Sports Central | Articles and Columns

« December 2009 | Main | February 2010 »

January 29, 2010

Kurt Warner and the Hall of Fame

Cardinals QB Kurt Warner announced his retirement earlier today, and one of the hot topics this weekend is sure to be Warner's worthiness for the Pro Football Hall of Fame. Some people feel it's obvious that he should be in. He won two NFL MVP Awards and a Super Bowl MVP. He passed for 4,000 yards three times, threw 200 TD passes, and has one of the best passer ratings in history. Others question his credentials. He was surrounded by great teammates, he got benched by every team he ever played for, and early in his career, he protected his passer rating by taking sacks instead of throwing the ball away.

For years, I've taken a wait-and-see approach with Warner. He's had good times, he's had bad times, let's see where it all ends. Well, now it's ended. Unless, heaven forbid, the man pulls a Brett Favre. If he unretires, I won't support him for Canton. I don't care if he throws for 6,000 yards in a season and wins a Super Bowl by himself after all his teammates get ejected. I'm tired of this "psych, I'm coming back" stuff.

Basically, though, this wait-and-see approach meant that I didn't think Warner had earned his way in yet. Here's the case against him:

* He didn't deserve those MVP Awards. Marshall Faulk did. Faulk won team MVP both years. If you're not the most valuable player on your own team, how can you be MVP of the whole league?

* I'd have a decent passer rating if I spent my whole career throwing to Isaac Bruce, Torry Holt, Larry Fitzgerald, and Anquan Boldin. If Warner's best receivers had been Deion Branch, Todd Pinkston, Marques Colston, and Darrell Jackson, what would those stats look like? Would he have won a playoff game, much less a Super Bowl?

* Warner only played four full seasons: 1999, 2001, 2008, and 2009 were the only years he started 12 or more games. At a position where the best players often stick around for 15 seasons, is that really enough?

* Warner got benched three times, by three different teams: in 2003, by the Rams (for Marc Bulger); in 2004, by the Giants (for Eli Manning); and in 2006, by the Cardinals (for Matt Leinart). He arguably got benched by the Cards in '05, too, for Josh McCown. We'll give him the benefit of the doubt and say he was still hurt. Still, that's a lot of times his team decided they had someone better.

The argument for Warner, I've decided, is Sonny Jurgensen.

Jurgensen, who played for Philadelphia and Washington from 1957-74, is one of the lesser-known QBs in the Hall of Fame, but he's often described as the best pure passer in the history of the game. Vince Lombardi said that Jurgensen — not Bart Starr — was the best quarterback he ever saw. Jurgensen's relatively anonymity owes to two factors: he played mostly for bad teams, and his career was limited by injuries and Norm Van Brocklin. Altogether, I think his career has a shape similar to Warner's. Let's compare them.

Statistics

We'll start with numbers and go from there. The gross statistics are very, very close.

The efficiency stats clearly favor Warner.

Warner is ahead in every category except touchdowns and TD%. Looking at the numbers, you might conclude that Warner was better, and that it's not particularly close.

That's because passing statistics have changed in the last 35 years. Jurgensen is at a statistical disadvantage because of changes both in the rules of the game and in offensive strategy. When Jurgensen played, it was legal to "chuck" a receiver anywhere on the field. That meant no five-yard zone from the line of scrimmage, and no such thing as "illegal contact." Almost every significant passing record fell within 10 years of the new rules, which were instituted in 1978. The other, and possibly even more important change, was the new emphasis — attributable mostly to Bill Walsh — on short, high-percentage passes.

Today's quarterbacks throw more efficiently and more often than at any other period in history. Fortunately, there's still a way to compare statistics that makes sense: instead of straight numbers, we'll move forward with the statistical concepts of black ink. The figures you see below show the number of times each player led the NFL in that category. Higher numbers are better.

