Courtney Brown

Contact Us
Email Us

BroncoTickets.com is a ticket broker in the business of obtaining hard-to-get and premium tickets for worldwide, national and local events. The term Denver Broncos as well as all associated graphics, logos, and/or other tradermarks, tradenames or copyrights are the property of the Denver Broncos and are used herein for factual descriptive purposes only. We are in no way associated with or authorized by the Denver Broncos and neither that entity nor any of its affiliates have licensed or endorsed us to sell tickets, goods and or services in conjunction with their events. We are not affiliated with the Denver Broncos.

Sign up for last minute specials, merchandise giveaways and more!
Email us at info@Broncotickets.com.

Chris's Blog has quickly become one of my favorites. His takes are usually fresh and almost always funny. While following DC teams and kicking ARod and Michelle Wie when they are down are his specialty, he is also the only blogger I know with any Wake Forest knowledge. In the second part of my Summer Assessment Series, Chris tells us what we need to know about future opponent and annual heart attack game, Wake Forest.

1. What is the one thing that all the experts have wrong about this year’s Wake Forest team?
Chris's Sports Blog: The loss of Chris Barclay won't hurt as much as expected. In 2005 the senior RB became the first Wake Forest player to win the ACC's Offensive Player of the Year Award since 1979, so it would seem natural that his graduation would cripple a team that has had limited success over the past, oh, millennium. But Barclay, for as good as he was, always was more of a system runner. Just like any running back in the Denver Broncos backfield is nearly guaranteed a 1,000 yard season, Jim Grobe's ground-attack gives opportunities for big seasons to players that would languish deep on the depth charts of other ACC schools. (This is not to suggest the Deacs o-line is anything like the Broncos; for one thing they don't cheat nearly as much, but that's a topic for another day.) Let's just say that it's not coincidence Barclay went undrafted.

Without the reigning POY, junior Micah Andrews will carry the load for Wake. In the 2005 opener Barclay sat out because of a suspension and Andrews nearly set a school record in his stead, rushing for 254 yards against a solid Vanderbilt team. Andrews won't win POY honors, but the Deacs rushing attack should be fine in his hands.

2. The team struggled last year when Mauk started. Any reason to think things will be different this year?

Chris's Sports Blog: Not really. Mauk was Jim Grobe's most heavily hyped recruit after setting national records as a high school quarterback in Ohio. But ever since he threw an 85-yard TD pass on his first throw in college, Mauk has been a relative disappointment. He looks and acts the part, but has always been mistake-prone when he's on the field. Perhaps the graduation of Cory Randolph will help though. After starting the first few games in '05, Mauk was pulled for the senior and didn't get back on the field until an injury forced Randolph to the sidelines. It's possible that without a reason to look over his shoulder (Mauk's backups will be redshirt freshmen), the junior QB will be able to shine with a longer leash.

3. Everyone in the ACC thinks highly of Grobe, but what do Wake fans think? Is there any frustration with the whole “he gets a lot out of his talent, but they still lose� mentality?

Chris's Sports Blog: The Jim Grobe lovefest has always been a bit baffling, not because Grobe's a bad coach but because he really hasn't done all that much at Wake to deserve such praise. After a promising start in 2001, Grobe led the Deacs to a bowl victory in 2002. Wake finished 7-6 that year, but lost three winnable games in the final seconds. After that season, the "Grobe is great" chatter began and it was widely assumed he would leave Wake Forest for a better job within the year. Expectations were high in 2003, but the team struggled, bottoming out in a 51-17 loss to Division I-A newbie Connecticut. It was more of the same in '04 and '05; the Deacs would win close games against good opponents (BC in '04, NCSU and Clemson the following season) but couldn't close out the likes of Vanderbilt and North Carolina.

It's clear Grobe is a good program builder, but his end-of-game strategies have always been baffling. Too many times Wake lets the clock run down during the two-minute drill, or calls for a running play on 4th and 2 when a pass is clearly needed. At some point the 'bad luck' argument fades and it becomes clear that the Deacs lose close games for a reason.

