"Everything's cool.. get off our backs."
The University of Michigan football program, which has been on the verge of a full blown NCAA investigation into practice time, and allowable number of coaches infractions, released a statement yesterday that better not have cleared their name, and ended the issue. To summarize the entire press release in a few words, "Sorry dude... we cool now?".
Now maybe I am a skeptic, or maybe I am still sore about our star WR being suspended for a year for eating dinner and doing pilates with Deion Sanders and am expecting all future investigations to be treated in the same manner, but this story seems to have the potential to have DaVinci Code sized holes in it*. When any person, or institution, uses language like "the institution does not believe it is warranted in this instance", that feels fishy to me. Would Bones stop investigating because someone said it isn't warranted in this instance? Hell No! Bones would find the shit out of that killer or whatever it is she does. (Does anyone watch Bones? Is this what she does?)
All I am saying is, "NCAA, please make sure the death of Dez's career meant something." I realize these are separate issues but, if you are going to be badasses, then be badasses across the board. Don't drop the hammer on one guy, then take another schools word for it when they say everything's fine.
* Let me preface this footnotenovel by saying that I don't exactly fancy myself as as writer that never leaves a gap in a story, but I also don't have thousands of people making millions of dollars scrutinizing every word I write before it is ever released to the public. Anyway... I have seen the DaVinci Code movie a few times and even read the book a few years ago and was wondering if anyone else noticed these two huge plot holes.
Please tell me if I am way off base and there really is an explanation for these:
- No security cameras in the fucking Louvre? Really? The suspense of the story is based in the fact that nobody knows what actually transpired when the old guy was killed, since there were no witnesses, and no security footage IN THE MIDDLE OF THE MOST FAMOUS MUSEUM IN THE WORLD. Hell, the Cowboy Hall of Fame (it's still called that) has cameras covering every little inch of the entire museum, and there is no mention of video surveillance in the Louvre? And don't tell me that the killer disabled the system. He is a monk. There might be 4 people in the world smart enough to hack into the Louvre's sophisticated security system and you expect me to believe that this monk that whips himself is one of these people? No way Dan Brown, no way.
- The end goal of this entire story is to prove that Jesus had kids by finding the bones of Mary Magdalene and using them to do a DNA comparison with currently living people, thus proving the blood line exists. Let's say all of that works out... I still have one question... How does proving that the sneaky hot french girl (SHFG) is related to Mary Magdalene prove, or disprove, that Jesus had kids? Wouldn't you then have to match Mary's family or SHFG's DNA to Jesus's DNA? "That's super awesome that you matched Mary and SHFG's DNA Robert, now could you please prove to me that Jesus fathered that bloodline?" WHOOPS! "For all we know Mary Magdalene really was a prostitute who had all kinds of kids and SHFG is just one of thousands of her descendants running around today. Hey Langdon, where are you going?"
This ends the most off-topic post to date. Thank you all for understanding.