1) Matt Barkley is the problem

First off, Matt Barkley is as good as any true freshman quarterback I've ever seen. He's leagues ahead anyone else I've seen play the position at such a young age.

Secondly, I don't see how you can blame him for any of USC's losses. He didn't play in the Washington loss, and the Trojan defense did nothing to stop Oregon and Stanford.

Third, USC has as little depth at receiver as they've had in years, with the offense desperately missing Damian Williams, tight end Anthony McCoy, and fullback Stanley Havili when they were out.

There's no question Matt Barkley has struggled lately, and some would say he's regressed in recent weeks. I still wonder if Mitch Mustain would have been a better choice (I know Aaron Corp wouldn't have been), and I think the coaching staff has overhyped the freshman. But Barkley has proven himself enough in my eyes, and USC has not lost three games because of him.

2) All of Pete Carroll's good assistants are gone

This is becoming a hip thing to say, but I think it's an unfair scapegoat. I would agree that the offense hasn't been the same since Norm Chow left. But coaches like Ken Norton, Pat Ruel, Todd McNair, Jethro Franklin, and Rocky Seto are either experienced coaches or people who are very familiar with Pete Carroll. Only play-caller Jeremy Bates is really all that new, and I'd argue he's doing a better job than most of his critics.

Any good program is going to lose assistants to other jobs. It comes with the territory. But the names I listed above aren't idiot know-nothing coaches.

3) The defense is horrible

Since the fourth quarter against Notre Dame, the USC defense has barely looked like a facsimile of its former self. Despite having nine new starters, the Trojans didn't give up two touchdowns in a game until Week 6. Since then, Oregon State, Oregon, and Stanford have almost moved the ball at will against USC.

The defense has had some injuries, but that's never hampered USC before. This is an epic collapse that I simply cannot explain. Despite the offense's inconsistencies, I can say the defense has been consistently bad. The talent is there, but I think there has to be a deeper issue.

4) The gap has closed between USC and the other Pac-10 schools

This is true, but it isn't a valid excuse for USC's struggles. Oregon has always had an excellent football program, and as long as they have Nike money flowing in, they'll get great players. Mike Riley and Jim Harbaugh have done tremendous jobs at Oregon State and Stanford in recent years, while Jeff Tedford still has a good program at Cal. Arizona and Washington seem on the rise, and you can never count out Dennis Erickson at Arizona State.

I think USC has actually recruited too much depth at certain positions, and it's led other good players who want more playing time to go elsewhere in the Pac-10. That being said, USC still has considerably more talent than any other Pac-10 team. They've done a great job of recruiting nationally.

The other Pac-10 schools might be more familiar with USC than tough nonconference opponents whom USC routinely pummels. But when you have the better players, you shouldn't lose.

5) The program has become too complacent

I think this a valid concern. In the last few years, I've seen USC players act with a sense of entitlement. I didn't see that in Pete Carroll's first few years when players were trying to prove themselves and the program was building an identity.

I'm sure Pete Carroll is still working his team hard in practice. But a sense of confidence has been replaced by cockiness. And I was horrified to see the way USC gave up in the fourth quarter against Stanford. Personally, I think Pete Carroll needs to establish a new mental approach for his team.

-----------

Before people panic too much, it's worth mentioning that USC is 6-3 and not 3-6. Every program, including Florida, Oklahoma, LSU, and Texas has an off-year once in a while. Pete Carroll's consistent excellence has been beyond remarkable. That doesn't excuse this year's disappointments. But it should allow for some perspective. USC football is still as talented as any team in the nation, and it will be back very soon.

Brad and Angelina were there, as were James Franco, Eva Mendes, Chloe Sevigny and Gwen Stefani with husband Gavin Rossdale. They perused the contemporary art in the galleries along with David Hockney, John Baldessari, Frank Gehry, Takashi Murikami and Ed Ruscha.

Cocktails were served, live lounge music was played and then the guests filed into a huge tent festooned with red velvet and crystal chandeliers. Lady Gaga's image was everywhere, her striking face featured in Russian revolution-era posters inside and outside the tent, and her performance piece, created with the collaboration of artist and needlepointer Francesco Vezzoli, was dedicated to and inspired by Sergei Diaghilev, founder of the Ballet Russes.

Dressed to the nines in a hat designed by Gehry (echoing the Disney Hall silhouette), dress by Prada, mask by Baz Luhrmann and Kewpie doll makeup, Ms. Gaga sat at a pink Steinway decorated by artist Damien Hirst as members of the Bolshoi Ballet danced along a catwalk. Lady Gaga was more subdued than usual at the high end event, for which a ticket ran in the thousands. After the show, the Damien Hirst piano--with Gaga's prints all over the ivories--was auctioned off and the winning bidder, gallery owner Larry Gagosian, took it home--or perhaps to his gallery--for $450,000.

Ms. Gaga's costume pieces will be auctioned online to add to the $3.5 million the museum raised with the gala. "Collection: MOCA's First Thirty Years" will be free to the public for the coming week to see the real stars--Rothko, Warhol, Bengston, Baldessari, Rauschenberg and friends.

All photos by Iris Schneider. Click to view larger.

From the top: Lady Gaga performing, Mendes and Baldessari, Hockney, Stefani and Rossdale, Ruscha.

In recent years, a coalition consisting of the Desert Protection Society and the Center for Community Action and Environmental Justice joined the battle, and Oakland attorney Stephan C. Volker argued the case against the Bureau of Land Management and Kaiser Eagle Mountain, Inc. "The land trade BLM approved here would have literally 'trashed' a spectacular national park whose outstanding natural values have earned it designation as a World Biosphere Reserve," Volker said today. "Shy of Yosemite Valley, I cannot think of a worse place to dump LA's trash for the next century than the fragile desert wilderness adjacent to Joshua Tree National Park."

I concur. In fact, I met the Charpieds some time ago, during my many moons of wandering through Joshua Tree National Park, and through them, I have learned much about a place that has become so crucial to my life, and theirs. Over the years, they have taken me on hikes into remote areas of the park, shown me secret petroglyph sites known to few moderns, walked with me down Pleistocene trails, and spoken quietly of the very jojoba plants - Adam and Eve - that spawned their beautiful, little farm in the Colorado Desert. Like many sacred things, the plants cannot be viewed, but they are somewhere in the environs, living their ancient lives together. From these plants have flowed the most wonderful oil, through their descendants, who pour out the park's wonders into an old still at the Charpieds' farm, then fill a mini-assembly line of pretty bottles that pop up at farmer's markets around southern California or are available for purchase right here.

