Friday, December 31, 2010

Worst of the Best: The Hockey Hall of Fame's Worst Players by Position

Today is the conclusion of the "Worst of the Best" series, in which I look at the worst Hall of Famers of four different sports by position. After previous looks at the baseball, football, and basketball Halls of Fame, it is now time to look at the Hockey Hall of Fame's worst players by position. Since there are usually two defensemen on the ice at the same time, my "Worst of the Best" team will also have two defensemen. Keep in my that I don't necessarily think that the players I have chosen as the "Worst" were bad players or anything like that, it's just that I find their place in the Hockey Hall of Fame somewhat befuddling. Well, as the Black Eyed Peas would say, let's get it started.

D: Leo Boivin, Playing Career 1952-1970, Inducted 1986

A checking defenseman, Boivin was most remembered for his devastating body checks that he dealt out with relish during his 19 year career. While Boivin had a long career, it's hard to see what exactly made him stand out to Hall voters. After all, Boivin only played in three All-Star games, never made an All-League team, and in his 19 seasons, only saw action in the postseason in seven of those seasons, even though he played the majority of his career in the Original Six era and had a 4 out of 6 chance to make the playoffs. Was Boivin a good player? Sure, but was he memorable enough to merit inclusion into the Hall of Fame? Well, I'm not so sure about that.

If Boivin is in, then why not:

J.C. Trembley? Trembley played in seven All-Star games (although three of which he made because those games were the All-Star team against his Montreal Canadiens), made the All-NHL second team in 1968 and the All-NHL first team in 1971. While with the Canadiens, Trembley was a key member of five Stanley Cup winning teams. After the 1972 season, Trembley jumped to the Quebec Nordiques of the WHA, and while in Quebec, Trembley won two Dennis Murphy awards as the league's best defenseman and is second all-time in WHA history with 358 assists. Trembley was a heck of a defenseman in the NHL and probably the best defenseman in WHA History, but his jump to the WHA may have cost Trembley a spot in the Hall of Fame.

D- Fern Flaman - 1945-1961, Inducted 1990

Flaman was once traded with Leo Boivin  by the Boston Bruins to the Toronto Maple Leafs in 1950. Four years later, both players were traded back to Boston in separate deals. Flaman was a little more accomplished than Boivin, making the All-NHL second team three times and playing in seven All-Star games. Flaman was a feared player who retired with the third most penalty minutes in NHL history. However, Flaman's playing career wasn't terribly memorable, and he was nearly a zero on the offensive end, scoring a point every four games and finishing his 17 year career with a mere 34 goals. So it's hard to see what exactly made Flaman stand out over other defensemen to get in the Hall.

If Flaman is in, then why not:

Gus Mortson, Mortson and Flaman were rather similar players, as both were defensemen that played around the same time and racked up penalty minutes as two of the most aggressive players of their era. Mortson played in eight All-Star games (six as an All-Star, two as a member of the Toronto Maple Leafs), was an All-NHL first team defender in 1949-50, and led the NHL in penalty minutes four times. Mortson also was a member of four Stanley Cup winners with the Maple Leafs. To me, Flaman and Mortson were quite similar players with similar resumes, but one is in the Hall while the other is out, so go figure.

LW: Dick Duff, 1955-1972, Inducted 2006

To be honest, I had a hard choice picking between Duff and Clark Gilles here, but ultimately I went with Duff because his induction was so strange. After over 30 years of retirement, Duff was suddenly voted into the Hall in 2006, leaving many people to wonder, who is Dick Duff? Well, Duff was a member of six Stanley Cup winning teams with the Toronto Maple Leafs and Montreal Canadiens. He also played in seven All-Star games, although four of those were because he was a member of the defending championship team. Duff was considered to be a better postseason player than regular season player, somewhat like hockey's version of Robert Horry or the Claude Lemieux of the 1960s. Of course, neither of those guys are in the Hall of Fame as of yet and its hard to see why Duff is either. He never scored more than 53 points in a single season, never had a 30 goal season, and its not as if the Hall needed more Maple Leafs or Canadiens from that era in the Hall of Fame. Yes, Duff was a contributor to many Stanley Cup winning teams, but so were Kris Draper, and Kevin Lowe, and Craig MacTavish. So what makes Duff different from any of those guys?

If Duff is in, then why not:

Dean Prentice? During Duff's playing career (1955-1972), Prentice scored more goals (353-283) and considerably more points (787-572) than Duff.  Prentice played in four All-Star games, and in 1960 was named to the NHL All-Second team. Duff had five 20-goal seasons to his credit, while Prentice had 10 during his career. For his career, Prentice finished with 391 goals, retiring as the 12th leading goal scorer in NHL history. Yes, Prentice never won a Stanley Cup, but he also didn't have the fortune of playing with a roster full of Hall of Famers like Duff did.

C: Bernie Federko, 1977-1990, Inducted 2002

Federko has some impressive numbers that are in part due to the high scoring era in which he played in. In his career, Federko put up four 100 point seasons and finished with 1,130 points. It should also be noted that Federko scored 101 points in 90 playoff while playing for some St. Louis Blues teams that weren't exactly loaded with talent. However, Federko never finished higher than eighth in points, never finished in the top 10 in goals, and only played in two All-Star games during his 14 year career. Federko was a very good player, but in my opinion, he wasn't a great player.

If Federko is in, then why not:

Adam Oates? Oates was actually traded for Federko in 1989 in a deal that didn't work out so well for the Red Wings, as Federko only lasted one year in Detroit. Meanwhile, Oates was just getting started on a career that landed him in five All-Star games and a spot on the 1990-91 All-NHL second team. During his career, Oates led the NHL in assists three times, finished in the top three in points three times, and finished in the top ten in assists in 12 different seasons. Oates ranks 16th all-time in points with 1,420, and is sixth in assists all-time with 1,079. Like Federko, Oates never won a Stanley Cup, but did play in two Stanley Cup Finals and scored 156 points in 163 career playoff games. Put all that together, and Oates looks like a Hall of Famer to me, but he is still on the outside looking in.

RW: Glenn Anderson - 1981-1996, Inducted 2008

Anderson, like Federko, played the majority of his career in the high scoring 1980s and therefore, was able to put up some impressive numbers that were in large part due to his talents, but also was somewhat due to the era in which he played in. Anderson put up some impressive numbers during his career (498 goals, 601 assists), but only finished in the top 10 in goals three times and in the top 10 in points once. A four time All-Star, Anderson is most known for his playoff exploits with the Edmonton Oilers during their dynasty, as Anderson ranks fourth in career playoff points with 214 and has his name etched on six Stanley Cups. However, one could argue that Anderson was merely the beneficiary of playing with such great players such as Wayne Gretzky, Mark Messier, Jari Kurri, and Paul Coffey, and the only reason he was able to play in so many playoff games was because of the talent of his teammates more than anything he did. Yes, Anderson did score a lot of key goals for the Oilers, but he also was never seriously considered more than a supporting player for the Oilers and was basically finished as a player by the time he hit 30. There's a reason why it took so long for Anderson to get into the Hall, it's because he's a borderline candidate.

If Anderson is in, then why not:

Pat Verbeek? Okay, Verbeek is also a borderline candidate much like Anderson, but in my opinion, the 'Little Ball of Hate' is just as, if not more deserving than Anderson. Verbeek has the unique distinction of being the only player in NHL history with over 500 goals (522) and over 2,500 penalty minutes (2,905, which ranks 11th all time). Verbeek didn't have a ton of big seasons and was only a two time All-Star, but he scored 35 goals or more in seven different seasons, like Anderson, and unlike Anderson, Verbeek was considered a good player on the defensive end of the ice. Verbeek may not have had the postseason success of Anderson, but he was a key member of the Dallas Stars' 1999 Stanley Cup team. Yes, Verbeek may have been too aggressive at times, as his penalty minutes number suggests, but his grit and goal-scoring ability made him an asset on any team he played with.

G- Chuck Rayner - 1941-1953, Inducted 1973

Rayner was a four-time All-Star, a three time member of the all-NHL second team and won the 1950 Hart Trophy as the league's most valuable player, which is a feat only four other goalies have accomplished. While he accomplished a lot, the fact is that Rayner is one of only two goalies (Gump Worsley being the other) to have a career losing record and be a member of Hockey's Hall of Fame. Other than losses, the only category Rayner led the league in was shutouts, with five in 1947, and for his career, Rayner finished with a record of 138-208-77. Yes, I admit that Rayner played behind some pretty bad teams during his career, but a .422 winning percentage in goal is not stellar by any means, so that's why Rayner is on this list.

If Rayner is in, then why not:

Mike Richter? Both Rayner and Richter were career long Rangers, and both men backstopped the Rangers to a game 7 of a Stanley Cup Final. While Rayner's Rangers came up short in 1950, it was Richter who was the man between the pipes as the Rangers ended their 54-year long Stanley Cup drought in 1994. During his career, Richter played in three All-Star games and is one of only 24 goalies to finish his career with over 300 wins (301). Richter finished his career with a .904 save percentage and 2.89 GAA, and played even better in the postseason, with a .909 save percentage, a 2.61 GAA, and nine career postseason shutouts to his credit. Richter also was a three-time Olympian for the USA, and backstopped Team USA to a Silver Medal in the 2002 Olympics and a Gold Medal at the 1996 World Cup, where he also won the MVP award for his play in that event. Yes, Richter was a fine goaltender for the Rangers, and would be a worthy addition to the Hockey Hall of Fame.

