Mid-Year Resolutions

This week, we'll be celebrating the 4th of July, and there will be sure to be fireworks a plenty.  About 6 months ago, we celebrated another holiday, quite possibly with fireworks - New Years.  Many of you may have been at a party, others perhaps at a concert winding down with Auld Lang Syne, while others might have sat quietly at home watching Carson Daily make a tool of himself while waiting for the ball to drop in Times Square.  Regardless of circumstances, countless people around the world had the common denominator of the infamous New Year resolution(s).

Fortunately for this young lady, these glasses
will come in handy again in the year 4102

While I am hesitant to use the term "resolution," I'll admit that I use the time to set some goals for the year.  Not so much a "I'm going to stop this," or "I'm going to start this," but rather look at how I can improve what I'm already doing.  For me personally, this mentality makes it easier to check on these goals throughout the year.  Because isn't that the problem with most resolutions?  They tend to fall apart about a month into the New Year.

So, this 4th of July weekend, after you've done your patriotic duty of eating lots of BBQ and ice cream, followed by blowing mini craters out of your back yard, I want to encourage you to hop into the time machine and re-live New Years 2014.  If you made a resolution, how are you doing?  Have you kept it?  If not, what can you do to get back on track?  If you didn't make one, why not do it now?  When you think about it, do you really need the calendar to read January in order to resolve something?  Besides, if you're afraid of making a resolution for fear of being a conformist, I'm sure there aren't too many people making July resolutions - that practically guarantees hipster status!

My wife and I were two months into our marriage in January.  So for us, we weren't just setting annual goals, it was an ideal time for us to start making some life goals.  In the next few moments, I want to review three areas we talked about.  I won't necessarily share the specifics of our goals (despite all the time we both spend on social media, we like to enjoy some level of privacy), but rather look at why these are important areas for everyone to be evaluating on a regular basis.

Fitness

This is probably the biggest bugaboo for most people. I'm sure there's like a hundred Buzzfeed lists for most popular New Years resolutions and least kept resolutions, and working out/losing weight is at the top of each one.  I'm not going to waste my time or yours trying to prove this through case studies and surveys - the proof is in the gym.  I'm proud to say I exercise year-round, and there's a noticeable spike in attendance from the last week of December to the first week of January.  Those numbers always plummet 3 weeks into January. 

Being healthy is not only reasonable, it's rational.  We only get one body on this side of Heaven, so it's in our best interest to take care of it.  Unfortunately, I feel many of these resolutions are ill-planned, and that's why they fade.  I'm not here to tell you the magic diet or workout that everyone should do in January.  That's nonsense, and in fact, if you hear about any 2-week weight loss programs, I recommend you run in the opposite direction.  My only suggestions for resolving to get into shape are as follows:

1. Be specific.  You want to lose weight - how much?  You want to get more muscle - what do you want to bench?  You want to run faster - what do you want your 40 yard dash to be?  Be specific, but be realistic too.  And give yourself time, which leads me to...
2. Develop good habits.  Even when crash diets achieve their claim of dropping x-amount of weight in x-amount of time, they don't last long because they ask people to do things they can't keep up over the long haul.  So I wouldn't set a 2-week goal, but a year-long goal, with maybe a few benchmarks along the way.  The point is when you hit your goal, you want to maintain it as well.

So, if you're ashamed of yourself because you ate one too many hot dogs this weekend, it's not too late to start asking what reasonable steps you can take to move in the right direction.

Financial

If there's one color everyone seems to love, it's the color green.  If we're honest with ourselves, there's never really enough.  While I'm not advocating a "Keeping up with the Joneses" mentality, I do think this is an area worth cultivating some wisdom.  We all have bills to pay, and we should have assets set aside, both for the short and long term.

How have you been doing this year financially?  Do you feel like you have all your needs met with some buffer room to spare, or do you feel like you're trying to just keep yourself afloat?  Either way, a self-audit is not a bad idea, regardless of time of year.  What are your spending habits? What are some unfavorable circumstances you keep finding yourself getting into?

Everyone's financial scenario is different, so we all can't have the same goals.  But here are some broad principles to consider when making your fiscal resolutions:

1. What's my budget?  If you don't have a monthly budget, now's a good time to start.  As I said before, it will vary for each person, but it's something we can all do.  Already budgeting?  Look at the monthly budget - notice any trends you can modify?
2. What's my debt?  We love the line on a bill that says "minimum amount due."  "What's the least I have to pay on this debt so I can have more fun now?"  May I challenge you to do the opposite - pay the max?  Not pay the balance in full (that would be crazy), but "what's the most I can pay ahead on this loan where I'll still have my daily needs met?"
3. What can I save?  Is it about time for a new car?  Are you looking to make that leap from apartment to home living?  Even on a more mundane scale, what's that one appliance you want that seems just about $100 out of reach every time you look at it?  Start setting aside money each month and lay out a timeline of when you'll have enough to go after that item.
4. What can I give (probably should have been first)?  For the Christian, are you doing your part in supporting your home church?  For those who may not be as definitive in their faith at this point in their lives (more on that later), do you really need every penny you get?  Let's lay faith aside for a moment and let me ask you - can you think of one charity you could give at least $10 a month to?

