Top Five NFL Teams to Never Win a Super Bowl

In honor of the playoffs kicking off next week. I think that numbers 5 and 1 will meet this year, but I've been making that prediction for about five years now, so we'll see.

5. San Diego Chargers

What puts the Chargers ahead of teams with longer histories, such as the Lions and the Cardinals, is that they have two periods of excellence in the Super Bowl era: the old Dan Fouts/Kellen Winslow teams; and the current run begun by Marty Shottenheimer and Drew Brees, and continued by Norv Turner and Philip Rivers. I would be willing to bet my mortgage that the Chargers will beat the Colts (if they face them) in the AFC title game this year.

4. Buffalo Bills

Mostly an NFL also-ran, the Bills accomplished one of the great feats in NFL history, reaching four straight Super Bowls. Of course, they lost all four, by increasingly large margins. So they have somehow become synonymous with losing and failure, which seems wholly unfair, but them's the breaks. Buffalo's first loss was immortalized in Vincent D'onofrio's Buffalo '66, so there's that.

3. Minnesota Vikings

The Vikings have a couple of unfortunate firsts in their history: they were the first team to reach four Super Bowls and loose them all; and they were the first team with a record of 15-1 or better to not even reach the Super Bowl. That year, 1998, might be the ultimate bitter pill, as kicker Gary Anderson went all year without missing a kick-- until the fourth quarter of the NFC championship game, when he missed a field goal that would have put the Vikings up by two possessions. Atlanta scored the tying touchdown and won in overtime.

2. Cleveland Browns

The asterisks to the Browns lack of Super Bowls are well known to any Browns fan. Cleveland was the dominant franchise in the pre-Super Bowl years, winning ten titles. And the Browns suffered the ultimate indignity of having owner Art Modell move the team to Baltimore when Cleveland refused to build him a new stadium, only to watch the newly-christened Ravens win Cleveland's rightful Super Bowl within five years, and the city build a new stadium anyway for an expansion Browns. Oh, and in between there was The Drive. And The Fumble. Why does God hate the Cleveland Browns?

1. Philadelphia Eagles

What, you were expecting someone else? If the Eagles weren't always one of the NFL's showcase franchises, they sure are now. The Eagles do have one NFL title to their credit, back in 1960, and two Super Bowl appearances, getting shellacked by the Raiders in 1981 and coming up three points short of the Patriots in 2005. Keep in mind that I FULLY EXPECT Andy Reid and Donovan McNabb to change this, perhaps as early as this February. Hope springs eternal and all that.

My Wallpapers Part 2: Frank Quitely

Since I just wrote about him, it seemed like a good idea to post some wallpapers I've made from the works of the great Frank Quitely. Surprisingly few, really, considering my admiration for his work. So many of his images are so iconic, I think, they tend to be made into wallpapers a lot, and I've tried to avoid those. I suppose that I'll have to remedy that. Anyway, these are all 1024 x 768, as usual.

Minimate Customs: Black Adam

So this one came about, basically, because Suncoast Video had DC Minimates Series 5 on clearance, and I racked my brain for something I could do with them to take advantage of the prices. It finally dawned on me that I could turn Captain Marvel into Black Adam fairly easily. I just put the boots and belt on a pair of black legs for the lower torso. For his chest and arms I decided to just use a black sharpie on the red parts that came with the original. I think it turned out really well; the sharpie allowed the muscle detail on the chest piece to show through, which you can kinda see in the picture.

The head comes from the Emo Peter Parker from Spider-Man 3, which I was thrilled to get such good use out of. I think the simple, angry face really looks great for Black Adam. And the hair is from the Sub-Mariner, which killed me to use, but sometimes in Minimate customizing tough sacrifices must be made.

The Comics Journal #300 Conversations: Dave Gibbons and Frank Quitely

Among my Christmas presents this year was the 300th issue of the Comics Journal, a bit of a bittersweet milestone, as it's the last regular issue for the foreseeable future. I've always appreciated the Journal, even though I found it less enjoyable over the last few years. And I'll be sorry to see it go, even if it's not really gone; the Journal will be expanding it's online presence while publishing a few special print issues a year.

But back to #300. The Journal has always done a fine job with special issues, and this one is no different. As editor/overlord Gary Groth explains, the Journal editors brought together several creators from different generations together for informal conversations. The results, we hope, will enlighten us all about how comics have changed over the last 20-30 years. So I thought it would be fun to read each one and post my thoughts and reactions. I'll be reading these, more or less, in my own order of interest. First up: Dave Gibbons and Frank Quitely.

The first time I ever saw Dave Gibbons' work would have been during his Green Lantern run in the early '80s, but the first time I became aware of it would've been the same as most everyone else: Watchmen. And I think, frankly, that he's more or less coasted on that; the only other work of note that he produced was the Give Me Liberty cycle, of which I'm not a fan. Frank Quitely, on the other hand, is just about the best artist in mainstream comics at the moment. My first exposure to his work (I think) was the Vertigo series 2020 Visions, and I thought it astonishing. I've bought pretty much everything he's done since then, and Quitely's name on the book is one of the few ways to guarantee I'll read something.

