When you called me Skip Bayless a few posts ago I half got the insult. But today when I was home sick from work I caught a little bit of "Cold Pizza" on ESPN2. Now I really get the insult. Not cool man. Not cool.
Well, the exaggeration to show your contrarianism was necessary to drive home the point. You made a crack about my lack of second date success, when we both know there has only been one girl on this planet who wasn't hooked after the second date. But that is a subject that should never be spoken of again. However, because I like you, I retract the Skip Bayless comparison. It was below the belt and I apologize. (But come on, man, you took the Bears. Did you expect a favorable comparison?)
Friday, February 09, 2007
Thursday, February 08, 2007
NFL: Manning's Place in History and Top Ten Quarterbacks
The title of this post is self explanitory. Before we delve into some back and forth on the subject, I should offer this caveat: We know his career isn't over yet. We will proceed as if the rest of his career will continue as normal, with him peaking during these prime years, and then a gradual decline into retirement.
Now, once that is all said and done, where do we expect him to rank amongst the all time great quarterbacks in history. The names most discussed for this mantle are: Unitas, Starr, Bradshaw, Montana, Marino, Favre, Elway, Brady, and now Manning.
What's interesting to note is that it seemed like overnight, Manning joined this list. Saj, I'd like your thoughts on not only where he ranks (And these thoughts can develop over several posts) but what you think about his career becoming "validated" with a Superbowl ring. In essence: Did he go from being a great QB to being an all time QB in the two weeks from from January 21st to February 5th? Did a two-week stretch allow him to be discussed with the alltimers?
No. What allows Peyton Manning to be discussed with the alltimers is his statistical dominance and the great potential for that dominance to continue. Everybody knows my feelings on Peyton Manning. But he has exceptional physical gifts, an almost unrivaled work ethic, and a Brady-esque awareness of the rush in the pocket (except with a better offensive line) that ensures he will almost never take a big hit. And because he's a big, pocket guy with a quick release and a great play action fake who plays in a dome, he could play until he's 45 years old.
The reason people perceive Peyton differently, and say that he needed to win "the big one" to be considered truly great, is that Peyton's Colts have been so very good over the last six years or so. He's been consistently left at the doorstep to the Superbowl like Ian on a second date. So he was unfairly labeled a choke artist because he always led his team to dominance only in the regular season. And yes his commercials are terrible, he pouts on the sideline, he's not charismatic, and he looks like he gets his hair cut by a blind, autistic toddler. I wil make fun of those things until the day I die (or the day he gets a new haircut). But you can't deny that he is the best quarterback in the game and probably the best ever. So he's had some pedestrian games against good defenses and good coaches in the playoffs. It happens.
As for the whole idea of validation through championship for guys like Manning, Marino, Barkley, I think its a little over-dramatized. Is Marino a worse quarterback for having never won a Superbowl or Barkley a worse forward for never having won an NBA Championship? I say no. A lot of things affect the outcome of a football or basketball game and many of those things are out of an individual player's control. Except for Alex Rodriguez. He's a choker.
Ian, give me your top ten quarterbacks on our viewing lifetime (let's say late 1980's to present day). This will probably be unprofessional and unreliable but we never made claims to professionalism or reliability.
Done. In reverse order for dramatic effect:
10. Vinny Testeverde - Sixth all time in passing yards and completions, and ninth all time in touchdown passes. Also holds the record for consecutive seasons with a touchdown pass. Bonus points for being the only quarterback to play this year that was playing before the late 80's. The problem was that he never played any big games.
9. Drew Bledsoe - Considered putting him in the Top 1. Record for most passes completed in one game (45), fourth all time in 400 yard games (6), sixth all time in consecutive 300 yard games (4), record for most passes in a game without an interception (70!), third most completions in one season, fifth all time in completions, seventh all time in passing yards. Only 33 years of age so he'll move up those all time charts if he gets a starting job. Won two AFC Championships and was a backup on a Superbowl winning team.
8. Troy Aikman - Makes the list mostly on the merits of three Superbowl championships. Not the strongest arm, not the most talent, but he quarterbacked a dynasty and won Superbowls with two different coaches.
7. Steve Young - Highest passer rating for a career (96.8). Aikman might have two more rings, but he had more time to do it in, and if I had to start a team with the early 90's quarterbacks, I'd take Young before Aikman.
6. Peyton Manning - Stats will be top 3 across the board and he has a Superbowl ring.
5. Tom Brady - But most of the country would still take this guy in a big spot. Three rings in his first four seasons. His numbers aren't like Mannings, but he's never had offensive lines, receivers, or running backs as good as Peyton Manning. Brady has a better chance than anyone since Bradshaw and Montana to win four Superbowls from the quarterback position. If he can get a fifth, it might be the most desireable record in the sport. And he's only played six seasons.
4. John Elway - Appeared in four Superbowls and won two of them. Fourth all time touchdown passes, third all time passing completions, third all time passing yards, second all time in total yards, NFL record 40 4th quarter comebacks.
3. Dan Marino - He has all the records...until Manning breaks them. The glaring deficiency in the case for Dan Marino is his lack of a championship. Marino has career records in Passing TD's and yards, and is second in completions. All told, he has 20 NFL records.
2. Brett Favre - Remember how Marino is second all time in completions? Well, this guy is first. And he has a Superbowl ring and won a second NFC championship. Based on pure talent and competetiveness alone, you could stack Favre up against any quarterback to ever play the game. I really hope his last couple of years doesn't sully his legendary status.
1. Joe Montana - 11 playoff appearances, nine divisional championships, four Super Bowls (XVI, XIX, XXIII, and XXIV), three Superbowl MVP's, three time all pro, eight time pro-bowler, and the best clutch quarterback of our lifetime.
Disagreements?
Yes. How could you pass up Jim Kelly and Warren Moon for Vinny Testaverde and Drew Bledsoe? I understand how much you love Drew, but come on. That makes as much sense as castrating yourself with rusty, dirty gardening shears. Everyone knows you should sterilize the shears before cutting. Bledsoe and Testaverde are 58 and 67 respectively in all time passer rating. Kelly and Moon: 14 and 31. I'm not saying that passer rating is a perfect stat, in fact I believe it's value has declined over the last ten or fifteen years, but its a good indicator or just how Kelly and Moon were consistently better than Bledsoe and Testaverde. My ten:
10. Troy Aikman - benefitted from a great coach (Jimmy Johnson), and spendthrift owner (Jerry Jones), the all-time leading rusher (Emmitt Smith), and super-talented cokehead receiver (Michael Irvin). But, as you said, he did win three Superbowls. If these rankings were based on concussions, well- okay, I won't say it. But I'll think it. (hint: I'm thinking Aikman-Young as 1A and 1B).
9. Jim Kelly - It's tough to drop Jim Kelly this far down the list, but it's much easier when you see who I placed above him. Kelly was another benefactor of a talented team and a talented coach. Plus I saw him on the Tim McCarver show once and he seems like a really nice guy. Kelly, not McCarver. McCarver is very dumb.
8. Warren Moon - A LOOOONNNGG NFL career allowed Warren to reach 4th and 5th all time in passing yards and touchdowns respectively. And that followed a stint in the CFL where he won five consecutive Grey Cups (like the Superbowl but for Canadians. So it ranks in importance somewhere between the Bud Bowl and that stupid college bowl game they play in Boise.) While I'm making this decision solely based on the little I know about football, you can't ignore the trouble Warren Moon had as a black quarterback in the late 70's to early 80's. Most colleges that recruited him requested that he switch positions and there's speculation that he went undrafted for the same reason.
