Editors' note: Every week, these two idiots will play a Pick 'Em NFL game. The object is for each editor to pick four seemingly even NFL matchups from the upcoming weekend, challenging the other pick to the winners. A running record will be tallied. Feel free to play along at home. Leave comments with your own picks if you want to go on the record.
Standings (Week 11 in parenthesis)
Ian 19-13 (1-3)
Saj 14-18 (3-1)
Week 11 was my first sub .500 week of the season. Some might argue I'm losing my touch. Others might argue I never had touch to begin with. I argue that all three of my losses that week were flukes. To each his own.
Time to get back on the wagon. Saj, your picks for the weekend:
Atlanta at Washington (Sunday, 1:00)
Houston at Oakland (Sunday, 4:05)
Miami at Jacksonville (Sunday, 4:05)
Seattle at Denver (Sunday, 8:15)
And I have a specific prediction for bonus points. I like the Bengals over the Ravens by 6 this week.
I'm 14-18 and that includes a 3-1 week last week. I'm so bad at this. And speaking of non-sensical segues and unexpected pregnancy in television shows: why don't more television characters that find themselves unexpectedly pregnant consider an abortion? I know it's a difficult and very real decision, but it never even crosses their minds sometimes. It's the conservative media, I am telling you.
Anyway, here are your picks:
Tampa Bay at Pittsburgh (Sunday, 4:15)
New York Jets at Green Bay (Sunday, 1:oo)
Dallas at New York Giants (Sunday, 4:15)
Arizona at St. Louis (Sunday, 1:00)
Easy picks for you, I think. You're running away with this thing, just don't choke.
I hope you noticed that I didn't give you the Jets, even though I know they'll win this weekend. Remember this when you buy your big house in New London and I need a place to stay. In this slate bestowed upon me, I see two gimmies and two toughies. Both gimmies are at 1:00, so I'm going to be 2-0 heading into the afternoon. It's a comforting thought.
Game 1: NY Jets @ Green Bay: At this point, the Jets are who they are. They'll beat teams worse than them, and lose to teams better than them. Only one exception to that rule has occured all year, and unfortunately that was against the superior Patriots. That win has kept them as a technical AFC contender, though anyone who knows anything knows they aren't an actual contender for anything but Best Football Team to Play in Giants Stadium. This game will settle one thing and one thing only: Which is the worst division in football? It's either the NFC North or the AFC East, and I personally think the AFC East is leaving the NFC North in the dust. Pick: New York
Game 2: Arizona @ St. Louis: (Random thought - How many people will be momentarily confused when the announcer says "The Cardinals" and he means Arizona?) How is Arizona worse than in recent years? They supposedly signed their best back in franchise history in Edgerin James. Their dynamic young receiving duo is a year more experienced. They have a talented quarterback with an excellent prep pedigree. They have an experienced coach. The thing is, I knew Arizona would be bad this year. How? Because they're the Arizona Cardinals. Until they prove otherwise, their situation is one not conducive to a succesful football franchise. At 2-9, their season is long gone. St. Louis, however, is the team chosen as most likely to be the sixth seed if the Giants continue to fall apart. The Rams are alive. A 4-1 record the rest of the way might get them in, and with home games against Arizona and Washington, and road games against Oakland and Minnesota, that is not out of the question. Translation: The St. Louis Rams have a lot more to play for than the Arizona Cardinals. Pick: St. Louis
Game 3: Tampa Bay @ Pittsburgh: Hey, it's two of the last three Superbowl Champions!! Wow, what a rare opportunity to see football titans of opposing conferences face off in midseason. What a treat! Uh oh, the captain just turned on the No Sarcasm sign. Anyway, the inconsistencies of these two teams make this a difficult matchup to pick. I'll take the Steelers for two reasons. 1) Homefield and 2) They won a couple of games before being bludgeoned by the Ravens defense last week. (A concern of mine is that they can't come back from that. Perhaps the Steelers offense is on no sleep after being kept awake all week, thanks to a combination of nightmares and pain.) Tampa has lost four of their last five. Pick: Pittsburgh.
