The ending to the epic extravaganza that was Avengers: Endgame left us with more questions than answers regarding what the future held for the heroes of the Marvel Cinematic Universe, including who (if anyone) would be a suitable replacement for the late, great Iron Man as the face of the franchise. I saw Captain Marvel's name brought up in a few different places, which I understood based off how successful her solo film was earlier this year, but she didn't feel well suited for the role in my opinion.

Spider-Man, on the other hand, definitely did, especially given his ties to Tony Stark from his first film in 2017 as well as their interactions in Infinity War and Endgame. It honestly only made sense for the torch to be passed to Peter Parker after the emotional passing of Stark at the conclusion of Endgame. If you saw Spider-Man: Far From Home (and if you haven't by now, why the hell not?), then you would know it certainly looked like Marvel was headed in that direction. Obviously, Iron Man wasn't technically in the movie, but he might as well have been considering there were so many references to him throughout.

Coming off last week's heartbreaking news that Spider-Man is out the MCU effective immediately, Spidey being pushed to the forefront of the MCU no longer appears to be a possibility.

In case you haven't heard, Sony and Disney have decided to part ways when it comes to their shared "custody" (so to speak) of Spider-Man. Their agreement dates as far back as 2015 when the two sides came together to make a deal happen that would see Spider-Man officially join the MCU, despite being property of Sony. The first two Spider-Man sagas, albeit financially successfully and beloved by a notable contingent of fans, didn't exactly light the world on fire. In other words, there were reasons why the franchises were rebooted after two or three movies.

Sony struck gold with Tom Holland as Spider-Man, who made his debut as the character in Captain American: Civil War in 2016. He went on to have his own film, Spider-Man: Homecoming, the following year before appearing in Avengers: Infinity War and Avengers: Endgame. The sequel to his solo film, Far From Home, was released this summer to rave reviews and brought in over one billion dollars worldwide.

Therefore, it shouldn't come as any surprise that Disney wanted a bigger chunk of the change. Reportedly, Sony was making most of the money from their own movies, but considering they produced and distributed them (among other things), it only made sense for them to profit off the films over Disney by a wide margin. Disney didn't see it that way and wanted 50 percent of all profits moving forward. Sony declined and understandably so, leading to the all-but-confirmed removal of Spider-Man from the MCU.

Regardless of who's to blame here (personally, I side with Sony), this news hits hard for a lot of fans who have enjoyed Holland's rendition of the character in recent years. Of course, he will continue to sport the suit as long as he wants (he's still signed on to do another movie or two I believe), but the idea that he can no longer reference Iron Man, the Avengers, or anything Marvel-related in the movies going forward is incredibly asinine. All of those things have been such a major part of the development of his character that to pretend like they never happened is ridiculous.

Unfortunately, Sony may not have any other choice if Disney doesn't want to play ball fairly. As expected, this resulted in plenty of outrage online in the days that followed. There were a number of fans from what I saw that had zero interest in sticking with Spider-Man as a Sony-exclusive property, probably because they were under the assumption that the movies would be garbage without Marvel's creative direction. While that could very well end up being the case, let's not get ahead of ourselves.

As entertaining as Iron Man and the rest of the Marvel characters were in Homecoming and Far From Home, the real star of those movies was Holland as Spider-Man. We can debate all day long if he's the best or the worst Spider-Man the silver screen has ever seen (or somewhere in between), but he made those movies a lot of fun, and I'm sure that will continue to be the case with or without Marvel. That said, I'm gutted we won't be able to see him interact with any of the Marvel characters in the future unless a miracle occurs.

Speaking of miracles, many fans (myself included) thought Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 3 was a lost cause after Disney fired director James Gunn last year for controversial comments he made online years ago. He was ultimately brought back into the fold in March 2019 and will be a part of the third installment of the Guardians franchise in a few years. It's worth noting that was a totally different circumstance and that this particular instance requires both companies to come to terms on something that seems impossible, but hey, it's happened before, so try not to lose faith quite yet.

I've become a big fan of the MCU since Avengers was released seven years ago and have loved seeing Spider-Man share the screen with so many major superheroes for the first time ever. His departure from the MCU is without a doubt disheartening, but that's no reason to crap on Sony or the Spider-Man franchise moving forward. I fully believe that the films will continue to be exciting and enjoyable, no matter whether Marvel is involved or not (though that would be a plus). Should Sony at some point reboot the Spider-Man franchise all over again (the fourth time in almost 20 years), then we'll have problems.