7. Tom Brady - You said it correctly: three Superbowls in six years. Tom's eleventh all time in QB rating and first all time in my heart. Sigh.
6. Peyton Manning - By the end of his career, he will probably be at the top of this list. And I'll be an old man who is pathetically still making this stupid list for this blog that no one reads. I've said it before and I'll say it again: Peyton Manning is like Alex Rodriguez. Preternaturally talented, works his arse off, but nobody likes him because of those exact reasons.
5. Steve Young - Who knew a short Mormon who ran the West Coast offense would become the Greatest Rushing Quarterback in History B.V. (Before Vick)? Actually, I did. Best all time quarterback rating (ignoring Kurt Warner), gunslinging lefty motion (southpaw here), and the fact that he was traded to San Francisco by Tampa Bay to make way for a young Vinny Testaverde in 1987 made Steve Young my favorite player growing up. When I found out he was born in Connecticut I flipped out.
4. John Elway - My top four are pretty much the same as your top four so I'll spare most of the details. John Elway endorsed the vortex football.
3. Dan Marino - 420 touchdown passes. Not counting Favre (who is six away) the next closest is Fran Tarkenton at 342. Peyton Manning is the next closest active player with 275. Peyton will probably catch him (20 or so touchdowns a year for seven more seasons) but taking a look at Marino's contemporaries and the closest (Elway) he outdistanced by 120 touchdowns. Ninth all time in passer rating over the most attempts in NFL history.
2. Brett Favre - Favre gets the edge over Marino because 1) he will break Marino's yards, TDs, and possibly attempts records before he retires, 2) 7th all time in QB rating, and 3) he either pronounces or spells his name incorrectly. Quite possibly the most fun quarterback to watch play what with the shovel passes and all that stuff.
1. Joe Montana - Undeniably the best. It's hard to say if Marino would own all those records if he had the four Superbowls that Montana had. He might have retired a few years earlier. And it's hard to say that Montana wouldn't have the records Marino had if he didn't win all those Superbowls. Bottom line: second all time in QB rating, The Catch to Dwight Clark, the Superbowls, the Pro Bowls, the stint in Kansas City that never really happened. Even a great quarterback name. Joe Montana.
Honorable Mention: Phil Simms, Drew Bledsoe, Shaun King, and Joe Girardi.
You're right, you're right. Sweet sassy molassey, you're right. I can't make the argument for Bledsoe over Moon because Moon has comparable stats and I can't make the argument for Bledsoe over Kelly because Kelly is the only quarterback to go to four straight Superbowls. I'll say Bledsoe is at #11, and I think Testeverde definitely deserves honorable mention. Other than that, you're right. Unlike you, I can seem to admit when I'm wrong (see Superbowl). BOOYAH.
Now, once that is all said and done, where do we expect him to rank amongst the all time great quarterbacks in history. The names most discussed for this mantle are: Unitas, Starr, Bradshaw, Montana, Marino, Favre, Elway, Brady, and now Manning.
What's interesting to note is that it seemed like overnight, Manning joined this list. Saj, I'd like your thoughts on not only where he ranks (And these thoughts can develop over several posts) but what you think about his career becoming "validated" with a Superbowl ring. In essence: Did he go from being a great QB to being an all time QB in the two weeks from from January 21st to February 5th? Did a two-week stretch allow him to be discussed with the alltimers?
No. What allows Peyton Manning to be discussed with the alltimers is his statistical dominance and the great potential for that dominance to continue. Everybody knows my feelings on Peyton Manning. But he has exceptional physical gifts, an almost unrivaled work ethic, and a Brady-esque awareness of the rush in the pocket (except with a better offensive line) that ensures he will almost never take a big hit. And because he's a big, pocket guy with a quick release and a great play action fake who plays in a dome, he could play until he's 45 years old.
The reason people perceive Peyton differently, and say that he needed to win "the big one" to be considered truly great, is that Peyton's Colts have been so very good over the last six years or so. He's been consistently left at the doorstep to the Superbowl like Ian on a second date. So he was unfairly labeled a choke artist because he always led his team to dominance only in the regular season. And yes his commercials are terrible, he pouts on the sideline, he's not charismatic, and he looks like he gets his hair cut by a blind, autistic toddler. I wil make fun of those things until the day I die (or the day he gets a new haircut). But you can't deny that he is the best quarterback in the game and probably the best ever. So he's had some pedestrian games against good defenses and good coaches in the playoffs. It happens.
As for the whole idea of validation through championship for guys like Manning, Marino, Barkley, I think its a little over-dramatized. Is Marino a worse quarterback for having never won a Superbowl or Barkley a worse forward for never having won an NBA Championship? I say no. A lot of things affect the outcome of a football or basketball game and many of those things are out of an individual player's control. Except for Alex Rodriguez. He's a choker.
Ian, give me your top ten quarterbacks on our viewing lifetime (let's say late 1980's to present day). This will probably be unprofessional and unreliable but we never made claims to professionalism or reliability.
Done. In reverse order for dramatic effect:
10. Vinny Testeverde - Sixth all time in passing yards and completions, and ninth all time in touchdown passes. Also holds the record for consecutive seasons with a touchdown pass. Bonus points for being the only quarterback to play this year that was playing before the late 80's. The problem was that he never played any big games.
9. Drew Bledsoe - Considered putting him in the Top 1. Record for most passes completed in one game (45), fourth all time in 400 yard games (6), sixth all time in consecutive 300 yard games (4), record for most passes in a game without an interception (70!), third most completions in one season, fifth all time in completions, seventh all time in passing yards. Only 33 years of age so he'll move up those all time charts if he gets a starting job. Won two AFC Championships and was a backup on a Superbowl winning team.
8. Troy Aikman - Makes the list mostly on the merits of three Superbowl championships. Not the strongest arm, not the most talent, but he quarterbacked a dynasty and won Superbowls with two different coaches.
7. Steve Young - Highest passer rating for a career (96.8). Aikman might have two more rings, but he had more time to do it in, and if I had to start a team with the early 90's quarterbacks, I'd take Young before Aikman.
6. Peyton Manning - Stats will be top 3 across the board and he has a Superbowl ring.
5. Tom Brady - But most of the country would still take this guy in a big spot. Three rings in his first four seasons. His numbers aren't like Mannings, but he's never had offensive lines, receivers, or running backs as good as Peyton Manning. Brady has a better chance than anyone since Bradshaw and Montana to win four Superbowls from the quarterback position. If he can get a fifth, it might be the most desireable record in the sport. And he's only played six seasons.
4. John Elway - Appeared in four Superbowls and won two of them. Fourth all time touchdown passes, third all time passing completions, third all time passing yards, second all time in total yards, NFL record 40 4th quarter comebacks.
3. Dan Marino - He has all the records...until Manning breaks them. The glaring deficiency in the case for Dan Marino is his lack of a championship. Marino has career records in Passing TD's and yards, and is second in completions. All told, he has 20 NFL records.
2. Brett Favre - Remember how Marino is second all time in completions? Well, this guy is first. And he has a Superbowl ring and won a second NFC championship. Based on pure talent and competetiveness alone, you could stack Favre up against any quarterback to ever play the game. I really hope his last couple of years doesn't sully his legendary status.
1. Joe Montana - 11 playoff appearances, nine divisional championships, four Super Bowls (XVI, XIX, XXIII, and XXIV), three Superbowl MVP's, three time all pro, eight time pro-bowler, and the best clutch quarterback of our lifetime.
Disagreements?