Money is one of those things that seems to be here one moment, gone the next.  Making good fiscal resolutions can help prepare for those moments when it seems to be gone.

Faith

What we believe defines who we are.  Whether we realize it or not, our beliefs affect our habits.  The two areas mentioned above, health and finances, especially can be altered significantly by what we believe.  Have you ever given much thought to what you believe?

If you know me or read this blog in the past, you'll know that my faith means the Christian faith.  If you are a Christian reading this (everyone else just bear with me a moment), then I encourage you to take a spiritual inventory and pray about where God wants you to grow.  None of us are perfect (and if you think you are, you need that prayer more than you think!), but we are the work of God and continually in progress.  Did you ever wonder why we weren't just snatched up to Heaven the moment we came to Christ?  God has work to do both in and through us in this life, and "will carry it on to completion until the day of Christ Jesus" (Philippians 1:6).  In other words, we don't stop growing, so don't get complacent!

Maybe you're reading this and aren't really sure what you believe (see, I promised I'd get back to you!).  There might have been a lot of confusing, intimidating language in the paragraph above.  That's OK.  That's not for you to worry about at this point in time.  I encourage you to resolve to start asking some more questions about who God is.  Who is Jesus to you?  And think about the implications - if the Bible is true, what does that mean for you and everyone else?  I can tell you what I think you should believe, and you can probably even guess what that is.  But I can't make that decision for you. Let this 4th of July weekend be the beginning of your search for defining what you believe.  And you can just start by asking thoughtful questions.

Until January....

You may have just read some things you liked, and maybe some others you didn't care for.  Let's agree to do this - rather than make a half-hearted resolution at some party on December 31, let's make a thoughtful resolution today.  That way, when New Years rolls around, we're already well on our way to an improved lifestyle.  And then we can just kick back and enjoy the countdown to midnight.

Haters Gonna Hate, but LeBron's Still Great

The NBA Finals concluded Sunday in a very forgettable fashion, as the San Antonio Spurs got revenge on the Miami Heat in one of the most lop-sided series in NBA history.  Before game 5 even ended, my Facebook and Twitter feeds blew up with a lot of anti-LeBron James sentiments.  I can understand the average basketball fan not liking LeBron.  If someone wants to cheer against him (as most America seems to do at this point), that's fine - it's certainly more reasonable than hoping both teams win.  But on the whole, the posts I've read in the last few days were either nonsensical hyper-criticisms on his career to date or ignorant predictions on the rest of his career.  Everyone is entitled to their opinion (Full Court Press is basically a pseudonym for Kos' opinion!), but if you're going to share those thoughts publicly, at least try to back it up with some facts and coherent thoughts.

I'm going to take a few minutes to do something very unpopular: defend LeBron James (not Tony Parker defend LeBron James, but court of public opinion defend LeBron James).  It's not so much that I'm a "fan" of the guy, although I don't hate him - as you'll see in the disclaimer below.  I can provide plenty of reasons to criticize the man, too.  However, I just can't sit by idly and watch people irrationally take away from what has been a stellar NBA career.  The focus will be on two trending claims: LeBron is overrated, and LeBron will never be as great as Michael Jordan.

Disclaimers

As I said, for the most part, I am not an avid LeBron James fan.  I'm certainly not a Miami Heat fan - that honor belongs to the Utah Jazz (yes, that's a real basketball team).  I do, however, remember watching LeBron when he was in high school, and I was excited for him to enter the NBA.  I had a feeling he would be something special, and as a fan of sports history, I was curious to see if he could grow into a legend.  It was obvious he would never be surrounded with the talent he needed to win a title while in Cleveland, so I didn't mind the fact that he took his talents to South Beach.  Besides, nobody deserves to be in Cleveland - except Johnny Manziel, and he's already there.  So, while I don't rock the 6 jersey (formerly 23 - no, not that 23, we'll talk about him later) and don't watch every game, I quietly pump my fist each time he hits a career milestone.

I say quietly because I can admit there's much not to like about LeBron.  I can honestly say I was sick to my stomach about "The Decision," which is now one of many reasons I no longer watch any ESPN original programming (i.e. I'll watch the games, but not SportsCenter, Baseball Tonight, College Gameday, etc).  Is the man arrogant?  Absolutely.  A crybaby?  Certainly.  And am I the only one who rolls his eyes as the size of his headbands continue to match the recession in his hairline?  So yes, LeBron is less than charming, which is why I didn't lose a whole lot of sleep when the Heat lost on Sunday.