Game 4: Dallas @ NY Giants: Game of the Week. I expect the Giants to play very well this week. If they lose, I think they end up being a .500 team. If they win, they might make a run at ten wins and the five seed, and they can pray Dallas trips up down the stretch to also finish at ten wins, giving the Giants the division with the head-to-head sweep. This would mean a homegame as well as a chance to avoid the Bears until the AFC Championship. On the other side, you have the Dallas Cowboys, who are playing as well as anyone in the conference. They are finally playing like the team I expected. Unfortunately, I cannot pinpoint a single reason why their season turned around. I can't think of any changes they made that turned this team into a legit contender. This should be a hard fought, close game. I'd take the Giants plus the points if that were an option here, but since it's not, I'll take the Boys in a great game. Pick: Dallas.
I hate to say this, but you might go 4-0 this week. Of course if I think you're right then you're probably wrong. Some intense reverse psychology going on here. On to my picks.
ATLANTA over WASHINGTON
Is Michael Vick sorry about flipping off some fans in the Georgia Dome last weekend? No. Should Michael Vick be sorry about flipping off some fans in the Georgia Dome last weekend? No. Should he have been forced to apologize? Yes. Should the NFL have fined him and made him contribute to a charity of his choice? Yes. It's all part of the game; the illusion that these egregiously talented and self-serving athletes (sweeping generalization, there are always exceptions) are role models. They aren't. But if Mike Vick wants to sell Gatorade and Nike shoes and No. 7 jerseys he better apologize and he better donate $5,000 of his $130 million to the family of a firefighter. Even better for taking the focus off his double fingered salute to the heckling hometown crowd: winning a football game.
HOUSTON over OAKLAND
Yes, I am picking the Houston Texans on the road against an Oakland team that put up a pretty good fight against the Chargers in San Diego last week. Shut up. All of you just shut up.
MIAMI over JACKSONVILLE
Sooner or later I knew that I would be right about the Miami Dolphins. I'm not sure what steroid cocktail Nick Saban has Jason Taylor on, but he's playing like one of the best defensive linemen in the league again. And Joey Harrington is making some incredible passes. His first touchdown on Thanksgiving was a perfectly timed dart that sliced between two Lions and hit Randy McMichael in the endzone. On top of that, the Dolphins are playing with a few days extra rest against a Jacksonville team that has an enigmatic inability to beat teams with a losing record. If they were playing in the NFC they'd be my pick for the sixth spot in the playoffs. Alas, leapfrogging any two of Cincinnati, Denver, and Kansas City in the playoff race will prove too difficult for them. Especially since they still have to play New England and Indianapolis, the latter in the RCA Dome.
DENVER over SEATTLE
Very difficult to pick this game, lots of variables. In Seattle's favor, Jay Cutler is getting his first NFL start. In Denver's favor, it's almost impossible for Cutler to play any worse than Jake Plummer- like walking on water impossible. Which means that only Jesus could play worse than Jake Plummer has played this season. Jesus and those snakes that can slither across ponds. In Seattle's favor, the Denver defense has given up an average of 24.2 points over their last five games and for the season they've given up over a 100 yards rushing per game. In Denver's favor, this is only the second game back for both Matt Hasselbeck and Shaun Alexander. In Seattle's favor, Alexander ran for 200 yards and looked great last week against Green Bay. In Denver's favor, Hasselbeck had three interceptions and a completion percentage below 50% in the same game. In Seattle's favor, "Real World: Seattle" featured a Jewish black man bitch slapping a white girl with Lyme disease. In Denver's favor, "Real World: Denver" features a love triangle AND two girls making out IN THE FIRST EPISODE. That pretty much seals it for Denver.
Is talking about the Real World too much of a Bill Simmons thing? I say yes, but we're Simmons' clones anyway, for better or for worse. (for worse)
Friday, December 01, 2006
Tuesday, November 28, 2006
NFL: Week 12 Recap
Okay, I ask thee questions numbered three
1. Twenty-five psi potato gun pointed at your liver, who wins the NFC and why?
2. Superbowl winner: Colts, Chargers, and Pats vs. The Field. Who do you take?
3. More embarassing: Giants collapse in one game or Falcons collapse in one season?
1. Boy that potato gun is going to hurt, but I'm going with the Chicago Bears. They've embarassed every quality NFC opponent they've played this season (READ: Giants, Seahawks) and with the number one seed they will only have to win two games at home to make it to the Superbowl. Close second (and I never thought I'd say this): the Dallas Cowboys. Great all around team (yes, as you've been saying all year) but I simply will not agree to trust Tony Romo in the playoffs. He'll make a mistake.
