Part 1.  Part 2.

On the 13th, I got an automated call from Charter.  It was a reminder that I had a technician scheduled to install my Charter HSI the next day, between the hours of 8am and noon.

Wha???  If you’ll recall, I did a self-installation of my Charter HSI; why the heck would I need a technician out here for a SELF-installation?

The best part was that I got the message stuck on my answering machine, and I didn’t find out about the call until past midnight of the 14th.  I quickly called the number left on the message, got to an operator, and asked to have the appointment canceled.  He put me on hold, and the system disconnected me not much later.

(Argh.)

I called back, quickly got to another rep, who immediately advised me that the account holder (my sister, who was still at work) had to call in to cancel the appointment herself.  I left her a note on her desk to try to call Charter as soon as she got home, and then I went to bed.

I was told that the technician never showed up between the scheduled time, so I figured that either my sister got around to canceling the appointment, or the techs weren’t going to show up at all.  Fast forward to 4:00, and guess who shows up?

I immediately told the tech that I had done a self-installation for my HSI service, and therefore, I had no need for a technician.  The tech muttered something to his partner, and then walked away.

Fast forward to this morning, where I woke up to flu-like symptoms (I LOVE that term).  I fired up my laptop, and immediately noticed that I could not connect to the internet.   I quickly checked my modem lights, and saw that I wasn’t getting four solid greens.  I called up Charter HSI tech support, and while navigating through the IVR, I was told that there was a service outage in my area.  No problem, I thought.

Several hours later, the outage was still going on.  I called HSI support again, and again got the recorded message of the outage in my area.  I then ‘borrowed’ a neighbor’s wireless connection, and started researching this supposed outage.

It wasn’t until I stumbled upon speedtest.net (just out of curiosity) that I noticed that the problem might not have been an outage.  Speedtest.net reported that the ISP that my neighbor was on was, lo and behold, Charter HSI.  Either I was one unlucky SOB and the outage just barely spread to my house and not my neighbor’s, or something else was going on here.

I fired up Charter’s Live Chat support—hey, I had great luck with them last time, if you’ll recall—and immediately got connected to a rep.  Again, I asked if there was an ongoing service outage in my area, and she confirmed this.  Then, after a bit of questioning, she asked me what ISP I was using.  Not sure what she was specifically asking, I told her that I was on a neighbor’s connection, but then added that I was 100% sure I was a Charter HSI customer.

That’s when the rep hit me with this:  according to my sister’s account, we did not have Charter HSI among our services listed.  Huh?  Immediately, the rep advised me to call in to rectify the problem.

I called in, got a real friendly rep, and quickly explained my situation.  I also asked the rep to check to see if there were any ongoing outages in my area.  She responded by telling me that there was no longer an outage in my area.  Wait a sec; the Live Chat rep told me, five minutes earlier, that there was still an outage going on.  What gives?

I then told the rep what the Live Chat rep told me (that Charter HSI was not on my list of services), and while she did not confirm this, she did notice the outstanding installation appointment on the account.  You know, the installation appointment for my SELF-installation.  Yes, on my account, it was noted that a tech was to be sent out for a SELF-installation.

The rep put me on hold for a good fifteen minutes, and then came back on the line to announced that she had ‘closed’ the issue.  She removed the installation appointment off the account, re-established HSI on the account, and assured me that I would still be getting HSI at the promotional rate of $29.99 a month for six months.

What probably happened was, upon telling the tech that his services were never needed, that triggered Charter to assume that I never signed up with HSI, and so they removed HSI from my list of services.  Next month’s bill is gonna be a ton of fun to go over; I better not see any HSI dis/connect fees.  And does anyone know if Charter charges a customer for a ‘missed’ installation appointment?

- Time for a mini-review of the latest episode of The Office.

“The Lover” might have been the craziest episode to date.  Who didn’t see Jim and Pam’s marriage get off to a rocky start?  Lots of yelling in the episode; I hope the cast had lots of Ricola on hand.