Yes. How could you pass up Jim Kelly and Warren Moon for Vinny Testaverde and Drew Bledsoe? I understand how much you love Drew, but come on. That makes as much sense as castrating yourself with rusty, dirty gardening shears. Everyone knows you should sterilize the shears before cutting. Bledsoe and Testaverde are 58 and 67 respectively in all time passer rating. Kelly and Moon: 14 and 31. I'm not saying that passer rating is a perfect stat, in fact I believe it's value has declined over the last ten or fifteen years, but its a good indicator or just how Kelly and Moon were consistently better than Bledsoe and Testaverde. My ten:
10. Troy Aikman - benefitted from a great coach (Jimmy Johnson), and spendthrift owner (Jerry Jones), the all-time leading rusher (Emmitt Smith), and super-talented cokehead receiver (Michael Irvin). But, as you said, he did win three Superbowls. If these rankings were based on concussions, well- okay, I won't say it. But I'll think it. (hint: I'm thinking Aikman-Young as 1A and 1B).
9. Jim Kelly - It's tough to drop Jim Kelly this far down the list, but it's much easier when you see who I placed above him. Kelly was another benefactor of a talented team and a talented coach. Plus I saw him on the Tim McCarver show once and he seems like a really nice guy. Kelly, not McCarver. McCarver is very dumb.
8. Warren Moon - A LOOOONNNGG NFL career allowed Warren to reach 4th and 5th all time in passing yards and touchdowns respectively. And that followed a stint in the CFL where he won five consecutive Grey Cups (like the Superbowl but for Canadians. So it ranks in importance somewhere between the Bud Bowl and that stupid college bowl game they play in Boise.) While I'm making this decision solely based on the little I know about football, you can't ignore the trouble Warren Moon had as a black quarterback in the late 70's to early 80's. Most colleges that recruited him requested that he switch positions and there's speculation that he went undrafted for the same reason.
7. Tom Brady - You said it correctly: three Superbowls in six years. Tom's eleventh all time in QB rating and first all time in my heart. Sigh.
6. Peyton Manning - By the end of his career, he will probably be at the top of this list. And I'll be an old man who is pathetically still making this stupid list for this blog that no one reads. I've said it before and I'll say it again: Peyton Manning is like Alex Rodriguez. Preternaturally talented, works his arse off, but nobody likes him because of those exact reasons.
5. Steve Young - Who knew a short Mormon who ran the West Coast offense would become the Greatest Rushing Quarterback in History B.V. (Before Vick)? Actually, I did. Best all time quarterback rating (ignoring Kurt Warner), gunslinging lefty motion (southpaw here), and the fact that he was traded to San Francisco by Tampa Bay to make way for a young Vinny Testaverde in 1987 made Steve Young my favorite player growing up. When I found out he was born in Connecticut I flipped out.
4. John Elway - My top four are pretty much the same as your top four so I'll spare most of the details. John Elway endorsed the vortex football.
3. Dan Marino - 420 touchdown passes. Not counting Favre (who is six away) the next closest is Fran Tarkenton at 342. Peyton Manning is the next closest active player with 275. Peyton will probably catch him (20 or so touchdowns a year for seven more seasons) but taking a look at Marino's contemporaries and the closest (Elway) he outdistanced by 120 touchdowns. Ninth all time in passer rating over the most attempts in NFL history.
2. Brett Favre - Favre gets the edge over Marino because 1) he will break Marino's yards, TDs, and possibly attempts records before he retires, 2) 7th all time in QB rating, and 3) he either pronounces or spells his name incorrectly. Quite possibly the most fun quarterback to watch play what with the shovel passes and all that stuff.
1. Joe Montana - Undeniably the best. It's hard to say if Marino would own all those records if he had the four Superbowls that Montana had. He might have retired a few years earlier. And it's hard to say that Montana wouldn't have the records Marino had if he didn't win all those Superbowls. Bottom line: second all time in QB rating, The Catch to Dwight Clark, the Superbowls, the Pro Bowls, the stint in Kansas City that never really happened. Even a great quarterback name. Joe Montana.
Honorable Mention: Phil Simms, Drew Bledsoe, Shaun King, and Joe Girardi.
You're right, you're right. Sweet sassy molassey, you're right. I can't make the argument for Bledsoe over Moon because Moon has comparable stats and I can't make the argument for Bledsoe over Kelly because Kelly is the only quarterback to go to four straight Superbowls. I'll say Bledsoe is at #11, and I think Testeverde definitely deserves honorable mention. Other than that, you're right. Unlike you, I can seem to admit when I'm wrong (see Superbowl). BOOYAH.
Wednesday, February 07, 2007
Weekday Filler: Sweet Sassy Molassey!
Since we're too busy to post, here's a brilliant Sportscenter parody from SNL back in 2000.
"This guy on the Bruins, he says, 'I'll shoot the puck anywhere I want. And if that happens to be in your pooper, so be it.' Stu-manji!"
"This guy on the Bruins, he says, 'I'll shoot the puck anywhere I want. And if that happens to be in your pooper, so be it.' Stu-manji!"
Monday, February 05, 2007
NFL: Superbowl Recap
Last night, our blog redeemed itself, if that was even still possible. After Saj and I got swept during the Championship round, we’ve come back with a vengeance. Before I get into the gloating portion of my post, let me just applaud Saj for pulling off a great joke when we made our picks last Friday. His out-of-left-field, convoluted supporting arguments (Brady dates Giselle…ha!) were perfect examples of the contrived reasons Colts haters and casual fans came up with in order to pick the team they wanted to win instead of the team that was going to win.
What I’m most proud of is not my pick, because that was the easy part. It’s the fact that I was so sure this would happen in the face of the out-of-control Bears bandwagon that had gained steam. For two weeks, it was en vogue to pick the Bears, while picking Manning and the Colts was decidedly uncool. As usual, I embrace uncool as if it were my brother.
Before I get into a lengthy list about my accurate predictions, I should address the few things I was wrong about. The most glaring example is that the Colts backfield was quite impressive. I maintain that this was not possible without their stalwart air attack, but I privately (and now publically) acknowledged to Saj that I ‘misnomer’ed the Colts as a “one-dimensional offense.”
Another example of an erred prediction was the one that said I would not stay up for the entire games. This, of course, turned out to be false once I realized I might miss history. I was worried that I'd be turning off the Superbowl that could set the record for fumbles and turnovers.
Okay, now on to the gloating. Here’s the Top 10 things I was right about in Superbowl XLI.
1. First, the AFC Champ outclassed the NFC Champ in every conceivable stat. This was as predictable as anything. Just like that NFC run of the 80’s and 90’s, the superior conference produced the team that was battle tested and simply better. You could count on them winning the Superbowl regardless of the record of the team from the inferior conference.
2. The Bears defense is not that good for the three reasons I outlined, none more significant than their less than stellar play since the loss of Tommie Harris, and less notably, Mike Brown.
3. Rex Grossman deserved every joke we made about him. How that last drive didn’t result in a 4th interception, I don’t know.
3a. My quote from Friday “…Jim Nantz yelps after Grossman's third interception.”
4. Accurate ways of determining a winner were foolishly thrown out the window by Bears apologists. Contrarians and New Englanders insisted on letting bias get in the way of objectivity, especially with two weeks to build up said bias. Picking Indianapolis made all the sense in the world. What’s wrong with saying, “While I’m pulling for underdog Chicago, I just gotta take that jerk Peyton Manning because the Colts are just better.”?
5. ESPN Page 2 columnists like Bill Simmons, Scoop Jackson, and Jamele Hill all took the Bears. Ron Jawarski, Mel Kiper, and Sal Paolantonio too the Colts by 10, 13, and 11, respectively. The Colts won by 12.