2. Tough question. There is a fifty percent chance that one of those teams will win the AFC championship, greater if you consider they're all very good teams and two of them will have byes, and I don't know if there is an NFC team that can beat any of those three in a Superbowl. Still I'm going to have to take the field. Too many teams have the potential to hit a hot streak in the playoffs if they get in: Ravens, Chiefs, Broncos, Bears, Cowboys, Giants, Bengals, Saints, Seahawks, Panthers, and so on and so forth.
3. Giants collapse. Definitely more embarassing. It wasn't just a one game collapse, it was a FOURTH QUARTER COLLAPSE. Tennessee had exactly zero points until there were ten minutes left in the game. The Giants last four possessions? Interception, punt, punt, interception; each of which directly lead to a Titans scoring drive. That's a failure on both sides of the ball.
The two interceptions and one of the punt returns, thanks to Pacman Jones, resulted in Titan possession of the football on the Giants half of the field. The other punt, which was sent sailing out of bounds by Feagles at the Tennessee 24 (presumably to keep the ball out of Jones' hands) resulted in a two minute touchdown march by Vince Young to tie the game at 21. Two minute touchdown march! Vince Young!! And that's not even the most amazing part. The most amazing part was that on 4th and 10 from his own 24, after three straight incompletions, Giants rookie defensive lineman Mathias Kiwanuka had Vince Young wrapped up but suddenly released him, allowing Young to scamper for 19 yards and then out of bounds to stop the clock. Kiwanuka, having thought Young threw the ball, just let him go. If you didn't get to watch the game, go here. It looks like Young pointed up field and said, "hey look at that!" and as Kiwanuka turned to look, just took off. Like something from a Bugs Bunny cartoon. Four straight completions and 57 yards later the game was tied.
Post Script: I won't even get into Eli Manning and how right I was when I took all those potshots at him earlier in the season. Open your eyes world, Eli Manning sucks.
Tell me (partly because I didn't get to watch it): exactly how ugly was the Patriots Bears game?
1. I take the Seahawks if they can grab that second seed. I think they will, so that's that. They were the NFC champ last year and they're better this year, and their two stars will have a lot less tread on the tires compared to the rest of the conference.
2. I take those three teams. They're the best three teams in football, with the possible exception of the one-sided Ravens. Then again, the Ravens were one-sided in 2000, and Ray Lewis says this defense is better, so who knows. Still, your logic was brilliant and you shouldn't have doubted yourself. This is, of course, a departure from your typical football prognostication ability, a skill that should almost always be doubted.
3. I go Falcons. They're a complete embarrasment. The Giants scenario was just one isolated game, and that anomalous Kiwanuka play should have ended that one game with a Giants victory. The Falcons, eight weeks in, were a trendy pick to go to the freakin' Superbowl. Even you and I were huge on them, and not just because of Vick like countless unknowledgeable fans. Now, no one's picking them to even grab the sixth seed in the poorer conference. Throw in the internal turmoil (Mora Sr. vs Vick, Mora Jr. defending Vick against Mora Sr., Vick vs. Georgia Dome...hey a lot of Vick here) and this team is currently the biggest embarassment in football...with the possible exception of Brian Urlacher's jock.
The Pats-Bears game was the least ugly 9 turnover game I have ever seen, mostly because I had never seen a 9 turnover game before. Most of the takeaways were defensive plays, not offensive blunders. For instance, two of Asante Samuel's (favorite player alert!) three interceptions were incredible picks, remeniscent of Ty Law's play in New England earlier in the millenium. Also, Chicago forces fumbles like no one's business, it wasn't just this game. I've never seen a team claw at the ball and put helmets on the ball like the Bears did did on Sunday afternoon. It was a clinic.
