Dan Gould

Let me get this straight - you think that poor novices come to a bulletin board like this, have never heard the term "cover" and walk away sadly misinformed? You have got to be kidding me. No rational person in this day and age can be unaware of the modern usage of "cover". There is no thought necessary. You didn't get the memo about how language evolves. We're sorry about that, but feel free to continue to tilt at those windmills. Back in my day we didn't have people callin' new renditions of songs "covers"! We knew what was meant by that term, and we liked it!

Well, now that the teams are set, time to entertain with my impressions/judgments of the contenders. NL: There are basically three teams that for various reasons are lucky to be where they are, and then there are the Cubs, who always seem to need some luck to reach the post season and in this case had the good fortune to have the Brewers as their main competition. Rockies/Phils: Too bad that the two hottest teams in the senior circuit have to play each other, as one or the other will find itself booted after going through major tribulations to get this far. Logic says that the Rockies are the more balanced team, but somehow I think the Phils will move on to the NLCS. Cubs/Diamondbacks: First of all, I think we should all hail the D-Backs for turning the whole "Pythagorean" theorem of win percentage prediction on its head. Its one thing when the Pythagorean theorem predicts that a team with a negative run differential should have a losing record, but who would guess that team would have the best record in the league and be the only team with 90 wins? Score one for the Baseball Gods against the stat heads. So will the D-Backs keep it up or can the Cubbies come up big and reach the NLCS? I really don't know the answer, I just wish that the games weren't on so late on the east coast. AL Red Sox/Angels: I know I was on record as preferring that the Angels play the Yanks but that was only because of their consistent success against Joe Torre. With John Lackey carrying a lifetime 1-9 record against the Sox and lined up to start two games, I have a hard time seeing the Angels win this series, and that is before considering that both setup men had poor second halves, Gary Matthews is hobbled by knee and ankle problems, and that elbow problems may force Vlad to DH. The Red Sox, on the other hand, are my slight favorites to win it all. Best record in the league and most balanced combination of run production (second in the league to the Yanks) and pitching (best in the league in ERA). What keeps me from making them prohibitive favorites are question marks about the bullpen, specifically Okajima and Gagne, concern about Dice-K and Schilling, and concern about Manny and his troublesome oblique. Yankees/Indians: The reasons that the Yankees may bring home the long-awaited 27th championship can be summed up very simply: The offense Joba Chamberlain + Mariano Rivera But there are big question marks about the rest of the team. The team ERA trails every other playoff team except the Phils. Andy Pettite has been a big-time October performer, but his September ERA was nearly 6. Wang had a better September and season, but he's lined up to start on the road, where he had an ERA of 4.91 and BAA of .300. After that its Clemens/Mussina/Hughes and no one has a clue what will happen there. Add to that the fact that Torre has no good options in his bullpen outside of Chamberlain/Rivera and that the Yankees will have to win on the road to get to the WS, I expect that the wild ride of 2007 will come to a premature end. The Indians are a deep and dangerous team with the best 1-2 combination at the top of their rotation, excellent setup relievers, and a deep lineup that replaces one or two big boppers with a lineup with a lot of guys who can rake. The one obvious flaw is the closer and his staggering 5+ ERA. If the Division Series go as I expect, the biggest challenge the Indians will face will be closing out a win or two at Fenway.

If we already have a perfectly good word for recording a tune that somebody else has recorded, what is it? Revival or reinterpretation. MG So bar bands playing classic rock shouldn't be called "cover bands" but in fact should be "revival bands"? I propose we rename them "Lame Musicians Who Play Other People's Music In Order to Get Girls Because They Can't Write Their Own" bands?

The term is not being misused. It has evolved just as the practice that gave rise to its original meaning has virtually disappeared. The original meaning is nearly as archaic as those who are now bitching about its modern meaning and those who use it for its modern definition.

No doubt one of the greatest one-game playoff games in MLB history, sad for Hoffman to blow it twice in three days when his team just needed one win, but extra sad that the umpires blew two critical calls. No doubt in my mind when I went to bed that he was blocked from the plate, and what was the ump doing, waiting til the catcher started to go apply the tag to make the call? I know he's slow on the balls/strikes thing, but if the guy tags the plate and the ball scoots away, signal safe! If the guy misses the plate and the ball scoots away, don't signal anything. That was really pathetic.

That is total BS. I've gotten acknowledgment emails from sellers who regularly sell an enormous amount of LPs. They get an email from ebay, it takes two minutes to send a message to the buyer saying "thanks, the record will go out today or tomorrow." Considering all of the automated systems that exist for posting items and creating invoices, the idea that all you can do is ignore people simply excuses rudeness.