Having a successful football team at Wake Forest is difficult. Beyond Brian's Song there is no football history at the school, the university has the smallest enrollment of all BCS schools and has a suburban campus, making recruiting against Florida teams and schools located near cities (hello, BC) extremely difficult. So, in that regard, Grobe has done well just having the Deacs competitive. At some point, however, the team has to take the next step; the "next step" being consistent presence in the postseason. It's nice that ACC schools don't regard Wake as a pushover anymore, but that's not Grobe's ultimate goal. He wants to be a perennial contender for a bowl game and maybe sneak in an upset or two.

This will be Grobe's sixth year in Winston-Salem. Nobody realistically expected him to be there longer than three. It's not by choice. Had the Deacs lived up to expectations in 2003, Grobe would be on a sideline somewhere else. But those teams failed, much as Grobe has. Like I said earlier, Wake is no longer a doormat, but at least there's some pride in being a doormat. Seasons that begin with high expectations and end with records of 4-7 are just plain depressing.

4. The last three BC-Wake games have come down to the final two minutes? Care to make a premature prediction about this year’s game?

Chris's Sports Blog: Down 20 with 3:00 left to play, Wake will score two quick TDs and recover an onside kick down six points. Holding all three timeouts, the team will get down to the Eagles one-yard line and have four shots to get in the endzone in the game's final 19 seconds. After calling for three consecutive fullback smashes that go nowhere and using all three timeouts, Grobe's team will face a do-or-die 4th and goal from the one-inch line. Grobe will instruct Ben Mauk to lineup in a shotgun, whereupon he will promptly get sacked for a 47-yard loss.

Check out Chris's Sports Blog for a litte more on Wake and a lot more on the Redskins.

"It seems to me that architecture is, in fact, the machine that produces the universe which produces the gods. It does so not fully through theories or reflection, but in the ever non-repeatable and optimistic act of construction. The qualities of its resistance, which are as pragmatic as the materials from which it is built, form an irascible and volatile field whose smile is not that of Buddha." Daniel Libeskind

What the hell does this mean? It's either very, very profound (so profound that I am, in fact, having trouble digesting it) or is it so much bullshit from someone who likes to talk fast because, in doing so, he can just slipslide his way through the moment without really giving anyone an opportunity to contemplate what he's just said. I agree; it sounds good. But, what the hell does it mean? God is a product of the universe which is a product of architecture? I don't know...

It was instructive that both the the Rocky Mountain News and the Denver Post columnists, who usually write about historical preservation and parks and art and environmental issues, were less than enthusiastic with Libeskind's "conceptual vision" for Civic Center Park.

Voelz Chandler, News columnist, noted:

"You know you are in trouble when one of the first comments from the architect [Libeskind, during the unveiling of his 'vision'] is 'We left all the historic elements."

Forgive me, but did the epitome of architectural haute couture--Libeskind--actually believe the "...historic elements..." of Civic Center Park were available for removal; up for grabs?

Voelz Chandler continues: "That is true. The Greek Theater is there, and the Voorhies Memorial, and the balustrades. But they are obscured by so many other things that a statement like Libeskind's becomes as much apology as defense. ...This would be a busy, busy place -- not the serene ambience intended by a Beaux Art assemblage of buildings, sculpture and landscaping elements."

Let's look for a moment at Joanne Ditmer's column in the Denver Post: "Busy, busy, busy --and too much of a good thing.

"That was my conclusion after attending two presentations Wednesday on New York architecDanielle Libeskind's proposal for revitalizing 88-year-old Civic Center. Initially, his design -- with a major pondcontemporaryry fountains, glass house cafes, canopied walkways and a soaring bridge -- seemed fresh, exciting and imaginative. And it is. It would be a beautifulexhilaratingng park -- somewhere else.

"These amenities were not meant to enhance this cherished, historic public park and gathering place, tucked between Denver City Hall and the State Capitol.

