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 13 in parentheses)
Ian 22-14 (3-1)
Saj 16-20 (2-2)
Can't waste any time accusing you of cheating or voodoo this morning, I have a meeting to get to. Here are your games you cheater:
Baltimore at Kansas City (Sunday, 1:00)
Indianapolis at Jacksonville (Sunday, 1:00)
Tennessee at Houston (Sunday, 1:00)
New Orleans at Dallas (Sunday, 8:15)
There were a number of games I thought you'd have trouble with this week so I just picked four of them. Plus I've never been so sure of the other 11 games on the schedule in the short life of this blog of ours. I'm feeling a 4-0 weekend, yes I am.
If by cheat you mean having immense perspicacity when it comes to the NFL, then guilty as charged. Four and oh, you say? Prove it, pal.
Philadelphia at Washington (Sunday, 1:00)
Minnesota at Detroit (Sunday, 1:oo)
Green Bay at San Francisco (Sunday, 4:05)
Chicago at St. Louis (Monday, 8:30)
Let's see it, Swami.
Very shrewd in not giving me the Chargers-Broncos game. Very shrewd. And I'm glad to see you didn't choose the Jets game for me.
PHILADELPHIA over Washington
Jeff Garcia is not an attractive man. That's a good thing, because I do not trust attractive men. They always break your heart. I also have a strange feeling that Garcia will lead these Eagles into the playoffs. But I don't trust strange feelings that have to do with unattractive men. I'm so confused. Um, let's just move on.
MINNESOTA over Detroit
Chester Taylor is listed as doubtful for this weekend, which definitely hurts the Vikings, but big ole' Steve Hutchinson will still be around to pass and run block, so I'm giving Minnesota the edge. Sidenote on Taylor: as of January 26th, he'll be a proud member of the University of Toledo hall of fame. Go Toledo Rockets!!
SAN FRANCISCO over Green Bay
If this game was in Green Bay, I might consider taking the Packers. But it's in California. Frank Gore will tear this terrible Packer defense apart and the 49ers will take another step towards contending for a playoff spot they have no business contending for. Their point differential is negative 110, second worst in the league to Tampa Bay. Translation: they'll find a way to beat Green Bay, Seattle, Arizona, and Denver in their last four games to grab the fifth seed in the playoffs.
ST. LOUIS over Chicago
Super upset spectacular of the day: The underdog Rams, at home, beat the Bears outright. With Tommie Harris, the Bears run-stuffing DT, out for at least Monday, I think Stephen Jackson has a big day. I also think I'm completely wrong about this pick.
Friday: I'll get to this tomorrow. Gotta go up and see the Celtics.
Saturday: Well, another Celtics close game, another loss down the stretch. Still, I enjoyed myself because I was yelling at Doc Rivers to do things, and then two possessions later he would do them. This included defensive switches, timeouts, and especially substitutions. I don't think I'd enjoy a competant coach as much, who would always be a step or two ahead of me instead of the other way around.
As for the NFL picks, why would I give you Denver-San Diego? This is Jay Cutler's second game against a non college defense, and as I've said so many times, Tom Brady's aren't that common. Or Philip Rivers'. Or Tony Romo's. Okay, maybe my "veteran quarterbacks on contending teams shouldn't be lifted for inexperienced quarterbacks during the season" rule is losing steam. Still, San Diego is playing too well right now, so you weren't getting that one.
As for the Jets, yes, that was a gift for you. It's in appreciation of you putting a counter at the bottom of this page.
Onto the picks...
