The SoapBoxers

Sometimes you start by jamming in someone else’s garage

In this case, The Soap Boxers first got its start in the Google garage, on BlogSpot.  Then Lazy Man offered one of the stalls of his garage and allowed us to customize our address.  Lazy Man also lends us tools and offers suggestions on how to improve the sound of the band.

Some bloggers rocket to fame American Idol style, some pay their dues for years

Baker of ManVsDebt became an overnight sensation in just a few months (although, to his credit, he had been an active commenter on other people’s blogs for years and poured a ton of effort into his blog once it was launched).  Other bloggers (such as your dear old kosmo) slog away month after month with just a small fraction of the audience the superstars attract.  Sometimes, like in music, this is simply a matter of paying your dues, and fame will be just around the corner.

Being an opening act can open doors

Many of the hottest acts in music started out as the opening act for other musicians.  This gave them exposure to larger audience and allowed them to attract a larger fan base.  The blogospheric equivalent of this is writing guest articles for bigger blogs.  I’ve been pitching my ideas to other bloggers in an attempt to get an opening act.  I’ve gotten some great opportunities on some blogs (Lazy Man and Money, 40Tech, Life, Laughs, and Lemmings, World’s Strongest Librarian) and continue to pursue other gigs.

Fitting into a genre is the surest way to gain fans

There are many different genres (niches) for bloggers to fit into.  Writing content that easily fits into one niche allows a blogger to interact with other bloggers who write on similar content.  There tends to be a community of readers who follow blogs of a particular niche, and interacting with other bloggers in those niches gets someone noticed.  Nonetheless, some blogs (such as your beloved Casual Observer) rebel, refusing to simply scratch a niche.

You need original music to hit it big

You’re not going to sell gold records doing covers of Hotel California.  Likewise, you can’t get to the top just by repeating the same topics that everyone else is talking about in their blogs – you have to strike out on your own with some truly original content.

Gerald Champeaux hid his annoyance at the appearance of a hot cocoa mustache on the upper lip of the man seated across from him. His companion was oblivious to the foamy appendage. Gerald could scarcely believe that Jimmy Bagley was a competent professional. He forced himself to push the doubts to the back of his mind. Bagley had an excellent reputation.

“So, what you want,” said Bagley, wiping his lip as he finally became aware of the mustache, “is for me to steal stuff from your own house? For the insurance money?”

“Exactly,” replied Champeaux. “It’s really a profit deal. I have unfortunately become quite addicted to Texas Hold’em lately and have accumulated some sizable losses lately. A nice insurance settlement would allow me to hide our financial situation from my wife. A fringe benefit is that I’d be getting rid of some absurdly ugly pieces of art that she has purchased over the years.”

“OK, so what’s in it for me?”

“We’ll split the proceeds of the sales, 50-50. Some of the items are very identifiable, and may not be able to be sold for several years. Many of the others should be able to be quickly sold. I can give you the names of some dealers who have questionable ethics and are perfectly willing to buy stolen merchandise. You close the deal and keep half the money for your troubles.”

Bagley grabbed the sheet of paper from the table. “So, what sort of money are we talking about?”

“I think a conservative estimate would be a million dollars.”

Bagley whistled. “I’d make half a mill just for ripping you off? Wow.”

“For ripping me off and setting up the sales. And, of course, for your discretion,” corrected Champeaux.

“Ah, yes, discretion is the better part of vigor.”

“Valor,” corrected Champeaux.

“Huh?”

“Discretion is the better part of valor, not the better part of vigor.”

“Yeah? I always heard it the other way. Oh well, ten of one, half dozen of another.”

Champeaux rolled his eyes at the smaller man’s maligning of the English language. Focus, Gerald, focus. You don’t need to like this man, you simply need to use him.

“OK,” asked Champeaux, “what details do you need?”

“I’ll need to know about your security system, and also the layout of your home and the location of these items.”

Champeaux was prepared for these questions. He gave Bagley the details of his home security system, including flaws in the system that would allow a burglar to easily defeat the system. He verbally walked Bagley through the house. He described each room in turn, and described which of the items would be located in that room.

