My Top Ten Bond Girls

I have always been a huge fan of James Bond. The creator of Bond, writer Ian Fleming, created a character that displays brashness, intelligence, imagination,and ruthlessness, yet still shows us a softer human side of 007. The always interesting aspect in the Bond movies are The Bond girls. All individually displayed pieces of James Bond's personality, but all very different. Bond Girls are not only beautiful, but are smart, witty, funny, and bad asses. Thinking of that, I wanted to share my personal top 10 Bond Girls of all time. 

10. Miranda Frost as Rosamund Pike (Die Another Day 2002)
She plays a double crossing MI6 agent who does whatever is necessary to get what she wants.She is beautiful, smart, and very good with swords. The fight scene with Jinx(Halle Berry) at the end doesn't hurt her stock either.

9.Lois Chiles as Holly Goodhead (Moonraker 1979)

First of all, any beautiful woman with the last name Goodhead is a lock in the top 10. And besides being beautiful, she was a NASA trained astrophysicist who worked for the CIA. Sexy nerds are always attractive. 

8.Famke Janssen as Xenia Onotopp
(Golden Eye 1995)


Using sex as her favorite weapon, this sexy killer who also gained sexual pleasure from killing had an amazing talent of suffocating her victims with her thighs. Lord Have Mercy !

7.Barbara Bach as Maj.Anya Amasova (The Spy Who Loved Me 1977) 
Sexy Russian spy competing with Bond for a secret microfilm is all good and fine.She was Agent XXX !  What else needs to be said ?





6.Jill St. John as Tiffany Case (Diamonds Are Forever 1971) 


The Beautiful Jill St. John plays a greedy smuggler for the evil Blofeld. In many attempts on her life she definitely holds her own an ultimately helps Bond in tracking down smuggled diamonds. 






5.Michelle Yeoh as Wai Lin (Tomorrow Never Dies 1997)

Not only beautiful, but this Bond girl shows her strengths using her martial arts background as she poses as a Chinese journalist. Not to mention her shower scene with Bond was pretty sexy. 

4.Maud Adams as Octopussy,Andre Anders 

(The Man With The Golden Gun 1974,

 Octopussy 1983, View To Kill 1985) 

Maud has always been a very beautiful woman, and she displays that even more at the age of 38 in her role in Octopussy. Cunning , and smart, her character uses a different type of weapon to get what she wants. Seduction. The fact she is in three Bond movies, two with major roles and one as an extra, that alone puts her on my list. 

3.Halle Berry as Jinx (Die Another Day 2002)

I don't know if there are any real words that describe how beautiful Halle Berry is.Her character was average in this film, but when u have looks like that who cares ! She's sexy, holds on her on in fights, is sassy, while still making it known to us that she's a woman. All woman ! 

2.Ursula Andress as Honey Ryder (Dr. No 1962)

Berry in the 3rd spot brought back this beauties breathtaking scene walking out of the water in a tiny retro bikini. Honey practically invented The Bond Girl and will always be considered the trend setter.

1.Honor Blackman as Pussy Galore (Goldfinger 1964)

This is my #1 Bond Girl of all-time. The name alone pretty much makes it a done deal. Other than "Pussy Galore" the name, she does beat down James Bond. She's smart, she's sexy, and doesn't need to strut around naked to be noticed(wishful thinking).

Healthcare for NFL Retirees Is Not About Owing

The class-action complaint presented by a group of retired players in Federal District Court in Minneapolis against the teams, the NFL, the Brady v. N.F.L. Players association, and DeMaurice Smith is not as threatening or vicious as it seems. The suit claims the current players and the association are "conspiring to depress the amounts of pension and disability benefits to be paid to former NFL players in order to maximize the salaries and benefits to current NFL players." This weekend Sporting News Radio host Peter Brown spoke on why retired players feel like they are owed money from current players and the league. He specifically noted that it's not the current players fault retired players didn't put money away, were to busy buying cars and houses, living the extravagant lifestyle and even compared the incomes of household Americans to NFL players salaries  Although I understand the angle Mr. Brown was taking, In my opinion it is a misrepresentation of what is really the issue.

First and foremost, I am a fan of Sporting News Radio host Peter Brown. I listen to him often and appreciate his views and opinions on the many different topics he covers. He has a vast amount of knowledge and often produces credible facts to support his opinions. In respect to Mr.Brown I think he missed the overall picture of why the suit was filed. If you do or don't know, I am a former player in the NFL of 11 years. I do consider the ramifications of the damage that has been done to my body, and I signed up for it knowing those risks. I also have no regrets about it. 

The suit was not filed by the retired players to specify they are owed something. It was filed on the premis they have been excluded from negotiations  specifically to issues dealing with them as a whole. To some degree they have validity considering the District Court combined the retired players suit with the Brady suit. I am not fully aware of all laws pertaining to this subject, however, logic would tell me that if the suits are combined then the retired players should be allowed representation at the negotiations as well. In my opinion, the retired players should be represented apart from the NFLPA by the Retired Players Association anyway. It is ridiculous to think that retired players and their well being would be at the forefront or even the middle of present collective bargaining agreements. For those of you that don't know, the NFL is a cut throat business. With the exception of a small group of people, no one really cares, no one has loyalty. It is also sensible to understand the feelings behind the suit as they watch owners and players argue over 9 billion dollars and wonder what portion if any are they to receive. 