6. I’m not exactly sure what constitutes “big” when I said the Colts are going to win big. Twelve points might not be enough for a scoreboard blow out. That being said, the Colts dominated on both sides of the ball and were driving within 2 minutes and allowed themselves to turn the ball over on downs.
7. Don’t get down against the Colts. The only way the Bears could have won was in a blowout, and that was a long shot at best. All other scenarios were too much to overcome for them. They were in a close game and then they were down two scores. In both scenarios, the Bears, and especially their joke of a quarterback, stunk, as predicted.
8. The Colts fell down very early and could not possibly be counted out.
9. I acknowledged that the game could very well be close midway through the 3rd quarter, but I foresaw that the Colts would end up pulling away convincingly. (Note: Saj said the game could be 16-13 with 8 minutes left in the 3rd quarter. The score was 16-14. The guy is good.)
10. It was not a good Superbowl.
Saj, I have more to say, and I'm not nearly done ripping the Bears and all who took them to win. I'll allow this time now to let you get some words in on the Superbowl that was.
At the very beginning of the game last night, after Devin Hester's kick-off return for the touchdown, I asked Ian to apologize in this space when the Bears win. And he requested the same of me in the seemingly unlikely event of a Bears loss. Well, the unlikely came to pass. Hell froze over, it was a sloppy rain-filled game, and Prince's performance caused old people across the nation to wonder 1) who the nice young lady performing at halftime was and 2) why she didn't get that moustache of hers taken care of.
Since Ian, after the game, advised me not to engineer the back-handed faux-apology which I was, in fact, engineering at the time, here is as sincere an apology as I am capable:
I am sorry that Lovie Smith played his safeties so far back in the Cover 2 that he left Peyton Manning with perfect little dink and dunk passes under the zone instead of forcing him to throw the ball down the field through a driving rain. I am also sorry that somehow Chicago safety Chris Harris botched the coverage so badly that Reggie Wayne was left wide open and streaking down the field for the Colts first touchdown. On that play, Wayne was more open than a Chinese restaurant on Christmas.
I am sorry that Rex Grossman did not win the MVP award. He contributed more to the Colts win than any other single player. How does he fumble the snap? TWICE?? Say all you want about nerves, but Rex Grossman has been taking snaps as a quarterback for at least fifteen years of his life. And between the University of Florida and starting games in the NFL, he's played his fair share of crowds. I don't believe in nerves, I believe in poor preparation and poor execution. And he executed just as poorly as he did during the season. After that second interception I was praying for a Griese sighting. Hell, even give me Kyle Orton and his fabulous neck beard. SIDENOTE: I've had a beard for going on eight months now and only two things have lead me to consider shaving it. The first: eating an ice cream cone. It's very messy and your face smells like ice cream for the rest of the day. The second: Kyle Orton's neckbeard. Homeless, terrorist, ugly, I can take all those. But the day someone compares my beard to Kyle Orton's is the day I nair the motherf***** right off.
I'm sorry that CBS followed up the ratings bonanza Superbowl telecast with "Criminal Minds"; a generically terrible, mindless crime drama that only 75 year olds watch from it's full stable of generically terrible, mindless crime dramas that only 75 year olds watch. If anything, choose that timeslot to launch one of your generically terrible, mindless reality shows that could hit across demographics. In the end the blame is shared between Nielsen Media Research and the Midwest.
And lastly I am sorry for America. And no I'm not talking about how much the commercials sucked or how we had to hear Shannon Sharpe flubber on at halftime about all the fumbles. I'm talking about the fact that Peyton Manning won a Superbowl. As a rule, it's never good for this country when the best player in the league wins the Lombardi trophy while we're at war. Think back to the great wars that America has won. The Revolutionary War. The War of 1812. The Civil War. World Wars I and II. During exactly none of those wars did the best football player in the NFL win the Superbowl. I am certain of this. With the way things are going in Iraq and Afghanistan this does not bode well for the country.
Bottom Line: Peyton Manning does not support our troops.
I appreciate your humor, your hatred of Peyton Manning, like the Dark Side, clouds everything, even what's right in front of you. What would Tom Brady's solution to the Deep Cover 2 have been? The exact same as Peyton Mannings. Why can't you just appreciate what Peyton Manning just did? He just Bradied the Pats and the Bears. He took everything the defense gave him. What do you think would have happened if Lovie Smith tightened up the Cover 2? The Bears would have been beaten deep. I think it was the Deep Cover 2 that kept the Bears in the game for that long, anyway. The Colts were the far superior team last night.
And you know what? They'd be the far superior team every night. For those who picked the Bears, I'd be curious as to how they would have answered this question before the game: If these two teams played 100 times, would the Bears win more than half? Would anyone outside of Illinois said yes? So why would someone pick the Bears to win the game. Saj, if these two teams played 100 times, the Colts would win more than 80. They dominated this game and you know it.
I mean, look at what went wrong for the Colts and right for the Bears early last night. The Bears knew they couldn't get down early. Grossman and the running game needed a lead and they got it. Hester returned the opening kickoff for a TD. Manning threw a pick in his first drive and looks shaky early. The Colts botch an extra point. Vinatieri misses a field goal. It's the first Superbowl with rain, surely helping the team that relies on running and defense! Everything the Bears needed to happen did happen. And they still got smoked.
What else could Bears fans have hoped for? Grossman not to suck? How could anyone count on that? The first joke cracked by my ninth grader this morning was that he should have won the MVP. I seriously don't know how anyone could have picked the Bears in this one. The quarterback disparity was just too large. The only times quarterbacks nearly as bad as Grossman won Superbowls in the last ten years was Trent Dilfer and Brad Johnson, and they had two all time defenses on their team, not to mention they were facing Kerry Collins and Rich Gannon. Other than those two situations, which quarterbacks have won the last 20 Superbowls? Look at these names: Brady, Warner (MVP season), Elway, Favre, Young, Aikman, Simms, Montana, and two time pro-bowler Mark Rypien.
My point? Taking Grossman over Manning is a joke, especially when Manning's team is more talented.
You know what? YOU'RE A JOKE. You ever think of that? Huh?
And tell your son of a bitch ninth grader that the Grossman for MVP joke was my joke first (unless he's reading this). I'll get you for this, Peyton Manning!
Game, Set, Match: Ian. I look forward to our baseball predictions next month...
What I’m most proud of is not my pick, because that was the easy part. It’s the fact that I was so sure this would happen in the face of the out-of-control Bears bandwagon that had gained steam. For two weeks, it was en vogue to pick the Bears, while picking Manning and the Colts was decidedly uncool. As usual, I embrace uncool as if it were my brother.
Before I get into a lengthy list about my accurate predictions, I should address the few things I was wrong about. The most glaring example is that the Colts backfield was quite impressive. I maintain that this was not possible without their stalwart air attack, but I privately (and now publically) acknowledged to Saj that I ‘misnomer’ed the Colts as a “one-dimensional offense.”
Another example of an erred prediction was the one that said I would not stay up for the entire games. This, of course, turned out to be false once I realized I might miss history. I was worried that I'd be turning off the Superbowl that could set the record for fumbles and turnovers.
Okay, now on to the gloating. Here’s the Top 10 things I was right about in Superbowl XLI.
1. First, the AFC Champ outclassed the NFC Champ in every conceivable stat. This was as predictable as anything. Just like that NFC run of the 80’s and 90’s, the superior conference produced the team that was battle tested and simply better. You could count on them winning the Superbowl regardless of the record of the team from the inferior conference.
2. The Bears defense is not that good for the three reasons I outlined, none more significant than their less than stellar play since the loss of Tommie Harris, and less notably, Mike Brown.