I love Dwight’s new offensive against Jim.  Come on, who didn’t see anything suspicious about the pen Dwight put on Jim’s desk?  (By the way, can you legally record someone without his knowledge in Pennsylvania?)  I can’t believe that some Office reviewers out there actually felt that the writers couldn’t keep the Jim-Dwight rivalry fresh.  It wouldn’t surprise me in the least to see Dwight costing Jim his promotion by the end of the season, only to have Dwight passed over as Jim’s replacement.

I loved the whole opera scene with Jim, Dwight, and Andy.  Too funny.  I absolutely loved how Toby now thinks he and Michael are friends, and I wonder if Toby’s willingness to help out Michael has anything to do with his feelings for Pam.  I could imagine Toby’s friendship with Michael not lasting past one more episode.

(Oh, I REALLY loved the scene where Toby walks in and both Jim and Michael yell at him.  Toby’s “What did I do?” was priceless.)

Surprisingly, I didn’t particularly care for the whole Michael dating Pam’s mom storyline, though.  The scene in the conference room?  Didn’t do much for me. I hope this is not something the writers plan on pushing all the way to the season finale.  The last thing I need is a “Is Jim’s marriage already over?” end-of-season cliffhanger because of Michael dating Pam’s mom.

(And for the record, I would definitely be bothered if my mom dated my boss, especially if my boss were Michael Scott.  Was Pam overreacting?  Probably.  Was it justifiable?  Probably.)

All that being said, however, I wouldn’t mind seeing one Michael/Pam’s mom-Jim/Pam double date.  Oh, the possibilities!  In a dream world, this happens in the next episode.  Michael acts the way Michael does in front of everybody, and then realizes at the end of the episode what dating Pam’s mom is doing to Jim and Pam.  He then does the right thing and breaks it off with Pam’s mom.

I can dream, right?

I had few expectations going into this past Thursday’s episode of The Office—do you blame me?—and had even less so when Jim and Pam were nowhere to be seen at the beginning of the episode.  Their absences have to lower the overall episode score by at least two points out of ten, right?

The episode started out slowly, dragged on and on, and nearly got me to stop watching at one point. The whole scene in the restaurant bored me to tears, even Andy’s scene where he had to go jump-start some woman’s car.  Dwight and Andy’s plan to “convince” Michael that Grotti wasn’t part of the mob not only saved the episode, but it actually made the entire episode overall somewhat enjoyable.  My favorite exchange:

Dwight:  …I am talking about convincing Michael that the guy’s not mafia.

Andy:  That seems a little far-fetched.

Dwight:  Well, more far-fetched than a mobster walking into a paper company for a low level shakedown?  And that happened.”

(One minor gripe about this episode:  Michael, Dwight, and Andy all thought that Grotti’s e-mail to Michael was a threat, and not a common sales tactic!  I can only come to one of three conclusions:

1. No salesperson in The Office has ever had another sales person with another company.
2. Andy magically forgot everything he learned about sales from his time in the Stamford branch.
3. It’s no wonder that Dunder Mifflin is a failing paper company.

Although, I suppose not all three conclusions are mutually exclusive.)

It pains me to say this because I love Kevin’s character, but I could not stand his act in this episode.  Committing identity fraud by taking a call designed to prevent identity fraud?  And why did Jim have a pay stub on his desk like that?  Actually, I have a better question:  how did Kevin get access to Jim’s office in the first place?  Or could Dunder Mifflin not afford a lock for his door?

Another thing…in this exchange:

Dwight:  Did he threaten you?

Michael:  No, Dwight, not everything is a threat.

Andy:  Mobsters are.

Michael:  There is no such thing as monsters.

was that an unedited goof, or am I seriously supposed to believe that Michael stumbled upon the word “mobster,” the way he stumbles upon one big dictionary word per episode?

Finally, couldn’t the episode have ended with something happening to Michael that necessitated insurance?  Was it too much to ask for somebody to plow into the garage of his condo?  Couldn’t Michael have burned his foot again on his George Foreman grill?  Couldn’t some idiot with the vanity license plate “DA MOB” rear-end him?

(Too cheesy?  OK.)