So while this is clearly not a fully objective defense, I think I don't care enough to label this biased either.

The Best in the Biz

As stated above, some people seem to think every time Lebron loses, it's safe to say he's a loser, overrated, untalented... and the list goes on.  Let's get something straight: regardless of how you feel about him, Lebron James is the best basketball player on the planet!  He has more than earned the nickname "King James."  While not the league MVP this season, he won it last year, giving him a total of 4 (in a span of 5 years). He was an All-Star (his 10th).  Yes, I know All-Star appearances are a little skewed because they're a popularity contest, which is why it's important to note that he was selected to his 8th All-NBA 1st team.  Definitively, though, he "only" made 2nd team.  It's also his "only" selection to the 2nd team.  That's because in the previous 5 seasons, he was selected to the 1st team.

Some might knock him for only winning one scoring title.  A big pet peeve of mine is evaluating players solely on points scored.  There are many other factors to consider, and in fact, a player who scores a lot but doesn't do much else can fairly be criticized as one-dimensional.  First, LeBron averaged 27 points per game this season, which is consistent with his career average.  It is also a lot of points.  There's not a team in the league that wouldn't take a 27 point scorer just because they weren't the league's leading scorer.  So the guy can score, but as I said, there's more than scoring.  He also averaged 6 rebounds and 6 assists this season - averaging 7 and 6.9 respectively for his career.  Again, those are league-leading numbers, but they're darn good.  Most teams would love for their leading scorer to grab 6-7 boards a game.  Those same teams will trade up in the draft to get a 6' 8" 250 lb. forward that can dish out 6-7 assists a game.  He's also the ONLY player in NBA history to average at least 27 points, 7 rebounds, and 6 assists for his career.  If my point's not sinking in yet - this guy does many significant things at a high level.  Also consider his aforementioned size when he runs the floor - people that big should not be this fast:

He not only lights up the stat sheet, he a freakish athlete.  You want to know the real reason people are so upset with LeBron taking his talents to South Beach?  He didn't take those talents to their team.  I live just outside of Dallas, and I vividly remember the summer of 2010.  Everyone around here was clinging to the hope that Lebron just might be interested in being a Mav.  I remember New York had quite a buzz around him as well.  Chicago was another suitor that courted him.  Everyone wanted the best basketball player in the world, and many of those same people are calling him overrated today - because he didn't pick them. 

I could go on about his rookie of the year and 2 Olympic Gold medals (funny how the biggest honor in sports gets so easily lost in the talk of league championships), but it should be obvious by now this is not just a good ballplayer, but exceptionally great basketball player.

*stats courtesy of NBA.com

It Ain't Over

"Well, he's good, but he's no Michael Jordan," or "He'll never be as good as MJ."  That's probably the most common complaint out there.  It's also the most unreasonable.  Of course he's no Michael Jordan - there is only one.  Just like Jordan was no Magic Johnson, who was no Kareem who was no Wilt Chamberlain who was no Bill Russell.  Great players cement their own legacies, but they do so standing on the shoulders of other greats.  LeBron is the first Lebron, and he's done some special things in his career.  I already mentioned the skill-to-body size ratio.  It's unique.  That's why there was so much buzz about him in high school.  Speaking of which, he came straight from high school.  You can't do that anymore, but we have yet to see anyone that NBA-ready at the age of 18.  That includes every Kentucky freshman in the John Calipari era.  That even includes Michael Jordan.

Because of how young he entered the league and how ready he was able to compete, he's hitting career milestones faster than anyone in NBA history - youngest to reach 20,000 career points, youngest to record a triple-double (7th on the all-time list, most among active players), youngest to average 30 points per game in a season, youngest to be named to the All-NBA 1st team... and the list goes on (source: wikipedia.org).  The man is only 29 years old, and he's done what countless players have never done playing deep into their 30's.  The sky is still literally the limit. 

The elephant in the room, of course, is titles.  Michael Jordan has 6, and apparently that's the benchmark for LeBron.  Allow me to hop off this soap box onto another one for a moment: championships in team sports is the most ridiculous way to measure an individual's greatness.  Jordan was great, and he was certainly the leader of 6 title teams.  But his supporting cast was waaayyy better than what LeBron has had to work with, and that includes the "Big 3" era.  Statistically speaking, LeBron actually had more support from his 2007 Cavs runner-up team than he did this year's Heat team.  If we gauge a player strictly on titles, Trent Dilfer is a better QB than Dan Marino.  The title does not define a player's ability.  When the North Carolina Tar Heels won the 1984 NCAA National Championship (a game Jordan hit the game-winning shot), it was the first for legendary coach Dean Smith.  When asked after the game how he felt to "finally win the big one," Smith simply responded by asking if he was any better at coaching now that he was 5 minutes ago.  Furthermore, if we're counting strictly on titles won, Michael Jordan doesn't even have the most.  Does that make Bill Russell the greatest of all time?

