Auburn Stuns Alabama On Miracle Play

With one second remaining in the game, Auburn went from defending a tie to winning the game with one play. Chris Davis returned a missed field goal for 100 yards with no time remaining to win the game for the Auburn Tigers against the Alabama Crimson Tide by a score of 34-28. Auburn did a lot of things right to win the game, but it seems like the story of this game may be more about what Alabama failed to do.

Alabama's kickers made no field goals in 4 chances. To make matters worse, it was backup kicker Adam Griffith, not starter Cade Foster, attempting the field goal with one second left in the game. The result was a 100 yard return by Auburn's Chris Davis and a win for Auburn. This rivalry, one of the more prominent ones in college football, took an unanticipated turn. Alabama, ranked number 1 going into the season will not be playing in the SEC championship game next Saturday in Georgia. Instead, it will be Auburn heading to the conference championship game. Auburn was a team that was 3-9 last year. But at 11-1 this season, the Tigers have surprised many.

Auburn opened the scoring in the first quarter when Auburn quarterback Nick Marshall ran for 45 yards. Alabama would be held scoreless in the first, but came back with a fury in the second quarter. Alabama would score 21 straight points, 14 of which would come from an A.J. McCarron pass. However, Auburn did not go down quietly. Auburn would complete an 81 yard drive resulting in a touchdown with 1:40 left in the quarter to bring the score to 21-14. The drive would include multiple rushes by Tre Mason, including a 40 yard rush.

Auburn took some momentum from the end of the second into the third quarter. Marshall would cap off a 69 yard drive with a 13 yard touchdown pass to tie the game at 21 in the opening drive. It became much more interesting from here. Going into the final quarter of the game, the Crimson Tide would attempt to finish an 83 yard drive with a 33 yard field goal. Foster, having missed a field goal on the opening drive of the game for Alabama, made the field goal. However, a false start penalty by the Tide forced a re-kick for Foster. This time, he would miss. Auburns next drive would result in a punt in which they were able to pin Alabama at their own 1 yard line. However, that was no an obstacle for McCarron. The Alabama quarterback threw a pass to Amari Cooper, who was able to run all the way into the end zone for a touchdown. The one play, 99 yard drive would push the Crimson Tide ahead by a touchdown. That would be the last of their scoring however.

Auburn's next two drives included a turnover on downs and a punt, including a drive in which they totaled a loss of 9 yards. It seemed as though Alabama's defense would hold down the Tigers for the remainder of the game. Instead, Auburn would block a 44 yard field goal attempt by Foster and score a touchdown on the ensuing drive. Alabama had 32 seconds to try and score a field goal. They would manage to get into position for a 57 yard field goal. However, backup kicker Adam Griffith would fall short in his kick, and Chris Davis would return the ball from the opposite endzone for a touchdown and an improbably win for Auburn.

IMAGE from ESPN: #14 Nick Marshall of the Auburn Tigers celebrates after beating the Alabama Crimson Tide on Saturday night. (Photo by Kevin C. Cox/Getty Images)

Follow me on Twitter: @Gabriel0430

Penguins Blank Lightning

Chris Kunitz scored twice and Marc-Andre Fleury earned a shutout as the Pittsburgh Penguins beat the Tampa Bay Lightning 3-0 late Friday evening. The Penguins had won 7 straight games against the Lightning, a streak that started on November 11, 2011. The win tonight brought the streak up to 8 games. After struggling on the road, the Lightning returned home this week and won two straight games. However, the loss to the Penguins snaps a 7 game home winning streak for the Lightning.

The matchup between these two teams was predicted to be a high scoring one. Both the Penguins and the Lightning rank amongst the top 10 teams in the NHL in goals per game. Of course, the Lightning are without star center Steven Stamkos. The two big offensive guns for the Penguins, Sidney Crosby and Evgeni Malkin, did not score. However, while Malkin was held completely scoreless, Crosby assisted on all 3 goals for the Penguins.

The Lightning managed to hold Pittsburgh to just one goal through most of the game. Kunitz finished off a great passing play by him and Crosby for a goal early in the first period, and the Penguins were held off of the score sheet after that until the third. The Lightning applied plenty of pressure to Penguins' goaltender Fleury, but were unable to get a puck past him. The goalie ended up stopping 21 of 21 shots thrown at him for the shutout.

Lighting goaltender Ben Bishop was solid in net despite receiving the loss. Bishop made 26 saves in 28 chances. He was beaten early in the game by Kunitz and early in the third period on a Penguins powerplay. Pittsburgh center Brandon Sutter flipped the puck from behind the net off a Lightning defender and into the net for a 2-0 lead. Later on in the period, with Bishop on the bench in exchange for an extra attacker, Kunitz scored his second into an empty net to bring the score to 3-0 in the final frame.