I've been using the organic oil that Donna and Larry make since I met them, and I consider it a magic elixir from the desert - regenerating for skin and hair, and who knows what else? Like a mad prophet, I've extolled the miracle in various publications, and have also chronicled the Charpieds' battle to save the Promised Land at length - first in the now-defunct Buzz Magazine (where the article was buried because the editor feared the subject of garbage would repel readers), and then more recently in my book Joshua Tree: Desolation Tango, and also for the Mother Nature Network (which picked up a piece I first wrote for Plenty Magazine - another vanished publication).

The case to stop the dump took months to make its way through the Ninth Circuit and we were all beginning to wonder what this meant. At a time when the wilderness is under siege in so many ways, would Joshua Tree National Park be the next on the triage list? For the moment, the answer is a resounding no - the place where the streets have no name will remain so, unsullied by refuse, preserved for next Wednesday, and the Wednesday after that, and we can all say thank you to a pair of jojoba farmers who live in a trailer and make oil from a plant that shares its home with the desert tortoise, the raven, the coyote, the mighty rocks, the carpets of stars, and all the fine things that flourish and endure here - and help us do the same, wherever we are.

Dear JJ:

My wife and I are buying a car for our youngest son, who turns 17 next month. We're committed as a family to a low carbon footprint, so my wife drives the Lexus SUV hybrid, I drive a Tesla Roadster, and our twin 18-year-old sons each drive a Toyota Prius. We're hanging on to our 2002 Range Rover (I confess), but only for emergencies! Which 2010 eco-car do you recommend?

John Jr.'s Dad
Brentwood, CA

Dear John Jr.'s Dad:

While I admire your devotion to your kids, it's always good to recall--especially in the Los Angeles region--that a hybrid car is a car. So is a Tesla. It is not a magical environment-cleaning machine that sails into the sky under cover of darkness to gobble up carbon whenever President Obama--or even Al Gore--flashes the green bat signal. Legend to the contrary.

A Prius emits 4 tons/yr of CO2 if your teenager drives an annual average of 15,000 miles. That figure accounts for the vehicle's entire life cycle, from the ore mining and steel manufacture stages to freeway commuting and recycling. While he'll burn 320 gallons of gas each year to drive it, the manufacturing process itself has already burned up 113 million BTUs (equivalent to 905 gallons of gas)--a carbon debt equivalent to 41,630 miles, or three solid years, of driving.

I realize that using as many resources as possible as efficiently as possible is becoming a popular league sport in many communities. I also sympathize that buses arrive in some parts of Brentwood about as often as rain. Still, in light of one of the most fundamental guidelines for Greenie consumers--when you consume resources, you consume resources, even if you've changed all your light bulbs and you're a major environmental donor--I can only gently recommend that you sell one of the four eco-cars rather than acquire a fifth.

Since the Lexus allows you to travel as a family--and since to ask you to part with your Tesla Roadster would be downright inhuman--I'd suggest that you ask John Jr. and his brothers to choose the Prius they like best and that you sell off the second. If the three remaining eco-cars might possibly suffice for emergencies, I'd then also encourage you to sell the Range Rover--ideally, if you can, to a certified car recycler.

Did you know that SUVs are up to 85% recyclable?--and that 2002 Rover, as you know, only gets 12 mpg. Which is admittedly in contrast to the more efficient 2010 models, which deliver 14 mpg, despite packing 130% more horsepower, the Sand Launch and Rock Crawl features that many people do find useful for commuting in the Santa Monica Mountains, and a dual-view infotainment touch screen.

Your Rover would, by the way, qualify as a clunker for the intermittent "cash for clunkers" federal program--as would of course any $90,000 2009 Rover that's been in use for at least a year. Unfortunately, though, that wouldn't allow you to reduce your multi-car fleet, since the program requires you to use the cash from your major gas-guzzler to put a brand-new moderate or minor gas-guzzler (with a huge carbon debt to manufacture it) on the road.

So instead, you could send all the Rover's iron, steel, zinc, aluminum, brass, copper, rubber, oil, plastics, and other resources off to do greener work in the world. The five 255/SSR18/XL tires alone could become shoes, mulch, fuel, asphalt, boat fenders, garden ponds, sandboxes, a basketball court, or an artifical reef.

You might consider using some of the proceeds you'll get from turning your SUV into scrap metal and a basketball court to throw a blowout backyard BBQ bash. Organic hot dogs! Tesla test drives! You'll want to make sure it's big enough to compensate for any loss of social status the three teenagers might potentially encounter now that they'll be sharing one Prius.

Then you can give the rest to John Jr., who can use it to buy his share of gas for the Prius, the mountain bike of his dreams, and an annual Metro and bus pass--which is bound to work somewhere in the L.A. area--with enough left over for a modest college fund.

Happy birthday, John Jr.!

Green Me Up, JJ is an occasional advice column. You can e-mail JJ with your burning questions about how to act and think environmentally smart in our complicated 21st-century world.

The former host of Jonesy's Jukebox is now hosting a two-hour program every Sunday at BBC 6, according to both MusicWeek and the BBC 6 Web site.

His first show, to which you can listen online, aired Sunday, Nov. 1. The show's title is "A Month of Sundays with Steve Jones."

You'll recall that Indie 103.1 went off the air in January, when pretty much all we heard from Jones appeared in a press release from MSOPR, the public relations company that represented Jones' group, The Sex Pistols. See LA Observed, Variety, LA Weekly and OC Weekly for more background.

-- TJ Sullivan

For years, the biggest hurdle to NFL football in LA was the lack of a stadium. The city government in Los Angeles was only willing to get behind the Coliseum, a site the NFL desperately did not want. City politics helped kill perfectly legitimate plans in places like South Park and Chavez Ravine. (The latter led Peter O'Malley to sell the Dodgers, which ultimately put us in the bizarre situation we're in today with the McCourts. For the record, I blame Mike Hernandez and Mark Ridley-Thomas for that, but that's a conversation for another day).