And please don’t point out that, even if it’s true, supplemental insurance doesn’t cover any of the things listed above.  Did I mention my head hurts?

(TMI?)

Random thoughts from the past few weeks that never made it to a blog, not counting the one above:

- We went to the LA County Fair a second time, and this time I chose to get food from the Rib Ranch BBQ (I believe that’s what the restaurant was called).  My two sisters and I ’split’ three plates of food:  two orders of the tri tip, and one order of ribs.

I fell in love.  With my food.  I would marry it if I could.  Too far?

One of my sisters barely touched her slices of tri tip, so she made me finish practically her entire portion.  She didn’t need to ask me twice.  Later on in the night, we chased dinner with a big Mexican funnel cake.  Just imagine churro batter being used to make a funnel cake, seasoned with cinnamon and sugar.

(For those reading this that actually went to the Fair, and know which booth sold Mexican funnel cakes, no, we did not split a “Jumbo” cake.  We did, however, take pictures with one.  Yup, one group actually ordered a Jumbo laced with strawberries, whipped cream, and chocolate syrup, and some members of our party took pictures of and with the cake.)

Too bad we didn’t get a chance to go to the Fair a third time.

- In another twist to the Ryan Howard near lawsuit, which I discussed here and here, CNN reported something that I had not yet read anywhere else:

A Phillies employee, Jennifer says, told her if she handed over the ball, she could come back after the game, meet the slugger and get him to autograph it. She gave the ball up. In exchange, she got cotton candy and a soda.

If this is true, then I have no problem with a lawsuit, even if it wasn’t really about the money.  However, color me skeptical, but I highly doubt the Phillies employee really promised the girl the exact ball back.  If he did, then he’s an idiot.

Also, I can stop asking “Where were the parents?”  The girl attended the game with her grandfather, among other people.  So I’ll then ask, “Where was another adult?”

- I’m now 2-2 in both of my Fantasy leagues, after running into two more buzzsaws (122 and 100 pts from my opponents, respectively, and the team that scored 100 did so with two players on their bye week *sigh*).  On a more alarming note, however:  I cannot believe how badly I struck out on my waiver wire pickups this past week.  Check out these results (kickers excluded):

1. Pierre Garcon (WR-Ind):  0.90 pts
2. Kenny Britt (WR-Ten):  1.80 pts
3. Jerome Harrison (RB-Cle):  2.10 pts

Oh by the way, Indy and Dallas are on their bye week next week.  I only have to find replacements for that Manning dude, Marion Barber, and Jason Witten.

I hate fantasy football.

- So I finally watched The Office wedding episode, and this is all I have to say.

This episode all but reaffirmed my faith in the show.

Seriously, what was not to like about the episode?  All the puking at the beginning of the episode gave me flashbacks of Eddie Izzard’s bit about the inner ear and how hearing somebody vomit causes you to do so.  I loved the Dos/Don’ts list (is it just me, or is Jim very list-centric?).  I loved everything that went on during check-ins, especially Dwight’s “test” of Michael, and who didn’t foresee Toby offering to share his room with Michael?  Also, who didn’t see Michael hooking up with Pam’s mom by the end of the episode?

I couldn’t stop laughing at Dwight badmouthing Jim to all the kids at the dinner.  Please, oh please, let this be a season-long running gag.  And don’t Oscar and Kevin make a cute couple?

At first, Michael’s toast, followed by his attempt at explaining that “accidents happen” really ticked me off.  That’s when I realized this was all Jim’s fault, first for inviting Michael in the first place, and then for going brain-dead by revealing Pam’s little secret.  And I must admit that I did chuckle at least once at Michael’s “accidents happen” story.

I loved Kevin losing his shoes because they were a safety issue.  I loved his Kleenex-box shoes idea a hell of a lot more.  And wasn’t Jim’s cutting of his tie the most awwwwww-inspiring moment of the entire episode?

And yes, I had to Google search the YouTube video in question.  The final dance scene where everybody danced down the aisle must have been so much fun to tape.

Two questions:

1) At what point did Michael and Jim’s brothers collaborate on the whole dance-a-thon?

