on a poor game against K-State, I don't consider the BCS a complete failure for having placed them in the Sugar Bowl. There is something to be said for strength of schedule and "quality" wins. And, let's face it, USC has had a much easier ride than OU (or Michigan, and slightly easier than LSU) has had. So I'll be able to sit back and enjoy the New Years' bowl games and see how it all unravels. Then, with the benefit of 20/20 hindsight, I'll join everyone here in griping about how it should have unfolded. Congrats to OU and to LSU for making it to the Sugar Bowl.

I don't have such a problem with the fact that OU lost yesterday. Had the game been close... nay, had OU showed up and played competitively... I'd agree with Sgt. Ryan's point and cut 'em a little slack. The reason I think OU doesn't belong there is the way they lost yesterday. It's almost as if they didn't show up to play... hearts and minds weren't in the game, and I find that less forgivable than a simple loss. But in the end, the votes of a handful of number-crunching geeks who, as a group, get a vote in the BCS equal to the two major polls, decided OU should be ranked 1.17, resulted in OU placing 1.04 points lower than USC at the end of the season. Had the game with K-state resembeled a division-I football game, I would concur with the final result. But not the way events unfolded yesterday. And next gripe... I would have thought the first 8 teams, by bcs rank, would wind up in one of the 4 major bowls. That dóesn't happen. #10 K-state and #9 Miami get to play in a major bowl, while #6 Texas and #8 Tennessee get lesser bowls. Tennessee gets to play Clemson in the Peach Bowl. (why bother to watch this?), while Texas gets Washington State in the Holiday Bowl (does anyone know where this is played?) (OK, I looked into it... it's Tuesday, December 30 in San Diego. I'll be sure to mark my calendar.)

Thanks for your valuable insight, Ham. I could have sworn Clausen looked five times better in his freshman year. But now I understand why this kid isn't so bad.

Clausen is sitting out this game because of a shoulder injury. So the Vols are playing this James Banks, who's 3/6/11 in the middle of the third quarter. How'd this kid get on the Vols, anyhow? He stinks. Not only is he incapable of starting for the Vols, I don't think he could start for any Division I football program. What's going on there in Knoxville? I'd think Fulmer would have had one player who's capable of starting in Clausen's absence. For that matter.... why don't they switch Kelley Washington to QB for this week.... it's absolutely impossible to do worse than what they have in there now.

If, by chance, mine hits, Weige can give the $12 to the Pine Street Inn and I'll match with another $12 and buy my own Huddle membership next year.

OK, I don't think anyone took TB by 6 yet, so change mine to TB by 6. Sorry about that.

The Meathead picks TB by 4 on MNF.

They won 68 games out of 162 last year, so I guess it is, at least theoretically, possible to be worse than last year.