There's a laundry list of other failed stadium plans. A plan for the Raiders to move to Hollywood Park fell apart because Al Davis didn't want to wait for it to be built. A plan to renovate the Rose Bowl was rejected by the Pasadena City Council. A plan in Carson failed because partially because it was on a toxic waste dump. Other stadium proposals in Anaheim, El Segundo, and Lynwood never materialized.

But now, thanks to the incredible work of Ed Roski and Majestic Realty, we are as close as we've ever been to a modern football stadium in the greater L.A. area. Make that the state of California actually, as all three NFL teams in the state play in aging stadiums. I'd argue that today is also a victory for development and progress in California, as we showed that eight homeowners in Walnut are not enough to stop a project that will create jobs and benefit the region economically. In fact, those who are upset about the environmental exemption granted by the governor neglect to mention that the proposed LEED-certified stadium would actually be better for the environment than what would go there otherwise.

The biggest remaining hurdle now is getting a team to move here. Now that there is an actual stadium plan approved, expect relocation talks to get serious. The hope is that a team could move to the Coliseum or Rose Bowl in 2011, and the new stadium could be completed by 2013. Of course, relocation could be complicated by existing stadium leases and I am unsure what kind of deal Roski wants to work out in order give him at least some ownership stake in a franchise. There are seven teams that could potentially move to L.A. and I'll take a look at each of them.

San Francisco 49ers: The Niners are the least likely team to move among the seven. The team has been working for a long time on a new stadium in Santa Clara. It's possible that could fall through. But even if that were the case, the Niners are the dominant team in the Bay Area, there is a ton of history with the franchise, and one would reason that the Niners would exhaust every Northern California option.

Oakland Raiders: The organization is completely unstable right now, and it wouldn't surprise me if Al Davis were admitted to an insane asylum at some point. In the meantime, he's in a horrible stadium in Oakland with a lease that expires after the 2010 season. The NFL wants the Raiders to consider sharing a stadium in Santa Clara with the 49ers; however, the team has never given a definitive answer to that idea.

Rumors have persisted for years that anyone from Dean Metropoulos to Ed DeBartolo would like to buy the Raiders and move them south. Al Davis only owns 26% of the Raiders and he is not in great health, so anything could happen there. The Raiders also have as sizable a fan base any NFL team in L.A.

But part of the problem with the Raiders is their brand. When they played in the Coliseum, the Raiders name was synonymous with gang violence. Families stayed away from the Silver and Black. Players were afraid to let their kids attend their games in person. Even the NFL wouldn't allow Monday Night and Sunday Night games to be played at the Coliseum because they thought it wasn't safe.

It's true that USC football and continued development in the region has helped change the perception of the Coliseum and the surrounding area. But it will take a lot to change the perception of the Raiders. Perhaps a new owner with the right personality and the right marketing plan can make a difference, but it won't be easy.

San Diego Chargers: They might be in the best position to move of any team in the NFL. The Chargers can get out of their stadium lease if they're willing to pay a fee that decreases every year. They've been trying to get a new stadium in San Diego for a long time, and as far as I know, there aren't any serious proposals on the table. Still, it remains to be seen how much of a stake the Spanos family would be willing to give up, and at least publicly, they remain very committed to staying in San Diego. I think the NFL would like to keep a team there too, if possible.

Jacksonville Jaguars: If I'm NFL commissioner Roger Goodell, I'm looking at a team in a tiny market like Jacksonville that won't sell out a single home game this year on one coast, and I'm looking at an unserved market with 17 million people on the other coast, and I'd be wondering "how do I get them to move?"

I lived in Florida for two years, and I'd bet the Jaguars rank about fourth in the Jacksonville pecking order -- below Florida, Florida State, and Georgia college football. Certainly Jaguars attendance would bear that out, as the team appears to be nearing a crisis situation.

Moving the Jaguars to LA seems to make perfect sense. Even the name "L.A. Jaguars" has a nice ring to it. Unfortunately for LA though, Jacksonville has one of the toughest leases to break in the NFL. The team can only break its lease if it loses money for three consecutive seasons or if a judge determines that the city has not properly maintained the Jaguars' stadium.

On the first point, the Jags may very well be able prove financial losses at their current pace. But doing so would require the team to open its books to the public, something that sports teams almost never want to do, and the NFL might not even allow it. On the second point, the city has paid millions on improvements to the Jaguars' stadium, and it even hosted a Super Bowl as recently as 2005. Even if the Jaguars found a way to get out of their lease, they might have to pay up to $50 million in rent owed to the city in a lump sum.

The lease was negotiated by Jaguars owner Wayne Weaver, who is a Jacksonville guy and wants the team to stay. But he is also nearing 80 and has also openly talked about selling.

Perhaps a solution can be reached for the Jaguars to move to LA, especially since Jacksonville would appear to have little strategic value to the NFL. But for now, I still wonder why the league granted Jacksonville an expansion franchise over Baltimore and St. Louis back in 1993.

St. Louis Rams: I would absolutely love it if the Rams moved back to L.A. I grew up a Los Angeles Rams fan, and I have to admit -- as bizarre as this sounds -- that I miss them. TJ Simers recently wrote an article joking about how he didn't want the Rams back here because they're a terrible team right now. But good teams generally don't move, and in the NFL, bad teams can improve quickly. On-field performance is the least of my concerns right now.

The Rams have a storied history in Los Angeles, dating back to the days of Bob Waterfield, Norm Van Brocklin, Crazy Legs Hirsch, Deacon Jones, Eric Dickerson, and Jackie Slater. Despite what Simers might argue, the name Los Angeles Rams has cachet in this city, and at least has a historical brand to sell.

The Rams have a clear out-clause in their stadium lease in 2014 and have a murky ownership situation. After Georgia Frontiere died, control of the team went to her children Chip Rosenbloom and Lucia Rodriguez. Rosenbloom has made it clear that he'd like to keep the Rams in St. Louis, although I'm not sure why. He lives in Los Angeles where he's a Hollywood producer who made the Shiloh the dog movies. Still, him and his sister have been fielding offers the 60% share of the Rams that they own (Rush Limbaugh's interest became very public), and it might be difficult to find a buyer who wants to keep the team in Missouri when it would figure to be more profitable in Los Angeles. Still, 2014 is a long time from now.

Minnesota Vikings: I would be surprised if the Vikings left Minnesota, but it's certainly plausible. The Vikings' stadium lease expires in 2011, and persistent efforts to build a new stadium have born no fruit. The organization has expressed clear frustration with the state legislature for several years now. If significant progress is not made soon, then Vikings will surely take relocation seriously.