On the bright side, maybe this means a Spider-Man/Venom crossover isn't too far off. I, for one, would absolutely love to see those two worlds finally come together, but only time will tell.

For the first time in 15 years, the New York Mets clinched the National League pennant and advanced to the World Series in 2015, only to suffer a five-game loss to the Kansas City Royals. Despite the lackluster finish, the Mets had a fantastic season that year, boasting a star-studded roster featuring the illustrious likes of Jacob deGrom, Curtis Granderson, Matt Harvey, Lucas Duda and Noah Syndergaard. Although they were unsuccessful in taking home the title, they appeared to have a promising future ahead of them, especially if the nucleus of the team managed to stay healthy.

Unfortunately, it was all downhill for them from there, and they have yet to recover. So, what exactly went wrong?

​First and foremost, the biggest issue that plagued the Mets one year removed from their close call in the World Series was the plethora of injures. Their strengths with pitching and offense weren't enough to make up for those they lost, resulting in an overall record of 87-75 and second place in the NL East. That isn't too shabby considering the circumstances, but their record of 70-92 from 2017 was nothing short of abysmal (largely thanks to Harvey, Syndergaard and Zack Wheeler all having to miss time).

Coming off a disappointing 2017 season that saw the team sit seven games below .500 by the summer, the Mets were then expected to bounce back the following year when Duda was traded to the Tampa Bay Rays. They also eventually added standout AJ Ramos from the Marlins to their ranks and brought up their No. 1 prospect shortstop Amed Rosario.

The 2018 season have promise on paper but turned out to be a total disaster. They started out strong with an 11-1 record, but between batting out of order for a game against the Reds, trading away Harvey (who was once a mega star for them), and general manager Sandy Alderson taking a leave of absence to undergo cancer treatment, nothing seemed to be going their way.

The Mets' less-than-stellar win-loss records in recent years haven't been a terribly encouraging sign that they'd be back on the right track any time soon. Interestingly enough, they finished out the second half of the 2018 season with a .559 winning percentage, which was marginally better than the NL East division winners the Atlanta Braves' (.556), per Dylan Smith of Call to the Pen.

With many changes being made to the roster over the course of the winter and a number of notable All-Stars being brought in, Mets fans entered 2019 hopeful that the team could finally break their three-year streak of falling below .500 and return to their 2015 glory.

It wasn't long until a handful of players got hurt and hindered any momentum the team may have had. The injured include Yoenis Cespedes, Luis Avilan, Jed Lowrie, Steven Matz, Jason Vargas, Drew Smith, and Jeurys Familia.

Collectively, that's a big blow to the Mets' roster, but that still leaves deGrom, Syndergaard, and Wheeler, who can serve as the backbone of the team for the remainder of the season. Health is of the utmost importance, and so far, the 2019 season hasn't been greatest for Mets fans in that regard. They can try to make the most of who they have, however, assuming they can hold on to them through the end of the year.

For as valuable of an asset as Syndergaard has been to the Mets, one has to wonder whether he's too good for the team. He is early on in his career and can try to get the Mets back to the heights they haven't reached since 2015, but he could also be better off signing with the Yankees if he feels he's hit a ceiling with the Mets.

Yahoo! Sports reported that the Yankees are eyeing Syndergaard as a possible trade target this summer. That'd be huge void for the Mets to fill if they were to lose him, so in addition to their players staying healthy, the powers that be must ensure that they keep Syndergaard (and all of their other elite athletes) under contract so this rebuilding phase for the Mets can continue.

Despite arguably being the ace of the Mets, Syndergaard doesn't come close to leading the list of Mets' highest paid players. The top spot is occupied by veteran second baseman Robinson Cano. He got hit on the back of his left hand last month but thankfully missed only two games. Although he's a proven commodity and has done well with the Mets this year, the real key to success for the team will be Cespedes' return to the field.

Cespedes is one of the few players who helped the Mets get to the World Series in 2015 in the first place. His absence from the team due to injuries has undoubtedly been felt, as he hasn't been around full-time since the 2016 season. The Mets have suffered significantly as a result, so a speedy recovery for La Potencia is all fans can hope for.

Attendance at Citi Field for the Mets is down roughly seven thousand people on average since 2016, a stat that presumably has to do with the team's recent slump. But with the right pieces in place, a rock solid defense and a healthy roster, 2020 just might be the year the Mets become amazing again.