Well, thanks for reading. If you happen to agree or disagree with my selections, than feel free to express your opinions on this topic. If you have any comments on this post, or ideas for future posts, than send me them either by leaving a comment or by e-mail at

Tuesday, December 28, 2010

Worst of the Best: Basketball Hall of Fame's Worst Players by Position

Continuing with our series of the worst Hall of Famers in sports history is today's post about the bottom of the top-notch, the Basketball Hall of Fame's worst players by position. If you are interested, you can read the previous entries about the pro football and baseball Hall of Fame's worst of the best here and here, respectively. So, let's get started, shall we?

SF: Bill Bradley, Playing Career 1968-1977, Inducted 1983

Bradley was a two time All-American at Princeton and considered one of the greatest college basketball players of all time. After his playing career, Bradley had a quite successful career in politics, even running for the presidential nomination for the democratic party in 2000, eventually losing to Al Gore. His NBA career, however, can best be described as unspectacular. His best season took place in 1973, where Bradley averaged 16.1 points and 4.5 assists per game for a championship New York Knicks team. Those numbers are remarkably similar to Rodney Stuckey's numbers last year (16.8 ppg, 4.8 apg) and nobody around the NBA regards Stuckey as a potential Hall of Famer at this point. Bradley never finished in the top 10 in any statistcal category except for free throw percentage, and made only one All-Star game. During his career, Bradley's averages (12.4, ppg, 3.2 rpg, and 3.4 apg) are similar to Willie Anderson (12.2, 3.8, and 3.8) and if Willie Anderson is a Hall of Famer, then I'll play chicken on I-285. Bradley was a decent player who got in mainly because of his fame and because his teams won two championships in New York, although Bradley was, at best, the fourth best player on those teams.

If Bradley is in, then why not:

Bernard King?  King, like Bradley, also played for the Knicks, as well as the Nets, Warriors, Jazz, and Bullets. King, however, could fill up the basket at will. A four time All-Star, King led the NBA in points per game in 1984-85 (32.9), and finished in the top ten in that stat four other seasons. King was also a two-time first team All NBA forward, and his career 22.5 PPG average is the highest among eligible players not yet elected in the Hall of Fame. Not only that, but King had a higher career scoring average than Hall of Famers Alex English, Clyde Drexler, Billy Cunningham, Bob Mcadoo, Patrick Ewing, Charles Barkley, and many other Hall of Famers. True, King never won an NBA Championship, nor did he come close, but he was a much better player than Bradley, and if King hadn't of suffered a horrific knee injury that basically took two years off his prime, who knows what kind of numbers King would have posted.

PF: Clyde Lovellette, 1954-1964, Inducted 1988

Like Bradley, Lovellette was a superstar in college, a three time All-American and the Most Outstanding Player of the 1952 Final Four for Kansas. In the NBA, Lovellette wasn't a bad player, making four All-Star games and average over 20 points and 10 rebounds per game in five separate seasons.  However, Lovellette was never the best player on any of his teams, and his statisitcs are very comparable to players like Willie Naulls, who will never get in to the Hall of Fame barring some unforseen remarkable occurrence. For his career, Lovellette finished averaging 17.0 ppg and 9.6 rpg, numbers similar to George McGinnis's NBA numbers (17.2, 9.8), and that's not counting McGinnis's ABA career. Lovellette made only one All-NBA team (a second team selection in 1955-56 and his large numbers are somewhat due to the fact that teams took a lot more shots per game during his career than today, so everybody's points and rebounds totals were inflated.

If Lovellette is in, then why not:

Rudy LaRusso? LaRusso is largely forgotten today (his Wikipedia entry has more about Gilligan's Island than anything LaRusso accomplished on the basketball court), but during his 10-year career, LaRusso played in five All-Star games, one more than Lovellette. During his first eight years, LaRusso was the man that did the dirty work for the Lakers while superstars Jerry West and Elgin Baylor did most of the scoring, which must have worked, as the Lakers played in five NBA Finals with LaRusso. Once LaRusso was traded to Golden State, he transformed his game, becoming a 20 ppg scorer for the Warriors and keeping up his solid defense, earning a spot on the NBA Defensive second team in 1968-69. Unfortunately, a chronically sore back caused LaRusso to retire after the 1969 season at age 31, despite coming off a season where he averaged 20.7 ppg and 8.3 rpg. Nevertheless, his career averages (15.6 ppg, 9.4 rpg) are quite comparable to Lovellette, and he played one more All-Star game than Lovellette, so maybe the Dartmouth alum has a case for the Basketball Hall of Fame.

C- Walt Bellamy, 1962-1975, Inducted 1993

Bellamy has some impressive numbers, to be sure. For his career, Bellamy scored 20,941 points, grabbed 14,241 rebounds (ninth all time), averaged 13.7 rebounds per game (seventh in NBA history) was the rookie of the year in 1961-62 with an impressive 31.6 ppg and 19.0 rpg, finishing second and third in each category. Bellamy was also a four-time All-Star, although curiously he never made an All-Star team after 1965. So why is Bellamy on this list as the worst center in the Hall of Fame. Well, one reason is that this was the toughest postion to choose from, but the other thing is that for all of his stats, Bellamy seemed to never make an impact on the game. He never made an all-league first or second team, he never led the league in a category other than field goal percentage in his rookie year, and he never won an NBA Title. In fact, Bellamy never even played in the NBA Finals, and his teams only got as far as the conference finals twice, this in spite of the fact that the playoffs only had three rounds instead of four during his career. In Bellamy's 13 full seasons, his teams missed the playoffs six times. Yes, Bellamy put up some great numbers, but that's all he did.

If Bellamy is in, then why not:

Artis Gilmore? Gilmore, like Bellamy, never won an NBA Title, never played in an NBA Finals. However, Gilmore did play in two ABA Finals, and his 1975 Kentucky Colonels won the ABA Title. During his five year ABA Career, Gilmore led the league in total rebounds in each five seasons, and in rebounds per game four out of five seasons. Gilmore also finished his ABA career as the league's all time leader in blocked shots with 1,431. Once he moved on to the NBA, Gilmore continued to be a top-notch center, playing in six NBA All-Star games, finish in the top 10 in blocks per game six times, in rebounds per game seven times, and he led the league in field goal percentage for four straight seasons. Gilmore has the highest field goal percentage (.599) in NBA history, and only three players in professional basketball history have more blocks than Gilmore's 3,178. His detractors will point out that Gilmore was a better player in the ABA, but so was Gilmore's teammate Dan Issel, and Issel is in the Hall of Fame in spite of the fact that when the Colonels had to trade one of the two, they kept Gilmore and dealt Issel, so it's obvious who Kentucky thought was the better player.

SG: Calvin Murphy - 1971-1983, Inducted 1993

Murphy was also a three time All-American before his pro career, with Murphy playing his college ball at Niagara University. One of the best free throw shooters in NBA history, if not the best, Murphy's .892 free throw percentage ranks seventh all-time. For his career, Murphy averaged 17.9 ppg and 4.4 apg, which are actually quite similar numbers to Charlie Scott's career if you take out his two years in the ABA (17.9, 4.8). Murphy averaged over 20 points per game in five different seasons, and finished in the top ten in apg in two seasons. However, Murphy never made an All-NBA team, played in only one All-Star game (1979), and his teams missed the playoffs more times than they made it (seven to six). Sure, Murphy's college career was impressive and probably helped him get elected, but I'm just not seeing how he can be considered a Hall of Famer, unless we credit him with having 14 kids by nine different women.

If Murphy is in, then why not:

Randy Smith? Smith, like Murphy, was undersized for his positon (the 6'2" Smith had to play a lot of small forward during his career). But that didn't stop Smith from excelling. A two time All-Star, Smith also was the MVP of the 1978 All-Star game and was named to the All-NBA second team in 1976. During his career, Smith averaged 20 or more points in four different seasons, finished in the top 10 in steals in five seasons, and is 25th in NBA history with 1.7 steals per game. Smith also played in 906 consecutive games, setting an all-time record (since broken by A.C. Green). For his career, Smith finished with an average of 16.7 ppg, 4.6 apg, and 1.7 steals per game. Not bad for a seventh round pick not expected to make the team as a rookie in 1972.

PG: KC Jones - 1959-1967, Inducted 1989

Jones is in the Hall of Fame solely because he was part of the Celtics Dynasty in the sixties, picking up eight championship rings from 1959-1966. Then again, Jones played with players such as Bill Russell, Bob Cousy, and Sam Jones, among others, so you can see why he won eight championships. In his own right, Jones was considered a top-notch defender and a glue guy for the Celtics. That's all well and good, but here's the thing. Jones was never named to an All-Star game, never even averaged more than 10 points a season and finished his career with a career average of 7.4 points a game and a .387 shooting percentage from the field. Jones played nine seasons, played starter's minutes (over 30 per game) for only four of those seasons, and was an offensive zero that never made an All-Star team. I think it's safe to say that the only reason Jones is in the Basketball Hall of Fame is because of the success of the teams he played on, not anything he did to stand out individually.

If Jones is in, then why not:

Jo Jo White?  White was the Celtics' point guard shortly after Jones left, and while he may have only two Championship rings to his credit, there's little doubt that White was the more valuable player. White was a seven time All-Star during his career, and also has two All-NBA second team selections to his credit. During his peak years (1971-77), White averaged 19.8 points and 5.5 assists per game, and was also named the MVP of the 1976 NBA Finals. Like Jones, White's number has been retired by the Celtics, yet he still remains on the outside of the Hall's doors in spite of being one of the best guards of his era and a key contributor to two Championship teams.