I used combined NFL/AFL statistics for Jurgensen, so the competition is roughly the same size, 21-26 teams for Jurgensen and 31-32 for Warner. I didn't include interceptions this time, because the guy with the fewest interceptions in a season is usually a backup with 12 attempts all year. I will include interception percentage, though, when we look at the averages.

These statistics show a very close statistical battle. Jurgensen is ahead in the gross stats, and Warner in the efficiency metrics. We see more distance between them with gray ink, counting the number of times each player ranked among the NFL's top 10 in that category. Once again, I've included the AFL for Jurgensen.

Jurgensen adds a small advantage in rushing. These are straight stats. Sacks were not recorded during Jurgensen's career, but we can safely assume that Warner took many more sacks.

Pretty clearly, I think, Jurgensen compared better to his peers, but this is not a blowout; Warner is in the same neighborhood.

Team

It's important to recognize that great teammates can help a quarterback achieve more. Great offensive teammates help pad the stat sheet. All good teammates, offense or defense, can facilitate the wins and championships by which we so often judge quarterbacks. And of course, great coaching always plays a role.

Receivers

This is the most important category, and it's relatively equal. Jurgensen played with three Hall of Fame wideouts: Tommy McDonald (1961-63), Bobby Mitchell (1964-68), and Charley Taylor (1964-70, 73-74). He also had Pete Retzlaff and Jerry Smith, two of the finest receiving tight ends of all time.

Warner's receivers are, remarkably, of similar caliber. Bruce and Holt should both make it into Canton, and Fitzgerald is well on the way. Boldin isn't chopped liver, either. I guess you'd have to say Jurgensen had a little more help, but this is just about even.

Running Backs

Warner has an obvious edge here. He only had half a season with Tiki Barber, and got Edgerrin James past his prime, but Warner's best seasons came with Marshall Faulk. In addition to his fine running, Faulk was a very good pass-blocker and probably the greatest receiving RB in history. Jurgensen had a couple years with Timmy Brown in Philadelphia, and Larry Brown towards the end of his career, but had no one of consequence in the backfield during his prime. Advantage: Warner.

Offensive Line

The Rams had an exceptional offensive line during Warner's glory years. The Cardinals have given him mostly adequate protection. Jurgensen, in contrast, had Len Hauss and a prayer.

Defense

I'm lumping the whole defense together, since it has less direct impact on a quarterback than the various offensive positions do. The Cardinals had a pretty good defense the last couple seasons, and the Rams were solid under Lovie Smith in 2001, but Warner has also played with mediocre defenses that couldn't hold a lead. Washington's defense was awful throughout the '60s, though, so this is probably another small advantage for Warner.

Coaching

Warner played for Dick Vermeil, Mad Mike Martz, Tom Coughlin, Dennis Green, and Ken Whisenhunt. Jurgensen quarterbacked teams led by Nick Skorich, Bill McPeake, Otto Graham, Lombardi, Bill Austin, and George Allen. On the surface, that's an edge for Jurgensen, who had two Hall of Famers on the sidelines. Lombardi only coached in Washington for one season, though, and Allen and Jurgensen detested one another. Allen even benched his star quarterback for Billy Kilmer, and his conservative offense didn't lend itself to Jurgensen's style. Martz, meanwhile, clearly influenced Warner's success. Altogether, it's pretty close again.

Overall

This is why I like the Jurgensen/Warner comparison. This is close, in every area. They both had great receivers, a couple seasons with an elite running back, mediocre defensive support, and a shifting cast of coaches. You could make an argument for either one having better teammates, but I'm calling it a tie.

In the Clutch

This is a big part of the argument for Warner. He's thrown for about a million yards in the postseason. Jurgensen played in one postseason game his entire career, a 19-10 loss in his final season, when he was 40 years old. Warner was 9-4 as a starting QB in the postseason, with a sterling stat line of 307-for-462, 3,952 yards, 31 TD, 14 INT, and a 102.8 passer rating. In his three Super Bowl appearances, Warner averaged 385 yards, 2 TD, 1 INT, and a 96.7 rating.

