The NFL Off-Season Super Bowl! (aka the NFL Draft)

I've got some ground turkey meat thawing in my fridge right now. Turkey burgers FTW!

Before I get to the topic at hand...

- Finders keepers! Finders...um...felons? It seems a bank in Nebraska errantly deposited $106,000 into the account of Mr. George Costa, and Costa did what 99% of the population would do with that kind of found money: he went on a shopping spree. Apparently, he was able to spend $80,000 of it, before he was "charged with theft of lost or mislaid property. It is a crime to take money that's been 'delivered under a mistake.'"

Krunk and I talked about this story in length, and our thoughts were excellently summarized in his blog entry here.

Cliffs:

• The bank had six months to catch their mistakes. The article suggests that the bank had made multiple, errant transfers, so how did the bank not catch their mistake the first time around? Surely there had to be some sort of error checking protocol used by the bank to avoid making these mistakes.
  
• A felony is way too extreme, especially if the guy had nothing to do with the "theft." Yeah, maybe it was morally wrong for the guy to spend found money, but is this really any different from going to a restaurant, getting the bill, noticing that you weren't charged for a dish, and paying the bill anyway? Sure, the number of dollars is way different, but the principle, IMO, is the same.

Here's one question I gotta ask: what, exactly, is "mislaid property"? Let's say I lost my wallet at a Macy's. If a person picked up my wallet, took the cash out of it, went on a shopping spree, and all of this was captured on Macy's security cameras, could I sue the guy for theft? Worse, would he get charged with a felony? Perhaps it's my idiotic a$$ that should be at fault for losing the wallet in the first place. With regards to this case, I think the people responsible for the mistake need to be fired, and the bank should have to eat (at least) part of the loss. I wonder if the terms and conditions of the account in question had a clause saying that errant funds could be reclaimed at any time.

(warning: the following may contain sports-like substances)

- So the NFL Draft has finally arrived. I've only heard hype for the draft for the last six months (consider that the NFL season ended in early February). A couple quick thoughts on the draft:

• People say the NFL Draft is the most unpredictable of all sports drafts; basically "there is no such thing as a 'sure thing.'" If that's so, then why is everyone saying that the Raiders MUST take LSU QB JaMarcus Russell? Because he's a once-in-a-lifetime player? Last I checked, Daunte Culpepper was that same type of player. Big arm? Sure. Good decision making? Sure. Sure thing? Who knows? Also, maybe the Raiders do need a QB, but they also need tons of help elsewhere.
• Also, why is WR Calvin Johnson labeled "a sure thing"? ESPN analysts have insisted that the Lions will be making a huge mistake passing on Johnson; never mind that the Lions have a history of busting when it comes to drafting first round WRs. As with the Raiders, the Lions need a ton of help too.

I'd like to see analysts use "a sure thing" less and phrases like "the best choice" more often to define draft picks. Unlike the NBA, where you were pretty sure that Lebron James was destined for superstar-dom, you can't say the same for NFL prospects. For every Peyton Manning, there is a Ryan Leaf, after all.

My ground turkey is almost completely thawed. I can't wait!