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.
Tuesday, November 28, 2006
Monday, November 27, 2006
College Football: BCS Title Game debate
Before our weekly delve into the NFL, I'd like your thoughts on the BCS system in college football. Also, do you have a strong opinion, one way or the other, about whether Michigan can now play in the title game after their loss to Ohio State.
Tough question and I'm going to say what everyone should be saying: college football needs a playoff system. If you're going to use computers all season to determine which team (Ohio State) is the best in the nation then why even play a national championship game? It seems inherently unfair, in a season with a clear number one and a muddle of number twos, to give only one of the one or two loss teams the chance to challenge the Buckeyes for the national championship.
Logistically there are problems with a playoff system, but I say shorten the schedule and tack on an 8 team playoff schedule where the top two teams receive byes. In three weeks you'd have your national champion. It's just too damn bad that tradition and the money hungry powers that be that run the B-level bowls (Fiesta, Cotton, Cereal) are keeping this from happening and making fans across the nation happy. After all, if I paid to sponsor the Pets.com bowl I'd be pissed off it is was relegated to a first round playoff matchup too. As per Michigan: I don't think Michigan can or should be allowed to play Ohio State in the national championship game. It's already been proven that they're worse than Ohio State let somebody else give it a shot.
I think before we have a playoff system, we should go to the +1 Bowl. It will be an extra game played after all of the bowl games are over. You run the BCS calculations one last time, after all the top teams just played another top team. The top two teams remaining play an extra week with the entire country watching. This can work. No bowl really gets relegated. The +1 is the National Title Game and it can rotate between bowls like it does now. You know more than me, can this work?
As for Michigan, here's what I don't get about the people in your camp: Isn't Michigan still the second best team in the country? How does losing to the #1 team in the country AT THEIR PLACE by 3 points make you seem like a worse team? And haven't we always looked for the top 2 teams to play in the national championship? We look for #1 and #2 and they should play on a neutral site. I don't like the idea of finding #1 and then the best team in another conference. If Duke and UNC were the best two teams in the country in basketball, I want them playing in the national championship. Tell me where I'm wrong.
You're wrong because in college football, as opposed to basketball, schedules are heavily assymetric. None of the best teams even play a remotely similar schedule, and that makes it very difficult to rank the teams. So Michigan could actually be a worse team than USC or Florida or LSU but we have no way of knowing for certain either way which is why there is this convoluted points system anyway.
And in basketball, while 1 v. 2 is a great draw for a championship game, how often does it happen that the two best teams in the country both survive the tournament? I think your +1 idea has some legs, though. But remember, I don't know what I'm talking about.
I think the national title game was played already, and it was on Ohio State's homefield. That's not how it's supposed to be.
All right, we'll transition to the professionals tomorrow. I think Seattle needs to take care of business tonight, because they can't let Dallas get the 2 seed. Seattle and Dallas, in some order, will be the 2 and 3 seeds of the NFC, and will face each other in the divisional round. So whoever finishes with the better record will host that matchup, and be the favorite. More importantly, whichever team gets that second seed, I think that's the team representing the conference at the Superbowl. Carolina will upset Chicago in the 2nd round, and then travel to the winner of the Dallas-Seattle game. I've told you I'm clairvoyant, right?
See you tomorrow.
Tough question and I'm going to say what everyone should be saying: college football needs a playoff system. If you're going to use computers all season to determine which team (Ohio State) is the best in the nation then why even play a national championship game? It seems inherently unfair, in a season with a clear number one and a muddle of number twos, to give only one of the one or two loss teams the chance to challenge the Buckeyes for the national championship.
Logistically there are problems with a playoff system, but I say shorten the schedule and tack on an 8 team playoff schedule where the top two teams receive byes. In three weeks you'd have your national champion. It's just too damn bad that tradition and the money hungry powers that be that run the B-level bowls (Fiesta, Cotton, Cereal) are keeping this from happening and making fans across the nation happy. After all, if I paid to sponsor the Pets.com bowl I'd be pissed off it is was relegated to a first round playoff matchup too. As per Michigan: I don't think Michigan can or should be allowed to play Ohio State in the national championship game. It's already been proven that they're worse than Ohio State let somebody else give it a shot.
I think before we have a playoff system, we should go to the +1 Bowl. It will be an extra game played after all of the bowl games are over. You run the BCS calculations one last time, after all the top teams just played another top team. The top two teams remaining play an extra week with the entire country watching. This can work. No bowl really gets relegated. The +1 is the National Title Game and it can rotate between bowls like it does now. You know more than me, can this work?
As for Michigan, here's what I don't get about the people in your camp: Isn't Michigan still the second best team in the country? How does losing to the #1 team in the country AT THEIR PLACE by 3 points make you seem like a worse team? And haven't we always looked for the top 2 teams to play in the national championship? We look for #1 and #2 and they should play on a neutral site. I don't like the idea of finding #1 and then the best team in another conference. If Duke and UNC were the best two teams in the country in basketball, I want them playing in the national championship. Tell me where I'm wrong.
You're wrong because in college football, as opposed to basketball, schedules are heavily assymetric. None of the best teams even play a remotely similar schedule, and that makes it very difficult to rank the teams. So Michigan could actually be a worse team than USC or Florida or LSU but we have no way of knowing for certain either way which is why there is this convoluted points system anyway.
And in basketball, while 1 v. 2 is a great draw for a championship game, how often does it happen that the two best teams in the country both survive the tournament? I think your +1 idea has some legs, though. But remember, I don't know what I'm talking about.
I think the national title game was played already, and it was on Ohio State's homefield. That's not how it's supposed to be.
All right, we'll transition to the professionals tomorrow. I think Seattle needs to take care of business tonight, because they can't let Dallas get the 2 seed. Seattle and Dallas, in some order, will be the 2 and 3 seeds of the NFC, and will face each other in the divisional round. So whoever finishes with the better record will host that matchup, and be the favorite. More importantly, whichever team gets that second seed, I think that's the team representing the conference at the Superbowl. Carolina will upset Chicago in the 2nd round, and then travel to the winner of the Dallas-Seattle game. I've told you I'm clairvoyant, right?
See you tomorrow.