"The look-at-me design is a showcase of a celebrity architect's fertile imagination, not a sensitive enhancement of a city park so special that it is on the Nation Register ohistoricalri Places, one of just 7 percent on the register with the rating 'site of national significance.' It [the Libeskind vision] is a frivolity superimposed on one of downtown's last green spaces..."

The Libeskind "vision" for Civic Center Park is an incongruous assemblage of disparate components that only do not enhance the preservation of the historical elements in the precious open space, but pose a kind of amusement park crassness to the space. (What on earth is the torqued extravaganza that Libeskindnd calls a bridge that spans from the park to Sixteenth Street? Was this inspired from a visit to Six Flags where the Sidewinder for the Boomerang--roller coaster type rides--bare a striking resemblance to Libeskind's "vision" for a bridge?) Ditmer, the Post's columnist, observes that the design of this pedestrian bridge looks something "...like a whale's skeleton."

One of the most curious comments with regard to the revitalization, remake, preservation, enhancement--whatever you want to call it--of Civic Center Park came from Mayor John Hickenlooper. When asked about the issue of all the homeless folk who tend to congregate in the park, the Hick said, "If we create a great park [shades of Federico Pena's, "Imagine a great city..."], people will fill it, and I guarantee you that the people who are struggling to get their lives together aren't going to stick around."

The comment is curious because the mayor'euphemism--"...people who are struggling to get their lives together..."--colors the reality that those folks who hang in Civic Center Park today are drug dealers, drug seekers, mall rats, homeless, mentally disturbed, criminals, crooks, crass cranks, and hopheads who--when, as the mayor says, Civic Center Park becomes "...great..." ain't gonna be goin' nowhere, your honor. You bring good, decent, hard-working decent folk into the park and guess who's gonna be hangin' around, hopin' for handout, hopin' for a transaction, hopin' to intimidate, plead, cajole or simply steal from the other half who most of these pitiful souls believe caused their problems in the first place.

There is a wee bit of comfort in knowing that I am not alone in wondering what the hell this Libeskind "vision" for Civic Center Park accomplishes. Indeed:

Two Blowhards

If you'Â've got a little curiosity about contempo architecture and you take a peek at its coverage in the mainstream press (as well as the specialist architectural press), you'Â're probably running into names like Daniel (WTC-site) Libeskind, Herbert Muschamp, Rem Koolhaas, Zaha Hadid, and Coop Himmelblau. You'Â're probably also running into a lot of photos of zigzaggy, blown-to-bits buildings that look a bit like an L.A. kitchen the morning after the big one.

Chances are that, unless you'Â've gone to architecture school or have been otherwise marinated in contempo "theory," you probably have some variation on what I think of as the "Huh? What the fuck?" response. The writing and thinking seem almost incomprehensible and, when comprehensible, engaged with issues and ideas that seem of no conceivable human interest whatsoever. The designs themselves sometimes seem kind of cool and flashy -- but, lordy, imagine having to live in, or work in, or even have to pass regularly by such heaps of self-referential showboating.

Or:

City Comforts, the Blog

It seems to me that architecture is, in fact, the machine that produces the universe which produces the gods. It does so not fully through theories or reflections, but in the ever non-repeatable and optimistic act of construction. The qualities of its resistance, which are as pragmatic as the materials from which it is built, form an irascible and volatile field whose smile is not that of Buddha.

The only problem is that his words are too unclear to have any real substance. It would be nice if a (probably) talented fellow like Libeskind could get down from his high horse and just talk plain English.

One does not suffer lightly the machinations of someone, an architect for christ's sake, whose mantra includes the poo-poo of any further consideration of form/function in the design of buildings/landscapes that folks are going to live and/or work in or around. That's probably because I've not gotten an architectural degree in the last five or so years from a university where, I'm told, the form/function given is no longer a given and, well, let your imagination go, young'uns. It don't matter what the functional necessities of the rabble who have to live with, in or around your designs want/desire. What matters is that architectural design creates the universe which creates God...as Libeskind has imparted to us.

What more needs to be said.