6:14 PM
I: Bad news. Very bad news. Something occured to me today while grading an essay on the Neolithic Agricultural Revolution...
The New York Yankees are going to win the World Series.
Yeah, it totally sucks. It's bad for baseball, especially when they beat the New York Mets to do it. But it's going to happen. I will now chug a bottle of rubbing alcohol.
6:59 PM
S: Try mouthwash, it goes down easier. Before we go listing all the "rational baseball arguments" you can make for the Yankees winning the World Series this season, and for some darn reason there are a lot of them, let us not forget the incredible force with which we hate them. I hate them more than I hate bee stings. I hate them more than I hate really really cold weather. I hate them more than I hate JAY LENO. And I really hate Jay Leno.
That being said, when they win the World Series after scoring 80 runs in five games against the sacrificial NL pennant winner I will refuse to believe that it happened. Fucking cheaters.
7:35 PM
I don't think the baseball community realizes what's going, especially New Englanders. For most in our region, the baseball season ended with Boston Massacre III. It was football season even before the Bills came to Gilette.
The American League is, without question, the dominant league. The only NL team that could beat an American League lineup are the pitching rich Houston Astros, and they're not making it. This is why we stay in the AL when discussing World Series contenders. There are five remaining survivors in the AL. The Yanks and the A's have clinched. The Tigers, Twins, and White Sox will battle it out in the AL Central for the division and wild card. Here is the division with 13 games to play:
Al Central
Detroit
Minnesota (1 back)
Chicago (5 back)
And Chicago and Detroit open up a 3 game series tonight. Therefore, barring a complete collapse by Minnesota, the Twins will get in the playoffs. Either Detroit wins the series, effectively eliminating Chicago, or Chicago wins the series giving Minnesota the inside track to the division title.
So Minnesota is in. The problem is, they got to this point riding the stalwart pitching of Johan Santana and Francisco Liriano. Liriano is done for the year, making the Twins a MUCH weaker team. So weak that they aren't playoff quality. (If Liriano was healthy, this would be my World Series pick. But Santana can't carry them by himself. This is a first round knockout waiting to happen. Now they're only good. Before they were great.)
And let's face it, the odds are Chicago isn't getting in. Five games back with thirteen to play are long odds. This is the only team still alive that can possible topple the Yanks, so keep an eye on them to run off a winning streak. They probably have to go 10-3 to have a shot.
Recent playoff history shows only a couple AL teams can play with the Yankees, especially in the playoffs: Boston and The Los Angeles California Angels of Anaheim California. They are the only two teams that have stood up to them in the American league since 1997. They are the only two teams not afraid of them and not afraid of Rivera.
Oakland has buckled to the Yanks in the playoffs, multiple times. Ditto on Minnesota. And Detroit? They had a double digit lead in their division and are now only a game up, not to mention this is their first taste of meaningful fall baseball. Can those young, inexperience players really hang with New York? Can those pitchers get through the highest paid lineup in the history of the game? No and no.
See? It's decided. The New York Yankees are going to the World Series. If they don't, with that payroll, with that lineup, with no Boston, Chicago, or Anaheim in their way, they're an absolute joke.
And who will they see in the World Series? They'll see some National League team who will get run over like Billy Joel's mailbox. The Mets are the class of the National League, almost like they don't belong in it. In the American League, they're probably behind the Yankees, Boston, Detroit, Minnesota, Chicago, Oakland, and Anaheim. But they could at least hang with those guys. The Mets in the NL instead of the AL is like Danny Almonte in Little League instead of Senior League. They're still good, but nowhere near special.
Agreements? Disagreements?
Monday, September 18, 2006
Friday, September 15, 2006
Football Friday: Week 2
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.
I: All right, Saj. Here you go:
New York Giants at Philadelphia Eagles (Sunday, 1:00)
Kansas City Chiefs at Denver Broncos (Sunday, 4:15)
Washington Redskins at Dallas Cowboys (Sunday, 8:15)
Pittsburgh Steelers at Jacksonville Jaguars (Monday. 8:30)
S: Ok, Ian. I'm throwing down the gauntlet, pick the winners straight up
Carolina Panthers at Minnesota Vikings (Sunday, 1:00)
New Orleans Saints at Green Bay Packers (Sunday, 1:00)
Detroit Lions at Chicago Bears (Sunday, 1:00)
Tampa Bay Buccaneers at Atlanta Falcons (Sunday, 1:00)
Admittedly a weak gauntlet, but consider it special considerations for the handicapped. Do your best (or worst).
