Is that your final answer?

"What do you want to be when you grow up?"
Ask any eight year old this question and they are ready with an answer. Ask me, and I'll have no clue.
Ok, well I thought I had no clue, but then I went to collegeboard.com and viewed their alphabetical list of careers, causing myself to realize that I actually do have some idea. Although I could list about ten jobs I could see myself doing, I can now also list about 10,000 I cannot see myself doing. Funeral director...seriously, who majors in that?
Anyway, I am at the point where I must decide what I want to major in and pursue as a career, but I cannot commit. And I'm not talking about choosing between being a history or an English teacher. I am talking about being a history teacher, English teacher, elementary school teacher, nonprofit manager, politician, writer, sports analyst, or (the newest addition to the list) a veterinarian. So, that only leaves one answer: straight from Rory Gilmore, ladies and gentlemen it's the pro-con list.
(Feel free to deem me hopeless and stop reading now...)

1. Teacher- I decided to combine these all into one. Most of the things I dislike about teaching are general to the entire field, not the individual concentrations.

Pros: Very rewarding, good benefits, good start if I decide to go into politics

Cons: While I do enjoy working with children, working with them everyday at 7:30 am may make me want to kill myself. No lie. Then there's the parents, because we all know that all children are perfect and everything is the teachers' fault.

2. Nonprofit management

Pros: This gives me an opportunity to really help children, something I am really passionate about, without having to put up with them everyday. Plus, I would get to write and make speeches, both things I quite enjoy.

Cons: Job market is so-so. Plus, lately I've done a book drive and a toy drive. Both were major successes, but the receivers did not seem incredibly appreciative. Not that that is the most important thing, but it kind of left a bad impression. And last, Howard Roark tells Peter Keating in The Fountainhead that the outcome is not the important thing, you must enjoy the doing. I'd like to see the fruits of my labor in this field, but I don't know how much I would enjoy the doing. Another lesson learned from Ayn Rand.

3. Politician- HAHAHAHA scary thought

Pros: Being able to affect change, and being put in the same category as Mitt Romney

Cons: Being put in the same category as Hilary Clinton, Nancy Pelosi, Former President George Bush, Mike Huckabee, President Obama, Bob Riley, and Al Gore.

4. Writer

Pros: I really, really, really enjoy writing. (Bet you never would've guessed that!)

Cons: No money unless I become J.K. Rowling, and that's not going to happen. Plus, I might have to get my start as a journalist, and I would rather chew my left arm off (or cheer for Alabama) than do that.

5. Sports Analyst

Pros: You have no idea how good I am at this. The things I discuss with my dad while we're watching sports are the exact same things that the experts are talking about ten minutes later. I stay one step ahead of them. Plus, talk about doing something you love. Writing+talking+watching football=dream job!

Cons: Well, I'd have to work holidays. And I'd have to get my start as a journalist, which we have already discussed. Also, next time you get a chance, take a look at a group of sports analysts on ESPN. There is one major difference between me and them...HINT: It's something I couldn't change without surgery. Think women can do anything men can? Maybe in the pre-Palin error. (No, that's not a typo.)

6. Veterinarian

Pros: I love children and animals. (Hence, the teacher/vet dilemma.) I would make significantly more money than most of the aforementioned jobs, and I could stay in school like forever. It would be rewarding, and I do not want a career that I have to do the same thing everyday, so veterinary medicine would be perfect. AND, I would really like to concentrate in herpetology (study of snakes...well reptiles). Know anyone else doing that? Didn't think so. Plus, it's a field in which I would constantly be learning. Call me a dork, but this is a must.

Cons: The science. I'm not a huge fan, and it is by far my worst subject. Something about it does not click in my brain. But I would hate to have this be the only thing that holds me back.

Well, there it is and I still have no idea. This would be one of those times it would be great to have a significant following so I could hear their opinions. A crystal ball would work too.

And the winner is...