2) How the hell did Jim know that he needed a “backup plan?”

Bonus question:  has anyone, in one’s life, ever stuck his/her foot in the ice machine like that?  I don’t think I can ever trust those ice machines ever again.  EDIT:  After re-watching this episode, I just caught that Kevin got six numbers…out of seven for a full phone number.  LMAO!

I don’t know how the season finale’s gonna top this episode, but I can dream, right?  As long as Michael doesn’t ruin Jim and Pam’s relationship via his own fling (?) with Pam’s mom, I’ll be happy.

On Friday, I called Charter Cable, quickly got someone in the sales department (amazing considering I had to deal with Charter’s IVR), and started my Charter Cable inquiry with a patented “I’m a soon-to-be-former AT&T DSL customer.  Can you offer me a deal on Charter Cable?”  The rep responded with a seemingly sincere “I’m so glad to hear that!” before attempting to ask me questions geared towards figuring out which package was ‘best’ for me.

I already knew that Charter’s 5/1 plan was good enough for me, so I quickly interrupted her and told her which package I wanted.  The rep verified that the plan was $29.99/month with an additional $3/month fee for the cable modem rental.  I then asked if there was any way I could simply give a tech my modem MAC address—a SURFBoard 5101 which I knew would work with Charter—and get online immediately; I was able to do this back in my Adelphia days.  The rep explained that this was not possible; I had to allow a tech to come and hook up the cable modem.  Fine, I thought.  I told the rep I’d call back later to put in an order for the 5/1 plan.

A few minutes later, I called back, and Charter’s IVR wouldn’t cooperate.  I got transferred to some random drone who, despite my pleads, would not transfer me to someone in sales.  I again asked for a deal on Charter Cable; this time, I forgot to lead with the patented “I’m a soon-to-be-former AT&T DSL customer” line.  The rep explained that the only deals she could offer me were $44.99 a month for 5/1 and $54.99 a month for 10/1.  Huh?  What happened to the $29.99 offer for 5/1?  “Well, I can only go by what the computer gives me, and the computer won’t give me $29.99 for that plan.”

I asked her to transfer me to someone in the sales department, and the rep refused!  I quickly hung up on her, called back, and managed to successfully navigate the IVR again to a person in sales.  Again, I asked about the 5/1 plan, and the rep offered me the $29.99 price again, but only for six months.  Six months?  The first rep never mentioned anything about a six-month term (although, as Krunk pointed out, she also didn’t say that the $29.99 plan wasn’t a promotional rate).  I quickly navigated to charter.com, looked at the price of the 5/1 plan—$29.99 a month for up to 12 months—and realized immediately that “six months” = “up to 12 months.”  Fine.  Almost defeated, I accepted the terms, and that’s when the rep snuck in this haymaker:  “There will also be a $49.99 installation fee, which you won’t have to pay immediately, but it will appear on your next bill.”

Wait a freaking second.  “A $49.99 installation fee?”, I inquired, to which I got this utterly astounding reply:  “Yes sir.  You don’t expect us to send a tech out and not pay him, do you?”  Before I could pick my jaw off the floor and respond, the tech continued, “You know what?  I could reduce the cost of the installation fee, but only if you sign up for Charter Phone!”  I responded with a simple “No thank you,” and before the rep could ask me if I still wanted to go through with the Internet order, I hung up on her.

So you might have guessed by now that I was absolutely livid by what had happened to this point.  I then realized that my best option appeared to be sticking with AT&T DSL and my Christmas tree-like DSL modem.  That’s when I decided to go with the Hail Mary equivalent of customer service:  Live Chat.

(cue ultra-dramatic music)

Figuring that I had nothing else to lose, with the exception of a few minutes and the last bits of my sanity, I logged on to Charter’s Live Chat and began praying.  A rep named “Annyvette” logged on and, after verifying some information, asked me why I was only a customer of Charter Digital TV and not Phone and Internet too.

(After what I went through today, Charter should be lucky that we’re still a customer, period.)