Four nights later, Jimmy Bagley descended upon the Champeaux home. Gerald and his wife would be out for the evening, having dinner and watching a play at the theater.

Bagley quickly picked the lock and slipped into the house. He quickly disabled the security system and began the work of stealing. He decided to use the living room as a staging area. He would pile everything in the middle of the living room before taking everything out to his Explorer.

Jimmy quickly took three painting off the wall and set them on the floor. It took him a moment to find that statue that Champeaux had described. Jimmy agreed with Champeaux – in spite of its value to collectors, it was hideously ugly.

Bagley walked down a short hallway to the master bedroom. He opened the door and was surprised to see Champeaux inside the room. He only had an instant to wonder why Champeaux was at home instead of establishing an alibi for the time of the robbery. Then he saw the Glock in Champeax’s right hand and was more confused.

Gerald Chapeaux pulled the trigger and felt the thrill of killing another man.

Champeaux waited for Bagley to die before grabbing the phone.

“What is your emergency?” asked the voice on the other end of the line.

“There’s been a break-in at my home. I shot the burglar. I think he may be dead.”

Hooray!  After a few fits and starts, the first audio story is available in the store!  We expect to add stories as a regular basis, and within the next two months, we anticipate having the majority of the fiction catalog available.

The first story is Tale of the Wolf.  The audio is not perfect, since I’m an amateur making his first attempt at an audio version of a story.  The quality should improve as we move along.

You can download the MP3 for 40 cents in the Hyrax Publications Store.

thank you for your support.

“Sticking to Your Values”

“If you don’t stick to your values when they’re being tested, they’re not values, they’re hobbies.”

-Jon Stewart

That might be my favorite modern quote, because it’s one that rings so true these days, on both sides of the aisle.  Every single president elect in recent times has stood up when the votes were tallied and the opposing party has conceded and given a speech about how they will change this and make that right and accomplish this.  They say they will work with the other party.  They claim we need to stick to our values, to make our country great again.  In the end, most of the things we say end up getting tossed out the window.  The context of that quote was in response to Bill O’Reilly saying that sometimes we need to compromise our values to keep our country safe.

Every single one of us who went to grade school in the United States grew up learning the core values this country was founded on and later built upon:  freedom, opportunity, and tolerance.  We have all come to be told that justice is blind, and the law treats all equally.  If this is the case, why did the United States go against two documents it signed – the treaties of the Geneva Convention and the United Nations Convention Against Torture (signed by Reagan) – and torture captives at Guantanamo Bay?  We generally react pretty strongly when a country says one thing and does another, especially something we disagree on, why should we not expect others to do the same about us? 

In World War II both the Japanese and the Germans used waterboarding on prisoners.  This was decried as torture by our country.  This was declared as wrong by the Geneva Convention.  In spite of this the United States, under the direction of at least Vice President Dick Cheney, authorized waterboarding to be used on captives at Guantanamo Bay.  He not only admitted as much, he’s been openly critical of the current administration for their official stance against torture.  So we have a former vice president who has openly admitted to authorizing torture, and has said torture saved lives despite evidence to the contrary.

Almost as bad, we have a current president who is refusing to investigate the previous administration under the guise of extending an olive branch to the other side.  Even if no crime was technically committed, the spirit of the Geneva Convention and the UNCAT were broken giving the US a black eye in the view of the world.  Just another reason for the rest of the world to view the US as an aging bully, throwing waning power around because it’s scared.  Going right along with the scared bully image is J.D. Hayworth, running for John McCain’s seat in Arizona in 2010.  Appealing to the terrorist-fearing crowd, he recently said not only was Dick Cheney right to authorize torture, he didn’t go far enough.  We should not only be waterboarding anyone who might have information to give, we should be breaking fingers and shoving bamboo shoots under toenails.  The message I’m getting:  torture is wrong when the Japanese do it to us in WWII, but we’re allowed to use it when we feel like because we’re the US.