Monday, November 20, 2006
NFL: Week 11 Recap
Sorry for the lack of postings. The suits at Bikini Inspector HQ had me go to Bali this past weekend. I don't care what people say, nothing is worth a flight that long even if it is in first class. But on to football: For those of you familiar with my prognosticating prowess (If Don King can alliterate, so can I) you know that I have none. So for the last two weeks to make my NFL picks I have done what any self-respecting probability minded young man would have done. I turned to a coin. After all, if you're performing at less than 50% (READ: less than the success rate of random chance) why not try something new?
The coin lead me to a double digit performance last week (10/16) with designs towards a similar result this week (9/15 so far, I have the Giants +3.5 tonight in Jacksonville) and that is quantum leaps better than I have been doing. Just this week the coin was right about San Francisco, Oakland, and Buffalo. Without the coin I would have probably taken the Spurs, Lakers, and Timberwolves, and those are NBA teams in completely different cities. What this all boils down to is that I am stupider than a quarter.
And speaking of stupid quarters and nonsensical segues, how about them Cowboys (and this time I don't mean it ironically)?! That may have been the first, and last, time I ever actively cheer for the single most hated franchise in football, but what a performance. Parcells did what Belicheck should have done: he ran the ball. Thirty one rushes from his two runningbacks and five more from Tony "I can't believe people think I'm dating Jessica Simpson" Romo to only 23 pass attempts (of which Romo completed 19!). That's how you beat the Colts and their 6"5," 230 lbs. quarterback with the laser, rocket arm. Go ahead, Ian, make a case for Drew Bledsoe now. Please, I want to hear it.
Question for you: How do you think Ashlee Simpson reacted when Terrell Owens said he'd like to double-date with Tony and Jessica? I say pre-rhinoplasty Ashlee: all for it. Post-rhinoplasty Ashlee: not a chance. What do you think?
I cannot think of more aesthetically deviated siblings than Jessica and Ashlee. Ashlee isn't too bad, but I have the feeling she's a strong candidate for the Kelly Clarkson Award, given annually to the celebrity that would be most unrecognizable without their makeup, or if not unrecognizable, at least make the viewer say, "No way!" at least three or four times. Jessica, meanwhile, speaking strictly physical, might be head-to-toe the most gorgeous celebrity alive. (By the way, is anyone else giddy about Britney Spears inevitably getting hot again? It's going to happen. I suggest getting on board on the bottom level, for otherwise you will waste the small window of gawkability before she finds husband #3 and has child #3.)
Anyway, the Cowboys are a very good team, and it seems Romo is the right quarterback for them. (Clearly, the Cowboys would have won by more than one possession last night if Bledsoe were QBing, but I won't get into that.) It just seems like the team has tried a lot harder of late. I didn't think teammates dislikes Drew Bledsoe, but perhaps that was the case. I'm not surprised with the results of the last five weeks, though I did expect them to lose a nailbiter last night. As you know, since pre-season, I've been a proponent of the Cowboys making noise in the playoffs this year, maybe even making a run at the Superbowl. I backed off that a bit when they were struggling, but this is the team that I expected. They have everything it takes to be an elite football team, except an experience quarterback. But Roethlisberger, Brady, and Warner weren't experienced either.
How do you see the NFC stacking up heading into the playoffs? This McNabb injury might clear the way for another playoff team that we didn't see coming. Thoughts?
Even before the McNabb injury the Eagles were not looking great in terms of the playoff picture, but now there's absolutely no question. The only thing this team has to look forward to is going to Dallas on Christmas Day where new Eagles starting quarterback Jeff Garcia can get reacquainted with former teammate Terrell Owens, who called him gay in a Playboy interview. Okay, so maybe the Eagles aren't looking forward to this as much as I am.
What this injury does is just take down one of the seven possible playoff teams in the NFC, leaving six to make it in almost by default: New York, Dallas, Chicago, Carolina, New Orleans, and Seattle. Some permutation of those six teams will fill out the seeding come playoff time. Philadelphia, Atlanta, San Francisco(!), St. Louis, Minnesota, one or more steps behind those six, are all 5-5 or worse. Of that lot, Atlanta probably has the best chance to make the playoffs, but they will have to win at least four, probably five, of their last six games against New Orleans, Washington, Tampa Bay, Dallas, Carolina, and Philadelphia. And this is a team that has lost three consecutive games to Detroit, Cleveland, and Baltimore. Maybe they can go 4-2 against those teams, but relying on the Falcons to play consistent football is like relying on these commercials to sell Macs.
And speaking of relying on things to do things, how about relying on LaDanian Tomlinson to score touchdowns? Anybody who drafted Larry Johnson ahead of him in fantasy football should be smacking their heads against their desks and anybody who drafted Shaun Alexander ahead of him should be on suicide watch. Tomlinson bangs out touchdowns as if they were groupies waiting outside his hotel room on a Saturday night: methodically, precisely, and with a great stiff arm.
Give me your feelings on how the AFC is shaping up. Could the Patriots be on course to host the Denver Broncos in the first round of the playoffs? And if that's the case, how badly do they need to get at least the third seed in the AFC?
I completely agree with your assessment of the NFC. I think those are the six teams going. The Bears will get the homefield, but the running storyline of the second half will be who can secure that second first round bye. Steelers aside, winning the Superbowl without that first round bye is quite difficult. Until this past weekend, I had given Seattle the inside track on that 2 seed, noting how they practically wrapped up the division, they were getting healthy and their running back would have a lot of carries left in him, and they had a cake schedule...but then they lost to San Francisco. I don't think I'll back off the assertion as Seattle as the #2 team, but if the Giants win tonight, they'll be a game up. Seattle's head to head victory over the Giants might end up deciding who gets that bye. It'll take 11 wins from the G-Men to get it, and that's asking a lot from a banged up team.
In the AFC, I don't know what we can make of the Colts. I think since this is finally the year we think they can't do it, this will be the year they do do it. They've never had the no-respect card in their hand, and it seems every champ from the last 6 years has played it. It's a pre-req to a Superbowl. They have the top seed, count on it. The road to the Superbowl goes through the RCA dome...just like last year when the Steelers safely traversed the road in a howitzer.
