Who Else Wants to Fix the Calendar?

Tonight marks my 40th post of the year, which was my revised goal (see my post from July 3rd) once I admitted that 52 was not likely to happen. So quit bugging me about 52. If anyone other than my regular commenters is concerned about me dropping below one post a week, then I ask you to put in a little more effort yourself and make some comments. Nothing inspires Little Jackie like feeling he's being paid attention to. Now on with post 40 of the 2010 season.

We are getting near the end of the year and that makes me think of a bone I have to pick with the calendar. Two bones in fact. One about the year and the other about the weeks. Let's start with the weeks, because it is clearly the most glaring of the two annoyances when it comes to the calendar.

According to the calendar (I don't know who makes up the rules for calendars that we all follow so uniformly - and I'm all for calendars being uniform) the week starts on a Sunday and ends on a Saturday. How ridiculous is that? Everyone refers to the weekend as Saturday and Sunday, but on the calendar these two days aren't the weekend. Saturday yes, but Sunday is clearly the weekstart on the Calendar. Why doesn't the calendar week start on Monday like we really all think it does and finish on the Sunday?

This would work way better when planning weekend activities as well because, get this, the two days would be right beside each other on the calendar and not down one line and way over on the other side. Am I right? Can we fix this?

Meanwhile the year begins in January. Why? Well I'll tell you why. It is because that is the date that the new consuls in the Roman Empire took office. Seems like a great reason for us to continue doing it today. Probably just as good a reason for having the calendar week start on a Sunday. That reason? Inertia. Change is difficult. However, people, the time for a change is now!

January is not the start of the year in any real sense. It's the middle of winter in our hemisphere and the middle of summer in the south. Nothing is starting up then. I suppose that makes it hemisphere neutral, but since when have we in the North been worried about that. Let's move it to a sensible time. The start of spring comes to mind. Or how about the start of the school year which seems like the start of the new year in a lot of ways. And not just for the kids and teachers. Then we'd have two big celebrations at two different times of year, not two in a week like we do now. What do you all say? Are you with me??

Okay, maybe changing New Year's is not in the cards, but lets at least do something about the calendar week. Roman empire be damned!

Better Lucky Than Good

Warning: This entry is very hockey puckish.

The last five Stanley Cup winning goaltenders were: Anti Niemi, Marc-Andre Fleury, Chris Osgood, Jean-Sebastion Giguerre, and Cam Ward. What do all these goalies have in common? None of them are considered one of the great goalies in the NHL. Maybe some might say Cam Ward is a top ten goalie, but not better than Roberto Luongo of the Canucks of Vancouver.

When I say that Roberto Luongo is overrated, I don't mean it in the sense that he's not as good as people think (although with the difficulty in judging a goalie that may also be true - see this link: http://www.thegoalieguild.com/?p=4309 ). What I mean is that his value to the Canucks is overrated. Commentators seem to think you need a great goalie to win the Stanley Cup, but that clearly isn't the case. Then you'll hear you need a hot goalie to win the cup, but these 'hot' goalies aren't necessarily the best goalies. So why waste your money on a premium goalie? Just make sure you don't have a bad one.

Bottom line is I'm tired of hearing how Luongo is the difference maker. If the Canucks win the cup it will be because they play solid defensively and have enough offensive talent to beat a hot goaltender. And Luongo will have to play well enough not to lose games for them. Even Marc-Andre Fluery can do that.

Lay Off The Beiber

I vote for laying off Justin Beiber. You see it's not his fault that he's overrated. He's merely taking advantage of the poor judgement of one large sector of society. Same as Hannah Montana. The way I figure it these celebrities have done nothing wrong. All criticism goes to the people who think they are more talented than they are, not the celebrities themselves. What would you have them do? Call a press conference to admit that they aren't really all that good and that people should stop making a fuss about them?

So I say all the more power to Beiber and those overrated successes that went before him such as the Spice Girls, Harry Potter, Britney Spears, and Roberto Luongo.