Now, I don't want to throw the baby out with the bathwater.  Championships are important.  Basketball is a team sport, and teams play to win championships.  AND LEBRON WON 2 TITLES!!! Both as Finals MVP!  Hello?! Have we become so jaded that 2 championships aren't enough?  That's 2 more than hall-of-famers Karl Malone, John Stockton, Charles Barkley, et al. have won.  LeBron is a champion.  I know he's lost 3 finals, and yes, I agree that losing this recent one is a blow to his legacy.  But remember what we looked at before regarding his age - he's 29.  29 years old playing in 4 consecutive NBA Finals and winning 2 is remarkable.  Look at how old Tim Duncan was when he won his 5th.  To put it in perspective, if we're to compare him to Michael Jordan (which is still ridiculous), Jordan was 29 when he won his second title.  But supposedly LeBron will never win 6.  And he may not, but you don't know that, and neither do I. The window is still wide open. 

Hate, but Appreciate

I'm not advocating that people open their arms and embrace LeBron.  One thing Jordan had that LeBron may never have is charisma.  Every sport needs a bad guy, so if you hate LeBron's guts, you owe it to the integrity of fan-hood to cheer your heart out against him.  But please try to do 2 things in the process:

1. Respect the talent.  I mentioned I'm a Jazz fan and that Malone and Stockton have no rings.  Do you think I liked Michael Jordan from 1997-1998 when the Bulls beat the Jazz in consecutive NBA Finals?  Certainly not!  But I understood that I was witnessing greatness.  I count it a privilege that I watched all 6 titles (that's another thing - a lot of current LeBron haters were in diapers during the Jordan's first three-peat and just learning how to read during the second - so I take those evaluations with grain of salt).  LeBron is the best player in the world right now, can we at least begrudgingly agree on that?
2. Let time do its thing.  You can't truly evaluate or even appreciate a player's legacy while they're playing.  Why do you think there's a waiting period for Hall of Fame inductions?  LeBron is still writing his story.  Even Jordan needed a few years after he retired (for the third time) for us to forget about his one-man shows in the 80's, his botched baseball career in the 90's, and his Washington Wizards experiment in the 2000's.  LeBron may still have another 7-8 great years ahead of him, and if he's stubborn, another 3 useful ones after that.  

Let the man play the rest of his career out.  In the mean time, try to enjoy parts of it. 

Stacy Memes: Godzilla

So, the late-90's version of Godzilla came on Spike tonight:

I guess we have to see the new one now...

For the origin of Stacy Memes, click here.

The NHL's Dream Final Four

I guess you can call it the dream frozen four, but out of respect to college hockey, we'll leave it as is...

The NHL playoffs are in the midst of their conference finals, and the last 4 teams standing are pretty compelling.  Ever since the 2004-2005 season cancelled due to a lock out, the league has desperately been looking for any kind of momentum to thrust itself deeper into the pool of relevant professional sports.  Let's face it: hockey is a niche audience in the United States.  Sure, cities like San Jose and Columbus can tout their hockey clubs as the only professional game in town.  All the Canadian teams are the biggest sports draw in their collective cities, but no one in the US really cares.  There are a handful of American teams, such as the Detroit Red Wings, that have a reasonable argument for being the biggest ticket in town.  Some NHL teams are more relevant than others in their hometown, but still play second-fiddle to some other sport, as is the case with the Flyers and Penguins.  At the end of the day, most teams are a very distant 4th place among the local sports teams - the Dallas Stars are a great example of that.

So what is the NHL to do?  They were hoping Sidney Crosby would be the cross-cultural icon Wayne Gretzky was in the 80's and 90's.  But so far, the only non-hockey exposure he gets are a few lousy Reebok commercials every year.  Aside from grass-roots efforts such as youth clinics and rec leagues, for the NHL and hockey as a whole to make the next step in becoming a broader household commodity, it needs a Stanley Cup Finals that provides 3 things:

1. A large television audience
2. A compelling story line
3. A reason to check back in the fall

I believe the 4 remaining teams, The New York Rangers, The Los Angeles Kings, The Chicago Blackhawks and Montreal The Canadiens, can provide just such a formula for this year's Stanley Cup Finals.  Let's take a look at each of these teams, ignoring their current performance in the conference finals, and focusing on what they bring to the table should they advance to the championship round.

New York Rangers

Market: Biggest media market in the country, and that's significant for the NHL.  Make no mistake about it, regardless of how you feel about the Big Apple, it's a good thing for any league to have the New York team as a championship contender.  New York City is the cultural epicenter of the world, so if the Rangers make the Stanley Cup Finals, by default, many eyes will be watching.