That 2 seed comes down to Baltimore, San Diego, Denver, and New England. (Chicago, Indy, and those four teams make up the best six teams in football. Once again, the AFC has five of them. What else is new?)
You could make a case for all of the other teams to take that second spot. Handicapping the race:
So, I think New England finishes at 12-4, good enough for the 3 seed behind San Diego. Baltimore drops two AFC games, gets the 4 seed and a first round hosting opportunity vs. Denver. New England draws whoever can squeeze themselves in at the 6 seed. My question to you, Saj: Who will that team be?
I'm not one to shy away from bold, ridiculous predictions. So my bold ridiculous prediction for the sixth AFC playoff spot: either the Jets, Bengals, Jaguars, or Chiefs. One of those four.
The Jets have a cakewalk schedule in Houston, Green Bay, Buffalo, Minnesota, Miami, and Oakland. However, they suck more balls than a crackwhore on Christmas. The Bears defense is good, but is it good enough to make Chad Pennington piss himself the way he did? Granted Chad Pennington probably pissed himself at Saw III, so the answer is no.
I got an interesting email from Jim (a Bengals fan) in Dayton, Ohio after they beat the Saints this weekend, "Hey jerkoff, it's Jim, a Bengals fan, from Dayton, Ohio. How you like us now, m*****f*****! HUH! Ocho Cinco, m*****f*****, Ocho m*****f****** Cinco!! CARSON PALMER RULEZ! M*****F*****!" Of course I made that fan email up because nobody reads this aside from Ian, and I never said anything disparaging about the Bengals, but Jim I think you are right on the money (except "RULEZ" should be spelled with an "S"). Chad "Ocho Cinco" Johnson is back to his bad motherlovin' self and that offense put up 72 points in the last two games. But to make the playoffs they have to win at least four more games, and that may prove difficult with Baltimore, Indianapolis, and Denver on the schedule (not to mention Pittsburgh in Week 17 potentially playing the spoiler). M*****f*****.
If the Jaguars can beat the Giants tonight, they will be 6-4 heading into week twelve. Assuming they steal one of their three tough games in the last six weeks (Indy, New England, Kansas City) and beat the teams they should beat (Buffalo, Miami, Tennessee) Jacksonville is looking at 10-6 and a probable spot in the playoffs. However, three of their four losses have come at the hands of Houston (3-7) and Washington (3-7) and the Jaguars actually beat Philly and Dallas when both teams were playing decent to good football. What does all of this mean? That nothing makes sense and a Jaguar team that does not beat the Giants tonight won't make the playoffs.
Ah, the Chiefs. The quietest 6-4 team in football and my pick for the final seed in the playoffs. Competent defense, freakishly talented runningback, and the Concussion Kid Trent Green is back in the saddle. Not only has this team beaten San Diego, Seattle, and St. Louis, they lost to Denver by only three points in Denver. Week 12 sees the Broncos coming to Arrowhead and given KC's track record in the AFC West, the winner will emerge as the number two in that division. If I were San Diego, and wanted the breathing room a Chief win would give me, I would send Shawne Merriman's trainer to Kansas City right away. Not an easy schedule (Denver, Cleveland, Baltimore, San Diego, Oakland, Jacksonville) but the Chiefs are good enough to handle business.
Ian, I know you don't hate the Jets as much as me so they must be your pick.
First, more people read this and you know it, so stop trying to illegitimatize our blog. (And I think you hurt our readers' feelings calling them no one.)
I was definitely taking the Chiefs for one simple reason: They're the best of the rest. They're great at home, they have a top workhorse running back, and a good regular head coach. They should get in, and as a Pats fan, that worries me.
The Jets, meanwhile, are a bad football team, and don't let your fellow New Yorkers tell you differently.
Good work. To our readers, we'll be back midweek, with some more football and some Red Sox offseason talk.
The coin lead me to a double digit performance last week (10/16) with designs towards a similar result this week (9/15 so far, I have the Giants +3.5 tonight in Jacksonville) and that is quantum leaps better than I have been doing. Just this week the coin was right about San Francisco, Oakland, and Buffalo. Without the coin I would have probably taken the Spurs, Lakers, and Timberwolves, and those are NBA teams in completely different cities. What this all boils down to is that I am stupider than a quarter.
And speaking of stupid quarters and nonsensical segues, how about them Cowboys (and this time I don't mean it ironically)?! That may have been the first, and last, time I ever actively cheer for the single most hated franchise in football, but what a performance. Parcells did what Belicheck should have done: he ran the ball. Thirty one rushes from his two runningbacks and five more from Tony "I can't believe people think I'm dating Jessica Simpson" Romo to only 23 pass attempts (of which Romo completed 19!). That's how you beat the Colts and their 6"5," 230 lbs. quarterback with the laser, rocket arm. Go ahead, Ian, make a case for Drew Bledsoe now. Please, I want to hear it.
Question for you: How do you think Ashlee Simpson reacted when Terrell Owens said he'd like to double-date with Tony and Jessica? I say pre-rhinoplasty Ashlee: all for it. Post-rhinoplasty Ashlee: not a chance. What do you think?
I cannot think of more aesthetically deviated siblings than Jessica and Ashlee. Ashlee isn't too bad, but I have the feeling she's a strong candidate for the Kelly Clarkson Award, given annually to the celebrity that would be most unrecognizable without their makeup, or if not unrecognizable, at least make the viewer say, "No way!" at least three or four times. Jessica, meanwhile, speaking strictly physical, might be head-to-toe the most gorgeous celebrity alive. (By the way, is anyone else giddy about Britney Spears inevitably getting hot again? It's going to happen. I suggest getting on board on the bottom level, for otherwise you will waste the small window of gawkability before she finds husband #3 and has child #3.)
Anyway, the Cowboys are a very good team, and it seems Romo is the right quarterback for them. (Clearly, the Cowboys would have won by more than one possession last night if Bledsoe were QBing, but I won't get into that.) It just seems like the team has tried a lot harder of late. I didn't think teammates dislikes Drew Bledsoe, but perhaps that was the case. I'm not surprised with the results of the last five weeks, though I did expect them to lose a nailbiter last night. As you know, since pre-season, I've been a proponent of the Cowboys making noise in the playoffs this year, maybe even making a run at the Superbowl. I backed off that a bit when they were struggling, but this is the team that I expected. They have everything it takes to be an elite football team, except an experience quarterback. But Roethlisberger, Brady, and Warner weren't experienced either.