Dropping your values when it suits you is nothing new in politics.  Joe Lieberman claimed that he would fight for health care for everyone in Connecticut when he ran for senate in 2008, now he’s the poster child for me-first, just-vote-against-the-other-guy politics.  After the first World Trade Center in 1993, then-mayor Rudy Guilliani praised the US civillian justice system for its handling of Omar Abdel-Rahmanm.  When Zacarias Moussaoui was convicted in 2006, Guilliani expressed displeasure at him not getting a death sentence from a civillian jury, but said it shows the United States is commited to fairness and law. 

Fast forward to 2010 when Barrack Obama said he wants to shut down Guantanimo Bay and try the remaining terrorists in NYC and Guilliani acts like Chicken Little and claims the trials will make a mockery of the US justice system and our country is ill-suited to handling terrorist trials.  Little Fact, Rudy:  91% of terrorist trials in the last 12 years have resulted in a conviction.  I would expect more from a man who built his pre-political career as a tough prosecutor, but since he can’t go two breaths without utterng 9/11 I’m not surprised.

It’s not all partisan, though.  One of my biggest issues with Barrack Obama is his claiming on the campaign trail that any alleged US torture needs to be investigated.  President Obama has dropped the ball on this, as there is no sign of an official investigation and I can only assume it’s both a futile olive-branch gesture to the right and a pre-emptive covering of his own butt once he gets out of office.

Sticking to your values is a rare, rare thng in politics these days.  To finish up here, I’d like to salute two very, very different men in politics who have stuck to their values in recent times:  Dennis Kucinich and Ken Starr.  Congressman Kucinich as spoken out against the current health care bill being tossed around for a “reconciliation” vote because it does not contain a public option or a single-payer system.  He has been steadfast on the issue to the point of being willing to be the deciding vote against it.  Ken Starr recently spoke out against Liz Cheney for attacking US Justice Department lawyers as an Al-Quaeda sympathists because they defended terrorists in the US justice system.  Mr. Starr says that lawyers have a fine tradition of trying their best no matter who they’re assigned to defend, and he would do the same.  Sticking to your values may be rare in politics these days, but it need not be one side or the other.  In the end it makes you look like a far, far better person.

I am in the midst of my fantasy baseball draft.  As I have mentioned on a few ocassions, this league is a strange beast.  The main rule is that you are only allowed to start one player for each letter of the alphabet (based on last name).  You can’t play Matt Holliday and Cole Hamels at the same time.  This leads to some decision making that varies greatly from standard leagues.  Suddenly, Akinori Iwamura and Chris Iannetta are very valuable players, due to the scarcity of players for the letter I.  Iannetta is doubly valuable, since he’s a catcher within the scarce letter.  The Alphabet Soup League is in its third year of existence.

The league has a very strange draft.  There’s no way to use an out of the box automated draft, and an in-person draft isn’t feasible, with players scattered across a decent swath of the country.  Drafting one player at a time over email would take a long time.  Thus I have devised a way to allow participants to draft in a shotgun approach.

First, I developed a grid (shown below) that broke the draft into 10 rounds, with each participant assigned 2-3 letters for each round.  For example, in the first round, my letters were B and V.  Nobody else could draft players with B or V in that round.  This means that everyone could send me their picks whenever they wanted to – they didn’t have to wait for anyone else to pick (I announce my picks vefore the start of a round, to ensure that I don’t base my pick upon  how the round is unfolding).  To ensure that there is no bias, I use the last digit of the closing Dow Jones Industrial Average on a particular day to set the position in the grid.  We march through the draft, round by round.  Very good players drop to later rounds simply because their letter is deep in talent.

Why such a convoluted system?  Simply to make things more challenging, of course.  A few of the GMs (in particular, one “shark”) wouldn’t be interested if this was “just another fantasy league”.  I like winning, but it’s more important for me to match wits with quality opponents.

How is is the draft unfolding for me so far?

In round one, I snagged Justin Verlander and Josh Beckett.  These guys should be a good core for my rotation.