Read and learn, Saj.
Game 1: Carolina @ Minnesota: Carolina, a pre-season favorite to reach the Superbowl, lost last week. I know that they are notoriously slow starters who make up their wins at the end of the season. However, I also know that Minnesota notoriously sucks. This franchise never bounced back from that embarrassing 41-0 playoff game at Giants Stadium in 2001. There are no signs of turning it around. In the last year, they've lost their talent (Moss and Culpepper), their head coach (Tice), and their self-respect (cruise). Their offense is led by average-at-best Brad Johnson, and he's their best player on that side of the ball. Their defense has more holes than the conservative ideology. In this game, they are outmanned, outcoached, and outclassed by a superior Panthers team. Pick: Carolina
Game 2: New Orleans @ Green Bay: These squads are heading in completely different directions. New Orleans just drafted the most exciting NFL player to hit the league since Deion Sanders. They imported a pro-bowl caliber quarterback from San Diego. They have a cocky wideout, a premiere 1-2 punch out of the backfield, and, with the departure of head coach Jim Haslett, they've eliminated the hole at the head coaching position. Green Bay, on the other hand, is a once-proud franchise which has fallen apart faster than Tom Cruise's career. It's official, Brett Favre should have hung up the cleats. He's a bad quarterback on a terrible team that is going nowhere fast. The Packers need to move forward. They need to rebuild. They spent their first round pick last year on a quarterback, only to watch him freeze on the sidelines while Favre throws up wounded ducks at a record pace. Green Bay fans are among the best in sports and deserve better. Pick: New Orleans
Game 3: Detroit @ Chicago: Did you hear Lions WR Roy Williams said they'd score 40 points this week? After they scored 6 last week? AND Chicago has the best defense since the 2001 Ravens? I have qualms with Detroit scoring 40 points in any game this year. They're certainly not doing it against Chicago. However, it seems as if the Detroit defense is much improved, and could keep their offense in the game, a notion unthinkable for the last couple years. Detroit held NFC Champion Seattle to 3 field goals last week, and routinely earned big stops against Hasselbeck and Alexander. I think these are the only two average+ teams in the NFC North and they will battle for that division. Homefield advantage is significant in this matchup pitting a dome team in the Windy City. Pick: Chicago.
Game 4: Tampa Bay @ Atlanta: Thanks for the free-bee. The Bucs are a run-of-the-mill team on both sides of the ball. The Falcons, with both a superior defense and offense, will be playing meaningful football in January. AND it's in Atlanta. Pick: Atlanta.
Bold picks, Ian. Really going out on a limb with some of these. I say you're wrong about Carolina, New Orleans, and Chicago, but that's just me. I'm a risk taker. Gunslinger. Of course that's not the issue at hand here (and by the issue at hand I mean you making the incorrect picks). I have to focus on the four games you so graciously selected. I'm not going to mention how they're infinitely more difficult to call. And I'm not going to mention the herpes you got from that Massachusetts state trooper. I'm just gonna make my picks. Straight up, no bullshitting. Ready?
GIANTS. BRONCOS. REDSKINS. STEELERS.
There you go, now call your bookies. Yes I picked three road teams. Yes I'm probably wrong about three, possibly all four, of these.
GIANTS
Why I'm right: Tiki Barber and Brandon Jacobs. In a game where Eli won't be forced to throw 34 times to keep pace with the opposing offense (as was the case in the Manning Bowl) you'll see a lot more of these two. They looked especially good against Indy last week and have you been watching Tiki Barber these last few years? His smile alone is good for breaking a two or three tackles. Jacobs is a house on legs that are made up of smaller houses. He has lesser runningbacks pureed into hyper-protein smoothies and this is entirely what he subsists on for the week leading up to the game. Children are afraid of him (as they should be afraid of walking houses that eat pureed runningback protein smoothies). He's big.
And the Giants hung with the Colts last Sunday night until Eli was, well, Eli and Coughlin horribly mismanaged the clock. What did Philly do last week but beat up on one of the worst franchises in football. Donte' Stallworth = nonfactor this week. You have my word. And I stand by my word until I re-edit this post in three days.
Why I'm wrong: Eli Manning. He's not good. Trust me Giants fans.