That being said, the Corey Dillon fumble was the worst of his career. Bill Belichick finally has the reason to call Maroney his starting running back, and he'll get 80% of the runs between the 20's.
Let's talk more Giants. How do you rate their shot at winning the division (only one game back and playing the first place team IN New York on Sunday)? And short of the division, how do you like their chances of getting out of the first round?
The Giants are a befuddling team, but I still think they have a decent shot at winning the division. If they can handle the Dallas Cowboys at home on Sunday they will be tied (record-wise) for the division lead and have four division wins to the Giants one. And they have enough talent to at least keep pace with the Cowboys over the last four games of the season.
The problem that I do see with the Giants is their record against quality opponents. Of their five losses, three came at the hands of Indianapolis, Seattle, and Chicago; teams that will probably have first round byes in the playoffs. The fourth came against a Jacksonville team that is still in the AFC playoff picture and we all know about the fifth in Tennessee. For all this talk about their tough schedule, the only playoff bound team they've beaten was Dallas, and that was a game in which the Cowboys switched quarterbacks at halftime.
I think a question we should be asking is: How many wins does it take for team x to reach seed y? For instance, the Cowboys will have to get to at least 11 wins to get the 2 seed, and maybe win out for 12 wins, depending on how Seattle and New Orleans play. The Giants and Panthers need to worry about this algebra more than anyone. They NEED 9 wins to make the playoffs, but probably want 10 to ensure passage into January.
And there's the issue: Are the Giants playing well enough to ensure they go 3-2 the rest of the way to get to 9 wins? I'm not so sure. Dallas is a tough game, then they have to go to Carolina. Home games follow with rival (but depleted) Philadelphia, and the resurgent New Orleans Saints, who might be fighting for a division and home playoff game in that next to last week. In the closing week, the Giants travel to Washington to play a team and crowd that would LOVE to keep the G-Men out of the playoffs.
Could be trouble. I am not as sure as I used to be that they can get to 9 wins. We might be looking at an 8-8 team unless they considerably step up their level of play.
I completely agree. If the Giants can't beat Dallas they're a good bet to end the season at .500, which very well could be enough to sneak into the playoffs in the laughably mediocre NFC. And speaking of laughably mediocre, the NFC is like the National League is like the Eastern Conference. Just leagues behind the opposing conference.
Another .500 playoff team out of the NFC? Say it ain't so! Supposin' the Giants finish at 8-8, which team currently projected out of the playoffs is most likely to step up and take that 6th spot?
The four teams at 5-6 in the NFC, one game behind the Panthers and Giants for the two wildcard spots, are Philadelphia, Atlanta, Minnesota, and St. Louis. For lack of a better option, I'm going to have to give the nod to St. Louis, a team that had a shot at winning their division until they lost Orlando Pace for the season. Literally and figuratively, Pace was a huge loss for that team. A defensive end rounding the corner on Pace is like Vasco Da Gama rounding the Cape of Good Hope: it takes months and the natives are hostile. Simply the most dominant offensive lineman of this generation. And St. Louis has arguably the easiest schedule of the four.
1. Twenty-five psi potato gun pointed at your liver, who wins the NFC and why?
2. Superbowl winner: Colts, Chargers, and Pats vs. The Field. Who do you take?
3. More embarassing: Giants collapse in one game or Falcons collapse in one season?
1. Boy that potato gun is going to hurt, but I'm going with the Chicago Bears. They've embarassed every quality NFC opponent they've played this season (READ: Giants, Seahawks) and with the number one seed they will only have to win two games at home to make it to the Superbowl. Close second (and I never thought I'd say this): the Dallas Cowboys. Great all around team (yes, as you've been saying all year) but I simply will not agree to trust Tony Romo in the playoffs. He'll make a mistake.
2. Tough question. There is a fifty percent chance that one of those teams will win the AFC championship, greater if you consider they're all very good teams and two of them will have byes, and I don't know if there is an NFC team that can beat any of those three in a Superbowl. Still I'm going to have to take the field. Too many teams have the potential to hit a hot streak in the playoffs if they get in: Ravens, Chiefs, Broncos, Bears, Cowboys, Giants, Bengals, Saints, Seahawks, Panthers, and so on and so forth.