The postseason is an obvious advantage for Warner, but I don't want to hold it too strongly against Jurgensen. He missed opportunities for postseason play because the team around him was so bad, but was a good clutch player who led more comebacks than Warner.

Honors

I've thrown a lot of numbers at you, but sometimes it's hard to be confident that you've interpreted the stats correctly. How were Jurgensen and Warner evaluated on a yearly basis?

Jurgensen was named to five Pro Bowls and three Associated Press all-NFL teams, including a unanimous first-team selection in 1961. Warner was named to four Pro Bowls and two all-pro squads, both on the first team. Jurgensen's small advantage is neutralized by Warner's two MVP Awards. I'm calling this equal.

Conclusion

I don't think there's much doubt that Jurgensen comes out ahead in this comparison, but there's also little doubt that it's pretty close. Sonny Jurgensen is not a borderline Hall of Famer — he's probably one of the 12 best ever to play the position. For Warner to come out nearly equal with him, I think, is a convincing argument that Warner has indeed put together a Hall of Fame career.

Warner had down moments in his career, yes. Terry Bradshaw was repeatedly benched for Terry Hanratty. Troy Aikman had a miserable rookie season. The latter part of Joe Namath's career was basically injuries and interceptions. We remember those players for what they did at their best, not for the times they struggled. That's the way we should recall Warner's career, too. Fine, he disappeared from 2002-06. He was the best quarterback in the league from 1999-2001 and helped make the Cardinals contenders at the end of this decade.

He had two of the greatest statistical seasons in history, set postseason records, and won a Super Bowl ring. Five years from now, when Kurt Warner's name appears on the ballot for the Pro Football Hall of Fame, he'll have my support.

Posted by Brad Oremland at 5:37 PM | Comments (2)

January 28, 2010

2010 NASCAR Predictions

* Danica Patrick struggles early in her debut season in NASCAR, failing to finish above 30th in her first eight races. Frustrated, the incredibly fit Patrick surprisingly turns to food for comfort, and she gains 19 pounds, mostly in her back side, and the "rear" spoiler again becomes a hot topic of conversation in NASCAR circles.

* Jimmie Johnson and his wife Chandra welcome a baby boy on July 13, three days after Johnson wins at Chicagoland Speedway. Most of Johnson's crew is present for the birth, and crew chief Chad Knaus is even honored with cutting the umbilical cord. However, Knaus cut leaves the cord 1¾" too long, 3/8" over NASCAR specifications, and the child is impounded and kept an extra night after failing inspection.

* Bitter rivals Denny Hamlin and Brad Keselowski come to blows during the convocation before the start of the Daytona 500. NASCAR reacts strongly to the confrontation between the two hotheaded drivers, and NASCAR president Mike Helton acts swiftly, announcing the introduction of a hauler to be used solely for disciplining "those two idiots," as Helton puts it. The following week at Fontana, the "Ass Hauler" debuts, and Hamlin and Keselowski enjoy personalized seating after a late-race incident degenerates into a free-for-all in which Keselowski places Hamlin in a figure-four leglock, further damaging Hamlin's injured knee.

* Carl Edwards, who earlier in the year vows to avoid spinning discs, slices his right hand open after a freak accident incurred when he takes over the turntables at a Fatboy Slim concert in Atlanta on March 5th.

Edwards again suffers through a winless Sprint Cup season, verifying that the Aflac duck does, in fact, "lay eggs."

* Edwards' incident, however, pales in comparison to the oddest "freak" accident of the year, which occurs in Las Vegas when Tony Stewart's hauler collapses under the weight of one-third of Vegas' entire escort population.

* After Crown Royal drops its support mid-season, Matt Kenseth finds a sponsor for his No. 17 Ford when Flomax® signs on to back the Roush Fenway Racing car of the 2003 Cup champion. Kenseth's yellow paint scheme immediately becomes one of the most recognizable in NASCAR, and his pit crew, after initial reluctance, proudly welcomes their new nickname, the "Killer P's."