In the second round, I had the letters L and O.  L is easy – reigning NL Cy Young Award winner Tim Lincecum.  O is more difficult.  In a word, the letter O sucks.  I decide to go with Rockies catcher Miguel Olivo, even though he’ll be splitting time with Chris Iannetta (and in a pefect world for my Rockies, Iannetta will push him completely aside).  This is a low risk move, since there’s not a ton of value within O, aside from David Ortiz – and DH/1B  guys are a dime a dozen.  It also provides a bit of insurance – looking through the next few rounds, I don’t see any quality catchers would might slip to me.  I can’t simply grab a guy like Joe Mauer or Brian McCann – I have to wait until I get to the round with the correct letter.

In round 3, I decide to start snapping up the best available pitchers and worry about hitters later.  I grab young ace Felix Hernandez of the Mariners, and the closer for Seattle, David Aardsma.  A is not a great letter – Aardsma represents good value for that letter.  My strategy will be to win at least 4 of the 5 pitching categories in my weekly matchup, and pick up at least 1-2 wins on the hitting side.  2 hitting wins and 4 pitching wins is a fine 60% success rate.  That’s enough to make the playoffs – and winning 6 of 10 in the playoffs will advance me to the next round each time.

By round 4, some people are starting to realize my strategy.  I grab another young ace, Yovani Gallardo.  I also grab my second hitter, Matt Wieters.  Wieters, like Olivo, is a catcher.  However, Wieters has an extremely bright future ahead of him, as one of the top prospects in the game.  Miguel Olivo slinks toward my bench.

In round 5, I actually add a couple of hitters.  I think Howie Kendrick is the best of the remaining K players.  He played well down the stretch last year, and he should getting the starting second baseman nod ahead of Macier Izturis.  I also have the letter grouping % – which includes players from Q, U, X, Y, and Z.  The twist is that while these players are all lumped together in the draft (because they’re too shallow to stand alone), you can actually play a Q player AND a Z player – it’s different than playing two R players.  I grab Carlos Quentin – not only is he a good player, but he’s a Q player.  After the draft, I’ll try to nab a Y or Z player in free agency.

What lies ahead?

I need a first baseman, third baseman, shortstop, two outfielders, and a couple of pitchers.  I have specific players identified.  I wish I could tell you who … but I can’t – because other members of the league may be reading this.  Suffice it to say that I’m much more worried about shortstop and third base than I am about the other positions.

Interested in how the draft turns out?  Read the conclusion.

My apologies to the Connecticut Women’s Basketball team and their fans, but the entire content of this article will likely be offensive to you …

A dynasty is alive and kicking in NCAA Women’s hoops. It is worse than Duke of the 90’s, The New York Yankees, the Patriots and well … it even makes me more sick than Notre Dame Football.

The UCONN Lady Huskies

This just in … they are pretty damn good. Jedi Mind tricks do not work on the great recruiter Geno Auriemma …

About now I am waiting for all of you to chime in and say “Goodman, you are a Husker fan, and the Lady Huskers are undefeated this year so far and ranked #3 in the country so of course you are to dog the Huskies.”

True all these items are …

My question is this … is Geno the Hut a good coach or just able to work with SUPERIOR talent year in and year out?

I can make a bunch of comparisons here. Coaches that can recruit but really are not that good of coaches in my opinion include:

Mack Brown – CLEARLY the #1 on this list
Roy Williams – This year prove a lot to me
Rick Barnes – is there a Texas theme developing on this list? YES!
Les Miles – wow, he misses Pelini
Rich Rodriguez … nice job there Michigan
Charlie Weis … well … I guess the golden domers did figure that one out.

I think GENO is in fact a good coach. He has a lot of ladies that go on to not just careers in the WNBA, but are in fact some of the best in the league. Many of these players are three and four year starters at Connecticut … and they do indeed improve their games a LOT by the time they get drafted.

UConn will likely win it all again this year. They have utterly destroyed just about every single team they have played all year. But this is not necessarily a good thing for Women’s Basketball in general. The sport is gaining popularity. The is definitely MORE parity than I can remember in a long long time. Heck the Big XII conference has SEVEN count em, SEVEN teams in the top 25 alone.