BRONCOS
Why I'm right: Herman Edwards, Damon Huard, the Chiefs offensive line, the Chiefs defensive line. And the Bell boys. With Jake Plummer playing QB like Jake Gyllenhaal, Shanahan will be running the ball more than Ian runs his mouth. With both Bells trying to impress enough to get the bulk of the carries, Tatum and Mike will be on point; in the contest to prove who is the best Bell, the real winner will be the Denver Broncos. Meanwhile Brokeback Plummer turns in a vintage serviceable performance as CBS has 20 or so shots of Jay Cutler holding a clipboard and grinding his teeth.
Why I'm wrong: I'm not wrong about this one. Larry Johnson be damned.
REDSKINS
Why I'm right: Actually I'm probably wrong about this one, but the reward outweighs the risk. If I'm right and the Redskins win then it's likely that Drew Bledsoe had a fairly similar game to last week. This would undeniably upset Ian (a notorious Bledsoe apologist). For Ian the only thing worse than Tony Romo taking over in Dallas is Nomar Garciaparra getting busted for steroids. Tangent: Terrell Owens will behave himself this year. That's right. He will. Randy Moss, almost Owens' prima donna equal, will vault to the very top of the petulant wide receiver rankings. Mark my words. Post Script: the ghosts of last year's miracle Mark Brunell to Santana Moss x2 comeback still roam Irving, Texas...
Why I'm wrong: Shawn Springs won't be playing and Clinton Portis is listed as "doubtful." And last week the Redskins prompted Joe Theismann to call Brad Johnson a great "game manager." Of course Theismann also called Brunell a great "game manager" so that phrase may actually mean nothing.
STEELERS
Why I'm right: I think the Steelers are the best team in the NFL right now. Yes I don't know much (or anything really) but even without Randle El this team can score points. Parker, Ward, Miller, a solid coach, the return of Roethlisberger. The defense is still very strong, Ike Taylor can shut down almost anyone or anything and Joey Porter still won't shut down his mouth. They're too good.
Why I'm wrong: Byron Leftwich, for better or for worse, is the black Ben Roethlisberger. I'm not sure what that means but Leftwich is listed at 6'5", 245 lbs while Roethlisberger is listed at 6'5", 241 lbs. Leftwich played for small conference Marshall while Roethlisberger played for small conference Miami of Ohio. Leftwich was the 7th overall pick, Roethlisberger 11th. Both started as rookies. Too much crazy twilight zone shit going on here. That and I'm afraid of Mike Peterson's hair. I just hope Theismann calls one or both of these guys a "great game manager."
I: All right, Saj. Here you go:
New York Giants at Philadelphia Eagles (Sunday, 1:00)
Kansas City Chiefs at Denver Broncos (Sunday, 4:15)
Washington Redskins at Dallas Cowboys (Sunday, 8:15)
Pittsburgh Steelers at Jacksonville Jaguars (Monday. 8:30)
S: Ok, Ian. I'm throwing down the gauntlet, pick the winners straight up
Carolina Panthers at Minnesota Vikings (Sunday, 1:00)
New Orleans Saints at Green Bay Packers (Sunday, 1:00)
Detroit Lions at Chicago Bears (Sunday, 1:00)
Tampa Bay Buccaneers at Atlanta Falcons (Sunday, 1:00)
Admittedly a weak gauntlet, but consider it special considerations for the handicapped. Do your best (or worst).
Read and learn, Saj.
Game 1: Carolina @ Minnesota: Carolina, a pre-season favorite to reach the Superbowl, lost last week. I know that they are notoriously slow starters who make up their wins at the end of the season. However, I also know that Minnesota notoriously sucks. This franchise never bounced back from that embarrassing 41-0 playoff game at Giants Stadium in 2001. There are no signs of turning it around. In the last year, they've lost their talent (Moss and Culpepper), their head coach (Tice), and their self-respect (cruise). Their offense is led by average-at-best Brad Johnson, and he's their best player on that side of the ball. Their defense has more holes than the conservative ideology. In this game, they are outmanned, outcoached, and outclassed by a superior Panthers team. Pick: Carolina
Game 2: New Orleans @ Green Bay: These squads are heading in completely different directions. New Orleans just drafted the most exciting NFL player to hit the league since Deion Sanders. They imported a pro-bowl caliber quarterback from San Diego. They have a cocky wideout, a premiere 1-2 punch out of the backfield, and, with the departure of head coach Jim Haslett, they've eliminated the hole at the head coaching position. Green Bay, on the other hand, is a once-proud franchise which has fallen apart faster than Tom Cruise's career. It's official, Brett Favre should have hung up the cleats. He's a bad quarterback on a terrible team that is going nowhere fast. The Packers need to move forward. They need to rebuild. They spent their first round pick last year on a quarterback, only to watch him freeze on the sidelines while Favre throws up wounded ducks at a record pace. Green Bay fans are among the best in sports and deserve better. Pick: New Orleans
Game 3: Detroit @ Chicago: Did you hear Lions WR Roy Williams said they'd score 40 points this week? After they scored 6 last week? AND Chicago has the best defense since the 2001 Ravens? I have qualms with Detroit scoring 40 points in any game this year. They're certainly not doing it against Chicago. However, it seems as if the Detroit defense is much improved, and could keep their offense in the game, a notion unthinkable for the last couple years. Detroit held NFC Champion Seattle to 3 field goals last week, and routinely earned big stops against Hasselbeck and Alexander. I think these are the only two average+ teams in the NFC North and they will battle for that division. Homefield advantage is significant in this matchup pitting a dome team in the Windy City. Pick: Chicago.