* One year after becoming the youngest NASCAR driver to win a Sprint Cup race, 19-year-old Joey Logano sets another precedent when he uses astute fuel strategy to win at Darlington in May, thus becoming the first driver to win a race and start puberty on the same day.

Logano later qualifies for the Chase and finishes eighth in the final points standings.

* NASCAR's stance to let drivers "police themselves" hits a major snag in the first drivers meeting of the year at Daytona, when 43 sheriffs show up, and chaos ensues. NASCAR does the only logical thing ands calls another drivers meeting.

* Jimmie Johnson finishes 11th at Homestead on November 21st and easily clinches his fifth-consecutive Sprint Cup championship, further solidifying his status as one of NASCAR's all-time greats. Hendrick Motorsports commemorates the occasion with an online poll, asking visitors to vote on an official name for the "five-peat" signifying Johnson's dynasty. Although "Hand Job" receives a fair share of the votes, ultimately "Rule of Thumb" wins out, and the merchandise line becomes a top seller, albeit well behind Dale Earnhardt, Jr.'s products, and Danica Patrick's emerging "Momma Mia! Go Daddy!" merchandise line.

* The Jeremy Mayfield versus NASCAR trial takes a dramatic turn when, in opening arguments, Mayfield's counsel, Atticus Flinch, utters the phrase, "If there was no list, you must desist." The phrase quickly becomes a rallying cry for the Mayfield cause. Mayfield prints t-shirts and bumper stickers bearing the saying, and funds his attorney fees with profits from sales. NASCAR files an injunction, attempting to force Mayfield to cease sales, based on NASCAR's belief that "no one should profit from NASCAR's nebulous drug policy except NASCAR itself." A judge quickly denies the injunction.

The trial ends when Mayfield is exonerated after NASCAR lawyers make a disastrous decision to have Mayfield's former mother-in-law, Lisa Mayfield, testify against Mayfield. NASCAR lawyers ask Lisa Mayfield to recount the time she saw Jeremy using methamphetamines, and she surprisingly gives a credible and believable account of the incident. That is until she's pressed by Flinch, who asks, "How do you know they were amphetamines?" Lisa Mayfield replies, "Because they came from my stash."

* With the NASCAR rule book going retro, Jeff Gordon decides to do the same, and arrives at Daytona with a half-mullet and a cheesy, peach-fuzz mustache. The look is a disaster on the track, and Gordon retrogrades, failing to score a top-10 finish in the season's first 10 races, but it's a boon to his wine business, as Gordon Wineries buys out Boone's Farm and Gordon's goofy circa 1995 visage graces the bottles of the cheap wine nationwide.

* NASCAR's new rule allowing bump-drafting is tested sternly during the Sprint Cup opener at Daytona, where Tony Stewart and Juan Montoya prove that the hard feelings from last year's tangle at Homestead are far from over. Montoya, starting in the third position, bump-drafts Stewart's pole-sitting No. 14 Chevrolet on the second pace lap, sending Stewart sliding in front of the oncoming field. As driver after driver checks up, a chain reaction ensues, and all 43 cars in the field sustain minor damage which alters their aerodynamics. When the race resumes, most drivers find that their cars are uncontrollable in clean air, and single-file racing ensues for the remainder of the race.

Kurt Busch wins the race with a last lap pass of Kasey Kahne, only the race's seventh lead change under green.

* Former NASCAR driver Aaron Fike is spotted in a parking lot of a Wal-Mart in Peoria, Illinois, inexplicably conversing with a cardboard cutout of Wonder Woman. Police are called, Fike is questioned, and the troubled driver is sent on his way, charged with possession of "heroine," a misdemeanor.

* Mark Martin again comes up short in his quest to win the Sprint Cup championship, finishing fourth behind Jimmie Johnson, Jeff Gordon, and Tony Stewart. Weeks later, Martin quells rumors about his future with a press conference, where celebrity spokesperson Brett Favre announces on Martin's behalf that Martin will retire.