I politely explained that I was only interested in adding Internet service and told the rep that I wanted 5/1 service.  After trying to rent me a modem, and then a wireless gateway, the rep then sent me this:

Did you prefer to send tech to your home to install the internet or would you prefer to do a self installation? The tech installation is $49.99, and will be billed to you on your upcoming bill. Which mistranslation [sic] option did you prefer to set up with?

Wha???  Self-installation???  That first rep lied to me about not having a self-installation option!!!

Five minutes later, the order was put through, and I was chatting with an Internet support rep, getting my modem provisioned.  I was up and running a bit later.

Happy ending, right?  Not so fast.  ONE STINKING DAY after I was up and running with Charter, I had to reboot my modem.  Grrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr…

EDIT:  This is gonna have to be split up into two entries…I really need to learn how to better economize my words :P.

I moved back in with the parents in early July—long story, and I won’t get into it—and sadly had to kiss goodbye the joys of paying only $40 a month for 10/1 Road Runner Cable.  Excellent reliability (except for a disconnect at exactly 2:05 AM every day, and I never did discover why that happened) and 10/1 speeds for $40 a month?  Not a bad deal, eh?

So what did I come home to?  3/512 AT&T DSL.  Decent speeds, when I was the only one actually using the internet.  Unfortunately, that didn’t happen very often, and to compound the problem, my brother started messing around with a webcam.  At times in the evening, the connection would lag like mad.  I also noticed that my ping times were horrible, usually around 150ms, according to speedtest.net.  I figured, for $25 a month, the speeds we were getting weren’t that unbearable.

A week later, I upgraded to 6/512 for $10 more a month.  All of a sudden, my ping times dropped to the low 20s, and evening lags appeared to be a thing of the past.  Everything looked good.

A couple weeks later, the DSL connection because virtually unusable in the evenings.  After dealing with drops every few minutes for three days straight, I called AT&T DSL support to report a problem.  I told the tech that I was having internet issues, and the tech could only tell me that he detected a weak signal entering my DSL modem. He offered to send a tech out to check the wiring leading to the house.  Before I could agree, though, the tech mentioned that I could be charged if it was determined that the problem with my connection was on my end.

Thinking nothing of that remark at the time, I had the tech schedule an appointment.  For reasons that elude me at the time—perhaps the local call center was closed—he could not get me set up with an appointment right then and there.  No problem, I thought; I was given the phone number to the call center with a support ticket.

I went weeks without having a single serious line issue again, so naturally (stupidly?) I never gave the local call center a ring.  Everything looked good, until about a month ago, when the connectivity issues returned. I went two hours with a complete outage before I decided to call tech support again.

This time I was advised to remove the DSL filter from the wall and plug the phone cable directly into the modem.  That’s when I noticed something peculiar:  connected to one of those wall-mounted DSL filters was a second DSL filter!  All the connections were made properly—the second filter was connected to the correct jack on the wall-mounted filter, and the DSL modem was plugged into the “DSL” jack of the second filter—but I thought it was odd nonetheless.

I removed both filters, plugged the modem directly into the wall jack, and lo and behold, I was able to establish a connection immediately.  Coincidence?  Hmmmm.  Anyway, the tech ran his tests, and again advised me that he was detecting a very weak signal going to my DSL modem.  Like the first tech I dealt with, he advised me to allow a tech to come by and analyze the wiring leading to my house.  This time, though, in a seemingly threatening voice, the tech reminded me that I would be billed if the tech found the problem to be on my end.  Frustrated, I asked for a clarification.  The tech explained that, if the tech found no issues with the wiring, I would have been billed for the visit.

Not at all wanting to take that chance—knowing AT&T’s reputation, I certainly did not—I declined the offer.  The tech then reminded me that I could always try to fix any internet connection issues with a simple reboot of the modem…and that’s when I hung up on him.  I looked at the DSL modem, saw that the lines remained solid green, and prayed that I wouldn’t have to call back.

The serious connectivity issues came back last week, and yesterday, I had enough.  Between the hours of 6-10pm, I wasn’t able to stay online for more than ten minutes at a time.  It was time for me to give Charter Cable a try.