Game 4: Tampa Bay @ Atlanta: Thanks for the free-bee. The Bucs are a run-of-the-mill team on both sides of the ball. The Falcons, with both a superior defense and offense, will be playing meaningful football in January. AND it's in Atlanta. Pick: Atlanta.
Bold picks, Ian. Really going out on a limb with some of these. I say you're wrong about Carolina, New Orleans, and Chicago, but that's just me. I'm a risk taker. Gunslinger. Of course that's not the issue at hand here (and by the issue at hand I mean you making the incorrect picks). I have to focus on the four games you so graciously selected. I'm not going to mention how they're infinitely more difficult to call. And I'm not going to mention the herpes you got from that Massachusetts state trooper. I'm just gonna make my picks. Straight up, no bullshitting. Ready?
GIANTS. BRONCOS. REDSKINS. STEELERS.
There you go, now call your bookies. Yes I picked three road teams. Yes I'm probably wrong about three, possibly all four, of these.
GIANTS
Why I'm right: Tiki Barber and Brandon Jacobs. In a game where Eli won't be forced to throw 34 times to keep pace with the opposing offense (as was the case in the Manning Bowl) you'll see a lot more of these two. They looked especially good against Indy last week and have you been watching Tiki Barber these last few years? His smile alone is good for breaking a two or three tackles. Jacobs is a house on legs that are made up of smaller houses. He has lesser runningbacks pureed into hyper-protein smoothies and this is entirely what he subsists on for the week leading up to the game. Children are afraid of him (as they should be afraid of walking houses that eat pureed runningback protein smoothies). He's big.
And the Giants hung with the Colts last Sunday night until Eli was, well, Eli and Coughlin horribly mismanaged the clock. What did Philly do last week but beat up on one of the worst franchises in football. Donte' Stallworth = nonfactor this week. You have my word. And I stand by my word until I re-edit this post in three days.
Why I'm wrong: Eli Manning. He's not good. Trust me Giants fans.
BRONCOS
Why I'm right: Herman Edwards, Damon Huard, the Chiefs offensive line, the Chiefs defensive line. And the Bell boys. With Jake Plummer playing QB like Jake Gyllenhaal, Shanahan will be running the ball more than Ian runs his mouth. With both Bells trying to impress enough to get the bulk of the carries, Tatum and Mike will be on point; in the contest to prove who is the best Bell, the real winner will be the Denver Broncos. Meanwhile Brokeback Plummer turns in a vintage serviceable performance as CBS has 20 or so shots of Jay Cutler holding a clipboard and grinding his teeth.
Why I'm wrong: I'm not wrong about this one. Larry Johnson be damned.
REDSKINS
Why I'm right: Actually I'm probably wrong about this one, but the reward outweighs the risk. If I'm right and the Redskins win then it's likely that Drew Bledsoe had a fairly similar game to last week. This would undeniably upset Ian (a notorious Bledsoe apologist). For Ian the only thing worse than Tony Romo taking over in Dallas is Nomar Garciaparra getting busted for steroids. Tangent: Terrell Owens will behave himself this year. That's right. He will. Randy Moss, almost Owens' prima donna equal, will vault to the very top of the petulant wide receiver rankings. Mark my words. Post Script: the ghosts of last year's miracle Mark Brunell to Santana Moss x2 comeback still roam Irving, Texas...