* After a long pit stop costs him the lead 398 laps in at Bristol in March, Kyle Busch berates crew chief Dave Rogers, uttering a string of profanities not heard in NASCAR since Busch's previous diatribe. Rogers listens calmly and talks Busch down, and Busch recovers for the victory. In Victory Lane, Rogers eschews dousing Busch in a champagne bath, and instead cleanses his sharp-tongued charge with a mouthful of soap.

* Dale Earnhardt, Jr. takes full advantage of the extra resources allotted to him by Rick Hendrick and enjoys a fruitful spring, opening a new Whisky River bar in Nashville and adding an additional merchandise trailer.

* Juan Montoya storms to the front in the season's first 10 races, claiming a 143-point lead in the Sprint Cup standings. Montoya confidently proclaims himself the "Juan" to beat, and vows to maintain his lead behind his "fiery Latino resolve," and supported by his growing fan base, whom he dubs "Colombian Marching Power."

* In April, Chad Knaus signs a contract extension to remain with Hendrick Motorsports, easily making Knaus the highest-paid crew chief in NASCAR. Asked how he feels about it, Knaus says "Fine." Knaus is later honored by his fellow crew chiefs with a pair of suspenders, with music provided by a live "banned."

Posted by Jeffrey Boswell at 11:02 AM | Comments (2)

January 27, 2010

What Tennis is Missing

The tennis world always opens with a bang. Unlike all the other major sports, tennis begins its year with a major tournament. Welcome to the 2010 Australian Open. The ESPN coverage of the tournament has been spectacular, especially with the DirecTV links to most of the courts each day. I'm sort of bored, though. As I said, interesting, but predictable.

Overall, the tennis industry is in a slump, with all the major manufacturers looking for ways to increase sales. The total predictability of this tournament, with the exception of Justine Henin's run, doesn't really help either. It makes it even more clear to me why the three major names in the tennis tours all left this past fall to other endeavors. The globalization of the game and industry, and the stagnant sales and competition, do not bode well for this year. I won't speculate on the final numbers for Melbourne, but in watching a lot of the matches on the tube, I noticed a significant amount of empty seats on a lot of courts with otherwise good matches.

I know a lot of my colleagues would probably point out here that overall for many of the seasons in the past two or three decades you could almost always predict who would be in the final. That is true. However, it was very hard to predict who would win, and also for the most part you could assume incredible matches. Sure, Jimmy Connors, John McEnroe, and Bjorn Borg dominated the late-'70s and early-'80s, but you never were sure which of the two would be in the final, and the final couple of matches were almost always nail-biters. Always, without exception, exciting.

The women's side was not quite so, but you knew that there would be a cat-fight for whether it would be Billie Jean King, Chris Evert, Martina Navratilova, or Evonne Goolagong, and then later Martina Navratilova, Steffi Graff, and Monica Seles. Maybe what made them all so exciting was the great difference in styles of play. Serve-and-volley versus ground-stroker versus power player. Today, pretty much you have one style of play, backcourt ground-strokers who all hit every shot with a ton of power. Very little or almost no touch or finess.

Whether it's the women's or men's game, it's the same. And without variety, there is no spice. Without spice, there is no sizzle. Without sizzle, there is no excitement. Without excitement, who cares? Now I truly understand what Arlen Kantarian and Larry Scott saw and understood. The globalization of the player pool hasn't added anything but complexity, either. While there are new players every year, none have come through lately that truly impact the game. Jelena Jankovic and Ana Ivanovic brought Serbia to the brink, only to quickly fade and become like all the rest. Beauty aside, neither of them has a game that can dominate. Dinaro Safina, Maria Kirilenko, Victoria Azarenka, Caroline Wozniacki, yada, yada, it's the same.