3. Rex Grossman deserved every joke we made about him. How that last drive didn’t result in a 4th interception, I don’t know.
3a. My quote from Friday “…Jim Nantz yelps after Grossman's third interception.”
4. Accurate ways of determining a winner were foolishly thrown out the window by Bears apologists. Contrarians and New Englanders insisted on letting bias get in the way of objectivity, especially with two weeks to build up said bias. Picking Indianapolis made all the sense in the world. What’s wrong with saying, “While I’m pulling for underdog Chicago, I just gotta take that jerk Peyton Manning because the Colts are just better.”?
5. ESPN Page 2 columnists like Bill Simmons, Scoop Jackson, and Jamele Hill all took the Bears. Ron Jawarski, Mel Kiper, and Sal Paolantonio too the Colts by 10, 13, and 11, respectively. The Colts won by 12.
6. I’m not exactly sure what constitutes “big” when I said the Colts are going to win big. Twelve points might not be enough for a scoreboard blow out. That being said, the Colts dominated on both sides of the ball and were driving within 2 minutes and allowed themselves to turn the ball over on downs.
7. Don’t get down against the Colts. The only way the Bears could have won was in a blowout, and that was a long shot at best. All other scenarios were too much to overcome for them. They were in a close game and then they were down two scores. In both scenarios, the Bears, and especially their joke of a quarterback, stunk, as predicted.
8. The Colts fell down very early and could not possibly be counted out.
9. I acknowledged that the game could very well be close midway through the 3rd quarter, but I foresaw that the Colts would end up pulling away convincingly. (Note: Saj said the game could be 16-13 with 8 minutes left in the 3rd quarter. The score was 16-14. The guy is good.)
10. It was not a good Superbowl.
Saj, I have more to say, and I'm not nearly done ripping the Bears and all who took them to win. I'll allow this time now to let you get some words in on the Superbowl that was.
At the very beginning of the game last night, after Devin Hester's kick-off return for the touchdown, I asked Ian to apologize in this space when the Bears win. And he requested the same of me in the seemingly unlikely event of a Bears loss. Well, the unlikely came to pass. Hell froze over, it was a sloppy rain-filled game, and Prince's performance caused old people across the nation to wonder 1) who the nice young lady performing at halftime was and 2) why she didn't get that moustache of hers taken care of.
Since Ian, after the game, advised me not to engineer the back-handed faux-apology which I was, in fact, engineering at the time, here is as sincere an apology as I am capable:
I am sorry that Lovie Smith played his safeties so far back in the Cover 2 that he left Peyton Manning with perfect little dink and dunk passes under the zone instead of forcing him to throw the ball down the field through a driving rain. I am also sorry that somehow Chicago safety Chris Harris botched the coverage so badly that Reggie Wayne was left wide open and streaking down the field for the Colts first touchdown. On that play, Wayne was more open than a Chinese restaurant on Christmas.
I am sorry that Rex Grossman did not win the MVP award. He contributed more to the Colts win than any other single player. How does he fumble the snap? TWICE?? Say all you want about nerves, but Rex Grossman has been taking snaps as a quarterback for at least fifteen years of his life. And between the University of Florida and starting games in the NFL, he's played his fair share of crowds. I don't believe in nerves, I believe in poor preparation and poor execution. And he executed just as poorly as he did during the season. After that second interception I was praying for a Griese sighting. Hell, even give me Kyle Orton and his fabulous neck beard. SIDENOTE: I've had a beard for going on eight months now and only two things have lead me to consider shaving it. The first: eating an ice cream cone. It's very messy and your face smells like ice cream for the rest of the day. The second: Kyle Orton's neckbeard. Homeless, terrorist, ugly, I can take all those. But the day someone compares my beard to Kyle Orton's is the day I nair the motherf***** right off.
I'm sorry that CBS followed up the ratings bonanza Superbowl telecast with "Criminal Minds"; a generically terrible, mindless crime drama that only 75 year olds watch from it's full stable of generically terrible, mindless crime dramas that only 75 year olds watch. If anything, choose that timeslot to launch one of your generically terrible, mindless reality shows that could hit across demographics. In the end the blame is shared between Nielsen Media Research and the Midwest.
And lastly I am sorry for America. And no I'm not talking about how much the commercials sucked or how we had to hear Shannon Sharpe flubber on at halftime about all the fumbles. I'm talking about the fact that Peyton Manning won a Superbowl. As a rule, it's never good for this country when the best player in the league wins the Lombardi trophy while we're at war. Think back to the great wars that America has won. The Revolutionary War. The War of 1812. The Civil War. World Wars I and II. During exactly none of those wars did the best football player in the NFL win the Superbowl. I am certain of this. With the way things are going in Iraq and Afghanistan this does not bode well for the country.
Bottom Line: Peyton Manning does not support our troops.
I appreciate your humor, your hatred of Peyton Manning, like the Dark Side, clouds everything, even what's right in front of you. What would Tom Brady's solution to the Deep Cover 2 have been? The exact same as Peyton Mannings. Why can't you just appreciate what Peyton Manning just did? He just Bradied the Pats and the Bears. He took everything the defense gave him. What do you think would have happened if Lovie Smith tightened up the Cover 2? The Bears would have been beaten deep. I think it was the Deep Cover 2 that kept the Bears in the game for that long, anyway. The Colts were the far superior team last night.
And you know what? They'd be the far superior team every night. For those who picked the Bears, I'd be curious as to how they would have answered this question before the game: If these two teams played 100 times, would the Bears win more than half? Would anyone outside of Illinois said yes? So why would someone pick the Bears to win the game. Saj, if these two teams played 100 times, the Colts would win more than 80. They dominated this game and you know it.
I mean, look at what went wrong for the Colts and right for the Bears early last night. The Bears knew they couldn't get down early. Grossman and the running game needed a lead and they got it. Hester returned the opening kickoff for a TD. Manning threw a pick in his first drive and looks shaky early. The Colts botch an extra point. Vinatieri misses a field goal. It's the first Superbowl with rain, surely helping the team that relies on running and defense! Everything the Bears needed to happen did happen. And they still got smoked.
What else could Bears fans have hoped for? Grossman not to suck? How could anyone count on that? The first joke cracked by my ninth grader this morning was that he should have won the MVP. I seriously don't know how anyone could have picked the Bears in this one. The quarterback disparity was just too large. The only times quarterbacks nearly as bad as Grossman won Superbowls in the last ten years was Trent Dilfer and Brad Johnson, and they had two all time defenses on their team, not to mention they were facing Kerry Collins and Rich Gannon. Other than those two situations, which quarterbacks have won the last 20 Superbowls? Look at these names: Brady, Warner (MVP season), Elway, Favre, Young, Aikman, Simms, Montana, and two time pro-bowler Mark Rypien.
My point? Taking Grossman over Manning is a joke, especially when Manning's team is more talented.
You know what? YOU'RE A JOKE. You ever think of that? Huh?
And tell your son of a bitch ninth grader that the Grossman for MVP joke was my joke first (unless he's reading this). I'll get you for this, Peyton Manning!
Game, Set, Match: Ian. I look forward to our baseball predictions next month...
Friday, February 02, 2007
NFL: Superbowl XLI Preview
Saj, how much to Americans care about this Superbowl? Due to the fact that I'm constantly bombarded with New England sports, it's difficult for me to gauge how interested the country has been in recent Superbowls. I hate this year's matchup and I'm unsure how the rest of the country feels. These are two bad Superbowl teams. If I had to rank the Superbowls of the last seventeen years (since I started following the NFL) by the combined potence of the two Superbowl teams, either this or Superbowl XXXVII would come in last, and at least Superbowl XXXVII had a very good defense in Tampa Bay. This Superbowl has no stellar unit, nor can we say either team is impressively balanced. There's a reason I didn't blog all week about the biggest sporting event in the country. It's a dissapointing matchup. No New Orleans, no San Diego, no Baltimore, no New England, no Dallas. One of those teams had to make the Superbowl to get me interested. Does the country agree with me?
