If you were a red-blooded male in high school, then, at the time, there wasn't much on your mind: sports, women, sports, women, food.
Your time was tempered by wondering what the girl of your choice would look like in the suit that nature had made for her.
Also, if you were like most red-blooded males, you knew you had zero chance of ever finding out.
However, there was one way. One hope. One wish. One dream.
The girls' locker room.
"If only..." you would think to yourself. "If only I could see through to the other side."
Your high-school dreams and fantasies could be realized with one simple wish granted, and no doubt you'd like what you saw at first. Even if it were just a glimpse. Then time would continue on. You'd still look, but realize that you wanted more.
Viewing was nice, fine, awesome...but you wanted the next experience, the next step. You were no longer satisfied with just seeing. You knew the world was bigger than just that view, and you were ready.
- B/R Ticket Guide
Every year, this experience plays out in a smaller, less perverse way: The NFL preseason.
Come training camp, it's like we're in high school again. We wonder what's behind that door, because the most beautiful sport just walked through. Only, in this scenario, we get to see through the walls. It starts with the Hall of Fame Game and that first week, we're pumped. We're excited. We see the beautiful girls.
There's Peyton Manning, and Tom Brady! Look, Donovan McNabb, Tony Romo, and T.O.! It's Big Ben and Fast Willie!
The wall has come down and we see, in all of its glory, what our eyes had craved for so long.
Then the cheerleaders would leave and the women's rugby team comes in.
Gus Ferrotte? Charlie Batch? Jim Sorgi? Oh man...what am I watching?
The enjoyment of what we once yearned for quickly fades, as we realize: not every girl is hot. Likewise, not all football is entertaining.
We bide our time, like waiting for that special night, when the proverbial cherry is popped and the new season starts. It may not leave you as breathless, but you're relieved it's over, and you talk about it with all of your friends.
Much like your high school love, the preseason attraction will fade, and most of you will have your hearts broken. One of you in 32 will marry that woman you saw on the other side of the wall, and you'll love every flaw that you saw on her.
The thing about this school is that you don't graduate. At the end of the year, you're right back to wishing you could see through those walls. You forget all about what just happened; even the happily married couple revert.
You're right back to wishing you could see that track star after her run, know what that cheerleader looks like, and you don't even think about that rugby team.
Right now, I've had enough of looking through walls.
I'm ready to cash in my v-card for the 2008 season.
Let's go Steelers. May you make a beautiful bride.
comments (38) write a comment »
write a new comment
2 months ago
good article. best i've read from you nicholas.
underhanded compliment? NAY. well done.
from 2 months ago
Wow, great article. Five stars and my Pick of the Day.
2 months ago
5/5 man. Lets go Picksburg Stillers!
2 months ago
Very entertaining read!
2 months ago
Messed up comparison, but reasonable explanation.
2 months ago
Excellent read.
2 months ago
I laughed, being that I am in High School, so I can relate. haha.
2 months ago
Yeah what everyone said! To come clean I saw the cheerleader picture and clicked like 9 times.....Sorry
2 months ago
Good article. Thanks.
2 months ago
Very entertaining read......Odd comparison, but you made it work....
2 months ago
hayden panetierre is hot as hell
from 2 months ago
Yes she is!!! And good article, BTW
2 months ago
Great analogy!
2 months ago
I wish the standards on BR were higher, I really do
from 2 months ago
I cant tell if this is an attack or a compliment.
from 2 months ago
It's not a compliment, but I wouldn't call it an attack, either. Todd is merely expressing his opinion in a roundabout way, he is letting you know that he didn't like your article and is showing his dissatisfaction with the level of writing (the standards) on B/R. It is his opinion, and he is entitled to it. Remember, you cannot please everyone with your writing. I see a 10 to 1 ratio of positive comments to negative ones. The positive comments should give you confidence to write more. The negative ones should motivate you to improve your writing. Why not ask Todd "why" he thinks what he does about this piece? He might even tell you, and that's how you improve. Look, you both want the same thing - good writing. Just don't take criticism personally. Unless of course it's personal. This time it's not. :) You could also thank Todd for taking the time to give you feedback, for giving you the opportunity to improve your writing. All the best.
from 2 months ago
Sorry Todd, I always put the comment in the wrong place. Again, my apologies...
from 2 months ago
Reading through your history, Todd, I see a pattern of leaving random negative comments on others articles with no back up to them.
In other words, I wish the standards on BR were higher. I really do.
from 2 months ago
Hi Nick and Hi Pete. BR is a community driven site in which everyone is allowed to post their articles, be it good or bad, and have their comments heard, be them good or bad. I'm glad you took the time to research my comment history, however I would truly appreciate if you took the time to check out my article history, as that is where I am most proud of my work. I feel my articles, while not often commented on, are of a very high quality and for the most part speak for the standards in which I am referring.