Game 1: Baltimore @ Kansas City: Tough game to call. I usually prefer great defenses and great front sevens over good offenses and great runners...but I love great homefield advantage even more. It seems like some of the old school "stone cold locks" at home...the Lambeaus, the Foxboro's, the RCA's of the world...are no longer locks. I think the Chiefs now enjoy the best homefield advantage in football. Too bad they won't get a homegame in the first round of the playoffs, when I think this game will be played again but this time in Baltimore, where Herm Edwards will find some way to mismanage the clock down the stretch. But for now, take the homies. Pick: Kansas City
Game 2: Indianapolis @ Jacksonville: I'm calling this: Indy runs the table the rest of the regular season, people hop on the Colts bandwagon again, citing Peyton Manning's ability to outgun any team, and then they lose in the playoffs to the first team with a competant coach and running game. And then everyone will go "Ohhhhhh yeah. That's why I wasn't picking them a month ago!" Until then, take the defending regular season champs. Pick: Indianapolis
Game 3: Tennessee @ Houston: Houston is still a bottom feeder and Tennessee has been promoted to average team, but Houston often wins home games against average teams. Houston can't win anywhere but home. Still, I'll take Vince Young and his squad because I think the Titans have this laughable notion in the back of their minds that they can win out and make the playoffs. And to this laughable notion I say this: Ha! Picks: Tennessee
Game 4: New Orleans @ Dallas: This is the game of the week. These are two very good football teams. I'm in such an odd position with Dallas right now. I want them to do well despite them doing it without Bledsoe, because then if Romo gets hurt in the playoffs, Bledsoe can play in the playoffs one last time before he either A) retires or B) plays for Oakland or Detroit. But if the Cowboys cut Bledsoe or if he were to not be on the team for any reason, I'd be rooting against the Cowboys pretty hard. And this is despite my prediction before the season that they'd be a top team in the NFL, which everyone else if finally starting to realize, and they cite all the reasons I have listed for the last three or four months.
This game pits the two most revived franchises in the sport. I think New Orleans finshes as the 4 seed, while Dallas can be either the 2 or 3, so it's likely they're not facing each other in the playoffs. Too bad. If you asked the NFL, this would be the premier matchup they'd want to see in the NFC playoffs. The NFL's most hated team, though also the one with the biggest fan base in the Cowboys - against eveyone's 2nd favorite team this season in the Saints for the obvious reasons. They're both well coached, they each have likeable quarterbacks with strong interest stories, two dynamic running backs, an outspoken wide receiver, a young improving defense, and most important, loads of moxie.
For this matchup, I'm going to take the Saints and I'll tell you why. First, Tony Romo is due for a bad game. He just is. And the Cowboys better hope it happens before the playoffs. Second, Reggie Bush broke out last week and now he's on national television. So either A) He carries this team tomorrow night or B) The defense keys in on him realizing the threat he is, and Brees goes to other targets (Joe Horn) through the air. I like a scoring fest here. Take the over and take the Saints. Pick: New Orleans
Friday, December 08, 2006
Wednesday, December 06, 2006
Baseball: Red Sox sign D.L. Drew
The Red Sox signed JD Drew to a 5 year 70 million dollar deal - worthy of a superstar.
Where do I begin?
I hate this deal.
You cannot point out one year in JD Drew's career where he played like a 14 million dollar a year player. He's never - not once - been an All Star. He's never led the league in anything - not home runs, not runs, not rbi, not hitting, not walks, not OBP, and not OPS. He has no gold gloves.
He's consistently injured, averaging 118 games played in his eight full seasons. His top 3 home run seasons are 31, 27, and 20. Only once has he hit 100 RBI, and that was exactly 100. Only once has he scored more than 84 runs. Only twice has he hit more than 19 doubles. His last two seasons have seen him steal a combined three bases. His OBP, Slugging percentage, and thusly OPS have declined for three straight seasons.
And he's 31 years old and getting older. This means injuries will become more frequent. Moreover, at the age of 31, he's past the typical "breakout years" of the late 20's. It's highly improbable that he will break out without the use of illegal substances.
The Red Sox signed JD Drew to a 5 year 70 million dollar deal - worthy of a superstar. And he's not even a star.
I have more to say. Please give me your thoughts. Also, Julio Lugo for 9 million a year? What is going on? Did Steinbrenner buy us?