How do you see the NFC stacking up heading into the playoffs? This McNabb injury might clear the way for another playoff team that we didn't see coming. Thoughts?
Even before the McNabb injury the Eagles were not looking great in terms of the playoff picture, but now there's absolutely no question. The only thing this team has to look forward to is going to Dallas on Christmas Day where new Eagles starting quarterback Jeff Garcia can get reacquainted with former teammate Terrell Owens, who called him gay in a Playboy interview. Okay, so maybe the Eagles aren't looking forward to this as much as I am.
What this injury does is just take down one of the seven possible playoff teams in the NFC, leaving six to make it in almost by default: New York, Dallas, Chicago, Carolina, New Orleans, and Seattle. Some permutation of those six teams will fill out the seeding come playoff time. Philadelphia, Atlanta, San Francisco(!), St. Louis, Minnesota, one or more steps behind those six, are all 5-5 or worse. Of that lot, Atlanta probably has the best chance to make the playoffs, but they will have to win at least four, probably five, of their last six games against New Orleans, Washington, Tampa Bay, Dallas, Carolina, and Philadelphia. And this is a team that has lost three consecutive games to Detroit, Cleveland, and Baltimore. Maybe they can go 4-2 against those teams, but relying on the Falcons to play consistent football is like relying on these commercials to sell Macs.
And speaking of relying on things to do things, how about relying on LaDanian Tomlinson to score touchdowns? Anybody who drafted Larry Johnson ahead of him in fantasy football should be smacking their heads against their desks and anybody who drafted Shaun Alexander ahead of him should be on suicide watch. Tomlinson bangs out touchdowns as if they were groupies waiting outside his hotel room on a Saturday night: methodically, precisely, and with a great stiff arm.
Give me your feelings on how the AFC is shaping up. Could the Patriots be on course to host the Denver Broncos in the first round of the playoffs? And if that's the case, how badly do they need to get at least the third seed in the AFC?
I completely agree with your assessment of the NFC. I think those are the six teams going. The Bears will get the homefield, but the running storyline of the second half will be who can secure that second first round bye. Steelers aside, winning the Superbowl without that first round bye is quite difficult. Until this past weekend, I had given Seattle the inside track on that 2 seed, noting how they practically wrapped up the division, they were getting healthy and their running back would have a lot of carries left in him, and they had a cake schedule...but then they lost to San Francisco. I don't think I'll back off the assertion as Seattle as the #2 team, but if the Giants win tonight, they'll be a game up. Seattle's head to head victory over the Giants might end up deciding who gets that bye. It'll take 11 wins from the G-Men to get it, and that's asking a lot from a banged up team.
In the AFC, I don't know what we can make of the Colts. I think since this is finally the year we think they can't do it, this will be the year they do do it. They've never had the no-respect card in their hand, and it seems every champ from the last 6 years has played it. It's a pre-req to a Superbowl. They have the top seed, count on it. The road to the Superbowl goes through the RCA dome...just like last year when the Steelers safely traversed the road in a howitzer.
That 2 seed comes down to Baltimore, San Diego, Denver, and New England. (Chicago, Indy, and those four teams make up the best six teams in football. Once again, the AFC has five of them. What else is new?)
You could make a case for all of the other teams to take that second spot. Handicapping the race:
- San Diego is the best of the bunch and is tied with Baltimore for the top record of the four.
- Baltimore also has the top record, AND defeated San Diego head to head, but lost to Denver head to head. But they're just not as good as San Diego and will lose twice traveling to Cincy, KC, and Pitt.
- New England is a game back of these teams and loses out on the tiebreaker to New England. However, if they can defeat the Bears this weekend, they have the easiest schedule of the lot. (seriously: Detroit, Miami, Houston, Jax, Tennesee. Seriously serious.) They'll need to win all of them, though, as they already have three conference losses.
- Denver is one game back and has the tie breaker over New England AND Baltimore, but they do not have the tiebreaker on San Diego.
So, I think New England finishes at 12-4, good enough for the 3 seed behind San Diego. Baltimore drops two AFC games, gets the 4 seed and a first round hosting opportunity vs. Denver. New England draws whoever can squeeze themselves in at the 6 seed. My question to you, Saj: Who will that team be?
I'm not one to shy away from bold, ridiculous predictions. So my bold ridiculous prediction for the sixth AFC playoff spot: either the Jets, Bengals, Jaguars, or Chiefs. One of those four.
The Jets have a cakewalk schedule in Houston, Green Bay, Buffalo, Minnesota, Miami, and Oakland. However, they suck more balls than a crackwhore on Christmas. The Bears defense is good, but is it good enough to make Chad Pennington piss himself the way he did? Granted Chad Pennington probably pissed himself at Saw III, so the answer is no.
I got an interesting email from Jim (a Bengals fan) in Dayton, Ohio after they beat the Saints this weekend, "Hey jerkoff, it's Jim, a Bengals fan, from Dayton, Ohio. How you like us now, m*****f*****! HUH! Ocho Cinco, m*****f*****, Ocho m*****f****** Cinco!! CARSON PALMER RULEZ! M*****F*****!" Of course I made that fan email up because nobody reads this aside from Ian, and I never said anything disparaging about the Bengals, but Jim I think you are right on the money (except "RULEZ" should be spelled with an "S"). Chad "Ocho Cinco" Johnson is back to his bad motherlovin' self and that offense put up 72 points in the last two games. But to make the playoffs they have to win at least four more games, and that may prove difficult with Baltimore, Indianapolis, and Denver on the schedule (not to mention Pittsburgh in Week 17 potentially playing the spoiler). M*****f*****.