Still, it's hard for me to believe that given the deep emotions Minnesotans feel for the Vikings, that the team would leave. They have a rich tradition in the Twin Cities. However, the same could have been said about the Cleveland Browns and Baltimore Colts, and they both found a way to leave. It would be interesting to have two Purple and Gold teams in L.A. that originated in Minnesota. Of course, if the team could always change its name if it moved here.

Buffalo Bills: The Bills are in a complex situation in Buffalo. The city is not what it once was, and it simply cannot support an NFL team. Bills owner Ralph Wilson recognizes this and has reached a deal to play several home games in Toronto each season until the team's lease expires in 2012.

Wilson just turned 91 though and has said he will not give the team to his children. That could leave the Bills for sale and open the doors for an L.A. buyer. Still, it's also possible that the team could wind up playing more games in Toronto, or even move there under a new owner. Additionally, Roger Goodell is from Western New York state and would like to keep a team there. If the Bills did move to L.A. though, then a name change might be a good idea.

I've always believed the playoffs to be something of a crapshoot, but that's certainly no excuse for them losing this series. The bottom line is, the bullpen which had been their strength all season, fell apart when the Dodgers needed it most. George Sherrill had barely given up any runs in Dodger blue, but his three-run homer allowed in Game 1, and sloppy pitching in Game 4 were real killers. And of course, Jonathan Broxton's fear of pitching to Matt Stairs and sudden loss of command at the end of Game 4 was crushing.

Much has been made of the fact that the Dodgers didn't have an ace. But in truth, aces don't grow on trees, and the Dodgers did have the pitching talent to win the series. For all the hoopla about Cliff Lee, he only won one game in the NLCS... a game the Phillies could have probably won with Chad Durbin going a full 9 innings. Cole Hamels was hardly stellar in his outings, and Joe Blanton didn't do much either. The only other Phillies pitcher with a dominant outing was Pedro Martinez, pitching in a game the Dodgers won.

Still, Chad Billingsley's sudden second half slide (after an All-Star first half) deprived the Dodgers of a much-needed arm starting an NLCS game. I'm disappointed in the Dodger training staff and Joe Torre for thinking that Hiroki Kuroda was healthy enough to pitch in Game 3. He clearly wasn't ready to come back then. And sometimes managers overrate the small sample size of postseason games, which probably led Torre to think that Vicente Padilla was an ace based on just two good starts.

The Dodgers lineup wasn't bad in this series, but they did leave a lot of runners on base and didn't come through quite as often as they needed to. Conversely, you have to give the Phllies credit for getting their lineup together, especially Ryan Howard, who raised his game to a whole new level.

This season is not a failure, although many will call it that. The Dodgers finished 2009 with the best record in the National League, they won a playoff series, and their kids officially grew up. They will enter 2010 with their nucleus in tact, and have a talent base good enough to contend for a World Series. Obviously, they will need to explore options for starting pitchers, as John Lackey will be a free agent they could sign and Roy Halladay could be on the trade block.

Until then, as the old Dodger saying goes: "Just wait 'till next year!"

The CAFAM exhibit's name uses the Spanish and Japanese words for dreams. Born in downtown Los Angeles in 1933 to Mexican immigrants, De Larios grew up with Latino and Nisei neighbors. After Dorsey High School and studying ceramics and sculpture at USC, she opened her first studio in Los Angeles. Exposure to Japanese culture at an early age was a key influence. It "set the stage for relationships with other cultures later on," says De Larios.

A 13-month trip around the world in 1963 included stops in Japan, Hong Kong, Nepal, East Africa, and Egypt, and further broadened her knowledge and love of world cultures.

De Larios has had a "lifelong interest in the divine, its symbolism and its interpretation in various cultures," says CFAM guest curator Elaine Levin. "She offers us an extraordinary world of whimsical yet confident animals, loving friends, family. Interspersed in this colorful melange are the mystical forces of life, embodied by mythological creatures and goddesses which fuel the artists imagination." De Larios works not just in clay, but uses wood, plastic and steel in some pieces.

De Larios also does commissions for public and private spaces in California, the U.S., and internationally. Architect Lisa Landworth, of Landworth Debolske Associates on Wilshire, met De Larios in 1987 when her client, Alan Sieroty, "had the idea of integrating the work of an artist into the façade remodel of his building at 6022 Wilshire, in the heart of the Miracle Mile. An unfortunate remodel done in the 1960's had obliterated the building's Art Deco roots."

De Larios was chosen for the commission since her medium of ceramic tile sculpture, and her geometric design concept, perfectly meshed with the desire to recall the original Art Deco style. "Dora's tile installation provided a dramatic bas relief focal point that successfully integrated fine arts with architecture," says Landworth.

De Larios continues to be inspired by travel, world culture and her hometown. "I love the vitality of Los Angeles, the different cultures and enclaves. You can really get lost here," she says.

A favorite spot is the Greek Orthodox church near Normandie and Venice Boulevard. But she makes it very clear that her favorite place to be is her studio on Venice in Culver City. With a smile she says, "I work, and I work, and I work some more."

"Sueños/Yume: Fifty Years of the Art of Dora De Larios" is on view at CAFAM through Jan. 10, 2010.

Top photo: courtesy of Dora De Larios
Photo of De Larios: Judy Graeme

I don't really know the reason for the split, but I've heard that there was an internal struggle between Frank and Jamie on how to run the team's business operations. Frank had brought in Dennis Mannion as President, a very sharp executive who has done some great work for the team. Mannion had previously been an executive with the Baltimore Ravens. Jamie had brought in Dr. Charles Steinberg, who now "has permission to entertain offers from other MLB clubs." Steinberg grew up down the street from Jamie in Baltimore and supposedly lost influence to Mannion within the organization.

Secondly, Fox Sports' Ken Rosenthal claims that if there is a divorce, then Jamie would be in a better position to buy out Frank. Third, most reporters this evening are bringing up John Moores' recent divorce which led him to slash the payroll of the San Diego Padres and then sell the team early this year. Let's hope the McCourts can either patch up their differences or if they hold onto the team for a little while, they do it in a way that doesn't cause them to give up the nucleus of a team that's reached the playoffs 3 times in 4 years.