I spent the latter part of last night alternating between dry-heaving and trying to rationalize the J.D. Drew signing, and I think I've succeeded:
If you factor out the money the Red Sox paid, and the fact that they signed an injury-prone 31 year old with two years left of his "prime" to a five year contract, I like this signing. Drew has a .393 career OBP and plays plus defense. Coming up, he was hailed as the next Mickey Mantle. The man broke a ridiculous amount of collegiate records at Florida State. In his first month of major league duty he hit .417 with five homeruns. Sure he never played in more than 140 games in a season until 2004 due to a litany of injuries. And yes he was involved in that cash-grabbing contract dispute after being drafted by the Phillies in 1997. And, okay, he is represented by Scott Boras, an agent affectionately known as "The Baseball Antichrist." But why dwell on these minor issues? The man was hailed as the NEXT MICKEY MANTLE. He hit five homeruns in his first month in the major leagues! I'm sick of all these naysayers picking and choosing the stats that suit their argument.
Okay back to reality. The money matters (despite the fact that the Red Sox are spending it like it doesn't) but what matters more is the potential effect this signing has on the roster. Best case scenario he plays 145+ games a year and plays at or just below the value of the contract. And by value I am ignoring the ridiculous money that guys like Gary Matthews and Juan Pierre received earlier this year. Is J.D. Drew worth $25 million more than Juan Pierre? Sure. But that only makes him worth $25 million. Worst case scenario we have five years of a brittle right fielder on the wrong side of thirty patroling a physically demanding right field in Fenway Park. Don't try and tell me that Trot Nixon wouldn't have stayed healthier if he played right field for the Yankees or the Cubs. The money isn't the principle issue here, as proven by the $51.111... million bid just to speak to Matsuzaka. The issue here is having to deal with a potentially inconsistent headache who could turn into Shawn Green in a few years and has a reputation among fans, true or not, as a cash-grabbing primadonna.
Positive spin: Manny, if he stays, finally has the protection in that lineup he lost when Nomar was traded and Ortiz started hitting in front of him. We could see 100 homeruns between the two. After all, they hit 92 in 2005 with Kevin Millar getting the bulk of the at bats in the 5-hole.
And onto Julio Lugo, which I am actually even more upset about. Theo Epstein: if you're reading this, sign up for Netflix. Go ahead, its a great deal. For less than twenty bucks you can rent any three movies in their database at a time for as long as you want with unlimited rentals per month. And you even get a free two week trial period. Do it now, I'll wait. Finished? Okay, run a search for "Edgar Renteria." The 2-disc widescreen version. It could be under Comedy or Drama. Wait a day for it to arrive. Watch the movie. Now seal the return envelope they sent you and send it back. What did you learn? OBVIOUSLY YOU LEARNED NOTHING.
Now wait a year, watch Lugo commit 25 errors, and trade him and $10 million dollars to another team for a blue chip corner infield prospect. You still with me? Good. Then find a team flooded in young outfielders that has a 26 year old true leftfielder with a career .745 OPS named Frankenberry Jones they're trying to unload and send that blue chip prospect and a half decent reliever over for him. Force Frankenberry Jones to play centerfield and watch him struggle. Lather, rinse, repeat. Make sure to film the entire thing and sell it to Miramax as "Edgar Renteria 2: The Rise of Lugo."
I'd get into Matsuzaka but that was emotionally taxing and I think I have a stomach ulcer.
Yes, we can talk ourselves into JD Drew. Red Sox fans could talk themselves into just about anything. You talked yourself into Matt Clement ("He has good stuff"). I talked myself into Josh Beckett ("He was so good in the Series!") Between us, we could talk ourselves into Johnny Pesky making a comeback ("He made such great contact, you don't need youth for that!")
But ultimately, I refuse to believe there was another team offering similar money. I refuse to believe this signing couldn't get done at 4 years 52 million. Who would have given him more money?
