Tonight/just a thought or two

Tonight is a slow night. It worked out well for Nicole & I. She's not feeling well and all I wanted to do today was come home, eat dinner with the wife and hang out with her.

We got all our "to do's" done right away (which living in a hotel there are not many "to do's") and the rest of the night was gravy.

******************************

A quote from Joe Deyo, the author of the book I'm reading, caught my attention and got me thinking about my childhood and up-bringing. I agree, yet I think there needs to be more to it. Here it is... "I once heard...it isn't a house or love that provides children security. It is the commitment children see between their mother and father."

Truthfully, I'm undecided how I feel about that statement. I think there's a lot of validity to it but there has to be more. Of what, I'm not sure. But for me, there's more.

I think I needed to see love in my parents relationship. Without that, I don't think that commitment would have been as strong between them.

I look at my father and I see how I want to treat Nicole. I know my fathers commitment to my mom is unending but the reason, in my opinion, is because he has a love for her that runs so deep that the result is commitment. That love goes beyond all feelings, wants and desire he may have.

With that being said, I think about commitment and wonder if I can truly be committed to something and not love it or be passionate about it. (I think we need to be passionate about commitment, but inside of that, there is love).

Finally, I think the statement is a valid statement and there is a lot of truth to it but I also think for there to be commitment, there needs to be some form of love or passion for the commitment to be desired.

Any thoughts? I'd love to hear them. I could be way off. Welcome to the wavelength I'm on tonight.

******************************

I've been thinking about Boise State football lately since I heard they finished so high in the preseason poll/ranking this year. I'm definitely not a sports writer and I definitely don't know enough to make real judgements for or against Boise State, but I do have an opinion.

I look at them and see an amazing, resilient team that is finally getting some respect and recognition for what they accomplish year in and year out. But again, this year, I'm feeling like some of the voters are "throwing them a bone" and putting them out there as a top 5 team only because there has been a "big stink" or lots of press about them not being included with the "Big Boys."

Boise State is a WAC team. Can they beat the big schools? Probably. Week in, week out? No! Look at their schedule of play. Look at any SEC, Big 12, Big Ten, or even PAC 10 team. Can they beat them. Probably a few but they can't do it week after week for 12-13 games.

Playing against the Alabama's, USC's, Oregon's, Florida's, Ohio State's is really something that I don't think they can do. And to be on that top 25 list, I think they need to be able to compete with anyone on that list and be able to beat them week in and week out. Especially if they are going to be in the top 5. I don't think they possess that ability. Not yet at least. Even if they do have 21 or their 22 starters returning.

You can't place a 14-0 WAC champion in the same category as an Ohio State, Florida, Alabama, Texas team. You just can't.

******************************

This previous point could have been summed up in three words: strength of schedule, but I had to write my thoughts because first, it's my blog and I can write whatever I want, and second, it's logical thinking. It makes sense!

I also have nothing against Boise State because I believe they are a phenomenal team with phenomenal talent and I can't wait to watch them at Nevada on November 26th. But again, they just don't fall into the same category, for me, as those big football schools.