If you would like to discuss this further, you can reach me on aim at Tenorion78, through e-mail or on through our personal profile boards, where I interact with many writers.
As far as this article specifically, I don't enjoy it on many levels. I feel the analogy of exhibition football, which is probably one of the most boring things on the planet, is weak. The article is put together incredibly poorly. There is no continuity to the article at all. The comparison of the beginning of training camp to the hall of fame game is brutal, and to discuss players from five different teams after talking about one specific game is lost on me. Is the hall of fame game played by the Eagles, Patriots, Colts, Cowboys and Eagles? Also, to discuss how exciting it is to see pro-bowl caliber superstars, who play at maximum, five drives the entire preseason si ridiculous. Is it really exciting to see Tom Brady come out, run eight plays and then sit on the bench for three hours? If you're going to form the argument, at least form a good one. Try, at least TRY to think of something clever. Like comparing the hot young freshman cheerleader who made the squad you've started dreaming about to your team's new draft picks. Or compare free agents to the new girl in the class who just transferred in with the killer body that the guys have been drooling over. But no, that's lost on you. You took us back to high school and then told us you were thinking of marrying these high school girls. What guy does that? Creepy ones. Nobody wants to feel creepy.
You said, "the thing about school is that you don't graduate." What? Yes you do, unless you drop out or die, you graduate. That makes no sense at all.
Figure out what makes a good article. Explaining what is good about the potential of the girls locker room as well as the the potential of preseason football.
You did neither.
Its a cheap attempt by a writer to get a lot of reads and booster their rating.
Let me go through this line by line for you, in case you have any trouble with what I'm saying:
Intro:
If you were a red-blooded male in high school, then, at the time, there wasn't much on your mind: sports, women, sports, women, food.
Me: Is fine. Not incredibly catchy and you write in second person, which I hate, but if thats what you like, so be it. Also the entire intro is just one big cliche, but again, if thats what you like, then ok.
Article: Your time was tempered by wondering what the girl of your choice would look like in the suit that nature had made for her.
Me: Incredibly awkward. Also, you just said that "red blooded males thought about women" and women, we get it. At least I get it. Its also terribly worded, let me ask you, have you ever said the phrase "the suit that nature made" when talking about nudity? If not, why would you think to use it in an article that you want people to read. If yes, and the answer was "yes, all the time!" then you can stop reading my analysis here, because you're just not going to get it.
Article: Also, if you were like most red-blooded males, you knew you had zero chance of ever finding out.
Me: Why? Guys didn't get laid in high school? No offense, but I wasn't like, Mr. Spectacular, but I saw one or two naked girls in my day, so if you think "most" guys didn't get some action in high school, again, I kind of feel some sympathy for you. This is where the article really REALLY took a bad turn.
Article: However, there was one way. One hope. One wish. One dream.
The girls' locker room.
Me: The girls locker room represented a dream, but it wasn't to satisfy the opportunity to see naked girls. It was the opportunity to see ANY naked girl. This is where you missed the point. Guys dreamed about the girls lockerroom because they knew it was where the cheerleaders, every gym class, the girls soccer team, swim team, volleyball team, track team, etc showered (and made out!) after practice and competitions. While were were changing in our locker room after gym, they were changing too, and while we were sweating, they were wet. While we were showering, making not to look anywhere but down, they were all in the shower...together, helping each other clean up. Its just how the imagination worked for a 16 year old boy.
Now you take that and move it to pre-season football. Preseason football is like starting the dream all over again. Its like imaginging the girls showering together because you believe your team has a chance, because you're convincing yourself JT O'Sulluvan can be great. Its that excitement of what COULD BE, not what IS - that JT O'Sullivan sucks.
If you want to use the games on the field, do what I said, and say its finding that diamond in the rough free agent, the girl in the library who you've gone to school with for ten years and you finally realized she's gorgeous, and thinking about her chaning.
Do you get my point. This article had potential, it coudl have been great. But you missed.
from 2 months ago
In being critical of my article, it seems you completely missed the point of my article.
"The comparison of the beginning of training camp to the hall of fame game is brutal, and to discuss players from five different teams after talking about one specific game is lost on me. Is the hall of fame game played by the Eagles, Patriots, Colts, Cowboys and Eagles?"
Read closely. "It starts with the Hall of Fame Game and that first week, we're pumped." The phrase "and that first week" implies the games that go along with the first full week of pre-season games.
"Also, to discuss how exciting it is to see pro-bowl caliber superstars, who play at maximum, five drives the entire preseason si ridiculous. Is it really exciting to see Tom Brady come out, run eight plays and then sit on the bench for three hours?"
No, it's not. Which is the point. Is it really so exciting after the first look through the wall? No, it wouldn't be. Just like pre-season football. After that initial rush and seeing what you want, the thrill is gone. Much more clever than your version of my article is.