Why have the Red Sox turned into a team that doesn't care about money? Why couldn't Johnny Damon be signed two seasons ago? He didn't need that kind of money. And he was a centerfielder, a table setter, great in the clubhouse, and played through numerous injuries. He worked his ass off for this team. Will Nancy Drew do the same? I'm not sure.
And when I'm not sure when considering a purchase, I tend not to spend 70 million dollars on it.
As for Lugo, you were spot on. We've been down this road before. Boston got rid of Cabrera to spend more money on Renteria, when Cabrera was more than adequate. Now Gonzalez has a perfectly adequate year, including the best defense Fenway has seen at that position in my lifetime. Shortstop was not a hole on this team. Relief pitching is, and they don't even have a closer nor a reliable set up man besides Timlin, and soon we won't be able to call the aging Timlin a reliable anything. Yet the Sox spend three times as much money on Lugo than they would have on A-Gon. I can't explain it.
So if the Sox want to throw risky money around, why not bring in Gagne?
If the Red Sox do end up signing Gagne, and I think they will, it might turn out to be the best valued signing of the offseason for them. Yes, Gagne is an injury risk, having only pitched 15 innings in the last two years, and yes, he's asking for at least $5 million, but the potential payoff is phenomenal. He'll be thirty in January and in his three full seasons as a closer he did not post an ERA higher than 2.19. In 2003 he won the NL Cy Young Award and was the first reliever to do it since Dennis Eckersley's MVP season in 1992. And with more innings pitched, saves, strikeouts, and a better park-adjusted ERA+ it can be argued that Gagne's 2003 season was the best ever by a reliever, including that guy in the Bronx.
If Gagne is healthy, a big if I will admit, he can and will dominate. The luxury of taking this sort of risk on a relief pitcher is that if he is not healthy, or if he underperforms, the Red Sox can bury him in their bullpen eating 5th and 6th innings. If J.D. Drew, your starting rightfielder, hits .250 with four homeruns through July, there's nowhere to stash him. And you get all this for less than than the Yankees are paying Kyle Farnsworth. Sign me up.
P.S. Good article by Seth Mnookin regarding the idiocy of general managers.
Where do I begin?
I hate this deal.
You cannot point out one year in JD Drew's career where he played like a 14 million dollar a year player. He's never - not once - been an All Star. He's never led the league in anything - not home runs, not runs, not rbi, not hitting, not walks, not OBP, and not OPS. He has no gold gloves.
He's consistently injured, averaging 118 games played in his eight full seasons. His top 3 home run seasons are 31, 27, and 20. Only once has he hit 100 RBI, and that was exactly 100. Only once has he scored more than 84 runs. Only twice has he hit more than 19 doubles. His last two seasons have seen him steal a combined three bases. His OBP, Slugging percentage, and thusly OPS have declined for three straight seasons.
And he's 31 years old and getting older. This means injuries will become more frequent. Moreover, at the age of 31, he's past the typical "breakout years" of the late 20's. It's highly improbable that he will break out without the use of illegal substances.
The Red Sox signed JD Drew to a 5 year 70 million dollar deal - worthy of a superstar. And he's not even a star.
I have more to say. Please give me your thoughts. Also, Julio Lugo for 9 million a year? What is going on? Did Steinbrenner buy us?
I spent the latter part of last night alternating between dry-heaving and trying to rationalize the J.D. Drew signing, and I think I've succeeded:
If you factor out the money the Red Sox paid, and the fact that they signed an injury-prone 31 year old with two years left of his "prime" to a five year contract, I like this signing. Drew has a .393 career OBP and plays plus defense. Coming up, he was hailed as the next Mickey Mantle. The man broke a ridiculous amount of collegiate records at Florida State. In his first month of major league duty he hit .417 with five homeruns. Sure he never played in more than 140 games in a season until 2004 due to a litany of injuries. And yes he was involved in that cash-grabbing contract dispute after being drafted by the Phillies in 1997. And, okay, he is represented by Scott Boras, an agent affectionately known as "The Baseball Antichrist." But why dwell on these minor issues? The man was hailed as the NEXT MICKEY MANTLE. He hit five homeruns in his first month in the major leagues! I'm sick of all these naysayers picking and choosing the stats that suit their argument.