If the McCourts did wind up having to sell the team, then who would buy them? Well, this is just pure speculation, but I'll throw a few names that might make sense. Again, this is speculation on my part, and I have no direct knowledge of anyone's intentions. First, AEG would figure to be a possibility, considering their investment in sports facilities all over the world and their position in the LA sports market. Ed Roski has done work with AEG in the past, but he is also working actively on bringing an NFL team to the City of Industry. That being said, Chavez Ravine has long been rumored as a potential site for a football team, and that could motivate any sale. Casey Wasserman is another name that could surface.

When the Dodgers were for sale earlier this decade, Alan Casden was a potential buyer for the team. So was David Checketts who is now trying to buy the Rams, and just removed Rush Limbaugh from his investment group. The Glazer family was also interested six years ago, led by Malcolm who owns the Tampa Bay Buccaneers and Manchester United. Glazer lives in Beverly Hills, but owning the Dodgers could lead to issues with the NFL's cross-ownership policy. It's also possible they could skirt that issue if one of the Glazer sons bought the team, but there's a lot to work through in that scenario. There was also once a rumor that Eli Broad wanted to buy the Dodgers and install Peter O'Malley as team president. Dennis Gilbert is someone with LA ties who is currently trying to lead an investment group to buy the Texas Rangers. He actually interviewed for the Dodgers GM job once. Mark Cuban would like to own a baseball team, but he is not well-liked by MLB owners.

The current economic climate has reduced the number of people who could potentially buy the team, especially since it's now worth over $700 million. Buying the team would also include all of the land around Dodger Stadium in Chavez Ravine. It's possible that anyone who buys the team will view the acquisition as a land deal. It's also possible that the McCourts could go through a messy divorce that puts the team in limbo for a few years, when hopefully the economy does improve and MLB could see the team sold for a higher price. In all likelihood, there would probably be several potential buyers who aren't on anyone's radar screen right now, whom most people have not heard of before.

It's certainly a heck of a time for all of this to happen.

Update: According to Frank McCourt's attorney, Frank is the sole owner of the team. Future control of the Dodgers could depend on the pre-nup.

If the McCourts are really about to go through a long and bitter divorce -- and reports are that could be the case -- then shame on them. They made every possible misstep after they bought the team, and after numerous regime changes, they finally have the organization where it should be. Through it all, they sent legions of Dodger fans on a bizarre roller coaster that most would just as soon like to forget.

Now, with the team about to begin its biggest playoff series in 20 years, there is a strong indication that millions of Dodger fans are about to be dragged through a long and messy divorce which will put ownership of the club into question. Dodger fans don't care about these two people, and they don't want the McCourts' personal problems to throw the organization into chaos. If the McCourts can't come to a speedy and amicable resolution, then they should do the people of Los Angeles a favor and sell the team as quickly as they can. Dodger fans deserve better.

For seven straight years, the Dodgers and Angels have been in the top-6 in attendance in MLB. Yes, baseball is alive and strong here, and Los Angeles has proven itself as a great sports town. Don't let any obnoxious East Coast-biased fans tell you otherwise.

The Angels win over the Red Sox was predicted on this site, although I was a bit surprised that they were able to sweep. The Halos lineup is the best it's been in years, and they are getting contributions from everyone in the batting order. Their pitching has held up well for the most part, and their defense is strong.

The Dodgers win over the Cardinals was not predicted on this site, but only because I thought the team's late season struggles would continue. I've been a big defender of the Dodgers all season long, and evidently the belief that the team would step up their play in games that mattered held up true.

I am a bit dismayed though at the anti-Dodger pro-Angel bias that we've seen in the Los Angeles Times and in other media local media outlets, and I'll touch on that briefly. Like me, the Times predicted a Cardinals victory in the first round, but unlike me, they saw a sweep. Turned out the Times got every single game wrong.

Yesterday's LA Times offered 10 reasons "Why America should root for the Angels over the Yankees" without a similar article for the Dodgers. On the front page of that issue, there was a small box announcing a "Cole front is moving in" referring to Cole Hamels' success against the Dodgers in the postseason last year. It didn't mention that Hamels has been a completely different pitcher this year, and struggled in his one start against the Rockies.

Jon Weisman at DodgerThoughts has a great post about postseason myths, and how the Dodgers have proven many of them wrong. The Dodgers aren't winning baseball games in a traditional way and that seems to have flummoxed media pundits. The truth is there are many ways to win a baseball game, and it takes a full roster of 25 players.

You can't just say "Carpenter and Wainwright" and automatically give that team two wins. Even the best pitchers fail to get a win in 40% of their starts, leaving the win to the bullpen or an opposing pitcher. You can't just say "the Dodgers are all about Manny" when 89% of the team's plate appearances don't involve him, and then you see guys like Ronnie Belliard and Mark Loretta wind up with key hits.

So with all of that being said, I am going to preview both the Dodgers and Angels series by looking at specific matchups. First, let's look at Dodgers-Phillies:

Catcher: Carlos Ruiz vs. Russell Martin

Last year, a Sports Illustrated player poll rated Russell Martin and Joe Mauer as clearly the two best catchers in baseball. This year, Martin has confounded everyone and been the worst regular hitter in the Dodgers lineup. He's still a defensive asset, but his play this season has been very troubling. Carlos Ruiz is a pretty mediocre catcher with some upside and some power. In this series I see both players having similar production.

Advantage: Push

First Base: Ryan Howard vs. James Loney

It's true that Ryan Howard strikes out too much, can't hit lefties, and isn't much of a fielder. But he's still one of the best power threats in Major League Baseball, and only Albert Pujols hits righties better. James Loney will turn into Mark Grace if he's lucky.

Advantage: Phillies

Second Base: Chase Utley vs. Ronnie Belliard

For now I'm going to assume that Belliard will start over Orlando Hudson in every game, although I think there's some matchups that favor Hudson. It doesn't matter though because Chase Utley is the best hitting second baseman in the game today.

Advantage: Phillies

Third Base: Pedro Feliz vs. Casey Blake

Pedro Feliz is the weak link in the Phillies lineup while Casey Blake is a pretty consistent performer. Neither does much defensively.

Advantage: Dodgers

Shortstop: Jimmy Rollins vs. Rafael Furcal

Have you seen how bad Jimmy Rollins has been this year? He nearly destroyed my fantasy team before I was luckily able to unload him in a trade. Rollins was always overrated and he's nothing close to the player he was 2-3 years ago. Furcal has also struggled this season, but it looks like he's finally healthy and hitting like it. But given that both players are somewhat unpredictable, there's no clear advantage.