Part two to come tomorrow.

My loyal readers—all none of you—will notice that I haven’t said a word about the Dodgers in some time.

I’m going to break the silence with just one comment.

Adam Wainwright, in his attempts to defend LF Matt Holliday’s horrible gaffe that sparked the Dodgers’ ninth inning, two-out rally, went with this defense:

“That ball got lost in 50,000 white towels shaking in front of Matt’s face,” Wainwright said. “It doesn’t really seem fair that an opposing team should be able to allow their fans to shake white towels when there’s a white baseball flying through the air. How about Dodger Blue towels?”

You’re kidding, right Adam?  Let’s ban white T-shirts next!  And, technically, Matt really only had to deal with 30,000 or so towels.  How could the ones behind him in the pavilions and the seats by the foul pole distract him?

By the way, Adam, the Phillies’ rally towels are white too.

Go Dodgers.

From the article:

This was not about money, Vanegas insisted, although she admits that she contacted a Miami TV consumer affairs reporter after co-workers told her that the ball’s historical significance gave it added value. (emphasis mine)

So you didn’t have a lawyer sue the team for the money, even though you only got in contact with a lawyer after finding out the ball’s potential value?  Uh-huh.

The reporter, in turn, put her in touch with Kent.

As Krunk put it, when a lawyer gets involved, isn’t it always about the money?

(By the way, go to 0:42 in this YouTube clip, and then try to convince me that this case was not about the money.  Then, go to the 1:00 mark, and you’ll hear the lawyer use the phrase ‘criminal theft’ to describe what the Phillies did to this girl.  CRIMINAL THEFT???  For argument’s sake, let’s say that the girl did agree to trade balls with the team.  Fine, stick to the ‘illegal contract with a minor” case, but criminal theft?

I can’t watch any more of that clip.  If anyone wants to finish the clip and add to my remarks, please post a comment to this blog entry, and I’ll add it here.)

In addition:

“They’re saying I stole the ball from Mr. Howard,” Vanegas said. “I didn’t steal anything from Mr. Howard. Whoever caught the ball, the ball belongs to that person.

“Why did they take the ball away? Because they knew it was a very valuable ball. They took advantage of my daughter.”

Where in the hell does the mother get this idea that the Phillies were accusing her of trying to steal the baseball from Mr. Howard?  And why does she suggest that the ball was ‘taken away’?  As far as I’m concerned, when you trade one item for another (even if the trade is ridiculous, like an ice cream cone for a pebble), you’re not technically getting your ice cream taken away from you.  Or am I just splitting hairs here?  Also, if it’s not about the money, then why would you care about why the Phillies want the ball back?

Going on:

According to the lawyer, security officials escorted Valdivia to the clubhouse during the July 16 game and a Phillies equipment manager persuaded her to give up the ball, telling her to come back after the game and that Howard personally would give her a signed ball. “She thought he was going to sign the ball she caught,” Kent said. “She’s 12 years old. She didn’t have a clue.”

Sorry, being 12 years old isn’t an excuse for not having a clue.  “Give us the ball, and in return, we’ll give you a signed ball” is pretty clear in my book; we’re talking about two different baseballs here.  And I’ll ask again:  where were the parents during this alleged illegal contract with a minor?  Furthermore, the lawyer said it himself right there:  someone in the Phillies persuaded the girl to give the ball up.  CRIMINAL THEFT?

Valdivia came back as instructed, Kent said, but Howard did not appear and a club official sent her home with a different ball autographed by Howard.

What?  No breach of contract lawsuit?

Finally:

“People are talking so much crap about the ball, and that we just wanted it for the money,” she said. “We had no idea what it was worth. I don’t think Mr. Howard had any idea what was going on. I blame the Phillies’ administration.”

Until your co-workers told you how much it was worth, and then you were more than happy to speak to a lawyer to get the ball back.  But it wasn’t about the money, right?

Final thought:  do you realize that the ball is probably worth way more now than it would have been had the girl not been ‘robbed’ of the ball in the first place?   The ball is now encased in an acrylic holder, authenticated by the Phillies, AND, I’d argue, has extra value because of the controversy surrounding it.  But it’s OK; it’s not about the money.