No, the country does not agree with you. Because you are wrong. Dead wrong. Regardless of the regular season, where they combined for only 25 wins, two division titles, and one top playoff seed, these two teams played very good conference championship games. The Bears turned a close game against the Saints into a route while the Colts put together an impressive comeback in what was probably the best football game of the last ten years.
Take a look at how challenging the Colts' road to the playoffs has been. Counting Sunday, they will have faced the top three leagues defenses in points allowed in descending order. Has anyone every done that? Defeating the first two was no small feat and three in a row would be pretty incredible.
And the Bears: how many strong teams did they embarass this year (including the Saints in the NFC Championship game)? They have a knack for putting a game out of reach when they get a lead. Sure they tend to score unconventional points (returns for touchdowns, turnovers) but how consistently do they have to do this before people stop questioning how fluky these plays are?
You wait and see, this is the best Superbowl matchup we've seen in a very long time. For me, this is the most I've ever anticipated a non-Patriots Superbowl. Maybe it's the Grossman potentially winning a Superbowl before Manning subplot, maybe it's the strange Superbowl prop bets like how long it takes Billy Joel to sing the national anthem, I don't know. But I'm looking forward to it. Sidenote: how could even think to rank last year's Superbowl ahead of this one?
First, they skipped last year's Superbowl. It never happened. Second, the Bears stink. Third, the Colts stink. I should rest my irrefutable case there but I need a break from grading Ancient China quizzes.
This #1 ranked Bears defense is the biggest farce statistic in the Superbowl for several reasons.
1. As I outlined two weeks ago, they have not been the same since losing their best defensive lineman. Since the loss of Tommie Harris, they had given up over twenty points in five straight games. This streak was snapped against New Orleans, when the NFC South dome team went to Chicago to play in January.
2. They play in the NFC! THE NFC! And not just ANY division in the NFC, but the NFC NORTH. With Green Bay! And Minnesota! And Detroit! It is, quite simply, the worst division in football. To be a divisional winner and #1 seed coming out of that division means nothing to me, nor does winning a home game against New Orleans a week after getting outplayed at home by Seattle.
3. Teams that play in cold outdoors always keep low point totals. Domes and warm, calm-weather stadiums are tailor made for high scoring. It's the opposite up north.
So the Bears defense? Overrated. The Bears offense? How many Rex Grossman jokes can we make in one season? And don't you dare ask me "Then how are they in the Superbowl?" because I will just refer you to the aforementioned #2.
As far as the Colts go, they are the better team, and the 7 point line supports this. Their season and playoff run has been more impressive than the Bears. But if you want to push on me that the Bears defense is the best in the league because they're #1 ranked, than you must accept the fact that the Colts are ranked last in run defense. Don't rely on the Colts' stats coming down the stretch, because then the argument for the Bears being dominant goes up in flames. In this entire season, their only impressive win was in the AFC Championship, and they can thank an Ellis Hobbs phantom pass intereference and Reche Caldwell for that one. (By the way, if Reche Caldwell was a redcoat at Bunker Hill when the colonial commander instructed "Don't shoot until you see the whites of their eyes," would he have been hit with like a hundred musket shots?) Ultimately, the Colts are a one-dimensional offensive team and an average defensive team and slight variations on that sentence can be said for both teams.
But okay, you made a good case. The country disagrees with me. I admit that I hold the minority opinion that this year's Superbowl is a joke. All I know is that I have a prop bet of my own. Over/under of when the television will be off and I'll be catching shut-eye for work: 8 minutes left in the 3rd quarter. This is the first Superbowl I have no intention of completing.
Incorrect on many accounts. How can you say the Colts are a one-dimensional offensive team when the success of their passing game is so intricately related to the success of their running game? Just wait, there's going to be 8 minutes left in the 3rd quarter and the score will be 16-13 and you will be absolutely glued to your television eating your Baked Lays and drinking your Fresca. I'll take the over. Give me odds on your watching the entire game outright.
I will not be watching the entire game. The best chance for me to see the end is if I fall asleep some time during the game with the television on [Vegas doesn't even have odds on this it's such a sure bet] and then re-awaken after Jim Nantz yelps after Grossman's third interception.
Let's move on to the picks. There are three types of people taking Chicago: New Englanders, contrarians, and both. New Englanders are still wounded from the AFC Championship and can't stand the sight of Manning or Vinatieri in a Colts uniform. Talk radio up here is littered with people taking the Bears and I can't help but label it as pathetic.
As far as contrarians, their act is old hat. Given two weeks, people look for reasons to pick underdogs. Their Klingon passion for glory and desire overrides their Vulcan logic. Given enough time, contrarians could convince themselves that Ball State could beat the Kansas City Chiefs. They convince themselves to pick the team they want to win. They ignore the football sense and go with their gut. That's why, unlike the front page columnists, guys on ESPN Page 2 take the Bears. It's their job to look at things differently. Contrarians want to have a unique voice, but it just gets blended into an unintelligible cacophony that wreaks of unadulterated favoritism. For a game like this, commentators like Skip Bayless and Woody Paige take the Bears, while realistic, knowledgeable guys like Ron Jaworski, Mel Kiper, and Sal Paolantonio take the Colts. It just makes too much sense to take the Colts, and I'll get explain in three paragraphs.
I expect the Colts to win and win big, but I will offer this caveat: If you don't take the points, you're an idiot. Alow me to defend that apparently contradictory statement. It's the 2006-2007 NFL season, remember? On any given Sunday, a 2-14 team can beat a 14-2 team. Saj, it was probably the predominant running theme of our NFL blogs this year. Who knew what the hell was going on? We certainly didn't (though my record said otherwise). Therefore, when a team is favored by a touchdown, you just have to take the points. You just have to.
But if given the four choices of, "A) Bears in a blowout, B) Bears in a close game, C) Colts in a blowout, D) Colts in a close game," I'm taking the Colts in a blowout. I readily admit that, combined, any one of the other three are more likely to happen, but the most likely single outcome is Colts in a blowout. Thus, I expect the Colts to win big, but if you don't take the points, you're an idiot.
This Superbowl will be like the Superbowls of XIX - XXXI, discluding the Niners-Bengals and Giants-Bills matchups in Superbowls XXIII and XXV, respectively. What do I mean by this? I mean that the far superior conference produces the far superior team and that superior team wins big. Even in the two years I omitted, the stronger conference won. That was an NFC streak that lasted thirteen straight seasons. You learned not to take the AFC in that run. It was simply a bad move.
Now the strength of the conferences are reversed. While the AFC hasn't been undefeated since that time, they have undoubtedly been the better conference, and each year they've separated themselves a bit more. Beginning with Elway's Broncos defeating Favre's Packers, the AFC is 7-2 in Superbowls and have won the last three in a row. The AFC has continually produced teams that are the class of the league, specifically the New England Patriots, Tennessee Titans, Denver Broncos, Pittsburgh Steelers and, you guessed it, these Indianapolis Colts. Meanwhile, the NFC has had its own parity party of putridity since the 2003 Tampa Bay Buccaneers. There has been no great NFC team. They're all somewhere between above average (Eagles, Panthers, Seattle) and rotten (Cardinals, Redskins, NFC North).