If the Jaguars can beat the Giants tonight, they will be 6-4 heading into week twelve. Assuming they steal one of their three tough games in the last six weeks (Indy, New England, Kansas City) and beat the teams they should beat (Buffalo, Miami, Tennessee) Jacksonville is looking at 10-6 and a probable spot in the playoffs. However, three of their four losses have come at the hands of Houston (3-7) and Washington (3-7) and the Jaguars actually beat Philly and Dallas when both teams were playing decent to good football. What does all of this mean? That nothing makes sense and a Jaguar team that does not beat the Giants tonight won't make the playoffs.
Ah, the Chiefs. The quietest 6-4 team in football and my pick for the final seed in the playoffs. Competent defense, freakishly talented runningback, and the Concussion Kid Trent Green is back in the saddle. Not only has this team beaten San Diego, Seattle, and St. Louis, they lost to Denver by only three points in Denver. Week 12 sees the Broncos coming to Arrowhead and given KC's track record in the AFC West, the winner will emerge as the number two in that division. If I were San Diego, and wanted the breathing room a Chief win would give me, I would send Shawne Merriman's trainer to Kansas City right away. Not an easy schedule (Denver, Cleveland, Baltimore, San Diego, Oakland, Jacksonville) but the Chiefs are good enough to handle business.
Ian, I know you don't hate the Jets as much as me so they must be your pick.
First, more people read this and you know it, so stop trying to illegitimatize our blog. (And I think you hurt our readers' feelings calling them no one.)
I was definitely taking the Chiefs for one simple reason: They're the best of the rest. They're great at home, they have a top workhorse running back, and a good regular head coach. They should get in, and as a Pats fan, that worries me.
The Jets, meanwhile, are a bad football team, and don't let your fellow New Yorkers tell you differently.
Good work. To our readers, we'll be back midweek, with some more football and some Red Sox offseason talk.
Friday, November 10, 2006
Football Friday: Week 10
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 (Last week in parenthesis).
Standings (Week 8 in parenthesis)
Ian 18-10 (2-2)
Saj 11-17 (1-3)
To our loyal readers (and by that I mean Ian and myself) I would like to apologize for not posting a "Football Friday" for Week 9. Ian was busy volunteering with autistic children and I had to go on a business trip (being a bikini inspector is fun and all, but when beach season in Rio starts it can be very tiring).
As a consequence, Ian couldn't use Week 9, and all the havoc-wreaking games that happened, as a means to increase his 7 game lead over me. Let's see if he can capitalize on my NFL retardation this week:
San Francisco at Detroit (Sunday, 1:00)
San Diego at Cincinnati (Sunday, 1:00)
St. Louis at Seattle (Sunday, 4:15)
Chicago at NY Giants (Sunday, 8:15)
Never fear, Saj. If you go 3-1 for three straight weeks, you're back to .500 for the season. But you need to dedicate more time to the NFL! I still don't understand why you don't quit your bikini expecting job so we can get more blogging done.
Here are your four games for Week 10:
Kansas City at Miami (Sunday, 1:00). Your precious Dolphins at home against a bad road team.
Green Bay at Minnesota (Sunday, 1:00). The NFC Central. Love it or leave it. Welp, see ya later.
Baltimore at Tennessee (Sunday, 1:00). *Ian rubs his hands together.* Inside your head.
New Orleans at Pittsburgh (Sunday, 4:15). The feel good vs. the feel bad stories of the year.
Before I get to my picks, ESPN.com's Buster Olney just reported that Boston Red Sox may have the top bid for the rights to negotiate with Daisuke Matsuzaka. What does this mean? Probably nothing since this is all speculation.
I am wary of the scouts who say Matsuzaka is a top of the rotation kind of guy but given how he pitched in the WBC and how people temper their expectations of Japanese players after Irabu, Nomo, and (Kaz) Matsui, I'm inclined to believe them. Plus he is the only living man who can throw a GYROBALL. Positively exciting!
From a competitive balance standpoint: some team was going to overpay for Matsuzaka, why not the Red Sox (in part to keep him out of the Bronx)? And if Matsuzaka proves to be what he promises to be, you have a super marketable Asian player that will increase your team's international profile dramatically. Just as Ichiro did for the Mariners (not suggesting Matsuzaka is as good as Ichiro, he may not even be as good as Barry Zito). In the end, this is probably just a convoluted ploy to keep Matsuzaka from ever making it to any major league club this season. God bless this ridiculous posting system.
On to the picks:
MIAMI over Kansas City
I've gone too far into this season without picking against the Dolphins. Why start now? This cowboy is not changing horses midstream, that's for sure. Plus I'm still bitter that the one week the Chiefs get blown out is the same week in which I pick them to win. They had Ben Roethlisberger IN ARROWHEAD and he tore them to shreads? I am convinced the Chiefs lost to spite me. Will the Chiefs win this week? Probably.
MINNESOTA over Green Bay
The Packers lost to Buffalo last week. The Vikings beat Buffalo in Week 4. By the transitive property of equality, the Vikings will beat the Packers. Click here to see why my logic is unsound. I just don't see Chester Taylor not running for lots of yards on the Packers defense. I don't not see it.
BALTIMORE over Tennessee
Does anyone think that Steve McNair, who has something to prove in this game, is going to break down in tears screaming "Why don't you love me?!" to Jeff Fischer after the game? Me neither. He'll be a stonecold killer this game. Stonecold. Aside from losing out on all the money the Titans were set to pay him this year, he has to be happy with his situation in Baltimore. They essentially run the "Steve, Don't F*** Up" offense, relying on their defense to do most of their scoring. So listen closely Steve: don't f*** up.
PITTSBURGH over New Orleans
I see what you're doing here, I do. The Steelers are too good to be playing this poorly and the Saints are too bad to be playing this well. When in doubt make a whimsical pick and stick by it. As John Clayton says on ESPN.com. "The question facing him [Saints coach Sean Payton] is whether he's catchin the beleaguered Steelers at the right time or the wrong time." Thanks, John, way to go out on a limb here.
Thems my picks and I'm sticking to them.
I'll go on the record right now: Matsuzaka's career will pattern Hideo Nomo's. Watch for a solid rookie year, followed by a continual declination in success. I wish we could remember this prediciton five years from now. The question remains: Do I want the Sox to sign him? Only if A) The Yanks would get him otherwise AND B) It's for less than 10 million dollars a year.