Well, it's official. According to ComingSoon.net, Daniel Craig is set to reprise his role as James Bond to star in Bond 25 (a.k.a. the 25th film in the franchise). Of course, you might be thinking to yourself, "Wasn't that already implied?" It actually wasn't at one point, with rumors running rampant following the release of Spectre in 2015 that Craig was done with the 007 movies due to wanting to focus on other projects.

That was why it seemingly took so long for this announcement to be made, but I'm glad they waited for Craig to be available for filming as opposed to rushing the process and casting someone else instead. After all, as noted, this is going to be the 25th Bond film and thus it should be a big deal. I don't think this would be the best movie to introduce someone new as James Bond anyway, but there's nothing stopping this upcoming installment from being Craig's last in the role. That said, I surely hope it isn't.

I'm well aware that the original 007 movies are considered classics by many, and they are absolutely excellent films, but I was a little late to the party and admittedly didn't fall in love with the franchise until the release of Skyfall in 2012. I saw Quantum of Solace in theaters in 2008, but I don't remember much about it at all. Skyfall, to me, told a sensational story and was one of my favorite films of 2012, along with The Dark Knight Rises and The Avengers. I thoroughly enjoyed Bond's backstory being told and the acting of everyone involved, especially Javier Bardem as the main villain.

Its sequel, Spectre was also quite good, though not as strong as Skyfall. Part of me actually hoped after Skyfall that it would be the final installment in the franchise, if only because it ended on such a perfect note, but I'm happy the movies are continuing to come out and this next one should be great as well and worth the wait. I (along with many others) would argue that Sean Connery is the best Bond, but Craig would have to be my favorite, simply based off how much I loved his last two appearances in the role. Needless to say, I'm stoked he's sticking around for this next installment. Here's hoping he'll be back in many more films after that one, too.

I don't consider myself a "professional" writer by any means, but I'd like to think I know a thing or two about putting pen to paper and stringing words together well enough to create a compelling piece of work.

There are many, many questions I'm often asked by people I encounter regularly in regards to writing: Is it difficult for me? Why do I enjoy it and spend so much time doing it? When did my fascination with it start? Would I ever consider doing it for other people? The answer to that last one is no, by the way, so don't bother asking me to write (or "look over") your end-of-the-semester paper for you because I will vehemently turn your lazy ass down every single time.

Above all else, I'm asked what time of day is best for writing. Personally, I'm always writing, so the time of day doesn't matter too much to me and it obviously differs from person to person. But if I absolutely had to choose, I would go with the nighttime without hesitation. Hell, it's past midnight as I type this very sentence, and it isn't uncommon for me to write whole articles at a time before bed when I originally planned on writing a single sentence.

I could write an entire blog post about the importance of sleep and where I stand (and I actually did several years ago, which you can feel free to read here). Long story short, though, it virtually doesn't matter when I go to bed; as long as I'm able to receive my eight hours uninterrupted, I'm perfectly content. That's why I have no problem staying up from time to time if it means not interrupting my flow as a writer and risk ruining it by waiting until the morning.

Here's a semi-relevant small side story. On Friday, April 1, 2016, I had walked back to my dorm room around 10:30 p.m. after spending the evening at a friend's place watching NXT TakeOver: Dallas. My roommate was away for the weekend, and I decided to spend the rare opportunity wisely... by staying up until 5 a.m. (no joke) compiling story after story of events I'd experienced from my childhood through my high school career. I couldn't take that turn off the never-ending Memory Lane! It was only after I realized what time it was (and that I still had so much left to do that weekend ahead of WrestleMania 32) that I called it a night.

I totally understand the opposition to the argument I posed two paragraphs ago: "Dude, I worked all day and my body is killing me. I just want to rest, relax and sleep! Writing doesn't afford me any of those things!" I do admit that writing while sleeping is practically impossible, but who said you can't write while resting and relaxing? For some, it's an arduous process: typing, deleting what they wrote, typing up something new, and then deleting that, too. For others, it can also be an arduous process, but there's simply something satisfying about getting your thoughts down on paper (or a virtual document, I suppose) and emptying your head of them once and for all.

Isn't that what we do as we prepare to fall asleep, anyway? I couldn't tell you how many times I've laid my head down on the pillow and only then does every conceivable thought ever race through my mind and prevent me from drifting into a slumber. There's so many things I want to do or didn't get a chance to do that day! Then again, that could solely be me because I hate being the type of person that has nothing going on or isn't doing something productive at all times.