The Lightning are off until Tuesday, when the play on the road against the Columbus Blue Jackets. The Penguins will travel to Sunrise to take on the Florida Panthers tomorrow night.

IMAGE from Tampabaylightning.com: Chris Kunitz #14 of the Pittsburgh Penguins celebrates his first period goal with his teammates against the Tampa Bay Lightning in Tampa, FL.  (Photo by Scott Audette/NHLI via Getty Images)

Follow me on Twitter: @Gabriel0430

NHL Safety Blunders

In the last couple of years, the National Hockey League has made an emphasis to reduce the number of head injuries. In fact, a lot of people can trace this recent campaign against head injuries directly to Zdeno Chara's hit on Max Pacioretty two seasons ago. It has not been long since that horrific hit, but one fact stands out the most: Chara was not disciplined.

Of course, that issue was 'solved' two years ago, so I am not here to beat that dead horse any more than it probably has been already. My problem with the NHL is the inconsistency of discipline, and I am pretty sure most fans of the league can agree. It seems as though superstar players always receive the benefit of the doubt over players that are making fall less than multi-million dollar salary. Dare I say the word 'favoritism,' but it is extremely difficult sometimes to avoid that thought. That said, I read an interesting article regarding Chara's style of play. The article compared a hit by New York Islanders' forward Michael Grabner to a hit by Chara, both within a few weeks of each other. The article was written on a New York Islanders-focused blog, Lighthouse Hockey.

Grabner received a two game suspension while Chara received no discipline. The author, solely known as 'Dominik,' was quick to state that he agreed with the suspension against Grabner, a player on his preferred team. However, Chara's hit was at least equally as bad, if not worse, than Grabner's infraction. Dominik is disturbed by the fact that Chara's actions were not disciplined. In short, Dominik outlined the reasons why Chara's hit was illegal and concluded that Chara should have also been suspended.

Another controversial hit was made by Buffalo Sabres' forward John Scott on Oct. 23 against Boston Bruins' forward Loui Eriksson. The hit was somewhat comparable to the ones made by Chara and Grabner. Just somewhat. Scott, with no previous history of illegal actions, received a 7 game suspension while Grabner received just the two games. Scott threw an elbow at Eriksson, which was reason to accuse Scott of intent to injure. However, it is pretty clear that Grabner also threw an elbow deliberately at the head of his victim, while Chara's hit involved forearms to the face of the man he made contact with. I feel as though Chara's situation was the worst one (go figure, it didn't result in any discipline). He already towers above every other player at 6 feet and 9 inches, but Chara felt the need to launch himself upwards into the opposing player, obviously ending with contact to the head. With all of the similarities in the three plays, it is strange to me how one player gets a long suspension, the other gets a short one, and the third one gets nothing at all. Chara, who received no punishment, is the most famous player and has the fattest contract of the three, while Scott is regarded as one of the league's 'goons.' That spells favoritism to me right away, but that's just me.

Of course, there are many more instances where I feel the NHL has completely swung and missed in terms of player safety. The league will always be accused of playing favorites, and in the league's defense, they cannot ever be perfect. Hockey is one of the fastest sports in the world, and referees have so much to worry about on the ice. The league can only review plays a certain amount of ties before it becomes repetitive, and hockey is a sport where a lot of infractions are borderline. Fact is, player safety is not easily enforced in the NHL. However, I feel that the league is currently underachieving.

Image caption: UNIONDALE, NY - NOVEMBER 02: Zdeno Chara #33 of the Boston Bruins takes a two minute roughing penalty against Cal Clutterbuck #15 of the New York Islanders at Nassau Veterans Memorial Coliseum on November 2, 2013 in Uniondale, New York. The Islanders defeated the Bruins 3-1. (Photo by Mike Stobe/NHLI via Getty Images)

Follow me on Twitter: @Gabriel0430

Easy 'A'

A couple of months ago, I promised both all of you and myself that I would use my blog more often. Since being released from Bolts by the Bay, I have felt more free. When I was writing on that website, it was not encouraged for me to write on hockey topics using my personal blog. Of course, hockey is a major topic for me, so that made it difficult to write here. That is not a concern anymore, so I figured it would be quite easy to begin posting here regularly. It's safe to say it did not pan out the way I had hoped.

School came along, and despite all of the free time I knew I would have (and actually do have), I still can't manage to make posts regularly. School has had me under stress, along with many changes in my personal life. However, as of about 10 minutes ago, I received an assignment for one of my classes to... well, write on my blog. So within the next week or two, I will be posting blogs specifically for the class. This is a perfect time for me to raise my less-than-satisfactory grade that I currently hold in this class. This will be interesting. Stay tuned.