I for one will be rooting for everyone else. It will be more publicity than ever in the tournament this year if the Lady Huskies get knocked off. There is truly not a dominant team in the Men’s side of things this year, so the Lady Huskies are front and center. It would be one of the better things that could happen for ESPN coverage if the do get beat. Here on Monday when they have set the record for consecutive wins, it has been on all day long

It is on television all day long, because fans love a winner. Especially the home team fans. But ….

EVERYONE roots for the underdog …

My new favorite team this year is now whoever is playing the Lady Huskies.

Last week, I complained about scare tactics used by local governments during tax and budget planning.  This week I am going to complain about organizations misleading people with good intentions into donating money.

First, I want to point out that I encourage people to donate to their chosen causes, and donate generously.  Whether it is something as grand as feeding the people of Africa, timely like adding the people of Haiti, or as local as saving an historic building, all charity has value.  My complaint is purposefully misleading advertisements, naming or fear mongering to obtain money.

The best example of this is the Humane Society of the United States (http://www.humanesociety.org/).  At first glance or from their dramatic commercials, you would believe that these are the same people who run you local animal shelter.  This is not the case.  The HSUS is actually a subsidiary of PETA, People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (http://www.peta.org/).  Nowhere on their web site does the HSUS admit its association with PETA, nor their independence from local societies.  Local Humane Societies (including SPCA, the Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals) have suffered greatly from the divergence of charitable donations to this national organization.  I am not saying that the HSUS is not a worthy organization, it is just that it has different goals than your local Humane Society and the money may not be used in your community.

The HSUS and your local Humane Society are also not affiliated with the American Humane Association (http://www.americanhumane.org/).  They are at least a lot clearer in defining who they are, or more precisely, who they are not.  To take directly from their web site:

…And Who We Are Not

Dedicated to protecting both children and animals, American Humane is not affiliated with the Humane Society of the United States, an organization that primarily uses litigation and legislation to promote animal rights. Nor is American Humane a parent organization of local “humane societies” and SPCAs, which are locally based, independent agencies that operate animal shelters and provide animal care and control services to their communities. However, many of those agencies are member organizations of American Humane. As such, they benefit from our trainings, informational and funding resources, and national programs that increase the abilities, knowledge and effectiveness of their organizations and staff.

It is interesting and disturbing to me that some so called charitable organizations are nothing more than law suit generators.  I remember when PETA sued a group called People Eating Tasty Animals for having the web site PETA.com.  The result of that law suite was that the meat eating group lost their right to advertise because it was misleading.  At the same time, PETA created the HSUS, using the Humane Society name that has been so recognized for local efforts.  I personally believe that the intent was to capitalize on that name recognition to gather more funding.  Although this is not illegal, it is misleading, and many people with good intentions have inadvertently support a militant and aggressive national group when they believed they were supporting a local effort.

All I ask is that you do some research before sending your check.  I want to reiterate that I do not think any charitable group is bad.  If you truly believe that you can save an abused animal by enacting yet anther law or suing yet another business, then by all means support PETA and the HSUS.  If you are trying to save the animals you saw being taken from an abusive situation on you evening news, find the local group that is taking on that effort.  When you donate to a large national or international group, you need to know what that money could be used for.  PETA and HSUS have active campaigns to force corporations to stop the use of all animal products with the stated goal of making vegetarianism the standard for all people.  This is in addition to their efforts to stop the use of animals for painful and questionable research, most notably in the cosmetic industry.  Other groups have much narrower goals and tasks.

The bait and switch that I am concerned with here can only work with an uneducated or lazy audience.  You can avoid funding things you don’t like by taking the time to research any organization you think you want to support.  I personally believe that you can make the biggest impact in the world by starting in your own community.

The term “system quarterback” – meaning a quarterback who requires a specific offensive system in order to be effective – is often used in a disparaging way.