Regardless of what you're writing about or who you're writing for (it can be yourself), writing is an amazing remedy for scoring sleep.

There's an old saying that nothing good ever happens after midnight, and I could not disagree with that statement more. I have found that you'll conjure up some of your most original ideas ever after midnight (or at least once everybody else is fast asleep). That's because you'll have the house to yourself, as well as your own thoughts and peace of mind. Quiet can be peaceful and eliminate all distractions if you take advantage of it. That's what I am doing as we speak (update from earlier: it is almost 2 a.m. and I'm contemplating wrapping this up tomorrow, so if the rest of this post isn't as strong as everything you've read up to this point, that's why).

If you're tired and sleep deprived, the last thing you'll want to do is sit in front of a computer and type away for a few minutes/hours. I wouldn't recommend it if you have to be up early the next morning or are functioning off minimal sleep, but when that moon comes across the sky and you're left to your own devices, you are at your most alert and your mind is clear! So, what will you be creating tonight?

Whatever it is, it just might be the best thing you've written yet (final update: I decided against going to sleep and instead stayed up to see this article through, so I'm happy to report I took my own advice!).

I'm not even going to pretend to know what I'm talking about when it comes to YouTube personalities and celebrities, but you had to have been living under a rock (or at least not be on social media) to not hear about the Logan Paul controversy that transpired earlier this week in what I would argue is 2018's first major viral story. If you don't know who Logan Paul is, you're not alone, because I know very little about him myself, aside from how he's a famous daily vlogger with over 15 million subscribers on YouTube.

He ran into some trouble during one of his most recent daily vlogs where he filmed himself in a Japanese forest that is infamous for hosting suicides. He would have had to have been a complete idiot to not be aware of that before entering the forest, so don't think for a second that the fact the camera was rolling was a coincidence. He knew he was bound to see something as long as he was in that forest, and ultimately, that was exactly what happened.

Long story short, he encountered a dead body hanging from a tree, which he didn't blur out terribly well in his video. He acted shocked at the sight of the person who seemingly committed suicide, before proceeding to laugh and make jokes about the situation. Needless to say, this was not okay, and to post that at all was insanely stupid. He received plenty of backlash from the online community and subsequently removed the video from YouTube before issuing multiple apologies on Twitter and YouTube.

In so many words, he didn't think twice before posting that video. Perhaps he thought it would be a great way to generate views without realizing how bad the reaction was going to be. Whether it was intentional or not, there is that lesson to be learned here, and it can happen to anyone. No, I'm not defending his actions. In fact, I think what he did was quite deplorable, especially considering it involved a dead body and it was extremely disrespectful to that person and their family. That said, everyone can learn a thing or two from this: social media must be used wisely.

The internet is a place where you can find plenty of entertaining and sometimes inspirational content. Unfortunately, there is a lot of hateful stuff out there as well, which should be avoided at all costs. I would lump this in there with the negative part of the internet considering because it didn't send a positive message of any kind and it was absolutely offensive to anyone who has ever struggled with depression. Getting help to deal with depression is something else entirely, but how you go about using social media is what I want to focus on in this post.

Okay, so you might not be filming a dead body and posting it to YouTube, but you can still do stupid stuff with the simple click of a button on Facebook, Twitter, Instagram or wherever. There should be several things you think about before pressing that "Post" or "Submit" or "Send" button, though. This includes who it is affecting. You could be bashing someone directly (or even indirectly), or making a broad statement to the world. It may feel like the cool thing to do in the moment, but more often than not, you're going to regret it later, and some people never forget.

We're all guilty of it at one point or another. I know that I wasn't the wisest when it came to social media when I first started using it close to a decade ago. I did it to let off steam, and in most cases, it was harmless. Other times, I went out of my way to target people, not thinking about how it would hurt them or that they would see it. Because it's the internet, I thought I would be fine within the confines of my computer screen. Cyber-bullying is another issue entirely as well, but it all falls under the umbrella of things that should be contemplated before they are executed.

I personally believe there are many more pros to social media than cons, especially how instantaneous it can be. That's wonderful for receiving and sending information, but people tend to post stuff without thinking about the potential consequences it can have. If nothing else, that was my biggest takeaway from this whole ordeal with Logan Paul. You can forgive him or not, but on the bright side, let his actions be an example of how a mistake made on social media can ruin a reputation and hurt many people. This could have been prevented had he thought twice about posting that video.