So here we are again. The AFC representative goes through good teams while the NFC rep goes through average ones. Who do I expect to win? What does logic dictate?
And have you seen Rex Grossman this week? As if his season wasn't bad enough, the Bears have new reasons to be scared. He's got a perpetually nervous look on his face, like his brain is continually saying "I want to vomit." If he started off 1 for 9 in completions, would you be surprised? I know I wouldn't. How in the world could I justify picking a team where I wouldn't be surprised if the quarterback started 1 for 9? It'd be especially frightful against Indianapolis. Don't get down against the Colts. I may hate on them like Trump hates on Rosie, but I've always admitted that to be down two scores against Indy was a death sentence. They can rush the quarterback and on defense you can't stack the line on them. It's very tough to come back against a team like that. Very tough. To beat the Colts, you need to have a lead or stay close. I don't think the Bears will do either.
And if the Colts fell down, how could we possibly count them out? They just came back from a 21-3 deficit against Belechick, Brady, and the most experienced playoff team in the league. The Bears never came back to win this year. They're not built for it. The Colts just did it on the team least likely to allow that to happen. Frankly, in any game scenario, it'd be better for the Colts to be in that situation than the Bears. That included being down two scores, being in a close game early, and especially close game late. Don't forget who's kicking for Indianpolis and don't forget who's throwing passes for Chicago. Does Chicago want to be in a close game in the 4th quarter with Grossman throwing passes while Manning and Vinatieri have their helmets on? No way. Just ask the Patriots, who have a better coach, quarterback and more playoff experienced team than the Bears.
Ultimately, the only way the Bears can win this game is in a blowout. Is that someone anyone is betting on? A Bears blowout over the Colts?
Saj, you said 16-13 in the 3rd quarter? Maybe. Really, maybe. But 16-13 third quarter games have a tendency to become a shoot out. Unfortunately for the Bears, they don't have too many bullets. Peyton Manning's Colt revolver is too much to overcome. Pick: 38-20 Indianapolis
"Peyton Manning's Colts revolver"? You just won the award for 2007's worst extended gun-metaphor. And it's only February.
I'm taking the Bears and here's why:
1) Consistency. I've picked against the Colts pretty much all season and I can't abandon that position because of silly things like logic and run of the mill football analysis. Just call me a faux-Klingon.
2) Peyton Manning. Really I have no way of knowing what sort of person Peyton Manning is and it's unfair to judge him based on his doofy haircut or his Arod-like obsessive work ethic or even his not dating Gisele Bundchen. All I really have to judge him on is his laser-rocket arm, his happy feet routine in the pocket, the incessant audible-ing at the line which I am sure half his team isn't listening to, the way he pouts on the sideline when he's losing, him throwing his offensive line under the bus after last year's playoff loss to the Steelers, and the way the media licks his penis like a push-pop. My heart can't take him winning a Superbowl. My heart just can't take it.
3) Of all the NFL uniforms, I think I respect the Bears' uniforms the most. They're classically beautiful. The colors, the logo, I love it.
4) I'm a big fan of irony and I appreciate the irony of Rex Grossman winning a Superbowl before Peyton Manning. If the Bears won there would more proof that nothing in this world makes any sense and very few things have reasons for happening. And that's the fundamental philosophy of my life.
5) Tom Brady is dating Gisele Bundchen.
6) I'm afraid for Tank Johnson. The authorities found a veritable arsenal of assault weapons in his house and his bodyguard was murdered. If that doesn't smell like gambling debt to the Russian mafia (which smells oddly like stale bread and red cabbage) then nothing does (except for, you know, stale bread and red cabbage). Inside my head the Russians are putting tons of money on the Bears to win outright and will absolve Johnson's debt if they win. Tony Dungy: if you win this game you will have Tank Johnson's blood on your hands.
Bears: 38 - 30.
Ladies and Gentlemen, Skip Bayless! Those six reasons all made me more confident in my pick. Anyone picking the Bears are coming up with similarly inane arguments, only they aren't joking like Saj is.
I AM TOTALLY NOT JOKING.
Are too.
No, the country does not agree with you. Because you are wrong. Dead wrong. Regardless of the regular season, where they combined for only 25 wins, two division titles, and one top playoff seed, these two teams played very good conference championship games. The Bears turned a close game against the Saints into a route while the Colts put together an impressive comeback in what was probably the best football game of the last ten years.
Take a look at how challenging the Colts' road to the playoffs has been. Counting Sunday, they will have faced the top three leagues defenses in points allowed in descending order. Has anyone every done that? Defeating the first two was no small feat and three in a row would be pretty incredible.
And the Bears: how many strong teams did they embarass this year (including the Saints in the NFC Championship game)? They have a knack for putting a game out of reach when they get a lead. Sure they tend to score unconventional points (returns for touchdowns, turnovers) but how consistently do they have to do this before people stop questioning how fluky these plays are?
You wait and see, this is the best Superbowl matchup we've seen in a very long time. For me, this is the most I've ever anticipated a non-Patriots Superbowl. Maybe it's the Grossman potentially winning a Superbowl before Manning subplot, maybe it's the strange Superbowl prop bets like how long it takes Billy Joel to sing the national anthem, I don't know. But I'm looking forward to it. Sidenote: how could even think to rank last year's Superbowl ahead of this one?
First, they skipped last year's Superbowl. It never happened. Second, the Bears stink. Third, the Colts stink. I should rest my irrefutable case there but I need a break from grading Ancient China quizzes.
This #1 ranked Bears defense is the biggest farce statistic in the Superbowl for several reasons.
1. As I outlined two weeks ago, they have not been the same since losing their best defensive lineman. Since the loss of Tommie Harris, they had given up over twenty points in five straight games. This streak was snapped against New Orleans, when the NFC South dome team went to Chicago to play in January.
2. They play in the NFC! THE NFC! And not just ANY division in the NFC, but the NFC NORTH. With Green Bay! And Minnesota! And Detroit! It is, quite simply, the worst division in football. To be a divisional winner and #1 seed coming out of that division means nothing to me, nor does winning a home game against New Orleans a week after getting outplayed at home by Seattle.
3. Teams that play in cold outdoors always keep low point totals. Domes and warm, calm-weather stadiums are tailor made for high scoring. It's the opposite up north.
So the Bears defense? Overrated. The Bears offense? How many Rex Grossman jokes can we make in one season? And don't you dare ask me "Then how are they in the Superbowl?" because I will just refer you to the aforementioned #2.
As far as the Colts go, they are the better team, and the 7 point line supports this. Their season and playoff run has been more impressive than the Bears. But if you want to push on me that the Bears defense is the best in the league because they're #1 ranked, than you must accept the fact that the Colts are ranked last in run defense. Don't rely on the Colts' stats coming down the stretch, because then the argument for the Bears being dominant goes up in flames. In this entire season, their only impressive win was in the AFC Championship, and they can thank an Ellis Hobbs phantom pass intereference and Reche Caldwell for that one. (By the way, if Reche Caldwell was a redcoat at Bunker Hill when the colonial commander instructed "Don't shoot until you see the whites of their eyes," would he have been hit with like a hundred musket shots?) Ultimately, the Colts are a one-dimensional offensive team and an average defensive team and slight variations on that sentence can be said for both teams.
But okay, you made a good case. The country disagrees with me. I admit that I hold the minority opinion that this year's Superbowl is a joke. All I know is that I have a prop bet of my own. Over/under of when the television will be off and I'll be catching shut-eye for work: 8 minutes left in the 3rd quarter. This is the first Superbowl I have no intention of completing.