Don't get me wrong, tennis from the player's standpoint has the most parity ever. Maybe the most talent ever. This year's Australian Open will be good. But in my mind, not great. I'll be losing sleep all week waiting for that one match that will force me to go without sleep because not only are the matches in a way different time zone, but because I'm so pumped up I don't know what to do with myself.

As I end this, I also want all the tennis fans out there to keep Haiti in your thoughts and prayers. The players in Australia put together a very good impromptu exhibition fundraiser. Haiti will need a lot of help over the next couple of years. With any luck, we can help rebuild the country, and maybe even start one Haitian athlete on the road to professional tennis stardom.

Posted by Tom Kosinski at 11:21 AM | Comments (1)

January 26, 2010

Super Bowl XLIV Preview

Five Quick Hits

* Former Cowboy HC Chan Gailey is the new coach of the Bills. Dallas was 9-7 in both of Gailey's seasons as head coach, but this is a little out of left field.

* Is it too much to ask that the singers who perform the national anthem are people who don't hate the song? Jordin Sparks pulled a Kat DeLuna on the poor thing, and Kris Allen could only hit about half the notes.

* With this year's Pro Bowl a week before the Super Bowl, no Colts or Saints will take place in the game. That opens the door for, among others, London Fletcher, who will play in the game for the first time in his fine career.

* The downside is that none of the AFC quarterbacks voted to the Pro Bowl will actually play. The AFC will instead feature Matt Schaub, Vince Young, and David Garrard. This is an all-star team?

* The Saints won on the first possession of overtime, so I'm sure some outraged blowhards will call once again for a radical revamp of the NFL overtime system. Who wins more often, the team that gets the ball first in the NFL or goes on defense first in college? The Vikings have no one to blame but themselves.

***

Championship Game Roundups

Jets @ Colts

The Colts started slow, but they never panicked. Frankly, this team seems incapable of panic. It won half its games on fourth-quarter comebacks. I normally resist this sort of thing, but it's all about Peyton Manning. It is. I know he has a great offensive line, and he couldn't do it without them. I know he has Reggie Wayne and Dallas Clark and a couple of young guys who have really stepped up and made some plays. I know he has a fine defense, has Tom Moore and Howard Mudd and everyone else. They're all essential pieces of the puzzle. It's about Peyton Manning. He's the one who puts the puzzle together.

Does that mean every great quarterback deserves credit for his team's accomplishments? Of course not. The 2000 Ravens were not built around Trent Dilfer. The '02 Bucs did not revolve around Brad Johnson. Ben Roethlisberger was not the central piece of last year's Steelers. And of course, Peyton doesn't deserve all of the credit for this team. There's plenty to go around.

But Peyton is the foundation. He's the best QB in the game, or at least tied for best, with Drew Brees and Philip Rivers. A couple things separate Peyton. For all the criticisms at Tennessee and early in his pro career, he has become the greatest clutch quarterback in the game. You're down with 2:00 to play, this is the guy you want with the ball in his hands, and it's not even close. No player in history has led as many great comebacks as Peyton. The Jets were up 17-6 at one point this weekend, and the Colts' 11-point comeback is the third-largest in Championship Game history. It's old hat for a team that already holds the record, an 18-point comeback against the Patriots in the 2006 AFC Championship Game.

Early in his career, point deficits panicked Manning. He would try too hard and often made critical mistakes. Now, he has total confidence in his team and himself. He knows he just has to play, and the better team will come out on top. He's calm and in control, and that filters to the rest of the team as well. There's never a need to panic, because you'll get 'em next time.

That's what the Jets found out on Sunday. The game started almost as well as possible for New York. The Colts were settling for field goals, and the Jets were making big plays on offense, with Mark Sanchez having the game of his life. A great running team, with the league's best defense and a quarterback utterly in the zone, can't give up an 11-point lead, can it? Manning and Austin Collie turned the game just before halftime, with a 46-yard rainbow that set up a score to make it a 4-point game at the half. New York didn't score again, and the Colts won by two touchdowns.