Let’s step outside the world of sports for a moment. You’re the head of a large hospital. You’d like to hire a neurosurgeon for your staff, but there’s a problem. She’s left handed, and all your surgical tools are right handed. She’s a “system surgeon” who can’t be effective with the “system” of right handed tools and shouldn’t be hired, right? Of course not – that’s crazy talk. You just buy some left handed tools. You don’t allow the less expensive parts of an environment dictate decisions about the most expensive parts.

Why, then, should an NFL team discard the notion of giving a particular quarterback a chance to succeed, simply because he is a “system” quarterback?

What am I recommending exactly – that the team change itself to fit the quarterback, rather than finding a quarterback who is a better fit? Yes, precisely.

This probably doesn’t sound fair to a lot of people. Why should a team force its coaches and players to change to accommodate one player? In fact, other players on the team may not be a good fit for the quarterback’s preferred style of play, resulting in those players having reduced roles or no role at all. Changing the system to fit the quarterback could cost them their jobs. This doesn’t sound fair at all.

And it’s not fair. However, many things in life aren’t fair. In this case, I think that money trumps fairness. Quarterbacks are expensive – much more expensive than any other player. Some have speculated that Colts quarterback Peyton Manning may receive a contract extension that pays him $20 million per year, with a $50 million signing bonus. The first pick in the 2009 NFL draft, Matthew Stafford of the Detroit Lions, signed a contract that is likely to pay him $78 million during his first six years in the league – before he ever took a snap. Matt Cassel – who didn’t start a game in college – leveraged one strong season with the Patriots into a six year, $63 million contract after being traded to the Kansas City Chiefs.

The money changes everything. If you can spend $5 million per year on a quarterback that can excel within a particular system (getting him cheap because he is perceived as flawed) versus $15 million for a more traditional quarterback, you can afford to overpay a couple of other cogs that you need for the system.

Not all systems are going to work in the NFL, of course. Players in the NFL are stronger and faster than college players, and some offensive systems that work fine in college are doomed in the NFL for this very reason. But I am convinced that the right offensive coordinator could make some unconventional schemes work in the NFL. Sure, you’ll probably have to pony up a few extra bucks for a coordinator who can make it work – but just like the complementary offensive players, coordinators are cheaper than quarterbacks.

One of the most heated debates in college sports is whether or not college athletes should be paid.  Proponents point to the millions of dollars that some programs reap in tickets sales and merchandise.  Surely these schools should pay their athletes?

Today, I’ll make the argument that college athletes should not be paid.

Who Gets Paid?

If you take a step in the direction of paying athletes, one of the first questions is who gets paid, and how much? 

Let’s use football as an example.  Do Tim Tebow and Alexander Robinson (Iowa State running back) get the same salary?  Is there a pay scale based on yardage or some sort of complex formula?  What’s the value of a punter or a long snapper?  When are salaries set?  There are a lot of blue chip prospects who have disappointing college careers – so surely we don’t want to get locked into a pay scale at the time they sign.

Then comes the fun question of whether or not athletes in all sports should get compensated.  Should the backup fullback on the football team get a paycheck, but not the world class decathlete, simply because the football team turns a profit and the track team doesn’t?  What about the All-American volleyball player on a top 5 team?

It’s Not a Profit Deal – Really.

While many individual programs turn a profit, this is true of very few athletic departments as a whole.  In situations where football and basketball make a profit, their profits often make the gymnastics and tennis teams viable.  If football and basketball stop subsidizing these sports, they will likely die on the vine. 

Fielding a competitive team is not cheap.  A football team has 85 players on scholarship – meaning that their tuition, fees, room, and board are paid for.  If you have a child in college, imagine multiplying that  cost by 85.  Then there is the cost of coaches (do head coaches earn their salaries?), facilities, travel, lodging, etc. 

Supply and Demand

Student employees are often paid less than their skills would dictate in a free market.  This is because college campuses are awash in talented individuals, all competing for a limited number of jobs.  This is particularly true with positions that are internships that serve as gateways to lucrative careers. 

And that is precisely the role of an elite college athlete, of course.  Bear in mind that the “job” of college athlete is high desired, not only for the prestige of playing at the college level, but also for its pipeline to the pros.  For every athlete who cracks a college roster, there are many more who never sniff a scholarship – most of whom would gladly play a college sport in exchange for “only” a scholarship. 