Okay back to reality. The money matters (despite the fact that the Red Sox are spending it like it doesn't) but what matters more is the potential effect this signing has on the roster. Best case scenario he plays 145+ games a year and plays at or just below the value of the contract. And by value I am ignoring the ridiculous money that guys like Gary Matthews and Juan Pierre received earlier this year. Is J.D. Drew worth $25 million more than Juan Pierre? Sure. But that only makes him worth $25 million. Worst case scenario we have five years of a brittle right fielder on the wrong side of thirty patroling a physically demanding right field in Fenway Park. Don't try and tell me that Trot Nixon wouldn't have stayed healthier if he played right field for the Yankees or the Cubs. The money isn't the principle issue here, as proven by the $51.111... million bid just to speak to Matsuzaka. The issue here is having to deal with a potentially inconsistent headache who could turn into Shawn Green in a few years and has a reputation among fans, true or not, as a cash-grabbing primadonna.
Positive spin: Manny, if he stays, finally has the protection in that lineup he lost when Nomar was traded and Ortiz started hitting in front of him. We could see 100 homeruns between the two. After all, they hit 92 in 2005 with Kevin Millar getting the bulk of the at bats in the 5-hole.
And onto Julio Lugo, which I am actually even more upset about. Theo Epstein: if you're reading this, sign up for Netflix. Go ahead, its a great deal. For less than twenty bucks you can rent any three movies in their database at a time for as long as you want with unlimited rentals per month. And you even get a free two week trial period. Do it now, I'll wait. Finished? Okay, run a search for "Edgar Renteria." The 2-disc widescreen version. It could be under Comedy or Drama. Wait a day for it to arrive. Watch the movie. Now seal the return envelope they sent you and send it back. What did you learn? OBVIOUSLY YOU LEARNED NOTHING.
Now wait a year, watch Lugo commit 25 errors, and trade him and $10 million dollars to another team for a blue chip corner infield prospect. You still with me? Good. Then find a team flooded in young outfielders that has a 26 year old true leftfielder with a career .745 OPS named Frankenberry Jones they're trying to unload and send that blue chip prospect and a half decent reliever over for him. Force Frankenberry Jones to play centerfield and watch him struggle. Lather, rinse, repeat. Make sure to film the entire thing and sell it to Miramax as "Edgar Renteria 2: The Rise of Lugo."
I'd get into Matsuzaka but that was emotionally taxing and I think I have a stomach ulcer.
Yes, we can talk ourselves into JD Drew. Red Sox fans could talk themselves into just about anything. You talked yourself into Matt Clement ("He has good stuff"). I talked myself into Josh Beckett ("He was so good in the Series!") Between us, we could talk ourselves into Johnny Pesky making a comeback ("He made such great contact, you don't need youth for that!")
But ultimately, I refuse to believe there was another team offering similar money. I refuse to believe this signing couldn't get done at 4 years 52 million. Who would have given him more money?
Why have the Red Sox turned into a team that doesn't care about money? Why couldn't Johnny Damon be signed two seasons ago? He didn't need that kind of money. And he was a centerfielder, a table setter, great in the clubhouse, and played through numerous injuries. He worked his ass off for this team. Will Nancy Drew do the same? I'm not sure.
And when I'm not sure when considering a purchase, I tend not to spend 70 million dollars on it.
As for Lugo, you were spot on. We've been down this road before. Boston got rid of Cabrera to spend more money on Renteria, when Cabrera was more than adequate. Now Gonzalez has a perfectly adequate year, including the best defense Fenway has seen at that position in my lifetime. Shortstop was not a hole on this team. Relief pitching is, and they don't even have a closer nor a reliable set up man besides Timlin, and soon we won't be able to call the aging Timlin a reliable anything. Yet the Sox spend three times as much money on Lugo than they would have on A-Gon. I can't explain it.