Advantage: Push

Left Field: Raul Ibanez vs. Manny Ramirez

Ibanez has gotten a lot of publicity for having one of his best seasons. But Ibanez is a prime example of how a player's good first half can lead to a season-long reputation. Ibanez hit .232 after the All-Star break and his defense is almost as bad as Manny Ramirez's. While Ramirez has gotten a lot of criticism this season, justifiably so, he's the greatest threat in this series at the end of the day.

Advantage: Dodgers

Center Field: Shane Victorino vs. Matt Kemp

Shane Victorino was a key to the Phillies win over the Dodgers last year. But Matt Kemp hits for more power, steals more bases, and is a greater threat at the plate. Both of these guys are great players, but Kemp is a little bit better.

Advantage: Dodgers

Right Field: Jayson Werth vs. Andre Ethier

The Dodgers once had both Victorino and Werth in their organization, but let them go. Their stellar play is an example of what can happen if a team gets rid of good young players. Fortunately, the Dodgers held onto Kemp and Ethier and their in the NLCS for the second straight yet.

As for Eithier and Werth, both of these players have remarkably similar statistics. The biggest difference is that Werth strikes out a bit more while Ethier is horrible against lefties.

Advantage: Push

Projected Game 1 Starting Pitchers: Cole Hamels vs. Clayton Kershaw

I know that Cole Hamels pitched well in the postseason last year. But that was last year. He hasn't been the same pitcher in 2009 and his whining about throwing a day game against the Rockies made him look almost immature. Clayton Kershaw has looked fantastic lately and he provides a useful left-handed arm in this series. Still you wonder about him going deep into games, even with the Dodgers great bullpen.

Advantage: Push

Remaining Starting Rotations: J.A. Happ, Cliff Lee, and Pedro Martinez vs. Randy Wolf, Vicente Padilla, and Hiroki Kuroda or Chad Billingsley

Since neither manager has told us much about the rotations beyond Game 1, I won't project another matchup. I'm guessing the Phillies will use Cliff Lee in Game 3 so that he doesn't go on short rest. In that case, Lee could be used in Game 6 on normal rest. Lee has been terrific since he joined the Phillies and is the best pitcher in this series. J.A. Happ is a good young pitcher, but we can't really expect to see much from him. He only lasted three innings in his first postseason start. Martinez had a nice comeback year, but he's still a shell of his former self, and he can't pitch deep into games. That's worrisome if you're the Phillies and you have a bad bullpen.

Randy Wolf finally looks like the great prospect that the Phillies once had now that he's over his injuries. He didn't pitch well in the first inning of his first postseason start and it hurt him the rest of the way. Still, you have to think he'll bounce back. Vicente Padilla is another great ex-Phillies prospect who has had his own journey and is pitching as well as he ever has. The No. 4 starter spot is between Hiroki Kuroda who might be pitching hurt and Chad Billingsley who is unpredictable.

If you were to rank these starting pitchers, you'd go Lee, Wolf, Padilla, Happ, Martinez, Kuroda/Billingsley with the last spot potentially moving into the top-3. If I were the Phillies, I'd actually consider using Joe Blanton over Martinez. Overall, I think Lee's great pitching will be counter-balanced by the pedestrian performances from the other pitchers, while the Dodger pitchers will consistently get into the 6th inning and leave their team with a chance to win.

Advantage: Push

Bullpen

The Dodger bullpen has been a source of strength all season long, and the addition of George Sherrill coupled with the health of Hong Chih-Kuo allows the team to mix lefties and righties. The Phillies bullpen could actually cost them the series. The Dodgers won two early season games because of Brad Lidge meltdowns and Scott Eyre and Ryan Madson haven't pitched well in the 9th when called upon.

Advantage: Dodgers

Bench

The Phillies bench is not much to write home about with guys like Ben Francisco, Greg Dobbs, Miguel Cairo, and Matt Stairs (yes, him). The Dodger bench offers some interesting options with the obligatory Jim Thome pinch hit appearance, Orlando Hudson's solid play, and the speedy Juan Pierre.

Advantage: Dodgers

Manager: Charlie Manuel vs. Joe Torre

Both of these managers have proven themselves in the postseason, but Joe Torre has won more and I love the job he's doing this year. I'll give the edge to experience.

Advantage: Dodgers

Prediction: I see the Dodgers taking Games 1 and 2 in LA, with the Phillies bullpen possibly blowing one of those games. I think Cliff Lee will come back strong in Game 3 and the Phillies will steal another back home. Even though Lee is going Game 6, I see Dodgers learning from him the first time and coming back to win the series at home.
Dodgers in Six.

Angels vs. Yankees

At this moment, I don't have the time to write a full post about this series. I might between now and Friday. Either way, I think this series is going to be a classic. Both teams have deep lineups, but they both have their flaws. The Angels still match up particularly well against the Yankees though, the Halos taking it. Angels in Seven. And yes, I think we'll have a Freeway Series.

"Who is it?" I asked, not being able to see through the keyhole, which, for reasons I have no explanation for, is set at six feet high.

"It's Hector," came the voice. "I'm Brendan Mullen's friend."

I remembered meeting Hector during Brendan's trip to Portland last year, to read from Live at the Masque: Nightmare at Punk Alley, his book about the proto-punk club he opened in Hollywood in 1977. Brendan's appearance at Powell's Books had been packed, more crowded than for any of the dozen writers I've seen read there, and as was fitting the subject and its author, included young punks, old punks, and one drunk heckler with a mullet. Brendan patiently answered the questions of each. Brendan always chose his words with care, and often spoke so softly, and with a Scottish burr so burry, one did not realize for several beats that what he'd just said was lacerating or funny or both.

But this morning, not yet having had a cup of coffee, I could not understand why Hector was on my doorstep this early, and so, I asked.

"Brendan died yesterday," he said.

I opened the door. The Army jacket Hector wore looked as though it weighed a hundred pounds. I brought him inside. He told me Brendan had died during a trip up the coast with his longtime girlfriend Kateri Butler; they'd been at a restaurant in Ventura celebrating Brendan's 60th birthday when he had a stroke. I asked if Hector had spoken with Kateri, with whom I worked for years at the LA Weekly. He said he had, several times, including once already this morning.