"You said, "the thing about school is that you don't graduate." What? Yes you do, unless you drop out or die, you graduate. That makes no sense at all."
No, what I said was, "The thing about this school is you don't graduate." There's a word in there that makes a whole lot more meaning that you either chose to overlook, or did so unintentionally.
Try, at least TRY to think of something clever. Like comparing the hot young freshman cheerleader who made the squad you've started dreaming about to your team's new draft picks. Or compare free agents to the new girl in the class who just transferred in with the killer body that the guys have been drooling over."
While this could have definitely added to the article (which I realized later I wrote while getting sick from food poisoning), I think it translates just fine. So do the 7 Post of the Day nominations I received for it.
"You took us back to high school and then told us you were thinking of marrying these high school girls. What guy does that? Creepy ones. Nobody wants to feel creepy."
You know what guy does that? High school guys. The guys I took you back to. So really... not so creepy. Unless you miss the point, which you have.
"Figure out what makes a good article. Explaining what is good about the potential of the girls locker room as well as the the potential of preseason football.
You did neither."
You're correct that I did neither, because that wasn't the point. The point was to explain how boring it was. You think it's awesome, it gets there, you're excited at first, then the ugly truth of what you wanted sets in and you're ready for the real thing.
"Do you get my point. This article had potential, it coudl have been great. But you missed."
The article the way you wanted to write it had potential. You're mad that I missed it.
The article the way I wrote it is just fine. You just missed the point.
from 2 months ago
"Me: Incredibly awkward. Also, you just said that "red blooded males thought about women" and women, we get it. At least I get it. Its also terribly worded, let me ask you, have you ever said the phrase "the suit that nature made" when talking about nudity? If not, why would you think to use it in an article that you want people to read. If yes, and the answer was "yes, all the time!" then you can stop reading my analysis here, because you're just not going to get it."
So colloquialisms and different ways of saying common phrases aren't encouraged? Well, I might as well stop being creative then. It's my writing style. I'm sorry if you're offended.
"Article: Also, if you were like most red-blooded males, you knew you had zero chance of ever finding out.
Me: Why? Guys didn't get laid in high school? No offense, but I wasn't like, Mr. Spectacular, but I saw one or two naked girls in my day, so if you think "most" guys didn't get some action in high school, again, I kind of feel some sympathy for you. This is where the article really REALLY took a bad turn."
So you're saying you had no self doubt or lack of confidence that made you think, "I'll never get with that girl..."? Okay. I believe that.
"Article: However, there was one way. One hope. One wish. One dream.
The girls' locker room.
Me: The girls locker room represented a dream, but it wasn't to satisfy the opportunity to see naked girls. It was the opportunity to see ANY naked girl. This is where you missed the point. Guys dreamed about the girls lockerroom because they knew it was where the cheerleaders, every gym class, the girls soccer team, swim team, volleyball team, track team, etc showered (and made out!) after practice and competitions. While were were changing in our locker room after gym, they were changing too, and while we were sweating, they were wet. While we were showering, making not to look anywhere but down, they were all in the shower...together, helping each other clean up. Its just how the imagination worked for a 16 year old boy."
Right. And preseason football represented the chance to see ANY girl naked. Same concept. I made it fairly obvious with later statements that it became a broad perspective.
"Now you take that and move it to pre-season football. Preseason football is like starting the dream all over again. Its like imaginging the girls showering together because you believe your team has a chance, because you're convincing yourself JT O'Sulluvan can be great. Its that excitement of what COULD BE, not what IS - that JT O'Sullivan sucks."
See, this is where you're at fault. My article was never about the positives of what could come. It's about the harsh reality that you may get what you ask for, but eventually it wont be what you want anymore. You wanted to see through the walls, you got it. You saw the few good mixed with the much ugly and you're ready to move on to the next step, more than just watching. You got to see football, good mixed with the bad, and you're ready to see the real thing. Ready to move on to the next step.
You feel I missed out on a chance to write an article you wanted to write with my idea. I feel I wrote an article that was just fine with my idea.
from 2 months ago
Hi Nicholas. It appears you are of the belief that every idea is a good one. That is simply not the case. Defend your article all you want. Its poorly written, doesn't convey a thought out thesis and was clearly written to get hits instead of for credibility or true journalistic integrity. In this day and age of sensationalism, I'm not a fan of that type of journalism. I called I suggest you take the criticisms as a way to improve your writing, or completely dismiss them as hogwash, or accept that you're a below average writer who has an outlet that will accept your garbage, and some people have the opportunity to call a spade a spade. Get over it. If I missed "the point" of the article, I'm glad, I should have been more harsh, then, not less.
from 2 months ago
Todd- I have read your articles and you come off exactly the same way as you come off in your criticisms. That you are the end all to be all when it comes to writing and knowledge. You write with a stuck up tone that suggests you're better, your thoughts are smarter, and your ideas are brighter. You also refuse to see other ways of constructing articles, opinion pieces, humorous pieces (as this is clearly marked). If I wanted to make this a serious piece of writing, I could. That wasn't me intention. My writing isn't structured. My writing isn't the norm. However, I've had things I've written published on more than one occasion. I've also gotten praise from all of my English teachers in free form writing assignments. Structured writing is not my strong suit, nor will it ever be. If you dont like it, that's fine. However, I suggest you look at writings in ways other than what you think is right.