Twitter Quotes: Peter Laviolette Fired

Early today, the Philadelphia Flyers announced the firing of Peter Laviolette. The fact that he was fired is not what people are questioning; it's the timing of it. The Flyers have severely underachieved in the last three years, making the playoffs but choking in the middle rounds. In fact, the Flyers did not even make the playoffs in last season's shortened campaign. With all of the talent on that team, the firing of Laviolette was due. Well, it's overdue right now, and that is the problem. How do you justify his firing now, after three games this season? The Flyers have not won a game and have only scored 3 goals, while giving up 9. No doubt, this is not the start any team wants to have, but where's the true logic behind the firing? Why not fire Laviolette immediately after last season?

Normally I would only post a single tweet for articles in this series, but I've found multiple tweets that I would like to share. This should be fun.

Here's what I don't get. If you're going to fire a guy three games into the season, why bring him back after last year in the first place?
— Craig Custance (@CraigCustance) October 7, 2013

Craig Custance, Senior NHL writer for ESPN The Magazine, essentially makes the same point I just did to begin this article: why bring him back?

Snider also strong on culture of team. "We don't need a fresh perspective. ... We know what we're dealing with."
— Dan Rosen (@drosennhl) October 7, 2013

Seriously? This is about the most arrogant statement that could be made in this situation. Indecisiveness is not deemed as justification, and Chariman of the Flyers Ed Snider seems to think so. Despite waiting for the summer, and firing a coach three games in, Snider wants everyone to believe the team "knows what they are dealing with."

How do you even justify Laviolette's firing when you fire him NOW. Should have been done over the summer, good luck explaining this one.
— Gabriel A. Moreta (@Gabriel0430) October 7, 2013

This is the point I make against the Flyers management, what was the basis of his firing? Firing Laviolette three games in gives the impression that those three games served as the judgment period. That is a ridiculous notion. Any team with any coach can have a bad streak of three games, especially to start a season. This will be tough for Flyers fans to swallow I'm sure.

Analysis: Tampa Bay Lightning 3 Chicago Blackhawks 2

The game last night featuring the Tampa Bay Lightning and the Chicago Blackhawks was an interesting one with multiple mini-stories embedded within. The most ominous stat was a fat zero in the shots on goal column for the Lightning at the conclusion of the first period. In fact, the Lightning were out-shot in every period except in the overtime period (shots tied at 2). So, was the Lightning offense really that bad? My answer is no. In fact, I do not believe that the performance by the Lightning overall was bad.

Fans will look at stats as and end-all-be-all most of the time, especially in hockey. There is so much more behind the stats than is showed simply by the numbers. The Blackhawks managed 39 shots on goal, but I would argue that most of their scoring chances were not high quality ones. After not getting a shot on goal until about halfway through the first period, the Blackhawks proceeded to shoot from everywhere. That being said, most of those shots were long range. Lightning goaltender Ben Bishop stole two points for the team, but his saves were rather simple. The Lightning allowed most shots from the outside along the half-boards or the blue line. Bishop did not have much trouble seeing the majority of shots and was able to control his rebounds and cover the puck. The rest of the team cleared out rebounds and eliminated Blackhawks players in front of the net physically, which is something that was rarely seen last year.

Defensively, last night's game was very well played for the Lightning despite giving up 39 shots. However, the offense was more questionable. No shots in the first period is not a good number, even if it is against one of the top defensive teams from last season. The Lightning have always had an issue with getting shots on goal, and not for a lack of talent. The team has a tendency to try and score a pretty goal, giving up a point blank shot chance for an extra pass instead. Of course, the Blackhawks did do a great job of suffocating the offense for the Lightning. Chicago forced the Lightning to dump and chase the majority of the time, and was able to beat the Lightning to the puck. Breakout plays were smooth, as every player on the Blackhawk team was in the exact right spot on the ice to execute the transition out of the zone.

The Lightning were finally able to establish some offensive leverage, scoring two goals within about 2 minutes in the middle of the final frame. Captain Martin St. Louis led the charge, scoring the team's first goal and setting up the typing goal on the power play by Teddy Purcell. From there, the next big story was Ben Bishop. Bishop made big saves during a late penalty kill for the Lightning, and then stopped Jonathan Toews, Patrick Kane, and Marian Hossa in the shootout. Valtteri Filppula scored the lone shootout goal for the Lightning. Last season, defense and goal tending were the two major issues fans wanted to see fixed this season, I think last night was a big step in the right direction.