Well, thanks for reading. If you happen to agree or disagree with my selections, than feel free to express your opinions on this topic. If you have any comments on this post, or ideas for future posts, than send me them either by leaving a comment or by e-mail at

Monday, December 27, 2010

Canon Video Game Review: Fable 3 (XBOX 360)

First of all, Merry Christmas dammit. I hope that everyone out there had a great Christmas filled with merriment and no fruit cake. Today's review is of the recently released XBOX360 game Fable III. Developed by Lionhead Studies and published by Microsoft Studios, Fable III was released in October 2010 and includes voice acting from Ben Kingsley, Simon Pegg, Stephen Fry, and John Cleese, among others. Fable III takes place some fifty years after the events of Fable II, and you, the hero, are the child (you can choose to be either man or woman) of the hero of the previous game. But things aren't so peachy in Albion, as your brother Logan has become a tyrant who rules his kingdom with an iron fist. Eventually, you have enough of Logan's style of rule and rebel against him after a particularly ugly incident in which you must make a choice of grave consequences, and go out into the world, gaining allies and biding your time until you and your cronies can successfully overthrow King Logan. Eventually (SPOILER ALERT), you succeed, and now as ruler of Albion, you are faced with difficult decisions in governing the people. Like the previous two Fable games, you can be as good or as bad as you want to be. Whether you want to be good to the people and give back to the poor, or be evil and slay innocent villagers left and right, Fable III gives you that choice. Here is the cover for Fable III, courtesy of

Some of the positives for Fable III include the graphics, as the team at Lionhead Studios have created a gorgeous and breathtaking virtual world that has many different elaborate designs and features. The various characters in this game actually look like people, and all of the various towns each have their own distinctive charm to them. The audio in this game is also very well done, with the voice acting coming through crystal clear. The music wasn't too annoying, although there wasn't much variety, while the sound effects seemed to fit in well with what was happening at the time.

Combat in Fable III is, shall I say, kind of repetitive. Most of the time you just encounter a horde of enemies like hobbes and hollow men and are able to slash your way through the pile without too much damage. Or you can do a major spell and obliterate your opponents that way. For some reason, the makers of Fable 3 decided to dumb things down a bit by not only reducing the number of available spells from 15 to 6, but also taking away the manual aim on ranged weapons that was present in Fable 2. The latter decision has made sniping enemies from long range without being noticed nearly impossible, as you can't get a one shot kill anymore. Also, it has made shooting ranged weapons in general a lot less effective and frankly, less entertaining. Magic in this game is quite devastating, almost too devastating, and unlike most games, there's no limit on magic energy, so you can just press the B button over and over a few times and kill all your enemies with ease. While the ability to combine spells is interesting, I'm kind of ticked that there isn't nearly as many spells to use and master than in the first two Fable games. I'm also kind of ticked that there is no health bar in the game, as the only indication that you're in peril is when the option to take a potion or some food comes up on the option wheel in the lower left corner of the screen.

One of the things I enjoyed most about the Fable series is interacting with characters by using various expressions and effecting their perceptions of your character in either a positive or negative way, depending on the expression. Well, you can also do that in Fable 3, but it's not quite as enjoyable. On the plus side, there are a variety of new expressions to use, including hugging, tickling (which is kind of weird to do to a random stranger, but whatever), patty cake, and others. However, the expression wheel from Fable 2 is gone, so instead of having multiple expressions to choose from at any time, you are now only left with the two that happen to be presented. Also, instead of being able to interact with multiple people at a time, you can now only perform an expression for one person at a time, making it more time consuming to make friends or enemies. Also, instead of just becoming friends with villagers through expressions, you now have to earn their friendship or love through doing tasks for them. Unfortunately, the tasks are very repetitive and unimaginative, as either you go find something buried in the ground, deliver a package to another person, or you have to buy something for them. If you are pursuing a romantic relationship, you must go on a date with the person, which only consists of holding their hand, taking them to a specific spot, and sharing a kiss. Like the first two Fables, you can eventually marry and have children with the spouse of your choice, or, if you find the right person, you can go out and have premarital sex, although you may also get an STD if you do this without protection. Overall, the villagers are kind of repetitive and dull, and the constant tasks you must do in order to make friends doesn't really seem worth all of the effort.

The game also allows you to buy property like houses and shops with whatever money you earn, and through renting out houses and owning shops, you can accumulate money quite easily. Almost too easily, in fact. Furthermore, since everything like potions and furniture can be bought at a a fairly decent price, there comes a point in the game where money is really no object, so you can just go around and buy whatever you want while your savings are replenished through rent money after every five minutes of game play. As for the story of the game, it felt a bit shorter than the previous two Fable games, and although most of the main characters involved are interesting, and there are some cool side tasks, the main part of the mission is full of similar missions (usually you go somewhere, kill a bunch of enemies, and advance). Even when you become ruler, the choices you make aren't really terribly difficult to decide, as you either do the good thing or the evil thing after a minute long presentation is given by various characters.

If there were two beefs that I had with Fable 3, one is that the game is full of glitches. There are many fits of weirdness, such as getting stuck for no reason at all, having your dog disappear for minutes at a time, losing the trail you are on at the time in the middle of a quest, so you have no idea where you're going before it magically reappears, and so forth. The other thing about Fable 3 that I have beef with is that it is just too easy. Death has no real consequence in the game, as you just get back five seconds later to fight again instead of a more severe penalty such as, say, losing whatever progress you made on your quest. Making money is a cinch after you gain the ability to own property (why you have to gain the ability to own property with experience points is kind of strange, but whatever), so you're never short on cash. Your weapons evolve with each use, so there's no real use in buying newer weapons, and besides, the enemies never evolve too much in difficulty from the beginning to the end of the game, so it doesn't really matter anyway. Heck, even your dog has become easier, as unlike the previous game, it never gets hurt even when surrounded by 25 sword wielding bandits and improving it's skill is basically a matter of finding the right book (instead of evolving by levels, you can now buy a level five treasure seeking book, use it, and poof, your dog's instantly at the highest level, even if he started at level one).

Overall, I may have said a lot of seemingly negative things about Fable 3, and they are all true, but Fable 3 still can be a somewhat enjoyable game experience. That being said, it almost seems like a Triple-A version of Fable 2, as the series seems to have taken a step backwards instead of forwards in quality and innovation. Overall, I'd give Fable 3 a 5.2 out of 10, as it's decent enough, but is overall too repetitive and simple and could have been so much better. Well, thanks for reading, and if you have any comments about this or previous posts, or ideas for future reviews or posts, than share them either by leaving a comment or by sending me an e-mail at

Thursday, December 23, 2010

Let's talk about Kurt Angle

Recently, a wrestling magazine out of the UK called Powerslam released it's annual top 50 wrestlers of the year list. Number one on that list is Kurt Angle, as you probably guessed by the title of this post. So, in tribute of this accomplishment, I have decided to watch a few videos on Kurt Angle and review them for your amusement. I will be choosing which videos to watch by searching the Google Video search engine, and picking videos with random numbers, so who the heck knows what I'll get. So, without further adieu, here's a look at a man that shares a birthday with me (albeit a few years apart), Kurt Angle.

Video 1: A Look at Kurt Angle Training

So, we all have wondered how an Olympic Gold Medalist who switched over to professional wrestling and became the most intense individual in a profession full of intense people trains. Well, it may have been just me. Actually, I was never terribly interested either, but this video released by TNA shows us just how Kurt Angle trains to get in shape to carry Mr. Anderson to a decent match. According to this video, all Kurt Angle does to train is lift weights, be it with his legs, arms, whatever. Most of the video is Angle talking about his decision to drop himself out of the top 10 rankings in TNA and beat every wrestler ranked 1-10 on the list in order to earn a World Title match. I'm going to assume that he eventually realized this goal, or maybe he didn't. It is kind of odd to see Angle with some stubble on his face, as I'm more used to seeing him clean shaven. Anyway, I guess this wasn't that bad, so the video gets a 2 out of 5.

Video 2: WWE Kurt Angle Moonsaults From Cage

This video is from 2001, and features Kurt Angle in a commercial selling insurance. No, not really. As the title suggests, Kurt Angle does a moonsault off a cage in a match against Chris Benoit. He ends up missing Benoit and bouncing hard off the ground, which isn't surprising considering he did a backflip from about 12 feet high and landed straight on his torso. Even though it was a planned spot, that still probably didn't feel good. I'll give the video a 2.5 out of 5, because at least it was what it said it was.

WWE  Kurt Angle  Moonsaults From Cage
Uploaded by johncena77. - More professional, college and classic sports videos.

Video 3: TNA: Kurt Angle Threatens Jeff Jarrett 

Yep, it's just as it says, Kurt Angle threatens Jeff Jarrett. This video is from late in 2008, just before TNA Final Resolution 2008. At that show, Kurt Angle is to face Rhino with the stipulation being that if Angle wins, he gets a match with Jarrett, whom he lost to at the previous TNA pay-per-view. If Angle loses, he leaves TNA for good. Obviously, Angle won in a match that I actually reviewed earlier this year. So Angle calls Jarrett out, and tells him to celebrate, because Jarrett's celebrating somehow makes Angle stronger. Angle declares that he's more focused on beating Jarrett then he was winning the Gold Medal at the 1996 Olympics, which either means that he really hates Jeff Jarrett or his priorities are out of whack. Or maybe Angle just lacks perspective. Angle then mentions the issues, both in the ring and out, that he and Jarrett have had since Angle arrived on the scene in 2006. Of course, now they probably have more issues than ever since Jarrett is now married to Angle's ex wife, but that's neither here nor there. Jarrett looks bemused for the first few minutes of Angle's diatribe, until Angle decides to bring up Jarrett's family. That set off Jarrett to the point where now he stood on the entrance ramp with an angered look in his eyes. Angle concludes that stating that he will take Jarrett's company and family away from him because he's Kurt by God Angle, and Jarrett responds that the only way Angle will accomplish that is "over my dead body". Well, I'm sure that's pretty much what Angle stated he was going to set out and do, but whatever. The promo was ok, although it's funny that TNA was building to an Angle-Rhino match when Rhino was hardly mentioned. I'll give it a 2.15 out of 5.