2 months ago
Nicolas, it's not a compliment, but I wouldn't call it an attack, either. Todd is merely expressing his opinion in a roundabout way, he is letting you know that he didn't like your article and is showing his dissatisfaction with the level of writing (the standards) on B/R. It is his opinion, and he is entitled to it. Remember, you cannot please everyone with your writing. I see a 10 to 1 ratio of positive comments to negative ones. The positive comments should give you confidence to write more. The negative ones should motivate you to improve your writing. Why not ask Todd "why" he thinks what he does about this piece? He might even tell you, and that's how you improve. Look, you both want the same thing - good writing. Just don't take criticism personally. Unless of course it's personal. This time it's not. :) You could also thank Todd for taking the time to give you feedback, for giving you the opportunity to improve your writing. All the best.
from 2 months ago
Right. I figured it was negative, but I personally have a problem with giving a broad negative comment without any feedback to back it up. I was hoping he would come back, address my comment, and tell me why.
from 2 months ago
I couldn't agree more Nicholas, if one is going to make such a blanket statement with no points to it, it is a pointless statement. Which means it doesn't belong. C'mon, this is a comment area, leave your real comments Todd.
from 2 months ago
Hi Craig, I left my real comments. I guess I just assumed, at some level, that Nicholas knew he wrote an article which panders to the lowest common denominator and didn't need a lot of explanation. I apologize for being wrong and you can see my comments above.
2 months ago
I liked this more when at the beggining, when it was about girls.Lol
2 months ago
Haha great job with this one, man!
2 months ago
Let me know if that was detailed enough for you or if I wasnt clear on anything.
from 2 months ago
I think you were crystal clear, Todd. Thanks for going "beyond the call of duty" on this one. I was not being sarcastic with regards to you or your comment. I was on your side, trying to explain to Nicholas that you weren't "attacking him". Cheers.
from 2 months ago
I appreciated your comments, but since in your mind this article was supposed to be on the other side (yours is positive, mine is negative) they aren't of much use.
Thank you for coming by, though.
from 2 months ago
Nicholas, there are no "sides." We are a community of writers here to discuss each others writing and we are allowed to have views that differ. If everyone said that everyone's writing was superb, we wouldn't have a community which allowed the elite writers to truly ascend to the top. I was told I should give constructive criticism by noneother than yourself, Craig and Pete. If you notice, I chose not to reply to your comment regarding how you perceive me, because that is your perception of me based upon what you viewed of my comments. Again, both you and Craig asked me to explain my comment, you even asked twice and said you wouldn't dare leave a comment like I left. I consider myself explained now.
from 2 months ago
Sides constitutes the spectrum upon which this could have gone. You would have gone more for the positive side of Pre-season football. Mine was went to the negative side.
Hopefully that clears things up for you.
from 2 months ago
Hi Todd. You are so right to comment on the lack of standards in writing on this website for amateur writers who don't get paid for their work. Someone needs to teach these troglodytes that the writing that they do on their own time out of passion and enjoyment doesn't meet your lofty standards.
Concurrently, I look forward to reading more of your A+ writing. Clearly, your writing is of an amazing caliber and you, obviously, are paid for what you do.
Your articles are all original, invigorating, and appeal to the highest common denominator. A list of 50 tongue-in-cheek predictions has never been done before, so I salute you for making a foray into the untapped forest of "articles that are simply a list of things."
Furthermore, the scope and grandeur of your writing is breathtaking. It's refreshing to find someone who's versed in the world of sports within a 5-mile radius of Buffalo, NY. It's good to see you writing such high brow material that never seems to become repetitious and trite. Do you write for the Los Angeles Times? Do they have you on their 'Buffalo' beat?
Also, I am going to nominate your article "Bills Finalize their Roster" for a Pulitzer Prize for outstanding journalism. I could not have had as much education and entertainment simply reading an AP blurb or news release.
Keep being amazing.
from 2 months ago
Thanks for checking out my work and the feedback, Stephen. Its appreciated.
from 2 months ago
You're welcome. I'm glad I could do my part to get you over 20 hits.
You keep writing'em, and I'll keep facetiously claiming that I read and liked them.
from 2 months ago
awesome, I hope you add me to your favorite writers list as well.
write a new comment