Story Line: It's been 20 years since New York last won the Stanley Cup.  After remaining a force through much of the 90's, they became the unofficial retirement home of the NHL in the 2000's.  However, this is their second trip to the Eastern Conference Finals in the last three years.  Despite a lack-luster regular season, they've managed to grind it out and hang around - winning 2 game sevens in a row, the latter of which they were trailing 3 games to one.  I wouldn't give them the "cardiac kids" title in this year's playoffs  (see Los Angeles Kings), but they're awfully close.

Future Implications: The shining star through all of this has been goaltender Henrik Lundqvist, who year after year, has been one of the elite goaltenders in the league.  Unfortunately, he hasn't had many opportunities to play in big games outside the Olympics... until now.  He's a remarkable 5-0 in playoff game sevens (2 of which came this post season), and if he can lift Lord Stanley's Cup in June, he might be able to get his foot in the door for the conversation of all-time great goaltenders.

Los Angeles Kings

Market: Second largest media market in the country - essentially New York's west coast counterpart.  It's also Hollywood, so lights always shine a little brighter when LA is involved in any sport.  We almost had a New York-Los Angeles Stanley Cup Finals 2 years ago, but instead the Kings had to settle for beating the armpit of the nation - New Jersey.

Story Line: As mentioned above, these guys are the cardiac kids.  They were trailing a far more talented San Jose team in the first round 3 games to love, only to storm back and win 4 straight and win the series.  After facing a 3-2 deficit in the second round against the Mighty Ducks, they took the next two games to win in convincing fashion.  It's almost as if they're more comfortable when they're losing.  If they make the finals and fall behind early, the level of interest in the series should rise.

Future Implications:  If the Kings were to win the Stanley Cup, it would be their second in three years.  Also keep in mind that they played in the conference finals last year, so had things gone differently, we could be talking about a Hollywood three-peat.  Heads will definitely turn if there's a hockey dynasty in a town with very little hockey tradition.

Chicago Blackhawks

Market: Third largest media market in the country, and definitely a bigger hockey town than New York and LA.  They're also really popular right now (as far as NHL teams go), featuring 2 on the top ten selling NHL jerseys.

Story Line: defending Stanley Cup champions, 2 titles in the last four years.  A dynasty is a big deal in any sport, and I don't think it's an exaggeration to say the Blackhawks are on the verge of one. On the whole, they've been the best team in the league for the last two seasons, and they don't show any signs of slowing down.

Future Implications: If Chicago manages to win the Cup, they'll be heading into the following season with the biggest target on their back.  However, they're talented and deep, so if any team is capable of handling the pressure, it's the Blackhawks.  Those jerseys will keep selling too.  The duo of Jonathan Toews and Patrick Kane could end up being the marketing tools the NHL has desperately been looking for.  They have a couple things going for them that Crosby doesn't - Kane is an American, and Toews has so much charm and charisma, fans of opposing teams don't hate him.

Montreal Canadiens

Market: Canada.  I know I already said America doesn't care about Canada, but the NHL needs Canada.  Canadian teams make up a greater percentage of the league's teams than any other American sport. If we're talking market size, Toronto would probably be the more desirable Canadian team, but if you read further, I think you'll agree Montreal is an acceptable substitute...

Story Line: Canada has been yearning for a Stanley Cup.  They have produced the best hockey talent in the world, but they don't have the sport's biggest prize (with all due respect to the Olympic gold medal, this is the country that glorifies pond hockey over school and church on their currency).  A Canadian team hasn't won the Cup since 1993 when, you guessed it, Montreal won it all.  On top of that, most non-hockey fans don't realize that the Canadiens are the New York Yankees of the NHL - 24 Stanley Cup titles.  The early 2000's were the first decade since the 1920's that Montreal didn't win the Cup at least once.  As far as provinces go, I'd imagine Canada views Quebec as the snobby relative you're hesitant to invite to your blue-collar Thanksgiving dinner.  I'd also be willing to bet that if Montreal brought the Stanley Cup back to Canada, most Canadians would be willing to temporarily put those differences aside. 

Future Implications: Even though Americans aren't terribly concerned about what Canada does, our national pride will not be able to overlook that Canada took our thing.  When Canada and the US squared off in the 2002 and 2010 Olympic finals, Americans who would never glance at the NHL paid some level of attention to the gold medal games.  Every sport needs a bad guy, and if Montreal wins the cup, I think some of the casual hockey fans might keep closer tabs on next season to see if we can bring the cup back to the US (BTW - I am generalizing about American sentiment toward Canada.  I have nothing against our neighbors to the north, in fact, I think they give us many reasons to like them).

Check It Out

The Stanley Cup Finals will start up shortly after Memorial Day weekend.  No matter which two teams make it, there's going to be a big audience, gripping sub-plots, and teasers for the 2014-15 season.  Even with my Penguins out of it, I'm going to tune in.  If you haven't given hockey a try, might I recommend you do the same?  I'll admit, there's been some lack-luster finals in the past (see any New Jersey Devils championship), but if there's ever been a year that the finals will be capable of generating any kind of buzz, I think this will be the one.  