Picks, to hold or expand my lead over the hapless Saj's:
Game 1: San Francisco @ Detroit: I feel like every week you give me some sort of crap matchup involving two crap teams playing like crap. Luckily for me, the crappy Lions have three things going for them: They're the better team, they're playing better football, and they're playing at home. I owe my success to never outhinking myself like Coach Belichick last Sunday. Pick: Detroit.
Game 2: San Diego @ Cincinnati: Do you remember in the first three weeks of the season when I called Cincinatti the best team in football to that point? And then I picked them to lose at home against the Patriots in Week 4. Clearly, I hold way too much power over the universe. I've received two emails from Cincinatti urging me to pick the Bengals to turn their season around, but I'd kind of like to see Chad Johnson flip out so they trade him to New England in the offseason. The Chargers are a very good team, though I worry about their longterm potential this season until Rivers learns how to throw to Antonio Gates (on both my fantasy teams). Handing off to LT is easy against the bottom two-thirds of the league...hell it's easy against anyone, I suppose. But it may not work as well against the Broncos, Ravens, and Patriots of the world. Against Cincinatti? It will work just fine. Pick: San Diego.
Game 3: St. Louis at Seattle: As far as I read it, still no Alexander, still no Mr. Elizabeth Hasselbeck. Result: Rams get a lead then Stephen Jackson finishes at +175 AYP. Pick: St. Louis.
Game 4: Chicago at NY Giants: Very tough game. VERY tough. Time to break it down, who has the advantage in these areas:
Offense: Giants
Defense: Bears
Special teams: Even
Coaching: Even
Damnit. That didn't help. It's not that tough to see Chicago losing back to back games. They clearly have issues, despite their 7-0 start. The Giants just took a hit with Toomer out for the year and Burress ailing. It's going to be a cold night game, and both teams can handle that. Since this all still leaves us even, and since they both have reasons to lose, I go to the tiebreaker that is never tied, unless it's the Superbowl. Homefield. Pick: New York
Standings (Week 8 in parenthesis)
Ian 18-10 (2-2)
Saj 11-17 (1-3)
To our loyal readers (and by that I mean Ian and myself) I would like to apologize for not posting a "Football Friday" for Week 9. Ian was busy volunteering with autistic children and I had to go on a business trip (being a bikini inspector is fun and all, but when beach season in Rio starts it can be very tiring).
As a consequence, Ian couldn't use Week 9, and all the havoc-wreaking games that happened, as a means to increase his 7 game lead over me. Let's see if he can capitalize on my NFL retardation this week:
San Francisco at Detroit (Sunday, 1:00)
San Diego at Cincinnati (Sunday, 1:00)
St. Louis at Seattle (Sunday, 4:15)
Chicago at NY Giants (Sunday, 8:15)
Never fear, Saj. If you go 3-1 for three straight weeks, you're back to .500 for the season. But you need to dedicate more time to the NFL! I still don't understand why you don't quit your bikini expecting job so we can get more blogging done.
Here are your four games for Week 10:
Kansas City at Miami (Sunday, 1:00). Your precious Dolphins at home against a bad road team.
Green Bay at Minnesota (Sunday, 1:00). The NFC Central. Love it or leave it. Welp, see ya later.
Baltimore at Tennessee (Sunday, 1:00). *Ian rubs his hands together.* Inside your head.
New Orleans at Pittsburgh (Sunday, 4:15). The feel good vs. the feel bad stories of the year.
Before I get to my picks, ESPN.com's Buster Olney just reported that Boston Red Sox may have the top bid for the rights to negotiate with Daisuke Matsuzaka. What does this mean? Probably nothing since this is all speculation.
I am wary of the scouts who say Matsuzaka is a top of the rotation kind of guy but given how he pitched in the WBC and how people temper their expectations of Japanese players after Irabu, Nomo, and (Kaz) Matsui, I'm inclined to believe them. Plus he is the only living man who can throw a GYROBALL. Positively exciting!
From a competitive balance standpoint: some team was going to overpay for Matsuzaka, why not the Red Sox (in part to keep him out of the Bronx)? And if Matsuzaka proves to be what he promises to be, you have a super marketable Asian player that will increase your team's international profile dramatically. Just as Ichiro did for the Mariners (not suggesting Matsuzaka is as good as Ichiro, he may not even be as good as Barry Zito). In the end, this is probably just a convoluted ploy to keep Matsuzaka from ever making it to any major league club this season. God bless this ridiculous posting system.
On to the picks:
MIAMI over Kansas City
I've gone too far into this season without picking against the Dolphins. Why start now? This cowboy is not changing horses midstream, that's for sure. Plus I'm still bitter that the one week the Chiefs get blown out is the same week in which I pick them to win. They had Ben Roethlisberger IN ARROWHEAD and he tore them to shreads? I am convinced the Chiefs lost to spite me. Will the Chiefs win this week? Probably.
MINNESOTA over Green Bay
The Packers lost to Buffalo last week. The Vikings beat Buffalo in Week 4. By the transitive property of equality, the Vikings will beat the Packers. Click here to see why my logic is unsound. I just don't see Chester Taylor not running for lots of yards on the Packers defense. I don't not see it.
BALTIMORE over Tennessee
Does anyone think that Steve McNair, who has something to prove in this game, is going to break down in tears screaming "Why don't you love me?!" to Jeff Fischer after the game? Me neither. He'll be a stonecold killer this game. Stonecold. Aside from losing out on all the money the Titans were set to pay him this year, he has to be happy with his situation in Baltimore. They essentially run the "Steve, Don't F*** Up" offense, relying on their defense to do most of their scoring. So listen closely Steve: don't f*** up.
PITTSBURGH over New Orleans
I see what you're doing here, I do. The Steelers are too good to be playing this poorly and the Saints are too bad to be playing this well. When in doubt make a whimsical pick and stick by it. As John Clayton says on ESPN.com. "The question facing him [Saints coach Sean Payton] is whether he's catchin the beleaguered Steelers at the right time or the wrong time." Thanks, John, way to go out on a limb here.
Thems my picks and I'm sticking to them.