Image credit: CHICAGO, IL - OCTOBER 5: Teddy Purcell #16 of the Tampa Bay Lightning (right) celebrates with teammates Ryan Malone #12 and Steven Stamkos #91 after scoring against the Chicago Blackhawks to tie the game in the third period during the NHL game on October 5, 2013 at the United Center in Chicago, Illinois. (Photo by Bill Smith/NHLI via Getty Images)

Follow me on Twitter: @Gabriel0430

Wal-Mart Experiences

Shopping at Wal-Mart is almost a necessity to most people living in the United States. The company is one of the richest in the country, and sells items in just about every genre you can think of. Convenience is a big factor, as 96% of the U.S. population lives within 20 miles of any Wal-Mart (The Designer Observer Group, All Those Numbers: Logistics, Territory and Walmart). Talk about a good store placement strategy. Wal-Mart advertises its prices as being the lowest, and most of us can all testify that this statement is in fact correct.

However, what about their employees? Do you ever walk into a Wal-Mart and find that the associates (employees) there look happy? Looks can be deceiving, but there always seems to be a consistent sense of dread amongst the majority of employees working at any Wal-Mart. The happiest employees at Wal-Mart are likely the members of the management. Well go figure, they are definitely making more money than the majority of the employees in the store.

I just recently worked at a local Wal-Mart. I more recently quit the job after just 3 weeks of work. I was initially excited to be working at Wal-Mart because I was desperate for any job period. I was a 'Courtesy Associate,' which sounds particularly glamorous at first glance. However, I was stuck pushing carts from the parking lot back into the cart bays. My shifts were an average of 7 hours, with a one hour lunch. So I would spend anywhere from 7 to 9 hours of my day at Wal-Mart, out in the extreme Central Florida elements.

This was not fun, and my co-workers were not much help either. It was a Wal-Mart Supercenter, and needless to say, the store was big. So obviously, the parking lot was big. It was one of those Wal-Marts with two big entrances and two big cart bays, and sometimes I would be stuck trying to keep both bays full. This was an impossible task, involved a lot of pain, and was just dumb. I would call for help, question where my co-workers were and why they were not scheduled to come in at the busiest times of the day and would still receive no support. It seemed like I was the only one in the entire store that truly cared about the quality of my work. So, naturally, since no one else cared, I was screwed. 3 weeks after being hired, I quit. I turned in my name tag, and had a manager officially terminate me. A couple of days later, a Customer Service Manager called me multiple times (at least 4 times within a day and a half) asking for an explanation for leaving. At least to me, this is very unprofessional. However, thinking back on it, the CSM was the one who directly interviewed and hired me. She probably took a lot of heat for my swift departure.

I read something this morning that made me feel a little better. It seems as I was not the only screwed over by Wal-Mart. In an article by Allen Clifton of ForwardProgressives.com, Clifton cites a colleague of his on the benefits system of Wal-Mart. I was not made aware of this, but Wal-Mart has a minimal hour count as a standard for providing minimum benefits to associates. Clifton explains:

See, what Walmart has done is set the bar for which part-time associates (employees are called associates at Walmart) can receive benefits at an average of 24 hours per week.  At this threshold an employee is given the most minimal options for health coverage, about 8-12 hours of personal days and maybe 12 or so hours of vacation per year.  It really all depends on how long you’ve worked for the company.

I was working around 36 hours a week. Of course, when I dug up some details on employee benefits, I found that my qualification for benefits would not even kick in until I have worked 90 days for the company. And when they did kick in, one of the benefits that struck me (and for all of the wrong reasons) was a mere 10% discount on Wal-Mart products. The place I work at now gives me 45% off of everything, and that was effective immediately. That's just one knock on Wal-Mart, and I am pretty sure there are others that I am not aware of.

Clifton gives a link to his other article. In that article, he promptly bashes a segment of Wal-Mart's employee orientation.

When you first get hired you’re given an orientation, like at most jobs.  In this orientation you’re shown several videos, one of which is called “The Benefits of Working for Walmart.”  But it’s really a 30 minute video bashing unions.  No, I’m not kidding.  It’s literally a video about 30 minutes long of people telling you how terrible unions are to work for

So right from the start, they attempt to instill a certain belief into each and every new employee that steps into their system (disclaimer here; this is not a statement to be judged as either for or against unions). That does not seem very professional to me, but at this point, it seems as if that is the theme. There is so much more dirt I could dig up on Wal-Mart with some more research, but this topic is truly exhausting. Allen Clifton goes into detail in both of his articles, and I strongly suggest reading both of them.

Sources:

The Perfect Scam: How Walmart Is Screwing Employees Out of All of Their Benefits
Think Walmart is an Evil Empire? Wait Until You Read This…
Allen Clifton Author Page
All Those Numbers: Logistics, Territory and Walmart