Video 4: John Cena vs. Kurt Angle and Tyson Tomko, Handicap Match

All right, finally a match. This match is from the September 12, 2005 edition of WWE Raw, and Eric Bischoff is out on the ramp to root on Tomko and Angle. Tomko gets the advantage for his team by attacking Cena from behind. Cena gets out of a back suplex and takes down Tomko with punches. Cena off the rope, but Angle gets a shot in from the apron, casuing Jim Ross to react as if Angle sodomized Cena. Tag to Angle, but Cena gets the advantage after a raised boot from the corner, and gets a two count after a side slam. Angle rakes the eyes and tags Tomko, but Cena's vision clears up in time to hit a cross body on Tomko out of the Irish Whip and follow up with a Bodyslam. Cena fights both men off for a while, knocking Angle off the apron, battling with Tomko, then baseball sliding into Angle, which knocks Kurt back against the barricade. Finally, Tomko hits Cena with a crummy looking big boot and Super Cena is down. Cena is able to kick out at one, but all men are down on the mat as we head to commercial.

Back to the action, Angle's stomping away on Cena, and for some reason they show a replay of Tomko's awful boot. Cena goes behind out of a side headlock and hits a back suplex on Angle, and the ref starts to count both men down. Angle's up first and tags in Tomko. Tomko has no success against Cena, as he takes a series of punches and clotheslines before Cena catches him with his awful arm drag after Tomko rebounds from the Irish Whip. Cena's fired up, which can mean only one thing, Oh, Here Go Hell Come. Cena delivers a suplex to Tomko and catches Angle with a Spinebuster. Cena sets up Tomko for the FU, but Angle German Suplexes Cena while he's holding Tomko in the air, and all three men come crashing down to the mat. Angle with another German Suplex, but Cena is able to counter out of the third. Tomko goes for the big boot, but Cena ducks and hits Angle instead. Cena finishes Tomko off after a shoulder block and the FU, and gets the victory. This match felt as if they crammed 10 minutes worth of stuff into a five minute match, as nobody sold anything for more than three seconds. I'd give it a 1.65 out of 5.

Video 5: Kurt Angle VS The Rock VS Stone Cold VS The Undertaker VS Triple H VS Rikishi Hell In A Cell

Oh Here go Hell in a Cell Come, as this is the main event from WWF Armageddon 2000 and is for Angle's World Heavyweight Title. Everybody's facing off against everybody as Kurt Angle and the Undertaker are the first to actually wrestle in the ring. Undertaker gets a two count after a big punch, while The Rock tries to choke Rikishi with a cord on the outside of the ring. Austin slams Triple-H against the cage a couple of times, while the Rock and Rikishi take their turn in the ring. Rikishi counters the Rock's series of punches, but The Rock rebounds with a flying clothesline after an Irish Whip. They leave, while Austin and Triple-H enter the ring to do a sequence that culminates with an Austin Thesz press into punches, followed by a front elbow drop. That gets a two count, and Austin gets another two count after setting Triple H up against the second rope and doing a rope straddle on his back. Triple-H catches Austin with a high knee, then drags Austin to slam his knee against the ring post before they leave and the Rock and Angle come in. Rock gets a two count after a Samoan drop. Now everybody's brawling on the outside, with Triple-H suplexing Austin on the outside mat. The Rock gets slinged into the cage by Rikishi, but Rikishi gets caught with a Kurt Angle baseball slide from the ring. Austin and Undertaker team up on Triple-H, and everyone's just sort of mindlessly brawling at this point. Triple-H becomes the first man to bleed after Austin rakes his head against the cage. Austin then walks all around the ring, raking HHH's face against the cage as he goes before finally stopping and slamming HHH against the cell wall. Austin throws HHH in the ring and goes to enter himself, only to get caught with a big leg drop from Rikishi on the back of his head. Rikishi and Triple-H seem to be an alliance, but Triple H changes that with a Pedigree on Rikishi, and only a last-second save by The Rock keeps The Game from winning the match. Angle saves Triple-H from losing to a DDT from the Rock, and then Olympic Slams the Rock, only for Austin to break up the count. Austin with the Stone Cold Stunner on Angle, but the Undertaker breaks up the cover and chokeslams Austin, only for Triple-H to pull Taker out of the ring. Taker responds by slamming Triple H against the cage a few time while the other men are down in the ring. Austin hits both Rikishi and the Undertaker with clothelines, and reverses a Rikishi Irish Whip with a Thesz Press and punches combo. All of a sudden, here comes Vince McMahon on the back of a flatbed truck.

Vince hooks the door to the back of the truck, and the truck is able to break the door off with ease. Vince then tells the crew of the truck to hook the chains up to the cell and take it down, which is probably not safe for the wrestlers inside. Here come Commissioner Mick Foley, who enforces the rules by force with punches to stooges Patterson and Brisco, before having Vince escorted out by security. Triple-H exits the cell door first, and Stone Cold follows, taking Triple-H down with a clothesline from behind. Austin slams Triple H onto the hood of a conveniently placed clunker. I don't know why there are a few junk cars next to the entrance ramp, but since they're here, why not use them? Austin uses a camera to smash Triple-H in the gut with, while everybody else have found their way to the car lot. Austin and Triple-H brawl around the construction truck, and eventually Triple-H slams Austin face first through a window. That makes Austin bleeder number two. Meanwhile, The Rock attempts to Rock Bottom HHH on the top of a car, but a Triple-H low blow puts a stop to that. Pedigree by Triple-H on the Rock, on the top of a car. Now The Rock is bleeding, meanwhile, Rikishi tries to brain Austin with a barrel, but Austin is able to kick Rikishi in the gut to bring a stop to that. Undertaker slams Angle on the hood of a car, and I believe Angle has a cut on his arm, but I'm not sure. Austin catapults Triple-H onto a car hood, and then tries to smush Triple-H with a barrel, but misses. Meanwhile, Undertaker and Angle are now around the announcer's table, and the Undertaker bonks Kurt on the headwith a microphone. While the others brawl, Angle somehow gets the advantage and bashes the Undertaker's head in with a chair. Now the Undertaker's busted open, and Triple-H has decided to climb the cage wall and go on the roof, with Austin right behind him. The two start brawling on the cage, with Triple-H teasing a fall off the cage, but eventually they move towards the middle and now Angle and the Undertaker have joined in the fun on the roof. Austin with an awkward looking Stunner on the roof. Angle becomes the fifth man to bleed from the forehead after The Undertaker bashes his head against a support beam on the roof of the cell.

Triple-H decides that it would be a good idea to climb down, and Austin follows. Rikihsi and The Rock are now on the roof, while a timekeeper throws The Undertaker a chair, and Taker uses it to bash Angle in the head. The Rock has decided to leave while Rikishi takes the chair to slug Taker. While Rikishi is busy with Undertaker, Angle decides that now would be a good time to head to solid ground. Kishi and Undertaker brawl on the cell, and get perilously close to the edge. Oh No, Taker chokeslams Rikishi off the cage roof into the back of the previously introduced flatbed truck, leaving Rikishi in a mess of wood chips and other stuff. The crowd goes into a frenzy as Rock and Stone Cold square off with each other, ending in a Rock Spinebuster. Rock goes for the People's Elbow, but Triple-H puts an end to that. The Rock knocks Triple-H out of the ring, then counters an Angle offensive attempt with a Rock Bottom. Cover, but Austin breaks it up before three. Both Austin and Rock struggle to their feet, and Austin hits the Stunner on The Rock, allowing The Rock to do his mega sell of that maneuver. Triple-H catches Austin before he can cover The Rock, and hits the neckbreaker on Stone Cold. That allows Kurt to roll over and drape his arm over The Rock, and get the three count to retain the title. Post match, Austin sends a message to Angle with a Stone Cold Stunner. Well, this was a mess of a match, but at least it was an entertaining one. I'll give it a 3.25 out of 5.

Well, thanks for reading The Canon Review's look at Kurt Angle, and if you have any comments about this or previous posts, or ideas for future reviews or posts, than share them either by leaving a comment or by sending me an e-mail at

Wednesday, December 22, 2010

Canon MST3K Review: Santa Claus Conquers the Martians

Today's little piece of Christmas Spirit is episode 321 of Mystery Science Theater, the 1964 cinematic effort Santa Claus Conquers the Martians. This is the second time I've seen this movie, but the first time I was feeling a twinge masochistic and watched the original uncut version without any commentary from talking robots. Starring future Golden Globe winning actress Pia Zadora, John Call as Santa Claus, the guy that played Ralph on the Jeffersons, and a lot of people who inexplicably never acted in another movie again. Directed by Nicholas Webster (who went on to direct an episode of Get Smart and The Waltons), Santa Claus Conquers the Martians is about Santa Claus, who gets abducted by Martians in order to cheer up the autonomous children of Mars. Also, the Martians kidnap two earth children named Billy and Betty along the way, and somehow they team up to bring Christmas cheer and joy to the fine citizens of Mars. But not everyone is happy about this, as a martian named Voldar is concerned that the introduction of toys will make the children annoying and bratty, much like Earth children :). A few notes about this movie:

- In this claptrap of a film, the Martians are presented as highly developed beings who can travel to Earth whenever they please and their ships are built with radar shields so they can't be detected. They also wear green helmets with antennas and skin tight green jumpsuits. Mars also has powerful enough satellites so they can watch Earth programs on their television sets, which concerned Kimar, as his kids seem to do nothing but watch TV. You know, just like Earth. At the very least, Kimar should be thankful that cable television wasn't around back then, or those children would never leave. Also, Mars eats food in pill form, which sounds about as enjoyable as eating dirt, and apparently have never heard of a handshake, as they prefer to greet each other with light headbutts.