3. Giants collapse. Definitely more embarassing. It wasn't just a one game collapse, it was a FOURTH QUARTER COLLAPSE. Tennessee had exactly zero points until there were ten minutes left in the game. The Giants last four possessions? Interception, punt, punt, interception; each of which directly lead to a Titans scoring drive. That's a failure on both sides of the ball.
The two interceptions and one of the punt returns, thanks to Pacman Jones, resulted in Titan possession of the football on the Giants half of the field. The other punt, which was sent sailing out of bounds by Feagles at the Tennessee 24 (presumably to keep the ball out of Jones' hands) resulted in a two minute touchdown march by Vince Young to tie the game at 21. Two minute touchdown march! Vince Young!! And that's not even the most amazing part. The most amazing part was that on 4th and 10 from his own 24, after three straight incompletions, Giants rookie defensive lineman Mathias Kiwanuka had Vince Young wrapped up but suddenly released him, allowing Young to scamper for 19 yards and then out of bounds to stop the clock. Kiwanuka, having thought Young threw the ball, just let him go. If you didn't get to watch the game, go here. It looks like Young pointed up field and said, "hey look at that!" and as Kiwanuka turned to look, just took off. Like something from a Bugs Bunny cartoon. Four straight completions and 57 yards later the game was tied.
Post Script: I won't even get into Eli Manning and how right I was when I took all those potshots at him earlier in the season. Open your eyes world, Eli Manning sucks.
Tell me (partly because I didn't get to watch it): exactly how ugly was the Patriots Bears game?
1. I take the Seahawks if they can grab that second seed. I think they will, so that's that. They were the NFC champ last year and they're better this year, and their two stars will have a lot less tread on the tires compared to the rest of the conference.
2. I take those three teams. They're the best three teams in football, with the possible exception of the one-sided Ravens. Then again, the Ravens were one-sided in 2000, and Ray Lewis says this defense is better, so who knows. Still, your logic was brilliant and you shouldn't have doubted yourself. This is, of course, a departure from your typical football prognostication ability, a skill that should almost always be doubted.
3. I go Falcons. They're a complete embarrasment. The Giants scenario was just one isolated game, and that anomalous Kiwanuka play should have ended that one game with a Giants victory. The Falcons, eight weeks in, were a trendy pick to go to the freakin' Superbowl. Even you and I were huge on them, and not just because of Vick like countless unknowledgeable fans. Now, no one's picking them to even grab the sixth seed in the poorer conference. Throw in the internal turmoil (Mora Sr. vs Vick, Mora Jr. defending Vick against Mora Sr., Vick vs. Georgia Dome...hey a lot of Vick here) and this team is currently the biggest embarassment in football...with the possible exception of Brian Urlacher's jock.
The Pats-Bears game was the least ugly 9 turnover game I have ever seen, mostly because I had never seen a 9 turnover game before. Most of the takeaways were defensive plays, not offensive blunders. For instance, two of Asante Samuel's (favorite player alert!) three interceptions were incredible picks, remeniscent of Ty Law's play in New England earlier in the millenium. Also, Chicago forces fumbles like no one's business, it wasn't just this game. I've never seen a team claw at the ball and put helmets on the ball like the Bears did did on Sunday afternoon. It was a clinic.
That being said, the Corey Dillon fumble was the worst of his career. Bill Belichick finally has the reason to call Maroney his starting running back, and he'll get 80% of the runs between the 20's.
Let's talk more Giants. How do you rate their shot at winning the division (only one game back and playing the first place team IN New York on Sunday)? And short of the division, how do you like their chances of getting out of the first round?
The Giants are a befuddling team, but I still think they have a decent shot at winning the division. If they can handle the Dallas Cowboys at home on Sunday they will be tied (record-wise) for the division lead and have four division wins to the Giants one. And they have enough talent to at least keep pace with the Cowboys over the last four games of the season.
The problem that I do see with the Giants is their record against quality opponents. Of their five losses, three came at the hands of Indianapolis, Seattle, and Chicago; teams that will probably have first round byes in the playoffs. The fourth came against a Jacksonville team that is still in the AFC playoff picture and we all know about the fifth in Tennessee. For all this talk about their tough schedule, the only playoff bound team they've beaten was Dallas, and that was a game in which the Cowboys switched quarterbacks at halftime.