Why I'm wrong: Shawn Springs won't be playing and Clinton Portis is listed as "doubtful." And last week the Redskins prompted Joe Theismann to call Brad Johnson a great "game manager." Of course Theismann also called Brunell a great "game manager" so that phrase may actually mean nothing.
STEELERS
Why I'm right: I think the Steelers are the best team in the NFL right now. Yes I don't know much (or anything really) but even without Randle El this team can score points. Parker, Ward, Miller, a solid coach, the return of Roethlisberger. The defense is still very strong, Ike Taylor can shut down almost anyone or anything and Joey Porter still won't shut down his mouth. They're too good.
Why I'm wrong: Byron Leftwich, for better or for worse, is the black Ben Roethlisberger. I'm not sure what that means but Leftwich is listed at 6'5", 245 lbs while Roethlisberger is listed at 6'5", 241 lbs. Leftwich played for small conference Marshall while Roethlisberger played for small conference Miami of Ohio. Leftwich was the 7th overall pick, Roethlisberger 11th. Both started as rookies. Too much crazy twilight zone shit going on here. That and I'm afraid of Mike Peterson's hair. I just hope Theismann calls one or both of these guys a "great game manager."
Monday, September 11, 2006
Tennis: Top 3
I: Federer is the first guy ever to win 3 straight Wimbledon's and US Opens. A bigger deal is not being made of this why? Oh yeah, it's tennis.
I think Roddick is back in the top 3 in the world. Do you agree?
S: Top 3, that's a tough call. He didn't beat a single guy ranked higher than him, right?.
Right, but he played phenomenally well, and convincingly beat up on the other guys, including the guys who beat Nadal and Nalbandian. And he beat Hewitt straight up on hard court in straight sets. And he took a set from Federer and was 5-5 in the 3rd.
So he gets top three over a guy like Blake or Davydenko? Nadal stays at two right?
I'm asking you, not telling you. Yes, I think Rafa stays at 2. Though if they have head to head by the end of the Masters Series, it'd be a pretty big match to see who's the #2 dog heading into 2007.
Roddick is top five easy, but I don't think he leap frogs Blake or Davydenko. Both were playing well and just ran into the brick wall that is Roger Federer. Maybe he passes one of the two: Blake for not getting into the semis, Davydenko for being unmarketable. It's amazing how we talk of the fierce battle to be called number two. It's like everyones just conceded to Federer.
Yep, it's happened in both the big individual sports (oh boxing, where have you gone?). It's Rafa, Roddick, Blake, Nalbandian, Hewitt, Lubcickcickc fighting for #2 just like Phil, Ernie, Vijay, Retief, Weir, Furyk, Sergio, DL3 and the rest. Are there any other sports like that right now?
I think Roddick is back in the top 3 in the world. Do you agree?
S: Top 3, that's a tough call. He didn't beat a single guy ranked higher than him, right?.
Right, but he played phenomenally well, and convincingly beat up on the other guys, including the guys who beat Nadal and Nalbandian. And he beat Hewitt straight up on hard court in straight sets. And he took a set from Federer and was 5-5 in the 3rd.
So he gets top three over a guy like Blake or Davydenko? Nadal stays at two right?
I'm asking you, not telling you. Yes, I think Rafa stays at 2. Though if they have head to head by the end of the Masters Series, it'd be a pretty big match to see who's the #2 dog heading into 2007.
Roddick is top five easy, but I don't think he leap frogs Blake or Davydenko. Both were playing well and just ran into the brick wall that is Roger Federer. Maybe he passes one of the two: Blake for not getting into the semis, Davydenko for being unmarketable. It's amazing how we talk of the fierce battle to be called number two. It's like everyones just conceded to Federer.
Yep, it's happened in both the big individual sports (oh boxing, where have you gone?). It's Rafa, Roddick, Blake, Nalbandian, Hewitt, Lubcickcickc fighting for #2 just like Phil, Ernie, Vijay, Retief, Weir, Furyk, Sergio, DL3 and the rest. Are there any other sports like that right now?
http://sports.espn.go.com/sports/tennis/rankings
I'm not sure how many points Roddick gets for his Finals appearance but look at the the chasm between Nalbandian at 4 and Robredo at 5. It makes it tough to crack that top four, althought ludlajdfeicicic did have a poor open and Nalbandian lost early on to Safin. Davydenko as a semifinalist and Blake as a quarterfinalist are both probably taken over by Roddick.