- Most of the Martians seem to be of higher intelligence, except for Dropo, who must be the village idiot of Mars. Dropo acts like a dumber version of Barney Fife. I'm not exactly clear what exactly Dropo's role is, but it must be something important considering he's in direct contact with the chief of the Martians. In the movie, Dropo's the token dumb comic relief and he's about as subtle as a sledgehammer to the face. After a while, I was rooting for Dropo to be dropped, so to speak. Instead his role just grows and grows, as he becomes a key figure at the end of the film.

- The Santa Claus in this film is not quite as strange as the Kris Kringle in the film I reviewed last week, but is still a bit unsettling nonetheless. Like the other Santa Claus, he is prone to fits of laughter in even the most mundane circumstances. There's one scene in the movie, where Santa and Billy and Betty meet Kimar's kids, Bomar and Girmar (very original names, fellows), and Santa just burst into a serial-killer esque laughing fit. To make things worse, the kids join in, and each of the martian kids (especially Girmar, played by Zadora) have this strange far away look in their eyes while laughing as if they heard the world's greatest joke. It's actually quite unsettling, to be honest.

- Every story must have some sort of conflict, and this movie's conflict comes from a martian named Voldar. We know he's evil because he's the only martian with a mustache. Voldar just hates the idea of Martian children having fun in their lives, to the point where he repeatedly tries to have Santa and the two Earth children killed in gruesome fashion. It's actually pretty heavy stuff for what's supposed to be a kid's movie. Fortunately for Voldar, he's surrounded by idiots, so he gets opportunity after opportunity to thwart Kimar's scheme and prevent Martian children from getting wooden trains and other toys. Unfortunately for Voldar, he's not nearly as smart as he thinks he is, as he's constantly stopped by Santa and Billy. At one point, he thinks he's kidnapped Santa, except it's Dropo in a spare Santa costume which was made for Santa by Kimar's wife Momar. Also, for some reason Momar decided to make Santa a spare beard, but whatever. Anyway, Voldar and his cronies somehow can't tell Dropo apart from Santa, even though Dropo has a GREEN HELMET ON HIS HEAD the whole time, while Santa has not, nor will he ever, wear a green helmet with antenna sticking up. You know, for a technologicly advanced people, the Martians sure are stupid.

- I would be remiss if I didn't discuss Santa's kidnapping. For one, their was a polar bear roaming around, which really was just a guy in a really cheap bear costume. Also, to kidnap Santa, the Martians sent out a robot named Torg to do the deed. Torg looked like an air conditioner with arms and legs and a coffee pot head, and moved about as swift as Cecil Fielder. Why the Martians decided to have Torg as their ultimate weapon is a mystery that will never be solved, as Santa disposed of him quite easily. Finally, the Martians have to come in their themselves, and Voldar freezes a couple of elves and Mrs. Claus (who, in the short time on film she had, somehow was the most annoying character in the movie due to her non-stop nagging), much to the relief of the audience. Finally, they take Santa peacefully, as Santa seemed more concerned about a future tongue-lashing from his wife then anything the Martians may of had in store for him. Perhaps all Santa needs is a good divorce lawyer.

- Not only did this episode feature Santa Claus Conquers the Martians, it also features a performance of one of the greatest Christmas carols of all time, a Patrick Swayze Christmas. Yes, it's as great as it sounds. Just listen to it here:

Overall, this is the type of movie that would probably be made more enjoyable through the use of hallucinogenic drugs. Unfortunately, I don't do drugs, and I don't recommend that you do any either. Actually, this type of movie is just ripe for parody, as it's really so bad that it's funny, and the constant barbs make this episode even funnier. Overall, I'd give the movie Santa Claus Conquers the Martains a 0.90 out of 10, and the episode a 6.9 out of 10. Well, thanks for reading, and if you have any comments about this or previous posts, or ideas for future reviews or posts, than share them either by leaving a comment or by sending me an e-mail at

Tuesday, December 21, 2010

Minnesota Vikings vs. Los Angeles Rams, NFC Playoff Game, December 26, 1977

With the Minnesota Vikings playing so poorly tonight against the Chicago Bears in the outdoors, it got me in the frame of mind to watch another football game where the elements played a role. So I went online and watched the 1977 playoff game between the Minnesota Vikings and the Los Angeles Rams, in a game that would later be dubbed "The Mud Bowl". The Rams had lost to Minnesota in both the 1974 and 1976 playoffs in Minnesota, and most experts figured that since the Rams had home field advantage this time around, that the Rams would finally dispose of their tormentors. But a torrential rainstorm made the L.A. Coliseum field a quagmire of slop, and as it turns out, actually gave the tough-minded Vikings the advantage, as they had more experience in rough conditions from playing their home games at Exhibition Stadium. Of course, the Vikings did the dumbest thing they could have done and moved to an indoor stadium five years later, taking away whatever homefield advantage that playing in the cold in Minnesota would have given them, but that's another topic for another time. Anyway, the Rams also had a huge advantage in that Minnesota QB Fran Tarkenton was injured and unable to play, so 32 year old journeyman Bob Lee had to take the snaps for the Vikings. All of that added up to a hill of beans for the Rams, as once again they found themselves on the wrong end of the scoreboard against the Vikings, losing by a 14-7 margin. A few notes about this game.

- The Vikings head coach, Bud Grant, seemed to have the right game plan in place for this type of game. With the field as bad as it was, Grant decided to have Lee throw often early in the game, although Lee didn't throw anything deep. It worked on the first drive, as Lee was 5 for 5 and the Vikings scored after a five yard run by Chuck Foreman. After that, Lee didn't complete any of the six passes he attempted, as by that point the Vikings switch exclusively to the running game, finishing the game with 28 straight running plays (the last three were really kneeldowns, but they count as run all the same).

- Both teams' featured running backs, Foreman and the Rams Lawrence McCutheon, actually did pretty well, as each player got over 100 yards. McCutheon broke off a couple of big runs to end up with 102 yards on 16 carries, while Foreman ran tough on 31 carries for 101 yards. The difference between the two teams became the fullbacks, as Robert Miller of the Vikings gained 66 yards on the ground and through the air, while the Rams' fullback, John Cappelletti, gained only 15 yards and missed large portions of the game due to being 'bone-weary', at least according to the announcers.

- Kudos goes to the Vikings, whom in spite of the muddy conditions, only fumbled the ball once early in the game, and didn't turn the ball over one time. This in spite of being -18 in turnovers during the regular season. Meanwhile, the Rams QB, Pat Haden, threw only six interceptions during the regular season, but threw three in this game against the Vikings (one was a desperation heave on the game's last play). That included a pick in the end zone by the Vikings Nate Allen, and another pick deep in Vikings territory on a wobbler by Paul Krause. Actually, I thought the Krause pick might have been tipped, but no, Haden's pass came out side to side instead of spiraling, and Krause was easily able to get under the ball and snatch it.

- Also, DT Alan Page of the Vikings was quite impressive in this game. After McCutheon broke off a 27 yard run early in the game, it was Page, a lineman, that chased down the speedy running back and prevented an even bigger gain. Page also got a sack when he sped by C Rich Saul in the third quarter, and also pressured Haden a few times and made some key plays stopping the run for the Vikings. Not bad for a 240 pound defensive tackle, which was small for that position even back in 1977. If Page came around today, he'd either be moved to linebacker or maybe defensive end. Quite frankly, you won't find many lineman in history that were as quick as Alan Page. Also, you won't find many as durable as Vikings DE Jim Marshall, as the 39 year old Marshall was playing in his 284th straight game. Not only that, but Marshall also made a few big plays for the Vikings, tipping a pass and making a big tackle for loss in the second half of the game. After the game, the network interviewed Page and Marshall, who both spent two minutes complaining about the officiating. If they did that today, chances are both men would be fined heavily, but that's just how things were back then.

- As for the announcers, it was a treat listening to Vin Scully. Yes, he's more known for baseball, but Scully's just as skilled at announcing football games. As for his partner, Alex Hawkins, well let's just say that he's at least better than Jon Gruden and Tony Siragusa.

- As you might expect for a game called the Mud Bowl, the field was a giant mess. Even at the beginning of the game, the whole middle of the field was nothing but mud. This resulted in everybody being covered in mud to the point where it was hard to tell who was who for the Vikings because their white jerseys were completely covered in mud. All except for Vikings' receivers Ahmad Rashad and Sammy White, who stood on the outside of the field and didn't have much to do as the Vikings ran every play right up the middle. Rashad caught a couple of passes early, while White wasn't even thrown the ball, as I can recall. As for the Rams, you could kind of see their numbers through the mud, as they were painted in yellow, but each team's offensive line was just coated in mud. The Vikings even changed jerseys at halftime, but about five plays in, they were just as dirty as they were before the change.

