Month: January 2009

Thought I would just throw out a couple of quick observations over the last week or so.  My favorite so far has to be something overheard during the Jan 1st Outback Bowl featuring Iowa Hawkeyes vs. the S. Carolina Gamecocks.  Iowa is a heated rival in my household since my wife is from the state of Iowa and I went to the land of Chief Illiniwek (you can strong arm it out of our weak university governing boards, but you are not removing it from the hearts of those who attended there and understand the difference between a mascot and a revered symbol).  However, since the Illini didn’t pull out the juicer at the end of the year, we were stuck watching from the comfort of our living rooms where Hersey was cheering from the sidelines in Tampa.  It was basically playing in the background as I did some odd work around the house when the game must have hit a low point. This forced the announcers to look for something else to talk about.  Once again, I failed to set up my PVR on delay mode in order to review or capture things that catch my attention.  This happens all the time with headline news and I keep promising myself I’ll get that set up.

I am unable to remember exactly where in the game the discussion occurred, but the producer panned down to the field where I think Rob Stone was standing next to the Gamecocks’ mascot which happens to be a rooster named Sir Big Spur.  Rob proceeds to place a mirror in front of it where it responds in the expected manner by pecking at the opposing rooster.  This continues on for what seems like eternity… rooster pecking, pecking, pecking, pecking … against the mirror.  Rob proceeds to explain how this particular bird would continue this fight until the death.  More pecking, pecking, pecking and then either Sean McDonough or Chris Spielman (my money is on the latter since he has a history of similar statements) says something like “[how long are we going to have to see this rooster…. he or she what is it Rob?]”  Again, I wish I had it on PVR to be more accurate.  I will let you think about that for a minute before I spoil the fun.  Did you put two and two together yet?  Rob hesitated a little (probably trying to figure out the appropriate response) and issues “well, it is a rooster so it is a he otherwise it would be called a HEN”.  If I can track down the accurate quotes, I’ll update this post – so no, I didn’t mess up the title to this post.

Lastly for today, my wife was walking through Kohls right after Christmas and passed by a kid that was extremely excited about his Kohls gift certificate he received.  He was eager to spend it and was busy telling the people he was with that he had $38 to spend.  Linda thought that was an odd amount to get a gift certificate for (and the reason she mentioned it to me when she returned home).  I had to agree and spent some time trying to figure out a combination that makes logical sense.   One person giving $2 short of $40, two groups going in for $19 a piece, a group of 7 each giving $5 and 3 of them throwing in an extra $1, a group of 38 each giving $1.  It just seems odd, but I am sure I just missing something glaringly obvious.  Before I get the comment on $38 is a lot of money for a family etc. etc., that is not the point of the observation.  It is a very nice gift and the child was clearly excited about it.  The strange amount is the part that is throwing me off.  $2 more gives it an even amount and I doubt that amount is going to break anyone shopping at Kohls.  $3 less makes $35 and I am guessing that would be just as exciting to the kid.  The only thought at the moment is the kid new exactly what he wanted already and the parents included the tax etc, for that particular purchase.  But I would expect in that case, my wife would overhear comments about the specific item he was going to obtain as opposed to the dollar amount that was going to be spent.  It was an odd scenario and that is what we are all about here.

That is all for now and stay away from those female roosters.