OF COURSE, STUDIO 60 WAS THE FIRST SHOW TO GET A BACK 9 PICKUP ITS SEASON: Given that we're a mere three weeks into the fall TV season and already have had two cancellations (one disappointing but not surprising, and one that I didn't even bother watching), it's surprising that it took till today to get our first official back 9 pickup. The winner in that sweepstakes is, surprisingly, not the top-rated new show (Hawaii Five-O) or even the top-rated sitcom (Mike & Molly), but Fox's Raising Hope. With that, it's time to make your allegiance known--what have you tried and picked up or decided to drop from the new season? For me, the pickups are:

• Hawaii Five-O--Solid procedural, and Scott Caan in particular is delivering a fine comic performance, even if Alex O'Loughlin is a charisma vacuum. I've also liked how the show's iconic catchphrase has been given a clever/taunting turn, though they need to be careful not to overuse it.
  
• Running Wilde--Given the pedigree, expectations were stratospheric among critics and AD fans, and it's been a bit of a mixed bag, but this week's finally seemed to be clicking, particularly with the running joke about Steve's science tutors. (I tried the first couple of Raising Hopes, but it kind of left me cold. Seemed like a pale retread of Garcia's last show.)
  
• No Ordinary Family--Still in testing mode for me, but I'm just happy to see a superhero show that has a sense of fun and joy and isn't all mopey, even if "ability to understand really complicated math problems" is the lamest superpower this side of Aquaman. In particular, Romany Malco and Autumn Reeser's sidekick characters are a lot of fun.
  
• Better With You--The jokes haven't been great thus far, but the performers (with the exception of the youngest guy) are all exceedingly likable, and I can identify with the situation.
  
• Outlaw--Mostly, just to see if it can get any more implausible.
  

Had it not been canned, I would have picked up Lone Star. Sampled for potential pickup purposes and rejected The Event (great production values, pretty cast, but seemed to be little more than chain-yanking without interesting characters), The Whole Truth (almost as implausible as Outlaw, but not nearly as ridiculous/fun), and L&O:LA (may watch from time to time, but L&O needs more "chung-chung" and less TMZ).

ELEVEN TO GO:  As the rabbis explain, each of the three recitations of the Kol Nidre chant on Yom Kippur is a bit different:

The first time he must utter it very softly like one who hesitates to enter the palace of the king to ask a gift of him whom he fears to approach; the second time he may speak somewhat louder; and the third time more loudly still, as one who is accustomed to dwell at court and to approach his sovereign as a friend.

And so it is with the Phillies and the playoffs.  The first time, against Colorado in 2007, we were giddy and thrilled to have snuck in on the last day.  By the fourth time around, and with one WFC belt already, the city is full of confidence and swagger and no one expects less than a third straight return to the World Series.

But it's not just repetition that provides confidence.  This team may not have scored quite as many runs as its predecessors (though injuries have played a part), but it's given up far fewer.  Having Two Roys and the Boy on the mound for potentially 17 of 19 playoff starts is a weapon that we've never had before -- indeed, you have to go back at least to the mid-aughts Astros of Clemens-Oswalt-Pettite to find any team that had starting pitching like this for a playoff run.  Moreover, it's the way they won the division crown this year with that blisteringly-awesome (yet Rollins-free) stretch run that makes me believe that on my 38th birthday, November 3, I'm either going to need my World Series Game Six ticket or I'll be at a parade.  As the 700 Level suggests, Welcome to Doctober:

The postseason in South Philly is where Brett Myers walked and Shane Victorino hit a grand slam. It's where Joe Blanton hits home runs. It's where Pat Burrell's final Philly swing sent one bouncing off the high wall in center. It's where Brad Lidge remained perfect. It's where Harry called the game of his life and Wheels celebrated like Wheels. It's where "Get me to the plate boys!" happened. It's where "Jimmmmmmmy!" was born. It's where Chase Utley joins the likes of Reggie Jackson. It's where championship pipe dreams become a reality.