Brown brought up the point why NFL players or profesional athletes should be any different from the average American. I couldn't agree with him more. For example, the average American can file for workers comp, NFL players can not. Average Americans are able to work in the state they live in,relocate elsewhere for a specific duty, regardless of the length of time, and are only taxed in the state which they work. In the NFL, every state a player sets foot in, even for two days, they are taxed in those states and in the state of their employer. Another example is UPS. If an employee is injured, they pay for  medical expenses for maximum recovery of the employee, lost wages, and LIFETIME medical benefits for the pertained injury. Also, if an employee is not able to return and work in the current position because of the injury, UPS will pay to retrain the employee for a different position in the company or a different field of work all together. Based on that information I would certainly think professional athletes would not want to be any different. The expected response to my points of course will always be "professional athletes make millions of dollars." Of course some do, but not as much as one would think. That's another topic for another time. 

Another point Brown expressed was the comparing of NFL player salaries to salaries of the average American in 1960. There is no one determinant of what players and the average American salary is or was, especially during that time. Data collecting and sources are no where near as accurate or as credible as now. Those numbers are skewed on both fronts because there is always a small percentage of either players or employees in corporations that change that number dramatically. Even now, if the average American salary is $70K, realistically that number is more like $35K because CEO's like Lloyd Blankfein collect salaries and bonuses of $100 million dollars in a years time. In my opinion using that as a determinate of the gap in salaries can't be fully supported. Think about this, supposedly the average player salary in the 1950's was $6000, the minimum starting in 1970 was $9000. Because of possible inaccurate  information, the number in 1960 can't be fully supported. 

In my opinion, both the retired and the current players should be united on this front. It has already been determined that money will be set aside for retired players, but what is important is the actual number itself. Whatever is decided for retired players now vastly affects the current players who will retire in the future. The healthcare system in place now has only increased for what it costs for medical care. There have been great advancements in technology and medicine, but the reality for now is it will only increase. The current players will have injuries and ailments just like myself and many other former players. For the risks players endure for this game, for families, fans, and the owners, it should definitely be addressed. If the league continues to use the likeness of players both former and present, and continue to be adamant about how players of the past fought and contributed to the growth of the NFL, then putting in place something that helps them with healthcare should not be an issue. Retired players are not owed, it was earned. 

Refuse To Be Silent

Those of you that know me, for the most part understand where I coming from. I'm usually pretty opinionated about certain topics, but I pose the following question. As a professional athlete, should I be as opinionated or as outspoken as I am ? There seems to be a weird dynamic among the public about athletes speaking out on issues. They pay to see athletes play but do not want to hear them speak their minds or have opinions on some issues.


Recently former NY Giant wide receiver David Tyree was very outspoken about his views on gay marriage. Tyree's view and opinion of the matter is not the subject, but should he have spoken out in general is.Many individuals who follow sports are very hypocritical. They want us to be "role models", be good fathers, leaders, mentors, love our country, and stand for things. However, when the athlete speaks out, these same individuals call he or she spoiled, not in touch with the real world, and at times unintelligent. This leads me to wonder what their definition of "role model" is. If those are the labels projected on athletes then why the need to be silent and walk around emotionally enslaved ? If the athlete is unknowledgeable of the issue being discussed, by all means it should not be spoken on, but if they are, whether they lived it or researched it in some form or fashion then it is appropriate for them to have an opinion about it. 

For instance, what if Curt Flood had not spoken up for free agency in baseball, Arthur Ashe had not spoken out against South Africa's aparthied policies, or Billy Jean King speaking up for equality and women's rights. These were all critical social issues and they made their voices heard. They were not robots, they did not walk around devoid of conscious. All made themselves heard and spoke intelligently on what they believed in.


In the present day, many athletes of this magnitude do not exist. No one speaks out or has an opinion as our athletic ancestors did. Why won't Tiger or Jordan be more outspoken and opinionated openly ? Obviously as humans our personality traits are different, but at some point everyone either has a need or needs to say something at some time on some issue. So pertaining to the athlete of today, are they only concerned with contracts and endorsement deals ? Is it the scrutiny or repercussions they could face when taking the opportunity to speak out ? Or, the lack of knowledge in general. In my opinion these reasons exist, but everything an athlete says now is planned or programmed. It's almost insulting because it feeds into the "dumb jock" label which isn't always the case. 

Athletes should be able to speak out on issues sports related or not. Just like the every day working man or woman, athletes have rights to society as well. Being a professional athlete does not diminish nor take away the social contract we as humans have. That does not mean speak without substance or validity, it means having knowledge of a situation, be able to articulate it, and express it in a manner where people can understand. I'm aware some individuals lack the skills or the confidence to do this, but just like shooting jumpers, or throwing passes, it too has to be practiced. I am in favor of athletes speaking out more. I think it adds a critical and influential element to society.


"I try to be as honest about what I see and to speak rather than be silent, especially if it means I can save lives, or serve humanity." Sandra Cisneros