Anyway. Judging by the bits I've read of the other conversations as I flipped through the Journal, I'm afraid that I may have chosen to start with the least interesting first. There's sadly very little discussed between the two men that could be considered engrossing. Much of the conversation revolves around the effect of computers upon working methods, and I think the most interesting thing said here is that Frank Quitely still draws on paper because he feels he needs to have the original art to sell in order to make a living.

Think about that for a minute: Frank Quitely, one of the most successful artists in the industry today, can't survive on his page rate and royalties alone. And sure, a lot of that has to do with being a British national working for an American company, and the lousy exchange rate, but still. Quitely's been the artist of some of the most notable books published in the last decade; one would think he'd at least feel financially stable enough to abandon drawing on paper if he wanted to.

Which leads me to a topic that I would have loved for the two to discuss, but sadly is never brought up: perennials. Gibbons, of course, is one of the creators of the ultimate perennial, which will probably always be one of the best selling books in any given year (though probably never again quite like the last year); Quitely, I suspect, will have a perennial of his own with All-Star Superman. How much does this mean to the artist? Will they continue to see monies from books that continue to sell years after their original publication? Is having a perennial on the shelf something to strive for, or does it still not matter in comparison to having the hot new comic on the stands?

One other item from the conversation struck me: the changed role of editors in comics. When Gibbons broke in, editors were still very much teachers, and his work would often come back with notes of things that needed to be improved. But Quitely, 20 years later, has never had such interaction with his editors. He notes that, nowadays, editors have probably never worked as writers or artists previously, and aren't likely to offer any kind of tutorial on the mechanics of storytelling to young talent. And I thought: yeah, that's true, why is that? Used to be, guys like Geoff Johns and Bendis would get a staff job, just like Marv Wolfman and Len Wein and so many others did in the '70s and '80s. But you don't see that any more. My guess is, probably, because the economics have changed. Most of those writers and artists became editors (or the editors started writing) to sublimate their incomes. And guys like Johns and Bendis make plenty of money- and have plenty of say in the direction of the respective fictional universes they shape- without having to worry about the letter page getting to the typesetter before the deadline.

This isn't a bad thing, necessarily, but I'm not sure it's a good thing either. You've now got at least a generation's worth of editors that have little power, really, compared with the talent; again, that's not necessarily a bad thing, but what if the talent's wrong? What about when a writer wants to have the spouse of a prominent Justice League member raped? Does the editor have the position to say no, and be backed by his bosses? At the end of the day, I think the paradigm has shifted towards the talent. Again, this in and of itself is not a bad thing, but without the likes of Archie Goodwin behind the scenes, are we really better off?

But I digress. You'll note that the things I found most interesting in this conversation weren't really things Gibbons and Quitely talked about at all. At the end of the day, these are two guys who are pretty satisfied with their careers, but pretty far removed from comics as a whole. Sadly, it feels like so many other topics are left on the table untouched. Like: these men are primarily known for having worked with two of the most brilliantly idiosyncratic writers in comics. Shouldn't their names have come up a few times? All in all, this conversation feels like a lost opportunity.

Ironically, I Much Prefer John Hodgman to Justin Long

So I'm sitting here typing this on my new computer, a Macbook Pro. Yeah, I've gone to the other side. Actually back to the other side, as I first started with Macs some fifteen years ago, and only ever went to a PC when I decided I wanted a laptop and couldn't justify the cost of a Mac notebook. I still can't... but my mom can! Thanks Mom!!!!!

I'm still getting used to it, but learning to use it sure is easier then my PC was when I first got it. I mean, I literally took it out of the box less then two hours ago, and here I am, filling it with pornography (not really!). I have switched from Safari to Firefox, and will probably replace Quicktime with VLC or something like that. I'm just happy with how easy everything is with this machine. And I don't have to worry about viruses.

This last semester was kind of a nightmare for me because our laptop caught its' second virus of the year. Thing is, I have no idea how it got it, because I wasn't doing anything out of the ordinary that would have lead to a virus. Really. I'm not lying about that. I was able to remove the virus, but the wireless drive or something was fucked, so the damn thing couldn't get online any more.

This lead to me pulling out of the mothballs my old, old first laptop, which I didn't think even worked any more. But it did... sorta. Not well, though. Not well at all. For example, it wouldn't install Adobe Acrobat, so any time I wanted to read a PDF I had to copy the file onto my external hard drive and get the other computer. Which wouldn't have been such a hardship, except they were both sharing a power cord. Yeah. Not fun.

But all that's behind me now. I'm a Mac. Woot woot.

My Wallpapers Part 1

Yup, it's another one of my stupid hobbies. I've been making wallpapers for a few years now, after reading a tutorial in the old Comic Book Resources forum. What the hell, I thought, doesn't look too hard. Anyway, here's a sample of some of my favorites. These are all 1024 x 768, but can be stretched to fit larger screens. Hope you like them, there's more to come.