"I called and woke her up," he said, a little sheepish but it couldn't be helped. He needed to talk about his friend, so much that it drove him out of his own home before dawn to find mine, a place he had only ever been once, a year earlier.

"It's too soon," he said, of Brendan's death. "We still had so many things to do."

We talked about what had been done. About Brendan's books, and his latest project, writing the copy for a Red Hot Chili Peppers coffee table book, copy the publisher had apparently asked to be cleaned-up; they wanted a little less of the early-years drug stuff, a request, Hector said, Brendan thought pretty funny, as did Hector, as did I. We'd all been in LA in the 1980s; we'd directly seen the casualties; I can still see Jamie Slovak, brother of the Peppers original guitarist Hillel Slovak, standing in my driveway the morning after his brother overdosed, looking utterly broken and alone.

Brendan had both driven the LA punk era of the 70s and 80s and documented it, its epiphanies and deaths, its rattiness and joys. But he never seemed, to me, nostalgic for it; he seemed circumspect, and concerned with getting things right. And happy, I told Hector; that the longer I knew Brendan, and I had known him twenty years, the more joyful he became. I told Hector, also, of Brendan's generosity; how after my first big story for the Weekly, he was the first person to phone and congratulate me. It was a call that made me feel validated, as I imagine his giving venue to so many at the Masque did, the way his oral histories did, by giving people voice.

"That's how he was," said Hector, wiping at a tear with a crumpled piece of paper towel.

It's true. And while it is equally true we tend to say nice things about the dead just to say them, I have a story, a recent story that is testament to Brendan's generosity.

It was during his trip to Portland last year, during which I threw a little party for him, to celebrate his book and so he might get together with some of his friends here, and some of mine. Also invited were my 18-year-old daughter and her friends, including her then-boyfriend Aidan, who was playing guitar in the band Wolfgang Williams and the Punk Rock Faggots.

I told Aidan, Brendan Mullen was coming over; that he'd run a club in LA called...

"The Masque," said Aidan. "You're kidding me. You know him? Can I meet him?"

When Brendan arrived, wearing per usual a pork-pie hat, I told him to be ready; that he was going to have a novitiate sitting at his feet. Brendan's eyes went wide in mock alarm, and he said, in all sincerity, that it would be his pleasure to meet Aidan.

Which it evidently was: as the party went on around them, Brendan and Aidan hung out for two hours; they looked through Brendan's books and they talked about Aidan's band. It was a meeting of equals, and it was Brendan's patience, curiosity and genuine kindness that made it so.

I called Aidan just now, to tell him, about Brendan's death.

"That's terrible," he said. "I was just thinking about him two days ago."

What had he been thinking?

"I was thinking," said Aidan, "how nice he was. He was such a nice guy."

Soon after passing his driving test on Monday morning, Bruce Lisker drove his car to the Sherman Oaks carwash. He pulled in and I jumped out with my camera ready, along with a CBS camera crew that is preparing a special on Lisker's story. The carwash employees couldn't help but notice all the attention. "What, did you win the lottery?" a young man asked. Lisker smiled. "Yeah, something like that," he said.

Reserved, quiet and polite to a fault, Lisker seems to be enjoying every minute on the outside, learning something new every day — like what to tip the car wash workers, or how to use an ATM. "Before I went in, there were no cellular telephones, gps, no internet to speak of. When I was arrested, they were just starting to sell albums on CD. I had never used an ATM, written a check, voted, used a credit card. It was a different world."

"If I was bitter and filled with loathing, no one would want to hang out with me. On the inside I was waiting for one day when I could heal, recover, and part of that is being sociable.

"There were people who set out to destroy me. I'm not going to complete their mission for them. My Dad was always there for me, Joy my stepmother was there for me, she treated me just like a mother, she became in my heart and in hers my mother." Joy passed away years before his release. Lisker is now living with her husband until he gets a job and sets out on his own.

With his driver's license came the last bit of freedom he was craving. "The last time I drove around as a licensed driver was March 10, 1983, driving to my parents' house...Getting my license--it's a milestone in getting back my life. "

He was looking forward to driving alone for the first time in 26 years.

"I want to drive to the beach. It's something I had in my mind for a long time. My parents' ashes were scattered off the coast. It's a resting place. I want to spend some time looking out. I love the beach, it's the edge of forever. The beginning of the ocean, the majesty of everything that can be, of possibility. I love the beach. The girls wear bikinis there."

With a camera crew in tow, he did not get much time alone. A trip to Point Fermin, where his parents' ashes were scattered into the ocean, will come sometime in the near future. Lisker had sought permission in 1995 to leave prison and attend his father's funeral, but permission was denied. He mentions his Dad often, and many memories of his younger life with his parents crowd his thoughts as he reconnects with Los Angeles and the Valley.

Since his release he has been experiencing L.A. with friends and family — a Dodger game, jogging in the park, the Santa Monica pier, his favorite waffle place on Ventura Boulevard, and a trip to the Getty. "Just the building alone is beautiful," he said. "And while I was inside, it struck me: two weeks before I was being guarded at gunpoint. Now, two weeks later, I'm standing in front of a Vermeer."

His days are often packed, busy, doing the simple tasks of ordinary life: shopping, banking, connecting with old friends. "Some days are hard," he says. When asked to explain, he mentions his parents, as he often does when something triggers a memory.

"Both my mom and dad are gone," he says. They can't share his joy, or see him finally free. The sting of that loss, and its enormity, is never far below the surface.

At the car wash, the curious young man approached Bruce. "So man, what's your story?" Lisker explained: "I was in prison for a crime I didn't commit, and I was released about a month ago." The young man's face was serious.

"Wow, I feel that, man," he said. "How long were you in?"

"Twenty-six years," Lisker said.

"Oh no," he replied.

"Yeah," said Lisker. Then he asked, "How old are you?"

"Twenty-one," he answered, and the number seemed to hang in the air as they both grasped what it meant.

This week Lisker will take his first plane trip, to Northwestern University where he will appear on a panel at Northwestern's Law School, along with two other men wrongfully incarcerated as juveniles and now released. The airport security measures, which seem so absurdly excessive to most of us, will feel all too familiar to Lisker.

