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.
Friday, December 01, 2006
Football Friday: Week 13
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)
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)
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.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