These athletes are having their expenses paid while a talented coaching staff attempts to ready them for a career as a professional athlete.  While it is true that athletes are proving value to the university, the university is also providing invaluable services to the athlete.  Stephen Strasburg, the top pick in the 2009 baseball draft, owes much of his $15 million contract to the coaching staff at San Diego State.  The conditioning coach at SDSU nicknamed him “Sloth” because he was so out of shape when he arrived on campus.  If you think that SDSU should pay for the services of athletes like Strasburg, should they also be paid by athletes who benefit from the coaching?

Did you find this article interesting?  Then you may like my article that asks whether athletes are overpaid.

Author’s note: This is the embellished version of an interesting dream I had Wednesday night.

Sam Jordan finally ripped the phone off the wall. His brutal honesty was being met with hatred from the faithful fans of the football team. As part of his end of year review of the team, he analyzed the professional prospects of several players on the team. His review of All-American left tackle Chad Jenkins had become a lightning rod.

“Jenkins’ size, strength, and technique would transfer well to the professional level. However, he does have a questionable work effort and had a tendency to give sub-par effort on some plays. At the college level, his physical skills allowed him to take off a play without repercussions. At the professional level, superior athletes will be able to overpower him on those plays, endangering the quarterback.”

Jordan knew that the controversy would blow over in a week or so. He shrugged it off, knowing that his journalistic integrity had forced him to speak the truth.

As Jordan began work on next week’s column, he heard a disturbance at the front door. A split second later, the hulking frame of Chad Jenkins plowed through the door, leaving splintered chunks of wood in the foyer. Jordan could see the action from his home office, which overlooked the lower level of the house. He quickly retreated to the back corner, hoping that Jenkins hadn’t seen him.

Jenkins had already spotted him, and thundered up the stairs. For a moment, Jenkins unleashed verbal abuse toward Jordan before he started to get physical. Jordan quickly absorbed two punches and a kick before he was able to scramble away to elude the angry lineman.

Jordan retreated toward the front of the room. Jenkins raced toward him and Sam quickly ducked out of the way to avoid the collision. Chad Jenkins’ momentum propelled him over the top of the railing and he fell to the room below, falling with a thud.

For a moment, Sam Jordan’s brain was frozen solid. When the brain cramp eased, he raced down the stairs to check on Jenkins. It was immediately apparent that the standout football player was dead.

When Sam finished cleaning up the blood, he looked at the clock. It was 3:55. Shirley would be home very shortly. She had disliked his analysis of her favorite player – he couldn’t imagine trying to explain why Chad Jenkins was lying dead on the floor. He acted as quickly as possible, slowly dragging the body down the hall. He opened to door to the storage room, hauled Jenkins inside, and threw some blankets on top of him. As he finished, he heard the garage door open.

When Shirley left for work the next morning, Jordan got to work. He had been promising to dig up the dead crab apple tree for a couple of years. This was a good time to cross that task off the list. He made sure to dig the hole big enough to hold a body.

Jordan cooled off with a glass of lemonade before getting to the next task on his list. He pushed the wheelbarrow to the door of the storage room. He opened the door and pulled the blankets off Jenkins’ body – only to realize that there was no corpse. Jordan was stunned. Jenkins’ had clearly had not had a pulse, and he had suffered severe head injuries. It was highly unlikely that he had arisen and walked away.

Sam spent the next two hours searching the house. Was his memory wrong? Had he actually stashed the body somewhere else? Sam’s panic level was at an all time high, but the mystery remained unsolved.

Sam was wondering what to do next when an incessant ringing invaded his ears. What in tarnation was that that awful sound? He eventually realized that it was his alarm clock. This had all been an awful dream.

Ralphie, his German Shepherd, had also heard the alarm and raced into the room to greet his master. Ralphie had a very large bone in his mouth. Sam realized that the bone was a human fibula, and was aghast to see bits of flesh sticking to the bone.