I'll go on the record right now: Matsuzaka's career will pattern Hideo Nomo's. Watch for a solid rookie year, followed by a continual declination in success. I wish we could remember this prediciton five years from now. The question remains: Do I want the Sox to sign him? Only if A) The Yanks would get him otherwise AND B) It's for less than 10 million dollars a year.
Picks, to hold or expand my lead over the hapless Saj's:
Game 1: San Francisco @ Detroit: I feel like every week you give me some sort of crap matchup involving two crap teams playing like crap. Luckily for me, the crappy Lions have three things going for them: They're the better team, they're playing better football, and they're playing at home. I owe my success to never outhinking myself like Coach Belichick last Sunday. Pick: Detroit.
Game 2: San Diego @ Cincinnati: Do you remember in the first three weeks of the season when I called Cincinatti the best team in football to that point? And then I picked them to lose at home against the Patriots in Week 4. Clearly, I hold way too much power over the universe. I've received two emails from Cincinatti urging me to pick the Bengals to turn their season around, but I'd kind of like to see Chad Johnson flip out so they trade him to New England in the offseason. The Chargers are a very good team, though I worry about their longterm potential this season until Rivers learns how to throw to Antonio Gates (on both my fantasy teams). Handing off to LT is easy against the bottom two-thirds of the league...hell it's easy against anyone, I suppose. But it may not work as well against the Broncos, Ravens, and Patriots of the world. Against Cincinatti? It will work just fine. Pick: San Diego.
Game 3: St. Louis at Seattle: As far as I read it, still no Alexander, still no Mr. Elizabeth Hasselbeck. Result: Rams get a lead then Stephen Jackson finishes at +175 AYP. Pick: St. Louis.
Game 4: Chicago at NY Giants: Very tough game. VERY tough. Time to break it down, who has the advantage in these areas:
Offense: Giants
Defense: Bears
Special teams: Even
Coaching: Even
Damnit. That didn't help. It's not that tough to see Chicago losing back to back games. They clearly have issues, despite their 7-0 start. The Giants just took a hit with Toomer out for the year and Burress ailing. It's going to be a cold night game, and both teams can handle that. Since this all still leaves us even, and since they both have reasons to lose, I go to the tiebreaker that is never tied, unless it's the Superbowl. Homefield. Pick: New York
Thursday, November 09, 2006
NFL: Pats vs. Colts fallout
Things have been hectic here in blog-land, so let's catch up with a recap of what's been going on in sports lately:
The Patriots defeated common sense playcalling and lost to the Colts, Tiger Woods started his own golf course design firm, Larry Brown settled with the Knicks on a $18.5 million pay day, and Terrell Owens proved that he's not only a narcoleptic, but that he's also a loudmouth a****** who can't catch the football.
That is certainly a very link heavy paragraph, I will give you time to sort through it before I publicly thank Ian for drafting my NBA fantasy team for me. Aside from a few missteps (READ: Nick Collison) he did a pretty good job building a fantasy team with no three point shooters or true point guards.
Yes, things certainly have been hectic, what with me covering the election and Saj pretending to have a social life. Let's wrap up loose ends before returning to Football Friday tomorrow.
I'm trying to figure out Belichick last weekend. I know there was some sort of reason for the crap he pulled. Like last year, when the Pats lost to Miami on the last week of the season. He had Flutie experiment with that drop kick, and on the last play I'm fairly certain he told Matt Cassel to not complete a pass. Cassel seemed to be "acting" disappointed when he didn't tie the game going for 2. Anyway, the purpose of this was clear. If the Pats won, they had to host the hot and physical Steelers in the first round. (That's right, I said hot and physical.) If they lost, they got to host Jacksonville in cooooold Foxboro. Which would you rather do? I would even go as far to say Belichick knew Pitt would upend Cincinatti, thereby going to Indianapolis the following week and either defeating top seeded Indy or at least beating them up before the AFC championship.
The point? Like me on the chess board, Belichick is usually four steps ahead of everyone else. So why didn't he do something as simple as run the ball against a run-defense more porous than Spongebob Squarepants? I began to consider reasons why he'd want to lose, like the Miami game next year. I wondered if it was better that we didn't show the Colts too much in the regular season. I wondered if Belichick and Brady wanted to get the reveivers' confidence up. I wondered if Belichick decided to drop acid while watching the Sunday afternoon games. But in the end, I decided there could be no reason that outweighs what a win would have accomplished.
Defeating the Colts would have put New England in the driver's seat for homefield advantage in the AFC. The Pats would be tied with the Colts but have the tiebreaker, as well as remain a game up on the Broncos. Now? The Pats are third behind those two squads, with teams like the Chargers and Ravens right there with two losses. It's a shame. Does anyone doubt New England would have had success running the ball? Travis Henry looked like the second coming of Emmit Smith, imagine what what Dillon and Maroney would have looked like.
I can't believe I'm saying this, but Belichick got outcoached. Let's hope it doesn't happen again.
How about them Bears? If given the option of Bears, Giants, and Panthers or the field for the NFC Championship, which side do you take?
(One more thing...you fantasy team will be just fine. Just stay patient. And hold onto Collison for a while.)
Just dropped Nick Collison for Luke Walton. He's averaging more fouls per game than points. And you're right Belicheck was outcoached last Sunday. BY HIMSELF. The Colts did what they supposed to do (THEY WERE WHO WE THOUGHT THEY WERE), they scored points. By not sending Maroney or Dillon up the gut on every first down play the Patriots were not exploiting their weakness.
Out of the NFC I'm going to take the field, I really am. You still have St. Louis, Atlanta, New Orleans, Philadelphia, Dallas, Seattle floating around out there. If you asked me which single team has the best chance to win the conference, I'd say the Giants.
Tony Romo: discuss.
I find Tony Romo as one of the more overrated players in the NFL. Leaving my partisan ship towards Drew Bledsoe out of this, let's take a look at Romo. He has three games worth of NFL experience. He has one NFL win under his belt. He threw three interceptions in his first half of football. He lost to a Washington Redskins team that his team handily defeated earlier in the year with the quarterback he replaced. And people are talking savior? To me, until he proves otherwise, he's just like JP Losman or Andrew Walter. I can't even say he's as good as Tampa Bay's Grostowksiskwksoiwki, because that kid is winning with a LOT less talent around him. Romo has Owens, Glenn, Witten, Jones, Parcells, and a top defense and couldn't beat Washington. That worries me.