The Bachelor and The Song of Solomon

Monday is the season premiere of The Bachelorette, marking its 10th season, and the 28th overall for the Bachelor/Bachelorette series.  I'm a little embarrassed to confess this, but I watched the majority of the last season of The Bachelor.  My wife introduced me to the show as one of her guilty pleasures.  While I thought the premise was overall ridiculous, I couldn't help but be at least a little intrigued.  It was kind of like driving by a car wreck - you know it's an awful thing, yet you still slow down to turn your head and look.

Apparently I had fallen on one of the most controversial seasons in the history of the show.  The bachelor that season, Juan Pablo, infuriated the contestants, fans and ABC producers with his fickleness and lack of authenticity.  Host Chris Harrison expressed his displeasure with the ballyhooed star the day after the season ended on Good Morning America.  As much as I didn't care for Juan Pablo, my reaction to Harrison's chagrin would be: "What do you expect?  Did you really think you could script one of mankind's most unpredictable emotions?"

What fascinated me about this reality TV show is that it's premise and subsequent results present the ultimate paradox.  On the one hand, there's nothing real about it.  This is quite possibly the worst way for a person to find true love.  Only 5 of the final couples in the last 27 combined Bachelor/Bachelorette seasons are still together (with Juan Pablo's relationship status still TBD) - and that's not even counting the scores of broken hearts left out at the rose ceremonies (if you've never seen the show, I don't have time to explain what the rose ceremony is, but it really is as ridiculous as it sounds).  On the other hand, by watching the interactions of the characters, I can't help but think that the show is a caricature of relationships in today's society - people seeking happiness on a surface level.

If there's any positive to this series, it's an excellent guide in what NOT to do in building a relationship.  And that's not just my opinion, it's based on a more definitive source: the Bible.  This may sound a little unusual, as even some Christians would hesitate to call it a practical guide to romance. However, there is an entire book of the Bible dedicated to love and romance: the Song of Solomon.  Would I call that a little old-fashioned and out-of-touch?  Old, yes.  Over 3,000 years old to be exact.  Its principles though, have remained relevant throughout the ages.  The Song of Solomon is an eight-chapter look at the romantic journey of King Solomon and his bride.  Starting with their initial attraction, it moves into their courtship, wedding, honeymoon, how they deal with conflict, and ending with their golden years (Tommy Nelson - 1990, Denton Bible Church). Let's look at some of the trends on both The Bachelor and The Bachelorette and see what this rich book has to say about it.

E Pluribus Unum

Latin: out of many, one.  It's on the back of every bit of loose change in your ash tray.  It's also the starting point for all relationships - out of a sea of many people, we're looking for THE ONE.  That's pretty much how the bachelor/bachelorette series starts.  A guy or girl is presented with a group of 25 members of the opposite sex, and through a long series of group and individual dates, is supposed to choose one.

People going on dates is a normal thing.  It's also reasonable that someone can have a bad date and not pick up the phone for date #2.  But you can't reasonably expect someone to think clearly when their attention and affections are simultaneously being drawn in multiple directions.  The stars of these shows sometimes don't even get a full day to process one date before they're out with another person.  Unfortunately, that seems to be the norm more than the exception in today's society.

Commitment in our culture has almost become a taboo.  We've encouraged the notion of "shopping around" and "test driving" before settling.  The result has been open-ended relationships, with a poor understanding of what direction they're going in.  That's why Facebook made the "It's Complicated" status an option on profiles. I understand that most of the time, we're never going to know after date one if this is the person we're supposed to marry.  I've heard many "love at first sight" anecdotes, and I don't doubt their authenticity.  I've also heard accounts from many happily married couples relating how the first date was a disaster.  The common denominator between the two is that neither couple was willing to spread themselves too thin - a resolve that was rooted in a sense of commitment.

In Song of Solomon 2:1-3, we see an exchange between the couple:

I am a rose of Sharon, a lily of the valleys.

Like a lily among thorns is my darling among the maidens.

Like an apple tree among the trees of the forest is my lover among the young men.

I delight to sit in his shade, and his fruit is sweet to my taste.

The man and the woman exclaim the exclusivity of their relationship.  They acknowledge there are "other fish in the sea" - of the valleys, among thorns, among maidens, among the trees of the forest.  But their sights are set on only one - rose, lily, darling, apple tree.  A skeptic of this passage might argue that this is the end result of the bachelor/bachelorette programs - the individual settles on one out of many.  However, the context of this passage does not fit that description.  Chapter two is still the dating/courtship phase of their relationship.  The wedding does not come until chapter 3.  In other words, this exchange is not a life commitment just yet, rather it is a declaration of the exclusivity of their courtship. 