I read the news almost daily. I rarely watch it on television, but then again, I rarely watch anything on television, with one exception: Sports! And lately I admit I've been fudging a little on reading the news and have put my concentration solely on sports. It's sad, but it's true. With the college football season winding down, I am trying to savor as much of it as possible in its last few days. So actual real-world problems will just have to move to the back burner for a while as I focus on America's new pastime.
Tomorrow is the Heisman Trophy banquet and awards. So I could not let this opportunity pass without giving my take on who should win it, and who will win it.
Let me start off by saying I hate the Heisman trophy. No "hate" is probably too soft of a word. Every time they begin talking about it, my blood starts to boil. I despise the hunk of metal.
First of all, the whole premise is ridiculous. Football is different than other sports. Every different position requires different talents and training. The best defensive lineman in the country probably couldn't throw a ball accurately more than 20 yards, but the top quarterback probably couldn't plow throw 300lb lineman putting their hands on him either. So the whole notion of giving one award to the best player is just stupid. It's hard enough to pick the best quarterback or tailback in the league, and they expect to accurately pick the best player period. Give me a break.
Second, the vote is based more on demographics than statistics. There are 870 members of the media who get a vote for the Heisman trophy, a spread of 145 from six different regions. Past winners also get a vote, and one fan ballot is counted. And I would venture to say it is a proven fact that you typically watch the football games closest to your area. Which means that you will typically vote for players from your region. However, if there are two outstanding players from the same region, like Tim Tebow and Mark Ingram, it stands to reason that they have less of a chance of winning than players like Toby Gerhart who dominated his region's attention. Plus, if you check the history of the Heisman, the awards typically jump from region to region each year. It is not a perfect statistic, but just by looking at history, it seems less likely Colt McCoy will win it this year due to Sam Bradford, a fellow Big 12 competitor, winning it last year.
I won't even get into the fact that although the Heisman trophy winner is supposed to embody the profile of a superior COLLEGE athlete, many winners often leave school early for the NFL.
And plus, I'm still bitter Charles Woodson won it over Peyton Manning.
Now, back to who should win it.
Tim Tebow has simply not done enough to prove he is the best candidate this year. Almost like a politician with empty promises, Tebow failed to bring home that final nation title and just had some poor games this year. Tebow got a ticket to the banquet more on hype than achievement.
Colt McCoy certainly did have some struggles this year. Yet Colt McCoy was shafted by a defective system last season, keeping him out of the national title game. You almost want to cheer for McCoy to take it home, but he gets his shot at a championship this year, so I say you've got to leave it on the podium Colt.
Which brings me to the backs. A strong case can be made for both Gerhart and Ingram. Both have an amazing ability to break tackles and stay balanced. Ingram is like a swift lion, while Gerhart is a horse. I would probably give Gerhart the edge simply because of the lack of talent around him, a luxury Mark Ingram enjoys at Alabama.
And last but not anywhere close to least is Ndamukong Suh. This guy is unbelievable. He makes me want to watch the Heisman presentation. If you haven't seen him play, you are missing a show ladies and gentlemen. If Ingram's a lion and Gerhart's a horse, then Suh is a bear! In a conference known for scores similar to basketball games, congratulations to Ndamukong Suh for shining as a defensive star.
But alas I must say that Gerhart really deserves the trophy. First of all, the Heisman is supposed to be given to the best college player, someone who truly is a student athlete. Gerhart goes to Stanford, a school more known for their academic resume. Plus, Gerhart is a senior and a two sport athlete. He embodies what the Heisman trophy stands for. And let's not forget that he actually does have better numbers than Mark Ingram in fewer games.
A different story is who will win the Heisman. I think Toby Gerhart stands a good chance simply because he can dominate the attention of that region, while Suh shares the Midwest with McCoy, and Ingram, the South with Tebow. But in reality, I will be surprised if the trophy goes home with anyone but Ingram or Suh. That's where all the excitement seems to be concentrated right now.
But what do I know; I'm just your average, everyday Bama hater.

This paper will not write itself...but neither will this blog

So lately I've been thinking about a lot of things. Mainly money and its relationship to school and the rest of my life. Two years ago I wasn't thinking about these things at all. I was thinking about graduation, getting out of Huntsville, and getting to Knoxville, Tennessee. I was convinced that I could get a million different scholarships to pay for school, spend four years at the best place on earth, graduate top of my class, and get the best job in the world...SportsCenter! Looking back, it is almost comical how silly I was. Two years ago I was one the smartest kids in my class. (It was a very small class.) Two years ago my ultimate goal was to have my own column in Sports Illustrated. Two years ago I could not stand children. Two years ago I was a Republican. Boy, how things have changed.
I love music, but mainly because I like to sing. I love any song that is sung passionately, when it feels like the artist has put their whole being into that song. (Picture Howard Roark type passion.) As a result, I tend not to look much into the message behind the song. But today a song really threw me for a loop. While I was at work, Steely Dan's "Reelin' In The Years" came on Pandora, and then I heard it again on my way to my other job. ~Quick plug: 100.3 The River = greatest radio station in North America~ Here's the line that really hit home:

The weekend at the college
Didn't turn out like you planned
The things that pass for knowledge
I can't understand

Now I make no attempts to decipher what Steely Dan actually meant; all I can do is tell you what that meant to me. I keep looking at other schools, Auburn, Alabama, Athens State, and all of them make perfectly logical choices of schools to attend in my circumstances. Auburn is generous with scholarships and a decent school for education. Alabama is a good school for communications if I decide that is the path I want to take. Athens is an excellent school for education and cheap. But now I see why I cannot totally commit to any of these schools. Because what I miss the most about U.T. is not the classes I took, though I took some good ones; not the friends I made, though I made the best anyone could ask for; and not the free passes to sporting events, although those were niiiiice. What I miss the most about U.T. is what I actually learned. Not that you never get the same rhino virus twice or how to find a derivative or how to launch a winning P.R. campaign. What I learned about life-about friendships, about helping others (courtesy of Dr.K), about God and his mysterious ways.
When everyone asks me why I don't go to a school in Alabama, that's the answer I can't tell them, because there is no way of putting into words how my year at the University of Tennessee impacted my life, how it transformed me into a different person, yet the person I think I was supposed to be all along.
I had a friend tell me in high school, "Angie, if you don't go to Tennessee, I think the world might stop spinning." Is it foolish to waste all that money to go to a school out of state when I could get just as good of an education here for much less? Probably, but if I don't go back, not only do I risk the person I've become fading away, but apparently now the fate of the entire world. And that's not a risk I am willing to take. :-)