Office review to come shortly…maybe.

- Fantasy Football updates:

Remind me never to listen to Yahoo! and their stupid point projections ever again, or I may have to deal with another Julius Jones situation in the future.

You know Julius Jones, right, RB of the Seattle Seahawks?  He of the incredible 3.5 points last weekend?

Fortunately, I got smoked in both leagues.  My opponents scored 121 and 98 points against me, respectively, while I didn’t break 75 in either league.  Next week, I’m going waiver-wire WR heavy, with pickups such as Kenny Britt and Pierre Garcon twice.

I’m now 2-1 in both leagues.

- One non-Fantasy Football update:  so the Monday Night revenge-fest game was the highest-rated cable show of all time, eh?  I can certainly tell you of one household that did not tune in to that game for more than five seconds.

- So Ryan Howard (the other one) got sued by a little girl over a home run ball, eh?  Let me summarize my reactions to this story with one motion.

***facepalm***

To all you wannabe lawyers that insist that the girl has all the right in the world to sue because the Phillies engaged in a contractual agreement with a minor, please stop.  This isn’t about an illegal contract, or extortion (!?!), or the rich guy trying to exploit the not-so-rich family, or any of that crap.  This is about a baseball player who reached 200 HRs faster than anybody else in MLB history wanting back a sentimental object to commemorate an achievement.  This is about a family that, I have to believe, thinks they can sell the ball in the future for an enormous profit.

Stuff like this happens in baseball all the time.  A player loses his grip on his bat, launching it into the seats.  A team staffer asks the lucky (or sometimes unlucky) guy who caught the bat to trade it for a non-game used bat.  He usually obliges, and life goes on.  So excuse me if I believe that this is nothing but a money grab.

Now don’t get me wrong.  If the girl caught Ryan Howard’s 763rd home run, and traded it in for a plain old autographed ball, then I wouldn’t have a huge problem with a family trying to get the ball back.  I know I would if my 12yo gave the ball back to the team.  Also, the story leaves out some pretty critical information.  Where were the parents when the girl was approached by staffers asking for the ball back?  Even if she did agree to go to the Phillies’ clubhouse to exchange baseballs, didn’t the staffers have to bring the girl to her parents first before doing so?  And if they didn’t, wouldn’t the parents have screamed bloody murder at the apparent kidnapping of their child?

Finally, as many people have already posed, how would the family know that Howard actually surrendered the real HR ball?  Sure, it’s probably fraud if he doesn’t, but how would we know the real HR ball isn’t locked in a safe in Howard’s house right now?

- Time for my Office thoughts:

1) “The Meeting” might have been the most topsy-turvy episode of The Office I’ve ever seen.  Let me explain what I mean by topsy-turvy:  the one character that really pissed me off in this episode was…Jim!

What the heck did he mean when he said that Michael screwed him over?  If he didn’t earn all those negative remarks in his performance evaluations in the first place, Michael wouldn’t have been able to screw him over.

Well, maybe he would have found a way, but still.

Michael did what he had to do—explain to David Wallace that Jim wasn’t fit to be a manager—and I wasn’t happy at all when he caved in and helped Jim become a co-manager.  Yes, I understand that, if Michael didn’t do so, Jim might have taken his other job offer.  But if he was planning on doing so, then why was he so upset that Michael “screwed” him over?

I entertained the thought that the performance evaluation was so slanted against Jim because the author of it, one Toby Flenderson, may have written it around the time he was expressing feelings for Pam.  Even if that was the case, what part of that eval is NOT true?  Constant office distractions?  Check.  Spends way too much time at reception?  Duh.  Antagonizes other salesmen.  Yeah.  Not at all what he thinks he is?  Debatable.  3.5 out of 4?  Bad.  Jim’s act actually made me feel bad for Michael, especially when it was obvious that Michael felt bad about costing Jim a promotion within the company.  I didn’t feel as bad when Michael gave in, however.