- I was struck mostly by how conservative each team was. Yes, the game was somewhat played in difficult conditions, but I was still surprised when the Vikings began to take a knee on first down with three minutes to play in the game. Also, when the Rams were driving during the last play of the game, they still kept two backs in the backfield and even ran a draw play with 30 seconds to go and no timeouts. I guarantee you won't see a team do that in the game nowadays. However, Bud Grant wasn't all conservative, as after his team scored in the fourth quarter, the Vikings pulled off an onside kick and kept the ball a little longer, which was great because nobody expected it, especially the guy trying to catch the ball.

- While Fran Tarkenton didn't play due to injury, another Hall of Fame quarterback was also on the sidelines. Yep, the Rams had Joe Namath on the bench, as he had lost the job to Haden early in the season. That didn't stop Hawkins and Scully from speculating whether we would see Namath come in at some point, but Broadway Joe never got into action in what would be his final game in uniform.

- The video I watched also showed the postgame show, and during it, Jimmy "The Greek" Snyder declared that Chuck Knox had coached his last game in Los Angeles, and that George Allen would replace him. While Allen did not come to coach the Rams, Snyder was at least right about Knox, as he resigned before he could get fired, in spite of five straight division titles. It would not be the last game Knox coached for the Rams, as he came back in 1992 in an ill-fated move to coach the Rams through three straight losing seasons. While the Rams never reached the Super Bowl under Knox, they would reach the Superbowl in 1979 under Ray Malavasi. As for the Vikings, they got the privilege of being decimated by the Dallas Cowboys in the NFC Championship game, losing to the 'Boys 26-13 in what proved to be Bud Grant's only loss in the NFC Championship game.

Well, thanks for reading. Remember, if you have any ideas for future reviews, or comments about this or previous reviews, then send them to me either by e-mail at or by leaving a comment on the blog.

Sunday, December 19, 2010

Your 2010 Canon Review College Football Preview in Review

Since today marks the beginning of college football's bowl season, I figured that now is a good time to look back at my 2010 College Football preview and see just how poorly I did in predicting what would happen this year. If you want to look back at my original picks, then check out the Canon Review College Football Preview and the Canon Review College Football Midseason Review .

ACC: In the Atlantic Division, I picked Boston College at the beginning of the season to emerge as the division champs, but a slow start thwarted the Eagles' hopes at a ACC Championship Game birth. My mideseason pick, Florida State, did just enough to emerge as the division champs, although if N.C. State had been able to beat Maryland in their final game, then I would have been wrong once again. In the Coastal Division, Virginia Tech was my pick at the beginning of the season, and despite a slow start, the Hokies reeled off an 11 game winning streak to easily capture the Coastal Division and win the ACC Championship Game against Florida State. Unfortunately for me, although I picked Virginia Tech at the beginning of the year, I changed my pick in midseason to Florida State. In hindsight, I should have just stuck with my gut, as Virginia Tech was far and away the top team in this conference, even though they lost to Division I-AA James Madison in the week's second game.

Big East: Pittsburgh was picked by many to represent the Big East in the BCS, but after another disappointing season, Pittsburgh fired coach Dave Wannstedt and will be playing in something called the BBVA Compass Bowl. My pick at the beginning of the season and at midseason was West Virginia, and in spite of a struggling offense, the Mountaneers had a strong defense and did finish in a three way tie for the conference lead. However, the Connecticut Huskies won the Big East crown after beating West Virginia and Pittsburgh in back to back weeks, and the Huskies will be making their first appearance in a BCS bowl game as they will get slaughtered by Oklahoma in the Fiesta Bowl. So, congrats to coach Randy Edsell, RB Jordin Todman, and the rest of the Huskies on a job well done.

Big Ten: Once again, I unwisely decided to change my original pick at midseason, the Wisconsin Badgers, and instead went with the Iowa Hawkeyes. Once again, I was quite wrong, as Wisconsin finished with an 11-1 record and average 43.5 points a game. Actually, Wisconsin, Ohio State, and the surprising Michigan State each finished with 11-1 records and 7-1 conference records, but because Wisconsin finished the season with the highest BCS ranking, they were the team chosen to represent the Big Ten in the Rose Bowl. Meanwhile, Ohio State gets a birth in the Sugar Bowl, while Michigan State gets the honor of being the highest ranked team left out of the BCS, even though they beat Wisconsin. Go figure. As for Iowa, even though they handed Michigan State their only loss of the season, the Hawkeyes struggled down the stretch and finished the season with a 4-4 conference record in the Big Ten. At the end of the day, I think I will claim that I was right about Wisconsin winning the Big Ten, and conveniently forget to mentioned that I abandoned that pick in the middle of the season.

Big Twelve: In the Big Twelve's last year with 12 teams (next year, it will have ten teams, while the Big Ten will have 12 teams, how strange is that?), I am pleased to report that my Big 12 North pick, Nebraska, was spot on. I am not pleased to mention that I picked Texas to win the Big 12 South and the Conference. I certainly did not expect Texas to struggle mightily on offense without QB Colt McCoy, and the only comfort I can take in my mispick is that I was not alone in that regard. At least my mid-season pick, Oklahoma, came through in the end and took the Big 12 South crown. But the Sooners proved me wrong again, as they beat Nebraska in the Big 12 Title Game and won the conference, thwarting Nebraska's chance of winning the conference in their final year before playing in the Big 10 next year.

Pac 10: At the beginning of the season, I declared that the Pac 10 had no dominant team and that the Washington Huskies would emerge as the champions at the end of the year. I don't remember ever being so incorrect in my life. For one, Washington was inconsistent all year, especially their quarterback, Jake Locker. Also, there was not one, but two dominant teams in the Pac-10 this year, as the Oregon Ducks ran roughshod over everybody with a rapid-fire offense that landed them a spot in the BCS Championship Game. Also, Stanford dominated everyone in their path, with the exception of Oregon, on the way to an 11-1 record and a top-5 ranking in the BCS rankings. I also made the statement that Locker is the best player in the conference, but as Oregon RB LaMichael James and Stanford QB Andrew Luck proved, that was quite a misfire on my part as well.

SEC: The story of the year in the SEC was Heisman Trophy winning Auburn QB Cam Newton. Whether it was with his excellent play on the field, or allegations of illegal recruiting practices off of it, the buzz in the SEC revolved around Cam Newton and the SEC champion Auburn Tigers. While some experts, like ESPN's Kirk Herbstreit, picked Auburn to win the SEC West, it would be safe to say that very few people saw Newton and Auburn having the season they had. I however, was also not expecting too much more than a mid-level bowl game from Auburn. Instead I went with Alabama to repeat as SEC Champions. Instead, the Tide lost three games and finished fourth in the SEC West. In the East, I had Florida as the pick to win at the beginning of the season, but their offense sputtered without Tim Tebow, so in midseason I switched to South Carolina. At last, one of my midseason changes paid off, as South Carolina beat Florida and won the SEC East, only to get slaughtered by Auburn in the SEC Championship Game.

Other Conferences: Of the five other conferences, only one of my picks, TCU in the Mountain West, proved to be correct. In the WAC, Boise State started the season ranked number three and won their first 10 games before falling to QB Colin Kaepernick and Nevada. The loss gave Nevada the tiebreaker advantage and the WAC crown. In the MAC, my preseason pick (Temple) didn't even make a bowl game (although they were eligible with an 8-4 record), and my midseason pick Northern Illinois lost to Miami of Ohio in the MAC Championship Game. Oddly enough, the MAC Title game was the last game for both coaches (Jerry Kill of NIU and Mike Haywood of Miami) as they moved on to bigger schools after the game. In Conference USA, my preseason pick was Houston, but an injury to QB Case Kessum derailed the Cougars, so I went with SMU in the midseason. That was also incorrect, as Central Florida triumphed over SMU in the C-USA Championship Game. In the Sun Belt, both my preseason pick (Middle Tennessee) and mid season pick (Troy) at least made a bowl game, but it was Florida International that took the Conference after a mid-season win against Troy gave them the tiebreaker advantage. So, in the other confrences, my prediction average was a nifty .200.

National Championship Game: Originally, I picked Alabama to battle Boise State. Since they didn't even win their respective conferences, you already know that that is wrong. At midseason, I had the wisdom to switch to Oregon at least, but I still believed in the Broncos and not only predicted a spot in the title game, but for Boise State to be the 2010 National Champions. Well, at the end of the day, it is Oregon and Auburn in a battle of two explosive offenses. This should be an exciting game, provided the month long layoff doesn't make the two teams rusty. If I had to choose a winner, I would go with Oregon, as they seem to be more talented than Auburn. But I wouldn't be surprised Cam Newton wins the game by himself a la Vince Young in the 2006 Rose Bowl.

Heisman Trophy: Let's take a look at my preseason top five, along with my darkhorse pick:

1. Jake Locker, QB, Washington
2. Terrelle Pryor, QB, Ohio State
3. Noel Devine, RB, West Virginia
4. Case Kessum, QB, Houston
5. Mark Ingram, RB, Alabama
Dark Horse: John Brantley, QB, Florida

I am pleased to report that of the six players listed above did not receive one single vote for the Heisman Trophy in 2010. Ingram and Devine failed to clear the 1,000 yard mark, Brantley was ineffective and eventually benched, Kesssum was hurt, Locker disappointed and Pryor was good, but not great. My midseason pick of Denard Robinson started the season on fire, but faded down the stretch. Still, at least he got some votes. The only comfort I can take is that at least I was not alone in not picking Cam Newton for the Heisman. Heck, he was ranked seventh among SEC quarterbacks in the preseason. Anybody that says they picked Newton at the beginning of the season to win the Heisman and lead Auburn to a 13-0 record is a liar, unless I see evidence to the contrary.