Manning was the only player all season — 19 games altogether — to throw 3 TD passes against the Jets. Indy's 461 yards were the most the Jets allowed all season. Pierre Garçon set an AFC Championship Game record with 11 receptions. Manning finds weaknesses. No QB in history is so adept at finding a secondary's weak point, or as ruthless about exploiting it. Cornerback Donald Strickland left the game with an injury, and the Colts used their three-wide receiver formations to pick apart the vulnerability, with Dwight Lowery a particularly frequent target.

The Indianapolis defense, and first-year coordinator Larry Coyer in particular, deserve a lot of credit for getting the Jets out of their comfort zone. It looked like lunacy early in the game, when Sanchez was doing his Joe Namath impersonation and hitting big plays. But the Colts took away the running game, holding New York to 86 yards and under 3 yards per carry. The price was those big pass plays, but the Colts never panicked, stuck to their strategy, and were ultimately vindicated. I don't understand why the Jets didn't do more with Brad Smith and the Wildcat formation, which yielded a first-half touchdown and then pretty much fell by the wayside.

Finally, though, a little praise for the defeated Jets. They came into the playoffs as monumental underdogs, charity cases who lucked out that neither of their last two opponents played to win. Then they dominated the Bengals, upset the Chargers, and gave Indianapolis a real game. Sanchez played well all postseason, and his play-action fake on the bomb to Braylon Edwards this weekend was a thing of beauty. If the Jets can stay healthy next year — and that's a big if after 19 bruising games — they'll be a threat to anyone in the AFC. They have nothing to be ashamed of.

Vikings @ Saints

This was a strange game, exciting but occasionally sloppy. Pretty clearly, the Vikings outplayed New Orleans, but you can't commit 5 turnovers and expect to win. This game was defined by Minnesota's preventable mistakes: 2 interceptions and 6 fumbles. The Vikings outgained the Saints by over 200 yards, made more than twice as many first downs, and won time of possession by nearly 10 minutes. What they didn't do was hold on to the ball.

We have clearly reached the point at which Adrian Peterson's fumbling habit has progressed from "concern" to "serious problem." He has 23 fumbles in his 49-game career. Over the same period, Frank Gore has 14 fumbles. Maurice Jones-Drew has 10. LaDainian Tomlinson has 3. Peterson is a phenomenal talent. He's a fast, powerful runner, fun to watch. Can you trust him in a big game? With the game on the line, would you want the ball in his hands? Right now, I don't think you would.

Of course, that means trusting your postseason to Brett Favre, and that's not a good idea, either. Over the past decade, Favre has played in 10 postseason games. His teams are 4-6 over that stretch, including just 4-3 at home. From 1957 to 2001, the Packers never lost a playoff game at Lambeau Field. Under Favre, they dropped three in six years. Besides desecrating the Lambeau mystique, over those 10 playoff games, Favre tossed 19 TDs and 18 INTs. That is an awful lot of interceptions, projecting to 29 in a 16-game schedule. The last player to throw 29 interceptions in a season was ... well, it was Favre, in 2005. Before that, it was Vinny Testaverde in 1988. You have to go back more than 20 years to find anyone who throws interceptions like this guy.

Barring the turnovers, this game would have been a story of Minnesota's good defense and New Orleans' poor defense. The Saints had the best offense in the NFL this offseason, but it didn't look like anything special on Sunday. What the Saints did do was avoid mistakes, with their only turnover coming on special teams. What they didn't do was pick up first downs or put together drives. It was a little hard to believe this was the same team that had those statement games against the Giants and Patriots earlier in the season. It didn't seem like New Orleans really had a gameplan for the Viking defense.

Minnesota, in contrast, converted a stunning 58% of its third-down conversions and basically had its way with the Saints' defense all game. Give New Orleans credit for forcing turnovers, but that was as much about mistakes by the Vikings as good plays by the Saints. In the end, New Orleans came through, with a game-winning 40-yard field goal by Garrett Hartley. There's someone it's hard not to be happy for, mobbed by his teammates after the kick and carried on their shoulders. Now the Saints are going to their first Super Bowl in franchise history.