Dating in of itself is OK.  It's also reasonable to date someone and not end up marrying them.  But, the person you marry is someone you have dated at one time.  The caution here is that if we spread ourselves too thin on relationships that turn up empty, we will have that much less of ourselves to give to the date that ends up counting the most.

Skeletons in the Closet

So what do these people talk about on their dates?  In my opinion, too much, too soon.  Remember, this is speed dating.  The contestants know they only have limited time to make a big impression, so they want to be able to connect with the bachelor/bachelorette.  Conversely, the main contestant wants to see if they can trust the others with their baggage, so a lot comes out in a short period of time. 

On the one hand, this doesn't seem like such a bad thing.  Of course you would want to be able to trust your significant other.  Yes, secrets do not make for a healthy relationship.  The trust building phase of any relationship though, takes time.  Thus, unloading all the intimate details of your life in the first couple of dates can be a little counter-productive.  All of this is addressed in Song of Solomon 2:14-15 - 

My dove in the clefts of the rock, in the hiding places on the mountainside,

show me your face, let me hear your voice;

for your voice is sweet, and your face is lovely.

Catch for us the foxes, the little foxes

that ruin the vineyards, our vineyards that are in bloom.

The dove in the clefts of the rock is a symbol of security with something fragile.  In this case, the sensitive information of one is secure with the other.  The foxes that ruin the vineyard are all the ugly things from our life that need to get out in the open so that it doesn't come to ruin the relationship later on.  Make no mistake, this passage encourages us to air our dirty laundry.

But remember the context of their relationship.  They're still in chapter 2, so they're not married yet.  But, at this point, they've been together for some time.  It's not their first five dates.  This couple has had time to get to know each other slowly, and as a sense of trust is built, they become more comfortable sharing the uncomfortable with each other.  What we can learn from this is that we certainly don't want to wait too long to let a significant other know something critical about our past.  However, if we leave ourselves too vulnerable too early, we could be setting ourselves up for heartbreak and disappointment.  That's one of the reasons we see so many tears when a contestant is let off the show.  Many have opened up parts of their lives that they typically keep closed.  They feel they've made a connection with the main contestant because they were confident in sharing that information.  Ultimately they are crushed when they're left out at the rose ceremony because they feel rejected.  Let's not make the same mistake in real life.  Be an open book, but turn the pages slowly.

How far is too far?

One of the most commonly asked and most ambiguously answered questions in church youth groups today.  Both The Bachelor and The Bachelorette toe this line frequently.  Throughout the countless dates cited above, there is also quite a bit of affection on display.  These moments tend to get more intimate as the season progresses and the field of candidates is narrowed down.  Let me just ask a quick rhetorical question to those of you taking the time to read this (married or single): if you went on a date with someone, then found out on date #2 that this person kissed, or even just held hands with someone else since your last date,  would you stick around for date #3?  This is the case on both programs - the main contestant will kiss (make-out, not peck on the cheek) one date, then do the exact same thing the next night with a different person. While it would seem like a no-brainer that this is a recipe for disaster, not everyone would seem to agree.

Although the rhetorical question was meant to have an understood answer of no, sadly, this is not the case with many people in our culture today.  Our generation has managed to coin the term "sexual compatibility," meaning we have to try things with different people to find the right fit.  It's viewed like test-driving a car.  What we fail to realize is that there is an emotional attachment that is associated with acts of affection.  Some people have become hardened to it, but it's not how we were naturally wired.  Let's look at the words of Solomon again:

2:7, 3:5 - Do not arouse or awaken love until it so desires.

A simple, yet profound statement.  If you want my biblical answer to the "how far is too far" question, that would be it.  As mentioned above, our affections are designed to be tied to our emotions.  In the context of this repeated statement, the woman is swooning over Solomon's efforts to romance her, and she wants to take him to bed.  Solomon's response is that the time is not yet right - the right time of course, being marriage.  

To leave abstinence only at avoiding premarital sex is to set one's self up for failure.  What this verse is saying is that we need to be on guard for conditions that trigger the same responses that come from sex.  God did not just intend sex to be within the confines of marriage, He meant for the emotions that come with it to stay there too.  To truly adhere to abstinence is to avoid compromising situations.

Another example of this can be seen in the "fantasy suite" (one of the most egregious pseudonyms in TV history) with the last three contestants.  Each contestant gets one overnight date alone with the main contestant - no cameras allowed.  Although there are no explicit descriptions of what is supposed to happen, the implication is loud and clear. And even though some couples claim nothing more than talking happens, that doesn't mean it was a good idea to begin with.  Look at this season's Bachelorette, Andi.  Things went south for her on the last season of The Bachelor after her fantasy suite with Juan Pablo.  Although we're told nothing happened physically, there were many words exchanged that evening, and for Andi, too many of them were hurtful.  Perhaps the biggest was his referencing the previous evening's fantasy suite with another woman.  If just spending the night together is so innocent, then why was Andi so hurt to hear that he did so with another woman, especially when she knew all the finalists would have a fantasy suite night?