I think a question we should be asking is: How many wins does it take for team x to reach seed y? For instance, the Cowboys will have to get to at least 11 wins to get the 2 seed, and maybe win out for 12 wins, depending on how Seattle and New Orleans play. The Giants and Panthers need to worry about this algebra more than anyone. They NEED 9 wins to make the playoffs, but probably want 10 to ensure passage into January.
And there's the issue: Are the Giants playing well enough to ensure they go 3-2 the rest of the way to get to 9 wins? I'm not so sure. Dallas is a tough game, then they have to go to Carolina. Home games follow with rival (but depleted) Philadelphia, and the resurgent New Orleans Saints, who might be fighting for a division and home playoff game in that next to last week. In the closing week, the Giants travel to Washington to play a team and crowd that would LOVE to keep the G-Men out of the playoffs.
Could be trouble. I am not as sure as I used to be that they can get to 9 wins. We might be looking at an 8-8 team unless they considerably step up their level of play.
I completely agree. If the Giants can't beat Dallas they're a good bet to end the season at .500, which very well could be enough to sneak into the playoffs in the laughably mediocre NFC. And speaking of laughably mediocre, the NFC is like the National League is like the Eastern Conference. Just leagues behind the opposing conference.
Another .500 playoff team out of the NFC? Say it ain't so! Supposin' the Giants finish at 8-8, which team currently projected out of the playoffs is most likely to step up and take that 6th spot?
The four teams at 5-6 in the NFC, one game behind the Panthers and Giants for the two wildcard spots, are Philadelphia, Atlanta, Minnesota, and St. Louis. For lack of a better option, I'm going to have to give the nod to St. Louis, a team that had a shot at winning their division until they lost Orlando Pace for the season. Literally and figuratively, Pace was a huge loss for that team. A defensive end rounding the corner on Pace is like Vasco Da Gama rounding the Cape of Good Hope: it takes months and the natives are hostile. Simply the most dominant offensive lineman of this generation. And St. Louis has arguably the easiest schedule of the four.
Monday, November 27, 2006
College Football: BCS Title Game debate
Before our weekly delve into the NFL, I'd like your thoughts on the BCS system in college football. Also, do you have a strong opinion, one way or the other, about whether Michigan can now play in the title game after their loss to Ohio State.
Tough question and I'm going to say what everyone should be saying: college football needs a playoff system. If you're going to use computers all season to determine which team (Ohio State) is the best in the nation then why even play a national championship game? It seems inherently unfair, in a season with a clear number one and a muddle of number twos, to give only one of the one or two loss teams the chance to challenge the Buckeyes for the national championship.
Logistically there are problems with a playoff system, but I say shorten the schedule and tack on an 8 team playoff schedule where the top two teams receive byes. In three weeks you'd have your national champion. It's just too damn bad that tradition and the money hungry powers that be that run the B-level bowls (Fiesta, Cotton, Cereal) are keeping this from happening and making fans across the nation happy. After all, if I paid to sponsor the Pets.com bowl I'd be pissed off it is was relegated to a first round playoff matchup too. As per Michigan: I don't think Michigan can or should be allowed to play Ohio State in the national championship game. It's already been proven that they're worse than Ohio State let somebody else give it a shot.
I think before we have a playoff system, we should go to the +1 Bowl. It will be an extra game played after all of the bowl games are over. You run the BCS calculations one last time, after all the top teams just played another top team. The top two teams remaining play an extra week with the entire country watching. This can work. No bowl really gets relegated. The +1 is the National Title Game and it can rotate between bowls like it does now. You know more than me, can this work?
As for Michigan, here's what I don't get about the people in your camp: Isn't Michigan still the second best team in the country? How does losing to the #1 team in the country AT THEIR PLACE by 3 points make you seem like a worse team? And haven't we always looked for the top 2 teams to play in the national championship? We look for #1 and #2 and they should play on a neutral site. I don't like the idea of finding #1 and then the best team in another conference. If Duke and UNC were the best two teams in the country in basketball, I want them playing in the national championship. Tell me where I'm wrong.