Incorrect on many accounts. How can you say the Colts are a one-dimensional offensive team when the success of their passing game is so intricately related to the success of their running game? Just wait, there's going to be 8 minutes left in the 3rd quarter and the score will be 16-13 and you will be absolutely glued to your television eating your Baked Lays and drinking your Fresca. I'll take the over. Give me odds on your watching the entire game outright.
I will not be watching the entire game. The best chance for me to see the end is if I fall asleep some time during the game with the television on [Vegas doesn't even have odds on this it's such a sure bet] and then re-awaken after Jim Nantz yelps after Grossman's third interception.
Let's move on to the picks. There are three types of people taking Chicago: New Englanders, contrarians, and both. New Englanders are still wounded from the AFC Championship and can't stand the sight of Manning or Vinatieri in a Colts uniform. Talk radio up here is littered with people taking the Bears and I can't help but label it as pathetic.
As far as contrarians, their act is old hat. Given two weeks, people look for reasons to pick underdogs. Their Klingon passion for glory and desire overrides their Vulcan logic. Given enough time, contrarians could convince themselves that Ball State could beat the Kansas City Chiefs. They convince themselves to pick the team they want to win. They ignore the football sense and go with their gut. That's why, unlike the front page columnists, guys on ESPN Page 2 take the Bears. It's their job to look at things differently. Contrarians want to have a unique voice, but it just gets blended into an unintelligible cacophony that wreaks of unadulterated favoritism. For a game like this, commentators like Skip Bayless and Woody Paige take the Bears, while realistic, knowledgeable guys like Ron Jaworski, Mel Kiper, and Sal Paolantonio take the Colts. It just makes too much sense to take the Colts, and I'll get explain in three paragraphs.
I expect the Colts to win and win big, but I will offer this caveat: If you don't take the points, you're an idiot. Alow me to defend that apparently contradictory statement. It's the 2006-2007 NFL season, remember? On any given Sunday, a 2-14 team can beat a 14-2 team. Saj, it was probably the predominant running theme of our NFL blogs this year. Who knew what the hell was going on? We certainly didn't (though my record said otherwise). Therefore, when a team is favored by a touchdown, you just have to take the points. You just have to.
But if given the four choices of, "A) Bears in a blowout, B) Bears in a close game, C) Colts in a blowout, D) Colts in a close game," I'm taking the Colts in a blowout. I readily admit that, combined, any one of the other three are more likely to happen, but the most likely single outcome is Colts in a blowout. Thus, I expect the Colts to win big, but if you don't take the points, you're an idiot.
This Superbowl will be like the Superbowls of XIX - XXXI, discluding the Niners-Bengals and Giants-Bills matchups in Superbowls XXIII and XXV, respectively. What do I mean by this? I mean that the far superior conference produces the far superior team and that superior team wins big. Even in the two years I omitted, the stronger conference won. That was an NFC streak that lasted thirteen straight seasons. You learned not to take the AFC in that run. It was simply a bad move.
Now the strength of the conferences are reversed. While the AFC hasn't been undefeated since that time, they have undoubtedly been the better conference, and each year they've separated themselves a bit more. Beginning with Elway's Broncos defeating Favre's Packers, the AFC is 7-2 in Superbowls and have won the last three in a row. The AFC has continually produced teams that are the class of the league, specifically the New England Patriots, Tennessee Titans, Denver Broncos, Pittsburgh Steelers and, you guessed it, these Indianapolis Colts. Meanwhile, the NFC has had its own parity party of putridity since the 2003 Tampa Bay Buccaneers. There has been no great NFC team. They're all somewhere between above average (Eagles, Panthers, Seattle) and rotten (Cardinals, Redskins, NFC North).
So here we are again. The AFC representative goes through good teams while the NFC rep goes through average ones. Who do I expect to win? What does logic dictate?
And have you seen Rex Grossman this week? As if his season wasn't bad enough, the Bears have new reasons to be scared. He's got a perpetually nervous look on his face, like his brain is continually saying "I want to vomit." If he started off 1 for 9 in completions, would you be surprised? I know I wouldn't. How in the world could I justify picking a team where I wouldn't be surprised if the quarterback started 1 for 9? It'd be especially frightful against Indianapolis. Don't get down against the Colts. I may hate on them like Trump hates on Rosie, but I've always admitted that to be down two scores against Indy was a death sentence. They can rush the quarterback and on defense you can't stack the line on them. It's very tough to come back against a team like that. Very tough. To beat the Colts, you need to have a lead or stay close. I don't think the Bears will do either.
And if the Colts fell down, how could we possibly count them out? They just came back from a 21-3 deficit against Belechick, Brady, and the most experienced playoff team in the league. The Bears never came back to win this year. They're not built for it. The Colts just did it on the team least likely to allow that to happen. Frankly, in any game scenario, it'd be better for the Colts to be in that situation than the Bears. That included being down two scores, being in a close game early, and especially close game late. Don't forget who's kicking for Indianpolis and don't forget who's throwing passes for Chicago. Does Chicago want to be in a close game in the 4th quarter with Grossman throwing passes while Manning and Vinatieri have their helmets on? No way. Just ask the Patriots, who have a better coach, quarterback and more playoff experienced team than the Bears.
Ultimately, the only way the Bears can win this game is in a blowout. Is that someone anyone is betting on? A Bears blowout over the Colts?
Saj, you said 16-13 in the 3rd quarter? Maybe. Really, maybe. But 16-13 third quarter games have a tendency to become a shoot out. Unfortunately for the Bears, they don't have too many bullets. Peyton Manning's Colt revolver is too much to overcome. Pick: 38-20 Indianapolis
"Peyton Manning's Colts revolver"? You just won the award for 2007's worst extended gun-metaphor. And it's only February.
I'm taking the Bears and here's why:
1) Consistency. I've picked against the Colts pretty much all season and I can't abandon that position because of silly things like logic and run of the mill football analysis. Just call me a faux-Klingon.
2) Peyton Manning. Really I have no way of knowing what sort of person Peyton Manning is and it's unfair to judge him based on his doofy haircut or his Arod-like obsessive work ethic or even his not dating Gisele Bundchen. All I really have to judge him on is his laser-rocket arm, his happy feet routine in the pocket, the incessant audible-ing at the line which I am sure half his team isn't listening to, the way he pouts on the sideline when he's losing, him throwing his offensive line under the bus after last year's playoff loss to the Steelers, and the way the media licks his penis like a push-pop. My heart can't take him winning a Superbowl. My heart just can't take it.
3) Of all the NFL uniforms, I think I respect the Bears' uniforms the most. They're classically beautiful. The colors, the logo, I love it.
4) I'm a big fan of irony and I appreciate the irony of Rex Grossman winning a Superbowl before Peyton Manning. If the Bears won there would more proof that nothing in this world makes any sense and very few things have reasons for happening. And that's the fundamental philosophy of my life.
5) Tom Brady is dating Gisele Bundchen.
6) I'm afraid for Tank Johnson. The authorities found a veritable arsenal of assault weapons in his house and his bodyguard was murdered. If that doesn't smell like gambling debt to the Russian mafia (which smells oddly like stale bread and red cabbage) then nothing does (except for, you know, stale bread and red cabbage). Inside my head the Russians are putting tons of money on the Bears to win outright and will absolve Johnson's debt if they win. Tony Dungy: if you win this game you will have Tank Johnson's blood on your hands.
Bears: 38 - 30.
Ladies and Gentlemen, Skip Bayless! Those six reasons all made me more confident in my pick. Anyone picking the Bears are coming up with similarly inane arguments, only they aren't joking like Saj is.
I AM TOTALLY NOT JOKING.
Are too.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