So if the Sox want to throw risky money around, why not bring in Gagne?
If the Red Sox do end up signing Gagne, and I think they will, it might turn out to be the best valued signing of the offseason for them. Yes, Gagne is an injury risk, having only pitched 15 innings in the last two years, and yes, he's asking for at least $5 million, but the potential payoff is phenomenal. He'll be thirty in January and in his three full seasons as a closer he did not post an ERA higher than 2.19. In 2003 he won the NL Cy Young Award and was the first reliever to do it since Dennis Eckersley's MVP season in 1992. And with more innings pitched, saves, strikeouts, and a better park-adjusted ERA+ it can be argued that Gagne's 2003 season was the best ever by a reliever, including that guy in the Bronx.
If Gagne is healthy, a big if I will admit, he can and will dominate. The luxury of taking this sort of risk on a relief pitcher is that if he is not healthy, or if he underperforms, the Red Sox can bury him in their bullpen eating 5th and 6th innings. If J.D. Drew, your starting rightfielder, hits .250 with four homeruns through July, there's nowhere to stash him. And you get all this for less than than the Yankees are paying Kyle Farnsworth. Sign me up.
P.S. Good article by Seth Mnookin regarding the idiocy of general managers.
Tuesday, December 05, 2006
NFL: Week 13 Recap
Nothing says "what the f***?" like Jeff Garcia throwing for 300+ yards and three touchdowns on Monday Night Football against the Carolina Panthers. I mean seriously. What the f***? Starting now I am officially not surprised by anything. I mean it. My male roommate could tell me he was impregnated by a sterile shemale transvestite cyborg and I don't think it would phase me. The NFL is a nutty place and I am afraid of it sometimes.
And speaking of afraid, how about the AFC playoff picture after Week 13? Kansas City and Denver losing and Cincinnati, New York (Jets), and Jacksonville winning leaves FIVE 7-5 teams for two playoff spots. Not only that, but those five teams are behind the four division leaders by at least two games and ahead of everyone else by the same margin. What you have here is a three tiered AFC: the division leaders, the playoff hopefuls, and everyone else. So clean cut and tidy. That is, of course, until you start thinking of tie-breaking scenarios and your brain shuts down.
Thoughts on the NFC playoff picture and the week that was?
If you look at it, BOTH conferences are three tiered with almost identical number of teams per tier.
AFC four Division winners: Indy, Pats, Chargers, Ravens.
NFC four Division winners: Chicago, Dallas, Saints, Seattle
AFC five teams for two spots: Jax, Cincy, Jets, Chiefs, Broncos at 7-5.
NFC four teams for two spots: Phily, Giants, Atlanta, Carolina at 6-6.
AFC has seven teams out of it.
NFC has eight teams out of it.
The NFC is more intriguing for two reasons. First, the teams are so much more inconsistent and mediocre that anything can happen. Second, and this is what I'll be writing about today, there are loads of head-to-head matchups involving those four NFC teams. I find it incredibly difficult to rank those four teams in probability of making the playoffs.
Carolina always finishes strong and Delhomme to Smith is one of the deadliest hookups in the sport. However, their schedule has them hosting the Giants and Steelers these next two weeks. Then the Panthers close with two road games in Atlanta AND New Orleans. That's a tough closing schedule. Rmember that they host the Giants and travel to Atlanta in two head-to-head matchups between three of these four teams. This is a theme.
Atlanta is interesting. We were both high on them earlier in the year, but then the headbird of the dirty birds gave his fans the dirty bird and now everyone involved feels dirty. Their schedule is also tough, going to Tampa, then hosting Dallas and Carolina, then finishing in Philadelphia. The Falcons host Carolina then play in Philly on the last two weeks of the season. Those will be immense games.