You're wrong because in college football, as opposed to basketball, schedules are heavily assymetric. None of the best teams even play a remotely similar schedule, and that makes it very difficult to rank the teams. So Michigan could actually be a worse team than USC or Florida or LSU but we have no way of knowing for certain either way which is why there is this convoluted points system anyway.
And in basketball, while 1 v. 2 is a great draw for a championship game, how often does it happen that the two best teams in the country both survive the tournament? I think your +1 idea has some legs, though. But remember, I don't know what I'm talking about.
I think the national title game was played already, and it was on Ohio State's homefield. That's not how it's supposed to be.
All right, we'll transition to the professionals tomorrow. I think Seattle needs to take care of business tonight, because they can't let Dallas get the 2 seed. Seattle and Dallas, in some order, will be the 2 and 3 seeds of the NFC, and will face each other in the divisional round. So whoever finishes with the better record will host that matchup, and be the favorite. More importantly, whichever team gets that second seed, I think that's the team representing the conference at the Superbowl. Carolina will upset Chicago in the 2nd round, and then travel to the winner of the Dallas-Seattle game. I've told you I'm clairvoyant, right?
See you tomorrow.
Tough question and I'm going to say what everyone should be saying: college football needs a playoff system. If you're going to use computers all season to determine which team (Ohio State) is the best in the nation then why even play a national championship game? It seems inherently unfair, in a season with a clear number one and a muddle of number twos, to give only one of the one or two loss teams the chance to challenge the Buckeyes for the national championship.
Logistically there are problems with a playoff system, but I say shorten the schedule and tack on an 8 team playoff schedule where the top two teams receive byes. In three weeks you'd have your national champion. It's just too damn bad that tradition and the money hungry powers that be that run the B-level bowls (Fiesta, Cotton, Cereal) are keeping this from happening and making fans across the nation happy. After all, if I paid to sponsor the Pets.com bowl I'd be pissed off it is was relegated to a first round playoff matchup too. As per Michigan: I don't think Michigan can or should be allowed to play Ohio State in the national championship game. It's already been proven that they're worse than Ohio State let somebody else give it a shot.
I think before we have a playoff system, we should go to the +1 Bowl. It will be an extra game played after all of the bowl games are over. You run the BCS calculations one last time, after all the top teams just played another top team. The top two teams remaining play an extra week with the entire country watching. This can work. No bowl really gets relegated. The +1 is the National Title Game and it can rotate between bowls like it does now. You know more than me, can this work?
As for Michigan, here's what I don't get about the people in your camp: Isn't Michigan still the second best team in the country? How does losing to the #1 team in the country AT THEIR PLACE by 3 points make you seem like a worse team? And haven't we always looked for the top 2 teams to play in the national championship? We look for #1 and #2 and they should play on a neutral site. I don't like the idea of finding #1 and then the best team in another conference. If Duke and UNC were the best two teams in the country in basketball, I want them playing in the national championship. Tell me where I'm wrong.
You're wrong because in college football, as opposed to basketball, schedules are heavily assymetric. None of the best teams even play a remotely similar schedule, and that makes it very difficult to rank the teams. So Michigan could actually be a worse team than USC or Florida or LSU but we have no way of knowing for certain either way which is why there is this convoluted points system anyway.
And in basketball, while 1 v. 2 is a great draw for a championship game, how often does it happen that the two best teams in the country both survive the tournament? I think your +1 idea has some legs, though. But remember, I don't know what I'm talking about.
I think the national title game was played already, and it was on Ohio State's homefield. That's not how it's supposed to be.
All right, we'll transition to the professionals tomorrow. I think Seattle needs to take care of business tonight, because they can't let Dallas get the 2 seed. Seattle and Dallas, in some order, will be the 2 and 3 seeds of the NFC, and will face each other in the divisional round. So whoever finishes with the better record will host that matchup, and be the favorite. More importantly, whichever team gets that second seed, I think that's the team representing the conference at the Superbowl. Carolina will upset Chicago in the 2nd round, and then travel to the winner of the Dallas-Seattle game. I've told you I'm clairvoyant, right?
See you tomorrow.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