The games simply mean more in the postseason. As the ticket gods may have it, the people who appreciate that meaning tend to, one way or another, find their ways into Citizens Bank Park when it matters most.

And they will get loud.

[Predictions: Phillies in 3, Giants in 5, Twins in 5, Rays in 4.]

THE FLORRICKGIRL VIDEO: I would like to believe that the Smoke Monster is a smart enough State's Attorney that he won't keep assigning Cary to prosecute every single case defended by Lockhart/Gardner, especially if he keeps losing like this. Add to that the unreality of the alleged conflicts situation (although if you're going to double-down on the random cameos, Joe Trippi's a nice step from Vernon Jordan), and you've got an episode of The Good Wife that's a bit low on the legal realism if high, as always, on the fun details -- Will Gardner as Chicago's 16th most eligible bachelor, a military judge on The Cleanse, the aforementioned video (which I hope will be released in full) and the return of Zach's shit-stirring techie girlfriend Becca.  Yes, I like this show.

TWO GREAT TASTES THAT ... Y'KNOW, I DON'T WANT TO FIND OUT:  Thanks to joking references on the show iCarly, our children may want us to serve them spaghetti in ... tacos?

THANKS TO RICK SANCHEZ, IT ONLY TAKES ONE MORE FOR THIS TO BE AN OFFICIAL TREND:  A caller to a Tampa radio station asks whether the only reason James Shields is starting in the Division Series** is because he, like the owners, is Jewish.  (He's not.)

** This post originally called it the "LDS," but that's way confusing.

GOD IS IN THE DETAILS: I should have posted this 12 or 16 hours ago, but let me pose a question: About what do you care less: Robin's bland, generic ex-boyfriend Don, or Ted's career as a (lousy*) architect?

*Why can't the show just spend a couple grand to have an actual architect draw up an imaginary building, or even just buy the right to use some conceptual drawing from some architecture grad student? It's one thing to show Lily's crappy paintings (while acknowledging that they're crappy). It's quite another to make Ted's love of and genius at architecture the A-plot of several episodes while trotting out a dumbed-down version of a tacky 1982 tax writeoff disguising as an Omaha office tower as Ted's signature building, or to show the nonsense that Ted spews when he teaches his class or holds forth with his friends about his supposed passion. I don't mind when shows are offhandedly unrealistic about their characters' jobs (which 60 hours of the week is Marshall working?), but when they're making the jobs an important part of the plot, they need to follow the West Wing Directive and to avoid the Studio 60 Disproof: If you're going to tell us how brilliant a character is at something, you either need to nail it onscreen or keep it offscreen in its entirety.

GENTLY, WITH A CHAIN SAW:  Back in 12th grade, we each had to "teach" one session of our health class, and so my friend Craig and I asked if we could combine our responsibilities over two classes and show our classmates a recent film about teen suicide, and since he said yes we just popped the R-rated Heathers into the VCR and completed our curricular responsibilities.  We thought we were really cool.

Flash forward to 2010, and skip past the overstated objections to Schindler's List and Saving Private Ryan for their nudity and violence to find out that in the Philadelphia suburbs, they were showing Larry Clark's unrated Kids in high school Health and Sexuality classes?

Looking through the catalog of R-rated films being shown (as compiled by the objecting parents), there's very little that I wouldn't let a 16- or 17-year old see.  I think it's silly to complain about using Frost/Nixon for AP American History just because it "contains one use of 'motherfucker', and a few uses of 'fuck'" as well as "occasional mild coarse language" like "prick"?  Or objecting to the use of the first twenty minutes of There Will Be Blood to illustrate Western expansion?  That's more than a stretch.

Still, including films like Kids and Glengarry Glen Ross (for 11th grade English, in conjunction with Death of a Salesman) in the curriculum feels a bit gratuitous. Or maybe I'm just become a prude prematurely.