Well, overall I did not do so well. Out of the 11 conferences, I correctly picked the winner of three of them at the beginning of the season (Virgina Tech in the ACC, Wisconsin in the Big 10, TCU in the Mountain West). After making some adjustments in midseason, I somehow did worse and only got two correct (TCU, Oregon in the Pac 10). All I can say is that it is a good thing I don't gamble on college football, because I would be broke, or moreso than I already am. Well, thanks for reading, and if you have any thoughts about this or other posts, or ideas for future posts, than let us know them either by leaving a comment or by sending me an e-mail at

Friday, December 17, 2010

Canon MST3K Review: Santa Claus

Hey, it's almost Christmas, as I am sure you have noticed. So in the spirit of Christmas I decided to sit back and watch an episode of Mystery Science Theater 3000. This episode featured the 1959 Mexican film titled Santa Claus, which has been dubbed over for American audiences. Thank God they did, as this film deserves to be appreciated by all of Earth's children. It's just that good. Well, actually it's one of the strangest films I've ever had the pleasure of seeing. Santa Claus was adapted for American audiences by a man named K. Gordan Murray, who also was the narrator in this cinematic effort. In this film, Santa and his child helpers are not situated at the North Pole, but instead they have a compound somewhere out in space, with a powerful enough telescope to zoom in on any house on Earth. Also, Santa has a powerful enemy in Satan, who sends a demon named Pitch to earth to thwart Santa Claus's attempts at bringing joy to all the children around the world. A few more notes about this episode, and yes there are SPOILERS, so in case you want to watch the movie sometime then you may want to stop reading. Then again, I can't see why you would want to, so I encourage you to read on.

- At the beginning of the movie, Santa is sitting on a bench playing a giant organ as children from all around the world sing various songs from their region. The singing is terrible, most of the songs aren't even Christmas songs and the whole thing lasts about seven minutes and is accompanied by Santa playing and laughing like a maniac, which would become a common sight throughout the movie. To make matters worse, the stereotyping of the various kids is politically incorrect at best (especially Africa, and according to this movie, all American children are cowboys). Not only that, but these kids actually spend their days and nights slaving away for Santa's enterprise, taking the place of the elves that normally work for Santa. I guess Santa had his operations base moved into outer space because by golly, there are no child labor laws outside of the Earth's atmosphere.

- After the viewers are tortured with horrendous singing from all around the globe, we cut to Hades, where a few demons in tight red costumes perform a dance number for what I assume is Satan's enjoyment. After that gets completed, a demon named Pitch is selected to muddle up Santa's mission, and if he doesn't do it, Pitch will have to eat a lot of chocolate ice cream. Apparently Pitch is lactose intolerant. Pitch as a whole seems, well, a wee bit effeminate, to say the least, and his skin tight uniform does not do him, or us, any favors. Every time he gets on screen, Pitch is usually seen prancing around like a schoolgirl before doing whatever dastardly deed he's going to do. Although I will say that Pitch does stoop to some rather low tactics to get what he wants, he's mainly used as a source of slapstick comedy until the end, where he finally gets smart and does a couple of things right.

- The story also centers around a few kids from Mexico City. There's Billy, the rich kid who gets a whole lot of toys but only wants more attention from his parents, who instead decide to spend Christmas Eve night at a cocktail party. There's Lupita, a poor girl who only wants a doll for Christmas, yet has never gotten one even though she's been good over the years. Also, there are three young boys who are never named and may or may not be brothers, but they're angry at the world about something so they decide to lash out and eventually, with Pitch's assistance, come up with a plan to kidnap Santa and take all of his toys. Oh please, like they're the first kids to think up that scheme. As it turns out, the worldwide battle of good and evil between Santa and Pitch will be centralized around five children in Mexico. Well, that's nice to know.

- The Santa Claus in this movie is, how shall I put it, crazy as a loon. He is prone to fits of hysterical laughter, has a horde of children working for him, and most disturbing of all, Santa has the power to not only see children while they're sleeping, he can also see their dreams. There are two scenes involving Santa in this film that would freak me the freak out when I was a kid. The first one was when all the kids' letters to Santa came, and Santa, with the look of a Manson follower in his eyes, laughs hysterically while swimming in all of the letters for about a minute before getting to business and reading the letters. The second one is when Santa cranks up the toy reindeer, as in this version, Santa's reindeer are actually toys that need to be cranked in order to work. Anywho, Santa successfully cranks the reindeer, as their toy eyes and legs start to move, Santa starts the chuckle like a madman once again. But what makes it worse is that the toy reindeer join Santa in a laughing fit that makes it both look and sound like a demented creature from a horror film. Also, for some reason there's a pentagram on Santa's wall. Um, I don't think I want this Santa coming down my chimney.

- There are a couple of other eccentricities that I want to mention. One is that Santa has another assistant, and its none other than the wizard Merlin, who provides Santa with some sort of special powder that will put children to sleep, and a flower that allows Santa to disappear. Yes, Merlin the magical wizard works alongside Santa Claus. Why not just toss in Don Quixote while you're at it? The other involves Lupita's dad, who can't seem to find work. The reason behind this might be because he's looking for a job in the early morning hours on CHRISTMAS DAY, where nothing is sure to be open except for the odd bar of club and apparently the nightclub where Billy's parents decided to party at.

Overall, I can't believe this movie was made for kids. It's just way too weird and has a couple of scenes that may very well give me nightmares tonight.  It is a rather hilarious episode, as this movie is just begging to be picked apart, and Mike and the Bots do not disappoint in riffing this movie. Overall, I'd give the movie a 0.59 out of 10, but I'd give the episode a 7.02 out of 10. Well, thanks for reading, and if you have any comments about this or previous posts, or ideas for future reviews or posts, than share them either by leaving a comment or by sending me an e-mail at

Thursday, December 16, 2010

Canon Book Review: Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows

Today is the conclusion of the reviews of J.K. Rowling's Harry Potter saga, with the review of the seventh book, Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows. The 768 page book was later the basis for two separate movies, one that was released a few weeks ago, while the second movie is to be released in July, 2011. In Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows, Harry, along with his friends Ron Weasley and Hermoine Granger, decide to forgo their seventh year of Hogwarts in order to look for Horcruxes which contain parts of Lord Voldemort's soul and destroy them before Voldemort can finally succeed in his mission to kill Harry Potter and become the most powerful wizard on the planet. Meanwhile, Voldemort and his followers, the Death Eaters, seem to have the world by it's tail, leaving behind a trail of fear and despair as they take over the Ministry of Magic and Hogwarts itself. Along the way, Harry, Ron, and Hermoine learn of three sacred objects that together are called the Deathly Hallows. Eventually, Harry and Voldemort have their faceoff, and everybody dies except for Seamus Finnegan and Professor Sprout. Well, not really. A few thoughts about this book, and yes there are SPOILERS, so you have been warned.

- You know, for a book series that was originally meant for kids, a lot of characters die in this book. Even from the beginning, many characters that have become well known in the series are bumped off rather unceremoniously. Actually, the whole book takes a more mature turn, as in this book there are characters cursing and numerous kidnappings and all sorts of stuff like that. I didn't have a problem with this too much, especially when you consider that the readers who grew up with the series were more mature by the release of Deathly Hallows and could accept this change in tone, but still, it is somewhat jarring to see how this story evolved from its beginnings.

- Since Harry and his cohorts are away from Hogwarts for most of the year, and out on their own, the story narrows its focus dramatically. Also, since there are a lot of times where the three are just out in the woods waiting for their next move, there's a lot of down time in this book where nothing happens other than some bickering among the three of them or they take forever to argue about their next move before finally coming to a decision. One of the things I liked most about this series was the wide array of characters that would either be introduced or greatly evolve throughout the series, but in the Deathly Hallows, there are very few characters being introduced, and we really only learn more about Dumbledore and Snape. Oh, and I guess the goblins. Everybody else either makes a token appearance or two or changes for the worse (i.e. Lupin). Except for Neville, as he finally stepped out of Harry's shadow to become a key part of the story, even though his role was rather short.

- After reading the seven Harry Potter books, I must say that I'm not impressed with Ron Weasley's performance. Or Ron in general, to be honest. Actually, he wasn't so bad in the first three books, but starting with the Goblet of Fire, Ron just gets more and more annoying. In this book, Ron really turns it up a notch, as he spends a lot of the book pining over Hermoine to the point where he becomes a lovesick mess who lost whatever charm he had possessed throughout the series. What really ticked me off is when he decided to leave his two friends, the only people who had put up with his constant bursts of immaturity and insensitivity, to fend for themselves. One, it really seemed kind of forced, as someone with the perpetrated bravery of Ron wouldn't just cut and run like that, and two, I understand that he was under some sort of negative force due to the locket, which of course raises the issue of why the three decided it would be a good idea to wear a cursed object like that around their necks in the first place. I guess at the end of the day I just have a hard time finding what it is Ron brings to the table. He's not particularly smart and tends to turn his back on his friends without warning. Harry's the chosen one, Hermoine supplies the ideas and logic, so what does Ron do, keep the drinks on ice?

- It was once observed by Professor Snape that "[Harry Potter] has fought his way out of a number of tight corners by a simple combination of sheer luck and more talented friends." Well, after the events of the Deathly Hallows, it's kind of hard to disagree with Snape about Potter's remarkable luck. Heck, he escapes time and time again from certain doom through an improbable series of events, and is only able to complete his task of destroying Horcruxes with the assistance of Neville and others. Then again, this is not anything new, as Harry once pulled a giant sword out of a hat and also was able to go back in time to save, well, himself. But in those other books, at least Harry had to show off some semblance of skill to accomplish his goal. In the Deathly Hallows, it seems like Harry became way too reliant on luck and other people's mistakes more than any skills he possessed, or maybe it's just me.