Nice link. I'd say Roddick is 5 easy, but continues to rise for the rest of the year. He should get head-to-heads with Ljbucicicic and Nalbandian and pass them come the final tournament of the year. That is, unless he runs into Roger before them in any tournaments.
With Andre gone, Blake's my favorite player, at least until Malavia Washington announces his return. Roddick, though, rankings aside, is the 3rd best player in the world. At least that's what I initially drove at when I started this thread. By talent, not by rankings, do you think Roddick is currently a top 3 player?
The way he's playing, yes. He's better than Blake by a lot I think. Blake's backhand is embarassing. I'm embarassed for him. Roddick on hard courts or grass is better than Nadal. Of course, Roddick on clay probably loses to the aforementioned Malavia Washington's talentless brother.
Good forehand and serve, but a terrible backhand. So, what you're saying is, Blake is just like me. I think I picked the right favorite player.
More NFL: The best teams in football
I: After the Patriots, who's the best team in football?
S: Tough call. Very tough. I would have said Indy, but their defense is not nearly as good as last year now that it actually has to worry about the rush since the Colts can't manage the clock with their terrible running game. Plaxico Burress abused their cornerbacks last night. A more accurate passer than Eli would have torn them apart with Tiki and Mike Jacobs running wild like that.
The steelers looked really good. Willie Parker might be the real deal. Their secondary has to be the best or top five at least. Good coach, good kicker, QB who, while an idiot off the field, has a level head on it.
What's your take?
I think it's wide open. I think the Pats are the best team because all of these other teams have so many question marks. In other years, this Pats team would not be the best - not with that receiving corps and apparently bad O-Line (I expected a good O-Line, we'll see).
I think there are a few incredibly important players in the NFL to determine who the best squad is.
Jamal Lewis - If he's a top RB again, with that defense and good-enough QB, they could be a top 3-5 team again.
Rex Grossman - Again, with that defense, a decent, healthy year out of Grossman means Chicago is a top team.
Willie Parker - You touched on it.
Mike Vick - Atlanta could represent the NFC with a good year from Vick.
Drew Bledsoe - Am I wrong? He was bad yesterday. If he's good, that team wins a lot of games. It's them, Carolina, and Chicago as the only defensive powers of the NFC. And Dallas' skill positions are as good as they get in that conference. It's on Drew.
So, what are my power rankings?
1. New England
2. Pittsburgh
3. Baltimore
4. Chicago
5. Indianapolis
The jury's still out on Grossman. He took advantage of a very very bad Green Bay defense, which is why it's too early to make any solid judgments. Philly looked sharp, but it was against the Texans. Chad Pennington (CHAD PENNINGTON!) threw for 319 yards, but against the Titans.
I'm buying what you're selling about Michael Vick. The Falcons have an underrated defense and a very, very good running game that abused the Carolina defense. Vick turned in a very good game and on any one down he's the guy I'd least like to, or most like to depending on your point of view, see with the ball in his hands. If he can make good decisions and accurate passes, he's going to the Superbowl.
I'm not sure if I'd give the Patriots number one in the power rankings. They struggled against a God-awful Buffalo team. There is no one for Brady to throw to. Good thing we have the extended preseason with the Bills and the Jets to kick things off, and good thing we have an easy schedule and crappy division, but we really to shape up come playoff time. While I don't think anybody can outcoach Belicheck in a single game, if you don't have the personnel to execute what he preaches then its a moot point.
S: Tough call. Very tough. I would have said Indy, but their defense is not nearly as good as last year now that it actually has to worry about the rush since the Colts can't manage the clock with their terrible running game. Plaxico Burress abused their cornerbacks last night. A more accurate passer than Eli would have torn them apart with Tiki and Mike Jacobs running wild like that.
The steelers looked really good. Willie Parker might be the real deal. Their secondary has to be the best or top five at least. Good coach, good kicker, QB who, while an idiot off the field, has a level head on it.
What's your take?
I think it's wide open. I think the Pats are the best team because all of these other teams have so many question marks. In other years, this Pats team would not be the best - not with that receiving corps and apparently bad O-Line (I expected a good O-Line, we'll see).
I think there are a few incredibly important players in the NFL to determine who the best squad is.
Jamal Lewis - If he's a top RB again, with that defense and good-enough QB, they could be a top 3-5 team again.
Rex Grossman - Again, with that defense, a decent, healthy year out of Grossman means Chicago is a top team.