I loved just about everything else about this episode:  Toby and Dwight’s adventures in attempting to prove that Darryl was scamming worker’s comp, Pam frustratingly trying to get a head count for the wedding (especially Kelly and Ryan’s responses!), and I loved Andy and Michael’s cheese-cart idea (fine grated Parmesan cheese, eh?).  But Jim…sigh.

2) “The Promotion” proved what I said about “The Meeting.”  Jim is NOT management material.  At least, he’s not fit at all to run THAT office!

I loved this episode.  I loved Dwight having to run from Michael’s office to Jim’s and back.  I loved watching Pam practically begging for money instead of gifts (LOL @ Kevin).  I loved how Michael antagonized Jim throughout the entire episode, and how Jim realized that, oh no, Michael might be his only friend.

(The episode should have ended with Michael giving Jim an awkward hug.  That would have been hilarious.  And Jim, I’m pretty sure Pam is still upset with you.)

Dwight, though, stole the episode with his attempts to rally the office against Jim, only to seemingly fail despite that awesome speech near the end.  I wonder if Dwight realizes that, by turning the office on Jim, he might also be turning the office against Michael.  And Pam falling prey to Ryan’s scam was icing on the cake.  Now THAT’s The Office I remember from years past.

What were Jim and Michael supposed to do?  Equal raises?  The entire office would have vetoed that.  Merit-based?  We saw how THAT worked out.  I just hope the writers touch upon how the raises were distributed in a later episode.

Until next time.

(Wait.  That wasn’t Andruw Jones?  That was MANNY RAMIREZ???)

And to think, I thought the Ung-hex was losing its powers.

I read on Yahoo! Sports earlier today that the Dodgers need but one win to not only win the NL West, but to clinch home field advantage throughout the NL playoffs.  And you know what?  As a true Dodger fan, I want them to choke the division crown away!  If they are going to play like absolute crap for the last week of the season, they don’t deserve home field advantage.

One last thought:  how did Colorado only manage two runs in the first inning?

- No, I have not watched yesterday’s episode of The Office.  I know, I know; I should turn in my Office Fan Club card.

- Fantasy Football updates:  I came back to win both league games, and now I’m 2-0 in both leagues.  However, my decision to bench Peyton Manning in Week 2 might prove to be costly.  In league #1, I’m ranked #1 via tiebreaker—total points scored—but I could have had a much larger lead had I not benched Manning.  Oh well.  I’m second in league #2, only because of the tiebreaker.

Fun fact:  I usually handcuff my star running backs in every Fantasy Football draft I do.  I don’t recall ever having to use the handcuff, though.

(For you non-FFB players, handcuffing a running back means to draft his backup, just in case the star gets injured.)

Of course, last week Marion Barber goes down, and Felix Jones slid comfortably into Barber’s spot in my starting lineup.  Then of course, Jones goes down, and fortunately I had a high enough waiver priority to handcuff him with Tashard Choice.

I gotta ask, though.  Who is Tashard Choice’s backup?

I’ve been battling a toothache this past week (that super duper large Mexican funnel cake I shared with my sisters at the Fair last week probably didn’t help), so I’ll leave it at that.  Until next time.

Or tomorrow.

Or next week.

Or right now (CBS is showing “The Play”).

Guess I’ll be skipping ESPN for a week.

- Nope, haven’t watched this past Thursday’s Office yet.  I plan on doing so later tonight.

- Quick Fantasy Football Week 1 recap:

In league #1, I was ahead 99-97 going into Monday’s Indy-Miami tilt, so I decided to bench Peyton Manning.

(People were giving me flak for benching Manning, calling me a wuss.  How was my decision anything but damn intelligent?  What if Manning fumbled the first snap and left the game with an injury?)

That’s when I found out that Yahoo! no longer rounds fantasy points.  It turns out that I was winning by 0.8 pts (97.90 to 97.10).

Oh well, a win’s a win.

In league #2, I won handily, 114-100, thanks to Matt Schaub (30.68) and Marques Colston (21.80).

I’m getting my butt kicked in both leagues so far today, though.

Later.