- Voldemort may be an all-powerful wizard and all, but he needs a new team of accomplices, as the Death Eaters usually suck. Even when they accomplish something, they usually screw things up so badly that things are worse than they were before. Yes, Bellatrix may be some sort of dark arts genius and the rest of the Death Eaters are fearful in their own way, but they seem to be so interested in serving Voldemort that all logic escapes their brains, so they do stupid things like leaving a bunch of wizards unattended in a prison cell. Actually, Voldemort seems to have a few brain farts himself throughout the book, as his arrogance seems to work against him in many ways throughout the series. I wonder if Voldemort is really that good, or the rest of the wizardy world (the ministry, Dumbledore, etc.) is really just not very good at their tasks.

Overall, Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows had a few problems. There were a few plotholes, some things went unacknowledged or under acknowledged, and there's a lot of time in this book where nothing happens. However, as a whole. Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows isn't too bad of a book, although not quite up to the level of the first four books. Overall, I'd give Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows a 6.43 out of 10. Well, thanks for reading, and if you have any comments about this or previous posts, or ideas for future reviews or posts, than share them either by leaving a comment or by sending me an e-mail at

Monday, December 13, 2010

Canon Book Review: Harry Potter and the Half Blood Prince

Continuing on with the reviews of each book in J.K. Rowling's Harry Potter saga, today I review the sixth Harry Potter book, Harry Potter and the Half Blood Prince. At 652 pages, Harry Potter and the Half Blood Prince isn't as long as the previous two books, but it's lengthy enough to cover what needs to be covered. In this book, Harry is back for his sixth year at Hogwarts, along with Ron and Hermoine and Seamus and all his Hogwarts friends. More personnel changes take place, as Hogwarts has a new potions teacher in Horace Slughorn, who replaces Severus Snape. But don't fret about Snape, as he finally realizes his lifelong dream of becoming the new defense against the dark arts teacher. But not all is well as Hogwarts, as Harry's arch rival Voldemort and his Death Eaters have risen to power, causing chaos in their wake, and Harry, along with Hogwarts headmaster Dumbledore, spend much of the year preparing for the eventual showdown with Voldemort which, as has been prophesied, will leave one of the two dead. A few notes about Harry Potter and the Half Blood Prince, and I'm going to try to not spoil too much in the story, but there are due to be some SPOILERS, so be careful.

- In the last book, I felt that Harry and others, including Hermoine, had become a bunch of self-important cranks. Well, a year seems to have made a difference with Harry, as although he still has a few moments of immaturity, he seems a lot more focused and less likely to snap at everybody in sight this time around. However, it seems as if Ron and Hermoine once again spend most of the book angry at each other about all sorts of things. Then Ron gets a girlfriend, which makes things much much worse, and Hermoine's various dates with others doesn't help matters, so basically you have Harry's two best friends feuding with each other for half of the book, which is probably not the thing Harry needs to deal with, what with his upcoming battle with the most powerful dark wizard of all time and all. Harry is not spared by Hermoine's wrath either, as Harry uses an old potions book written in by the mysterious Half-Blood Prince to become the top student in potions class, much to Hermoine's chagrin. Although, I must say, I do kind of see her point, as Harry just happened to find the right book while Hermoine does all her work the old-fashioned way.

- In the previous years at Hogwarts, a certain pattern developed. Something traumatic happens, Harry gets involved, and everybody starts to pile on Harry. Well, not this time, as the events of the previous book have made Harry a modern day folk hero. The same newspapers that sought to destroy his reputation now call him 'the chosen one', the same Ministry of Magic that tried to get Harry expelled now ask for his help, the same group of students that once mocked and ridiculed Harry now treat him as if he's up on a pedestal (well, except for the Slytherins). To Harry's credit, he doesn't rub it in everybody's faces by telling them 'I told you so' or some other nonsense, although he also is rather skeptical of his newfound acceptance, and wants little or nothing to do with the same people that nearly destroyed him in the last book.

- In Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince, it seems as if half the book is spent with Harry and Dumbledore learning about Voldemort's past through memories stored in Dumbledore's pensive. That's all well and good, as it gives both Voldemort and Dumbledore's characters more depth, the scenes also make the rest of the book's events seems boring in comparison. It's as if the Voldemort-Dumblerdore chapters are the ones that end up being of importance, while most of everything else that happens in the book (excluding Harry's scene with Slughorn at Hagrid's, and the ending sequence) kind of filler. Even when Ron Weasley, one of the main characters in the book, was in grave danger after being poisoned, it didn't seem to have the same impact as it should have, because the telling of the story gave more weight to Dumbledore's time with Harry than anything else, if that makes any sense.

- There aren't too many new characters introduced in this book. Yes, Slughorn is new, and plays a big role in the story after all. Slughorn isn't a particularly bad guy, however, he tends to favor those students who he feels would exceed in the future, and therefore, Slughorn can leech off of their fame in the future. It'd probably be mildly annoying for those that weren't the chosen few of Slughorn, I would imagine. Heck, I've had a couple of teachers like that before, and it's not too fun being on the other side of that equation. We also get acquainted with Voldemort's family, and considering what type of people they are, it's not hard to see how Voldemort could become so evil with people such as that being his blood.

- Once again, Draco Malfoy is back as Harry's foil at Hogwarts. But this time, Draco seems to have taken a turn. Not only is he more competent in his battles with Potter, breaking his nose at one point, but his smug self-nature seems to have been deflated some, as his pop's in prison and Voldemort has given Draco a seemingly impossible task. Somehow, even though it takes him all year, Draco puts together a plan that leads to this task being done, although you'll have to read the book to see what it is.

Overall, Harry Potter and the Half Blood Prince is better than the previous book, but still falls slightly short of the previous four books in the saga. Other than the demise of a major character at the end, it seems as if the sole purpose of Harry Potter and the Half Blood Prince is to build up to the final book in the series, where everything will come to a head. Even the title plot with the Half Blood Prince gets lost in the shuffle, and the revelation of said Prince doesn't have as much impact as other events towards the end do. Also, characters such as Neville and Hagrid kind of get shuffled to the background, as the book mainly focuses on Harry and Dumbledore. Still, it's not a terrible book by any stretch of the imagination, and it does build up a lot of suspense to the conclusion. Overall, I'd give Harry Potter and the Half Blood Prince a 6.5 out of 10. Well, thanks for reading. Remember, if you have any ideas for future reviews, or comments about this or previous reviews, then send them to me either by e-mail at or by leaving a comment on the blog.

Sunday, December 12, 2010

Canon Restaurant Review: Bar H Barbecue, Royston, GA

Earlier today, I, along with my sister, brother, and sister-in-law, went to the happening town of Royston, GA to dine at Bar H Barbecue. I had dined at Bar H a few times before, so I pretty much know what to expect when I went there today. Bar H Barbecue is only open three days a week (Thursday-Saturday) and like the name suggests, specializes in barbecue food.Bar H Barbecue doesn't have the biggest menu in the world, to be sure. It does one thing and one thing only, barbecue, and if I do say so myself, they do it quite well.

We arrived at Bar H at around 6:30 or so, and seated ourselves at a table against the wall. The restaurant has a little more than half-full when we walked in, so it wasn't too hard to find a place to sit. The tables in Bar H Barbecue are adorned with plaid patterned table cloths. Each table has a pitcher of tea on it and a couple of bottles of barbecue sauce, in both hot and mild flavors. Instead of napkins, each table is provided with a roll of paper towels for patrons to use, which is probably a smart idea, as barbecue can be quite messy to eat. The walls of the dining area are wooden, and there are a few nic-nacs and signs hanging off the wall that gives the dining area a folksy, old-fashioned feel.

So we sat then, and our server comes to take our order. Since there's not a whole lot to choose from, the menu is one page long. Bar H Barbecue offers plates of pork, chicken, and ribs, which come with sides of Brunswick stew, coleslaw, and slices of bread. They also offer pork sandwiches, and each person gets a pack of potato chips alongside their order. Myself, my brother, and sister-and-law all went with the all-you-can-eat barbecue pork plate, only my brother and I substituted an extra helping of stew in place of the slaw. Since it's all you can eat, you can get as many helpings of stew or meat as you wish. Meanwhile, my sister went with the barbecue chicken plate.

We ordered, and a mere minute or so passed before we were served, which was a good thing because I was quite hungry at this time. Even though I'm not the world's biggest fan of Brunswick stew, I happily ate the Brunswick stew on my plate. I don't know what it is they do with the stew, but whatever it is they shouldn't change a thing, as it is just great. The pork was pretty good, although it was a bit dry, all in all. But if you put enough sauce on it, it will take care of that rather quickly. The sauce that I had was quite tasty and complimented the barbecue pork very well. Meanwhile, my sister was quite complimentary of both the coleslaw and the barbeque chicken, especially the coleslaw. As for the service, I can honestly say that I have nothing bad whatsoever to say about it, as we were constantly checked on, and refills of stew were not a problem or a chore to obtain, as the servers were all quite friendly and seemed eager to assist.

Overall, if you're looking for quality barbecue at a reasonable price, then Bar H Barbecue is a very good choice, as the food is tasty and each of our meals were less than 10 dollars. Overall, I'd give Bar H Barbecue an 8.25 out of 10. Well, thanks for reading. Remember, if you have any ideas for future reviews, or comments about this or previous reviews, then send them to me either by e-mail at or by leaving a comment on the blog.

Bar H Barbeque on Urbanspoon