As a seller, I used to leave feedback as soon as I had received payment. After a few times when customers busted my balls unreasonably after I had exercised my feedback option, I decided that no feedback should be left until both parties are satisfied. The seller is satisfied when the payment arrives on time, and the buyer is satisfied when the item arrives and is acceptable. I watch my feedback regularly, and when I receive feedback, I know that the customer is satisfied, and so I respond. In the occasional instances when the customer has a problem with the item, I try to resolve the situation without hostility, and I have even received positive feedback from people who requested a refund. Exactly how it should be. I myself have given positive feedback in the same situation, when I felt that the seller took care of the situation promptly and without rancor. Those are the sellers I want to steer people toward, because they deal with the problem transactions in an above board way.

Well, the reason I have a problem with it is because it leaves a meaning without a word to express it. When I want to describe the operation of recording a new song, of obvious hit potential, by a different artist, specifically in order to steal sales from the original recording, I no longer have a word that means precisely that. Because the word that DID mean precisely that has been used for something related but so common and innocuous that it lacks impact in relation to the specific meaning, which is truly worthy of being singled out as a practice that should be greatly deprecated. MG Whatever practice you're describing...I don't think really happens in this day and age anymore. Maybe it happened 50 years ago. My thought exactly. Even if it was done as recently as 1973 with "Soul makossa" it is surely now an archaic business practice. Or did I miss the hit cover of "Like a Virgin" by Monday Michiru? No one "covers" current hits in hopes of having their own hit anymore, so the obvious implication is that the term "cover" should be permanently retired, frozen in time to only mean what Chris and MG believe it should mean. That's not how language works. However, if it must be done, then I think its up to the proponents of that change to cover, as it were, the resulting gap in the language.

What's with the ? The only performer that would make me want to schlep down there is Kevin Mahogany.

Well, the Sox have announced the rotation for the ALDS, and it turns out I was wrong. It will be Beckett, Dice-K and Schilling in that order, with Wakefield in the bullpen. If the series goes 5 and the Sox win, Schilling would be lined up to start the ALCS. I really thought Dice-K would start game 3 in Anaheim, because of the big difference in his ERA on the road vs at home (4.86 vs 4.02). There is one advantage though and that is that LA didn't see Dice during his rookie year. That should help - it certainly did against Minnesota in the clinching game when he went 8 innings with 8 Ks and only six hits. I really like our chances against Anaheim with Lackey going twice potentially. He's really had trouble against Boston this year and throughout his career. I can't see him beating us twice.

If the original meaning was to be adhered to, it became, over a very short period, an archaic term. When was the last recording by a white musician of a black artists' song? I think its natural that the meaning evolved to anyone's recording of any song that is associated with someone else. I frankly do not understand why Chris and MG have such a problem with this evolution in terminology.

Yeah, it's really just an expanded-from blues. I started playing it a few years ago. It's good to blow on. Finally, an answer to my question. Damn thread got hijacked in the first post.

Here is exactly what he wrote in response to my email: So, which is it vinyl junkies? Is there an "EXC" according to Goldmine?

I was just listening to Jimmy Dawkins tearing up "Ode to Billie Joe" and it got me thinking - there were a lot of covers of this tune by jazz and blues artists, both at the time it was a top 40 hit and afterwards. So that leaves me wondering - is it purely a function of these artists trying for a hit, or a recognizable tune to play at gigs, or was there anything intrinsic to the tune itself that made it "interesting"?

I have to say its neat for the star-crossed Philly franchise to be on the positive end of a miracle collapse instead of the other way around.

Well, that weird brawl between the Mets seemed to energize them yesterday, but it really energized the Marlins today. Already 4-0 and they are still batting in the top of the 1st. That's got to energize the Phils, as if they need it. Update: 5-0, only 1 out, and Glavine is gone. How can the Mets possibly have hope when they're into the pathetic bullpen with 8 2/3 to go?

I heard the announcement last night that the Red Sox had chosen to start the ALDS Wednesday but I had already shut off the PC and the ESPN guy didn't give any indication whether this was the long or the short schedule. Turns out, its the long schedule, and I seriously do not understand their reasoning. Why help the Angels? The only way it makes sense is if they figure that John Lackey's lack of success against the Sox means that getting two shots at him, if necessary, is going to be a good thing. The Globe is also reporting what I've been saying, that Schill will go in Game 2 and Dice in Game 3. That would at least line up with Dice starting Game 1 of the AlCS, which if he performs, can be a better prospect than most teams starting their number 3 in the first game. But sorry Patrick, we won't be helping you out against the Yanks.