Philadelphia is weird, and I don't just mean the city itself. Losing McNabb hurt, but Jeff Garcia is probably the second best backup quarterback in the league. That win over Carolina last night was huge. However, I don't know if they can keep it up. They have road games the next three weeks, going to all of their NFC East rivals' home buildings. Then they welcome in the Falcons on the last week of the season. So the Eagles played Carolina last night, they play the Giants in Week 15, and the Falcons in Week 17...all of the 6-6 teams. Crazy. If they beat the Giants and Falcons, they can lose their other two games. They'll make the playoffs at 8-8.
The Giants play two of the 6-6 teams in the next two weeks. This weekend they go to Carolina in the game of the week, and then host Phily the week after. They close hosting New Orleans then traveling to Washington. Not a slouch schedule at all.
It's enough to make one's head pull a Linda Blair. I was going to rank the Panthers as the most likely to make the playoff simply because of talent and reputation, until I realized their conference record doesn't match up very well against the other contenders. A quick peak at the conference records show the Giants and Eagles at 3 losses, while the Falcons are at 4, and Panthers are at 5. So I just don't know anymore.
I'll go on the record with my prediction later today. I've already figured it out, but I want to see yours first because I am frequently emulated.
I can't get over all these head-to-head matchups between these four teams. Considering that head-to-head is the first tie breaker, that makes these games THAT much more significant. One of these teams is going to get in on the last week of the season because of a head-to-head. At least one.
So how about it? Who's coming out the NFC?
I feel like every week we make a prediction about which team is going to grab the two wildcard spots. And every week our predictions are different. Last week I said it would be the Giants and the Rams. Of course the Rams lost to the now 3-9 Cardinals and that prediction looks really stupid. And speaking of the Rams, they're only one game back of the four 6-6 teams, as are the Vikings and the 49ers. With the orgy of head to head matchups in the next four weeks it's not unlikely that one of these teams sneaks into the playoffs.
In keeping with the spirit of picking different teams every week to make the playoffs, this week my teams are Atlanta and San Francisco. Remember, you heard it here FIRST. Just kidding: New York and St. Louis.
In your defense, last week, I forced you to choose a 5-6 team that is most likely to make the playoffs. You went with St. Louis. That wasn't your actual pick for the playoffs. *End defense of Saj.* However, I don't see how the Rams became your actual pick after a loss.
Also, we're stuck by our picks. We have both saw the Giants and Carolina as the last two teams, yes? I know I have. They remain my picks. I think the Eagles come up short. I think the Giants and Falcons finish the year tied, giving the G-Men the head-to-head tiebreaker thanks to their win in Atlanta earlier in the season. And I think Carolina doesn't lose again until it's safe to lose. What I mean by that is they win out to get to 10 wins unless they only need 9.
What I think this sets up is an NFC first round divisional rival extraveganza. I see Seattle winning out and they have the common opponent tie-breaker over the Cowboys. Therefore, the Seahawks hve that 2nd seed. Thus, in the first round, Dallas will host the Giants and the Saints will host the Panthers.
And speaking of afraid, how about the AFC playoff picture after Week 13? Kansas City and Denver losing and Cincinnati, New York (Jets), and Jacksonville winning leaves FIVE 7-5 teams for two playoff spots. Not only that, but those five teams are behind the four division leaders by at least two games and ahead of everyone else by the same margin. What you have here is a three tiered AFC: the division leaders, the playoff hopefuls, and everyone else. So clean cut and tidy. That is, of course, until you start thinking of tie-breaking scenarios and your brain shuts down.
Thoughts on the NFC playoff picture and the week that was?
If you look at it, BOTH conferences are three tiered with almost identical number of teams per tier.
AFC four Division winners: Indy, Pats, Chargers, Ravens.
NFC four Division winners: Chicago, Dallas, Saints, Seattle
AFC five teams for two spots: Jax, Cincy, Jets, Chiefs, Broncos at 7-5.
NFC four teams for two spots: Phily, Giants, Atlanta, Carolina at 6-6.
AFC has seven teams out of it.
NFC has eight teams out of it.