So why is Tony Romo hailed a savior who is so loved by Cowboys fans? I've said this before. His name is Tony Romo. It's a great name.
Now I can tie in both of your points: Giants and Romo. I was eating dinner with some friends last night; one of them was a Giants fan and knowledgeable football fan. (But he wasn't the dreaded Giants-Yankees combo). He told me the exact moment he knew they were making the playoffs and, depending on Philly, winning the NFC East. It was when Parcells succumbed to the pressure and put in Romo, probably for the year. Until that point, he said, he was afraid of a dangerous Cowboys team, mostly because it was Parcells in his 3rd year. He said when they brought in the kid with no experience, it had him jumping for joy. (He also claimed to have predicted Romo getting picked off in his first throw.) This Giants fan said, and I'm paraphrasing: "Right there, I knew we would win that game, meaning we're in first place in the division over the Cowboys, and we would pull away because they just benched a 10+ year veteran for a kid with no experience outside of preseason and practice."
Okay, we should save the rest of football for Football Friday tomorrow.
The Patriots defeated common sense playcalling and lost to the Colts, Tiger Woods started his own golf course design firm, Larry Brown settled with the Knicks on a $18.5 million pay day, and Terrell Owens proved that he's not only a narcoleptic, but that he's also a loudmouth a****** who can't catch the football.
That is certainly a very link heavy paragraph, I will give you time to sort through it before I publicly thank Ian for drafting my NBA fantasy team for me. Aside from a few missteps (READ: Nick Collison) he did a pretty good job building a fantasy team with no three point shooters or true point guards.
Yes, things certainly have been hectic, what with me covering the election and Saj pretending to have a social life. Let's wrap up loose ends before returning to Football Friday tomorrow.
I'm trying to figure out Belichick last weekend. I know there was some sort of reason for the crap he pulled. Like last year, when the Pats lost to Miami on the last week of the season. He had Flutie experiment with that drop kick, and on the last play I'm fairly certain he told Matt Cassel to not complete a pass. Cassel seemed to be "acting" disappointed when he didn't tie the game going for 2. Anyway, the purpose of this was clear. If the Pats won, they had to host the hot and physical Steelers in the first round. (That's right, I said hot and physical.) If they lost, they got to host Jacksonville in cooooold Foxboro. Which would you rather do? I would even go as far to say Belichick knew Pitt would upend Cincinatti, thereby going to Indianapolis the following week and either defeating top seeded Indy or at least beating them up before the AFC championship.
The point? Like me on the chess board, Belichick is usually four steps ahead of everyone else. So why didn't he do something as simple as run the ball against a run-defense more porous than Spongebob Squarepants? I began to consider reasons why he'd want to lose, like the Miami game next year. I wondered if it was better that we didn't show the Colts too much in the regular season. I wondered if Belichick and Brady wanted to get the reveivers' confidence up. I wondered if Belichick decided to drop acid while watching the Sunday afternoon games. But in the end, I decided there could be no reason that outweighs what a win would have accomplished.
Defeating the Colts would have put New England in the driver's seat for homefield advantage in the AFC. The Pats would be tied with the Colts but have the tiebreaker, as well as remain a game up on the Broncos. Now? The Pats are third behind those two squads, with teams like the Chargers and Ravens right there with two losses. It's a shame. Does anyone doubt New England would have had success running the ball? Travis Henry looked like the second coming of Emmit Smith, imagine what what Dillon and Maroney would have looked like.
I can't believe I'm saying this, but Belichick got outcoached. Let's hope it doesn't happen again.
How about them Bears? If given the option of Bears, Giants, and Panthers or the field for the NFC Championship, which side do you take?
(One more thing...you fantasy team will be just fine. Just stay patient. And hold onto Collison for a while.)
Just dropped Nick Collison for Luke Walton. He's averaging more fouls per game than points. And you're right Belicheck was outcoached last Sunday. BY HIMSELF. The Colts did what they supposed to do (THEY WERE WHO WE THOUGHT THEY WERE), they scored points. By not sending Maroney or Dillon up the gut on every first down play the Patriots were not exploiting their weakness.
Out of the NFC I'm going to take the field, I really am. You still have St. Louis, Atlanta, New Orleans, Philadelphia, Dallas, Seattle floating around out there. If you asked me which single team has the best chance to win the conference, I'd say the Giants.
Tony Romo: discuss.
I find Tony Romo as one of the more overrated players in the NFL. Leaving my partisan ship towards Drew Bledsoe out of this, let's take a look at Romo. He has three games worth of NFL experience. He has one NFL win under his belt. He threw three interceptions in his first half of football. He lost to a Washington Redskins team that his team handily defeated earlier in the year with the quarterback he replaced. And people are talking savior? To me, until he proves otherwise, he's just like JP Losman or Andrew Walter. I can't even say he's as good as Tampa Bay's Grostowksiskwksoiwki, because that kid is winning with a LOT less talent around him. Romo has Owens, Glenn, Witten, Jones, Parcells, and a top defense and couldn't beat Washington. That worries me.
So why is Tony Romo hailed a savior who is so loved by Cowboys fans? I've said this before. His name is Tony Romo. It's a great name.
Now I can tie in both of your points: Giants and Romo. I was eating dinner with some friends last night; one of them was a Giants fan and knowledgeable football fan. (But he wasn't the dreaded Giants-Yankees combo). He told me the exact moment he knew they were making the playoffs and, depending on Philly, winning the NFC East. It was when Parcells succumbed to the pressure and put in Romo, probably for the year. Until that point, he said, he was afraid of a dangerous Cowboys team, mostly because it was Parcells in his 3rd year. He said when they brought in the kid with no experience, it had him jumping for joy. (He also claimed to have predicted Romo getting picked off in his first throw.) This Giants fan said, and I'm paraphrasing: "Right there, I knew we would win that game, meaning we're in first place in the division over the Cowboys, and we would pull away because they just benched a 10+ year veteran for a kid with no experience outside of preseason and practice."
Okay, we should save the rest of football for Football Friday tomorrow.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