Its probably not going to be too much of a problem because the seller has promised a refund and has a high feedback rating, but I wanted to inquire on two separate isssues, one for vinyl-heads and one for ebay users in general. This seller claimed to grade "visually based on Goldmine standards" and he applied the rating "EXC+" to the vinyl and "EXC" to the jacket. When I received the record and saw that two of the corners were severely creased and turned up and that the record itself had an inordinate number of feel-able marks, I figured it was time to do a little quick research. What I found was that "EXC" is not a recognized Goldmine rating, but that it has come into increased use to basically describe super nice LPs that don't quite fall into the "NM" category. The seller has responded by insisting that "EXC" is a Goldmine rating. Second question is more in general for any Ebay user. If you are the winning bidder and make payment immediately without waiting for an invoice or a request from the seller, do you expect the seller to acknowledge your winning bid and quick payment with a message of thanks? Maybe its just me but I find more and more ebay sellers who do not acknowledge or express appreciation for the buyers who make their businesses successful. Not only is it rude but it leaves the buyer in the dark about the transaction. The seller may be out of town for all you know and who knows when he will ship? I got off on the wrong foot with this seller by sending a message which said, "while I have not received any acknowledgment or thanks from you for my immediate payment on this purchase, I assume that you are adhering to your stated policy of shipping withing two days". And to that I got an obnoxious message saying that he didn't understand the point of my communication and why wouldn't he be shipping it on time? Maybe this is how Ebay has evolved but once upon a time, sellers were more likely than not to actually say "thank you" for buying their crap. And get this: the seller's policy says that "negative feedback voids the guarantee". We'll see if it voids the guarantee after the refund is given.

And none sweeter than watching the Gators lose at home to unranked Auburn on a last minute FG!

My father called with his congratulations Saturday afternoon and I informed him that if both teams make the World Series, I will root for the Cubs to win it all. Not against the Sox, mind you, but for the Cubbies. I told him that we had our thrilling championship a few years back, and with the looks of this team now, I am comfortable in the belief that they will win again soon.

And that will do it. The AL seeds are: 1. Boston 2. Cleveland 3. LAAoA 4. New York Can't wait to hear which schedule Tito, Theo, et. al. will choose. To me it makes no sense to help the Angels get more out of their top two starters but they may think the extra rest helps Oki and Paps. I hope not, I want Cleveland to use it to their advantage. Go five against the Yanks, use CC and Carmona twice, eliminate the Yanks and have no choice but to start Byrd or Westbrook at Fenway. See Patrick? I'm tryin' to look out for ya, buddy!

I just got caught up on MLB Gameday late in the game, but it looked like Wake couldn't have pitched too badly, with six hits, three earned runs, no walks in seven innings. I guess the two homers really hurt him but at least he never gave up any big innings, just four straight 1 run innings. I'll take the Oki that gets into a little bit of trouble and then slams the door; that's much better than the one we had for six weeks before he got shut down. Indians just tied the score. Maybe if both teams just go through the motions tomorrow, we'll end up with a tie and win it on the tie-breaker.

I agree, given what little I know about the situation. But the thing was that Solo was told not to speak to the press and then turned around and minutes later bitched and moaned about the benching, and kept saying how you can't make decisions based on the past - meaning that just because Scurry won the Gold doesn't mean she belongs out there four years later. Also, Solo is seriously nice looking.

Well, I don't want to jinx anything but it doesn't look like the Sox are suffering too much of a hangover, up 6-4 in the bottom of the eighth on a JD Drew homer (3 for 4 and up to .270 on the year - yeah, I'm suckin' down that kool-aid big time!). Is it too much to ask for KC to hang on against the Tribe, up 3-2 in the seventh? That would clinch the best record in the majors, choice of ALDS schedules and home field throughout. Me likey. Meanwhile, they've already announced what I thought would be the case - Schilling will not pitch Sunday, giving him some extra rest heading into presumably a start in Game 2. If he was going later in the playoffs, I'm sure they would have had him throw 50 pitches or so, so I am pretty sure I was right last night - Dice-K was allowed to go deeper in the clinching game because they weren't planning to have him start Game 2 after all. And in the meantime, the Yankees hung up a ten-spot on the Orioles in the fourth inning but they can't possibly be pleased with Andy Pettite's post-season warmup: 9 runs, 8 earned, in just five innings. He can get the win but it was at the expense of his sub 4.00 ERA.