Stuff We Watched: Whatever Works

We just finished watching this about an hour ago, and I don't think I'm going to be able to sleep until I sit down and get this goddamn blog post out of my head. I'll just toss and turn for a few hours, going over the things I would say about it, if I had a forum with which to make my voice heard. Which now I do, so at least I can get this all out and maybe get a little sleep like a normal person.

I knew, when I put this sucker at the top of my Netflix queue, that it had not been very well received. But I was intrigued enough by the thought of Larry David walking around in a Woody Allen movie that figured, what the hell. I have to admit that I am something of a Larry David mark; he has a... well, presence isn't the right word. It's more that there's never been anyone else on camera remotely like him, not even Woody Allen himself. In the words of Mel Brooks, there's something about that middle-aged bald guy that thrilling.

Here's the thing you should know about Woody Allen movies, though, and keep this in mind the next time you think about seeing one: he makes a movie about once a year. That's a pretty rapid pace. Think about how long it takes to make a movie. And sure, Woody Allen movies don't take as long to film, and there sure as hell isn't a lot of post-producion done on them, but still. A movie a year. And he's been doing this for a long time, meaning he's made A LOT of movies.

And not all will be good. I often wonder if even the most creative of us have a finite source of creativity from which to draw from; yes, like a well, and remember that wells run dry. Woody Allen, I think, doesn't go through the normal process most of us go through in developing an idea, finding out if it's worthwhile. No, he just turns them right into movies. At that pace, how can he not? And who is going to tell him that maybe this one isn't so hot, and should stay in the desk drawer?

Whatever Works is the story of a middle-age New York Jew that falls for a woman much younger then himself. Manhatten it is not. David's character, Boris Yetzen-something, is supposedly a genius-level physicist that almost won a Nobel Prize once upon a time, though frankly the movie really doesn't do anything with this background. We never learn anything about the work Boris did that brought him to the top of his field, and David sure doesn't do a lot to sell that he's an expert in Quantum Mechanics. Really, the movie would be better off if he just thought he was smarter then everybody else, without having ever achieved anything more then made children cry playing chess.

The movie would be better off. That's a phrase that goes through my head a lot as I think about it. Because there are so many things that could have happened, that you expect to happen, that wouldn't have made the movie any better, probably, but would have made it less infuriating. Mainly, the ingenuine, played by Even Rachel Wood, who used to be on a show I have a certain fondness for called Once & Again that should really only have been watched by middle-age women. But I digress. She plays a young woman, fresh off the bus (or something) from Mississippi, with hardly a brain in her head but a heart on her sleeve.

But here's the thing about this girl, and I suppose I should say *SPOILER WARNING* here, although I beseech you to not see this movie, and just read what I'm about to type instead: I was sure she was a con artist. Her performance was so bad, her character so phony, that I was sure it was going to turn out that she was a junkie on the run from Queens that had found an easy mark and a comfortable place to lay low. Well, perhaps not that drastic. But surely- surely- we could not be meant to take this character seriously, not with her catfish and beauty pagents and story of her first time... you know *blush*. This can not be a real character.

When her mother shows up out of the blue, fresh from having left her father, I thought: here we go. This is her partner, mayber really her mother, and Boris actually has money stashed away, I mean look at how he's living. He's clearly not spending anything. But she'll have real feelings for him, not love but feelings nonetheless, and in the end she'll tell him the truth, leaving him heartbroken but a little wiser. Learning that even he, as brilliant as he knows himself to be, wants to believe that people are whom they say they are. Maybe, just maybe, he learns a little something about life.

This is not what happens. Her mother, it turns out, it something of an idiot savant photographer, and becomes an avant- garde artist, and shacks up with two men, and then her father shows up and- I kid you not- realizes that he's been gay all his life. See, because everybody that lives in the Red States is actually a repressed free spirit, and if they could just somehow find their way to Manhatten, they could discover their real selves, and everything would work out in the end. See, Republicans, see?

Woody Allen's career goes through this funny little cycle where he makes several lousy movies in a row, and everyone thinks he's lost it, and then he goes and makes something brilliant and everyone thinks he's back. It was only a few years ago that he made Match Point, which is one of the five best films he ever made. If he could just find a way to not make these movies in between, just say "no, that's a stupid idea, and anyway, I've already covered that theme like seven times in my career" we'd all be better for it. Thing is, everything he does has an audience. When I worked at the Ritz Theater in Philadelphia a decade ago, we would get a new Woody Allen movie every year, like clockwork. And the same senior citizens would come out for it; they wouldn't even adk for the movie by name, just say "one for Woody". I always wondered why he even bothered going to the trouble of naming his movies, when he could have just gone with My New Movie by W. Allen and been equally successful. Of course, most of that audience is probably dead by now.....

Whatever Works is probably the worst Woody Allen movie I've ever seen. It's definitely the worst episode of Curb Your Enthusiasm.