I broke down both series on The Filter with Fred Roggin yesterday, but here is a more in-depth analysis:

Dodgers vs. Cardinals

Both of these two teams finished the 2009 season poorly. The Dodgers seemed to take an eternity to clinch the NL West, while the Cardinals lost eight of their last 10.

Both teams have also struggled offensively of late. The Cardinals really only have two good hitters on their team -- Albert Pujols and Matt Holliday. I hear idiot media pundits all the time say that the Dodgers don't have the big hitters to win in the playoffs, but they forget that no MLB teams are perfect. St. Louis is going to start Ryan Ludwick (disappointing year), Skip Schumaker (no power), Brendan Ryan (an unknown), Colby Rasmus (inconsistent), and Mark DeRosa (.228 average in St. Louis). That's a lot of question marks.

Many of the Dodgers hitters have struggled mightily down the stretch. Manny Ramirez, who has been a major disappointment since he returned from the steroid suspension, hit just .229 in September and he hasn't hit a home run in a while. Matt Kemp hit .241 in September was hitless in two October games. Andre Ethier only hit .212 in the season's final month. Russell Martin has been an enigma all year. Casey Blake and Ronnie Belliard have been banged up lately. Orlando Hudson has fallen out of the lineup. And I have no idea what to expect from Rafael Furcal.

I don't think any of these Dodgers hitters are bad. But I don't think most of them have been at their best. There's a theory that the Dodgers hitters have just been bored for a while, and there is credence to that argument. Still, what I've seen this past month hasn't been encouraging.

When it comes to pitching the Cardinals have two of the best pitchers in the National League in Chris Carpenter and Adam Wainwright. I'm sure if Joel Pineiro was the Dodgers Game 3 starter then the local media would be freaking out, but he's gotten little attention despite having a solid year. In Game 4 the Cardinals will turn to either Kyle Lohse (who has struggled lately) and John Smoltz (who is barely hanging onto his career).

The Dodgers are going with two lefthanders in the first two games -- Randy Wolf and Clayton Kershaw. That's significant because the Cardinals do not hit lefties well. The team surprisingly announced today that Vicente Padilla will start Game 3 of the series. Rumors of Padilla being a clubhouse cancer were greatly exaggerated. He's pitched pretty well for the Dodgers, going 4-0 with a 3.20 ERA. That being said, neither him, nor Kershaw figure to pitch deeply in games. Perhaps no Dodger starting pitcher has greater questions surrounding him than Chad Billingsley who will start Game 4. I've been one of Billingsley's biggest defenders, but I can't explain his sudden and sharp collapse in the second half after being named an All-Star in July. Still, Billingsley has the talent, his last start was respectable, and he should have plenty of motivation in the postseason. We can only hope he comes through.

All season the Dodgers have gotten 5-6 innings from their starting pitchers and then turned it over to one of the best and deepest bullpens in baseball. George Sherill has been excellent in the 8th inning, and Jonathan Broxton is as tough to hit as anyone in the 9th. If guys like Ronald Belisario, Ramon Troncoso, and James McDonald can be stable, the Dodger pitching should be OK.

St. Louis' bullpen is filled with plenty of no-names who have mostly pitched well. Their closer Ryan Franklin had a stunningly good year, but a lot of sabermetricians think his luck is going to run out.

Both of these teams have veteran managers who are among the all-time leaders in postseason games managed. Joe Torre is known for keeping his teams mentally strong while Tony LaRussa has made many smart strategic moves over the years.

I've been one of the biggest defenders of the Dodgers this season. I felt like most of the criticism levied against them was unwarranted and unfounded, and I've often been appalled at the glee with which local media members have bashed them. That being said, I can't ignore what I've seen the past few weeks with the Dodgers. While there is no evidence that momentum means anything entering the postseason, I don't like the way the Dodgers are playing, and I'm going to pick the Cardinals to win the series.

Angels vs. Red Sox

The Angels have never beaten the Red Sox in a playoff series, going back to 1986 and the famed Donny Moore-Dave Henderson plate appearance. More relevantly, the Red Sox have beaten the Angels in postseason in 2004, 2007 and 2008. Is this the year the Angels come through? I think so.

The Angels have been playing with a great deal of inspiration in honor the late Nick Adenhart. But also, the reason why the Angels have struggled in the postseason is their lack of offense. The Halos will bring their best lineup into the postseason since 2002. Kendry Morales has been the home grown power hitter that they've been searching for. Their young infielders -- Erick Aybar, Maicer Izturis, and Howie Kendrick -- have all been good lately, while Chone Figgins gets on base and has speed. Bob Abreu was a shrewd addition in the outfield and Torii Hunter has had a pretty good year. Juan Rivera swings at a lot of bad balls, but he has power. And while Vladimir Guerrero isn't what he used to be, he's carried his weight since he came back from injury.

The Red Sox lineup is fantastic, and will not lay down against the Angels. Kevin Youkilis is one of the best hitters in baseball and Dustin Pedroia is a reigning MVP. David Ortiz has improved since his atrocious start and Jason Bay is as good as anyone in the outfield. Victor Martinez was also a nice addition.

The difference in this series for me is the pitching. Both Jon Lester and Josh Beckett are phenomenal pitchers, but both suffered late-season injuries, and it remains to be seen if they'll be at full strength. It's hard to believe that a team with a $120 million payroll will make Clay Bucholz their No. 3 postseason starter, but after spending much of the year in the minors, the young Bucholz will get the call. It looks like the Red Sox will go with Lester on short rest in Game 4 rather than going to hobbled pitcher Daisuke Matsuzaka. The Red Sox bullpen is a certainly a hodgepodge of characters after Jonathan Papelbon.

The Angels pitching staff is kind of weird. John Lackey, Jered Weaver, Scott Kazmir, and Joe Saunders are all talented pitchers who have all gone through ups and downs this year. But I think they'll come through, especially since the Halos will use two lefties at Fenway Park.

The Angels bullpen is arguably their biggest concern. Brian Fuentes led the AL in saves, but he's hardly lights out. All of the Angels top middle relievers imploaded early in the season, giving way to unproven commodities like Kevin Jepsen and Jason Bulger. No one knew who Francisco Rodriguez was when he dominated for the Angels in the 2002 postseason. I don't think we'll get that out of Jepsen and Bulger, but they're not terrible either.

Overall, I see the Angels going to the ALCS and facing the Yankees, against whom the Halos match up well.