Willie Parker - You touched on it.
Mike Vick - Atlanta could represent the NFC with a good year from Vick.
Drew Bledsoe - Am I wrong? He was bad yesterday. If he's good, that team wins a lot of games. It's them, Carolina, and Chicago as the only defensive powers of the NFC. And Dallas' skill positions are as good as they get in that conference. It's on Drew.
So, what are my power rankings?
1. New England
2. Pittsburgh
3. Baltimore
4. Chicago
5. Indianapolis
The jury's still out on Grossman. He took advantage of a very very bad Green Bay defense, which is why it's too early to make any solid judgments. Philly looked sharp, but it was against the Texans. Chad Pennington (CHAD PENNINGTON!) threw for 319 yards, but against the Titans.
I'm buying what you're selling about Michael Vick. The Falcons have an underrated defense and a very, very good running game that abused the Carolina defense. Vick turned in a very good game and on any one down he's the guy I'd least like to, or most like to depending on your point of view, see with the ball in his hands. If he can make good decisions and accurate passes, he's going to the Superbowl.
I'm not sure if I'd give the Patriots number one in the power rankings. They struggled against a God-awful Buffalo team. There is no one for Brady to throw to. Good thing we have the extended preseason with the Bills and the Jets to kick things off, and good thing we have an easy schedule and crappy division, but we really to shape up come playoff time. While I don't think anybody can outcoach Belicheck in a single game, if you don't have the personnel to execute what he preaches then its a moot point.
Friday, September 08, 2006
NFL: Week 1 Recap
S: Pittsburgh looked really good last night.
I: Yeah, they're good. Definitely better than Miami, AKA the most overrated team heading into the season. I think the AFC North might be football's toughest division, though the NFC East and South are right there too.
Yeah, the AFC North is tough. I still think Miami makes the playoffs. They're too good to not beat up on Buffalo and New York.
Are they too good? I don't think they are. I think they go 3-1 against those two teams if Miami plays well. Losing in Buffalo and New York is not out of the question. Miami has had far better teams since we started following the sport, and they lost in cold weather anyway.
Three teams in the AFC North are better than Miami. And so are three teams in the AFC West.
I don't think that's necessarily true. Besides San Diego or KC or Denver could go 2-4 in their division. The same goes for Cincy and Baltimore. Miami won't do worse than 3-3.
But they're better teams, yes?
Cincy yes, Denver and KC yes, but San Diego and Baltimore I dont know. Better teams don't mean playoffs.
I know they don't. But people have gone beyond Miami just making the playoffs. Some people say they win the division, and some people think they win a game or two in the playoffs. That's nuts. They won't win the division, which puts them on the road in the playoffs, and they'll have to go north.
So, yeah, Miami has a better chance of making the playoffs than the 3rd best team in the two stronger divisions, but those 3rd best teams have a better chance to make noise in the playoffs.
Yeah, no way they beat a cold weather team on the road in the playoffs. daunte just can't get the ball to his receivers against good secondaries.
I: Yeah, they're good. Definitely better than Miami, AKA the most overrated team heading into the season. I think the AFC North might be football's toughest division, though the NFC East and South are right there too.
Yeah, the AFC North is tough. I still think Miami makes the playoffs. They're too good to not beat up on Buffalo and New York.
Are they too good? I don't think they are. I think they go 3-1 against those two teams if Miami plays well. Losing in Buffalo and New York is not out of the question. Miami has had far better teams since we started following the sport, and they lost in cold weather anyway.
Three teams in the AFC North are better than Miami. And so are three teams in the AFC West.
I don't think that's necessarily true. Besides San Diego or KC or Denver could go 2-4 in their division. The same goes for Cincy and Baltimore. Miami won't do worse than 3-3.
But they're better teams, yes?
Cincy yes, Denver and KC yes, but San Diego and Baltimore I dont know. Better teams don't mean playoffs.
I know they don't. But people have gone beyond Miami just making the playoffs. Some people say they win the division, and some people think they win a game or two in the playoffs. That's nuts. They won't win the division, which puts them on the road in the playoffs, and they'll have to go north.
So, yeah, Miami has a better chance of making the playoffs than the 3rd best team in the two stronger divisions, but those 3rd best teams have a better chance to make noise in the playoffs.
Yeah, no way they beat a cold weather team on the road in the playoffs. daunte just can't get the ball to his receivers against good secondaries.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