Do not arouse or awaken love until it so desires.  Arousing or awakening love can mean a lot of things for a lot of people.  Some people wait until they're married for their first kiss.  Others kiss early and often but stop there until marriage.  The warning is simple, but practical - you know your weaknesses and limitations, so don't flirt with them.

In a Perfect World

There's no such thing.  A skeptic would argue that king Solomon did not adhere to these principles in the long run.  The Bible does highlight Solomon's relational shortcomings, but skeptics tend to ignore that it also records the consequences of his mistakes.  The important thing is that at one point in time, Solomon had it right, and The Song of Solomon was written at that time.  

Proponents of the bachelor/bachelorette would point out that the couple from the last season of The Bachelorette ended in a beautiful wedding, officiated by the father of the groom (an ordained minister).  I watched the ceremony that was broadcast live on ABC, and they seemed like reasonable people... which is why I'm so confused that they ever agreed to such an unreasonable show.

There will always be anecdotal evidence, but that does not mean that the end justifies the means.  I'm not saying it's a crime to watch The Bachelorette on Monday.  With the Penguins out of the playoffs, I lost my "there's a big game on tonight" trump card with my wife, so I'll probably watch too.  Just remember that the Bachelor/Bachelorette is not a reliable guide on how to find love.  If anything, it's a great example of what not to do.   But when we see that through a Biblical grid, there's a lot we can learn.

Stacy Memes: At the Movies

So we're at the movies last night, and this was said to me:

Stacy says this one's for Jennifer Aniston.

If you don't know what Stacy Memes are, click here.

Obligatory Johnny Football Post

Ugh. So for a week I've been trying to put a post together about Johnny Manziel and the 2014 NFL draft.  I got about a quarter of the way through a post about how WR Mike Evans and OT Jake Matthews would be better Aggies to draft over Manziel.  But....

I got distracted. And draft day came.  And then it was gone.  My post was now out-dated (although it should be noted that both Evans and Matthews were picked up before Manziel).  I then thought I'd do a knee-jerk reaction to Manziel's selection (drafted too high, too low, to the right team, etc).  But now the draft's over, and we've heard just about every analysis on the subject, so that would just be internet clutter (as if my blog is all that relevant on cyberspace to begin with).

At this point, I'm sick of Johnny Manziel, I'm sick of the NFL draft and I'm ready to move on.  But if I just abandoned the whole Johnny Football post, I'd feel like Johnny Manziel sleeping in at the Manning Passing Academy. So here's three random thoughts on Johnny Manziel, and then we can move on to the NBA & NFL playoffs, as well as the peak of summer baseball.

Football Purgatory

In 2007, the Cleveland Browns selected QB Brady Quinn with the 22nd overall pick.  In 2012, with the 22nd overall pick, they took QB Brandon Weeden.  In 2014, blah, blah, blah, blah....I don't really get hung up on coincidental facts like that.  But I do love the irony of how the cockiest guy in the draft ended up in the saddest city in America.  I mean, look what it did to Quinn and Weeden...

If there's a plus side for Manziel to be in Cleveland, he'll probably be bored out of his mind, having less opportunities to do stuff like this, and maybe show up to practice on time instead:

The Scampering QB

Of all the cons listed in scouting reports, I'm a little surprised no one mentioned HOW this guy runs.  Over the last two college football seasons, I feel like every time I saw a Manziel highlight run, I saw a little bit of this:

Notice the ball hanging out like a loaf of bread. It seems like half the time he was running on his tippy toes.  Seriously, I can't remember a time I didn't see this pose every he took off to run.  I'll admit, he's fast.  He's even agile.  He made a lot of good SEC defenders miss tackles.  But this is the NFL.  Runs like his don't go well in against the big boys.  

When I saw Tim Tebow and Cam Newton in college, they just looked like guys who could run at the next level (I know Tebow is jobless right now, but he still ran like a beast). Manziel on the other hand, looks more like a majestic sprite than a running QB.  If he tries to shake Clay Matthews with these kinds of "jukes," he'll either lose the football, be flattened like a pancake, or both...

Double the Pleasure

The Cleveland Browns are division rivals with my Pittsburgh Steelers.  That means they get to play each other twice a year.  For a guy known to miss practice and not study the playbook, it's going to be fun watching Manziel try to figure out Dick Lebeau's complex defense.  He's never had to run from the likes of Troy Polomalu, Lawrence Timmons, and Jarvis Jones. It was a down year for the Steelers defensively last season, but the brownies shouldn't hope for lightning to strike twice.  On September 7, the Browns and Steelers open the season against each other.  Welcome to the NFL Johnny.