The NFC is more intriguing for two reasons. First, the teams are so much more inconsistent and mediocre that anything can happen. Second, and this is what I'll be writing about today, there are loads of head-to-head matchups involving those four NFC teams. I find it incredibly difficult to rank those four teams in probability of making the playoffs.
Carolina always finishes strong and Delhomme to Smith is one of the deadliest hookups in the sport. However, their schedule has them hosting the Giants and Steelers these next two weeks. Then the Panthers close with two road games in Atlanta AND New Orleans. That's a tough closing schedule. Rmember that they host the Giants and travel to Atlanta in two head-to-head matchups between three of these four teams. This is a theme.
Atlanta is interesting. We were both high on them earlier in the year, but then the headbird of the dirty birds gave his fans the dirty bird and now everyone involved feels dirty. Their schedule is also tough, going to Tampa, then hosting Dallas and Carolina, then finishing in Philadelphia. The Falcons host Carolina then play in Philly on the last two weeks of the season. Those will be immense games.
Philadelphia is weird, and I don't just mean the city itself. Losing McNabb hurt, but Jeff Garcia is probably the second best backup quarterback in the league. That win over Carolina last night was huge. However, I don't know if they can keep it up. They have road games the next three weeks, going to all of their NFC East rivals' home buildings. Then they welcome in the Falcons on the last week of the season. So the Eagles played Carolina last night, they play the Giants in Week 15, and the Falcons in Week 17...all of the 6-6 teams. Crazy. If they beat the Giants and Falcons, they can lose their other two games. They'll make the playoffs at 8-8.
The Giants play two of the 6-6 teams in the next two weeks. This weekend they go to Carolina in the game of the week, and then host Phily the week after. They close hosting New Orleans then traveling to Washington. Not a slouch schedule at all.
It's enough to make one's head pull a Linda Blair. I was going to rank the Panthers as the most likely to make the playoff simply because of talent and reputation, until I realized their conference record doesn't match up very well against the other contenders. A quick peak at the conference records show the Giants and Eagles at 3 losses, while the Falcons are at 4, and Panthers are at 5. So I just don't know anymore.
I'll go on the record with my prediction later today. I've already figured it out, but I want to see yours first because I am frequently emulated.
I can't get over all these head-to-head matchups between these four teams. Considering that head-to-head is the first tie breaker, that makes these games THAT much more significant. One of these teams is going to get in on the last week of the season because of a head-to-head. At least one.
So how about it? Who's coming out the NFC?
I feel like every week we make a prediction about which team is going to grab the two wildcard spots. And every week our predictions are different. Last week I said it would be the Giants and the Rams. Of course the Rams lost to the now 3-9 Cardinals and that prediction looks really stupid. And speaking of the Rams, they're only one game back of the four 6-6 teams, as are the Vikings and the 49ers. With the orgy of head to head matchups in the next four weeks it's not unlikely that one of these teams sneaks into the playoffs.
In keeping with the spirit of picking different teams every week to make the playoffs, this week my teams are Atlanta and San Francisco. Remember, you heard it here FIRST. Just kidding: New York and St. Louis.
In your defense, last week, I forced you to choose a 5-6 team that is most likely to make the playoffs. You went with St. Louis. That wasn't your actual pick for the playoffs. *End defense of Saj.* However, I don't see how the Rams became your actual pick after a loss.
Also, we're stuck by our picks. We have both saw the Giants and Carolina as the last two teams, yes? I know I have. They remain my picks. I think the Eagles come up short. I think the Giants and Falcons finish the year tied, giving the G-Men the head-to-head tiebreaker thanks to their win in Atlanta earlier in the season. And I think Carolina doesn't lose again until it's safe to lose. What I mean by that is they win out to get to 10 wins unless they only need 9.
What I think this sets up is an NFC first round divisional rival extraveganza. I see Seattle winning out and they have the common opponent tie-breaker over the Cowboys. Therefore, the Seahawks hve that 2nd seed. Thus, in the first round, Dallas will host the Giants and the Saints will host the Panthers.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