The Crystal Ball

Super Bowl XLIV: Colts vs. Saints
Miami, Florida

It's been a long time since we got to see the two best teams of the regular season meet in the Super Bowl. The last time we had two top seeds was 1993, but the AFC Champion Bills weren't really the second-best team that year. The 49ers were. The AFC was the weaker conference through most of the '80s and '90s, and by my reckoning, the last time we actually saw the two best teams meet in the Super Bowl was 25 years ago, when Joe Montana's 15-1 Niners met Dan Marino's 14-2 Dolphins in Super Bowl XIX.

This is an exciting matchup for multiple reasons. Matching up two teams of this caliber is part of the reason, of course. With apologies to Chargers partisans and deluded Vikings fans, it's been clear for most of the season who the two best teams were. I was dreaming of this matchup as early as Week 6. The game will feature the two best QBs in the game, for the first time since ... 1997 (Favre and John Elway)? The last time a Super Bowl featured both the first- and second-team all-pro QBs was 1991, but if you're suspicious of Mark Rypien, you have to go back to that Dan Marino/Joe Montana matchup from the '84 season. I'd listen to arguments for 1988 (Boomer Esiason and Montana), too. Anyway, it's been a long time.

This is an unusual game in that it doesn't feature a dominant defense. It features two very good defenses, but nothing like last year's Steelers. The storylines that interest me revolve around the offenses, and the quarterbacks in particular. The Peyton-Manning-grew-up-in-New-Orleans story, however, bores me to death, and if I see Archie Manning on ESPN more than once this week, I may have to buy a gun just so I can shoot my television. Maybe it would be cheaper to just smash it with rocks.

COLTS ON OFFENSE

As they proved this weekend, the Colts will let you pick your poison. They can beat you deep, they can beat you short. They can overcome pressure, they can find holes in coverage. They can win with the stars, they can win with the other guys. They don't run very well, but it's not apparent that they need to. The Colts don't need to do anything out of the ordinary. They have to stay calm and stick with their gameplan. They'll run just enough to keep the defense honest and let Manning do the rest.

The Saints need turnovers. That's where their defense has made its money all season, and it's been more crucial than ever this postseason. Their best move is to slow down the game: don't give up the big play. Indianapolis is more than capable of marching down the field with a bunch of short plays, but I think that gives the Saints' their best chance to win. I don't think they can win a track meet against the Colts, but if they cover everything deep and limit Indianapolis to runs and short passes, they could score enough to pull this thing out and maybe force a couple of turnovers eventually.

New Orleans also may be able to take advantage of Jim Caldwell's extremely conservative philosophy. Last weekend, the Colts twice passed up fourth-and-goal to kick field goals, netting a total of six points. If they had gone for it both times, and made it even once, they would have scored seven points and left the Jets pinned inside the 10 the other time. Instead, they scored only six points and had to kick off twice, giving New York the ball at or beyond the 20 both times. Keep everything in front of you, and Caldwell will settle for field goals.

SAINTS ON OFFENSE

The Saints look best when their offense is balanced. Pierre Thomas should probably get 20 carries in this game. Reggie Bush is best as a receiver and returner; Thomas should be the primary ball-carrier. Balance is especially important against the Colts, because you need to slow down their pass-rushers. Dwight Freeney and Robert Mathis, when they know a pass is coming, are a quarterback's nightmare. The Saints should run when they can and pass mostly when they have to. I'd also incorporate repeated screens to Bush, which could be a huge weapon against this defense.

The Colts would do well to keep New Orleans a one-dimensional passing offense. This is a good matchup for them. They, like the Vikings, can get pressure on Brees without blitzing. The Saints have a fantastic offensive line, but it's weakest where the Colts are strong, on the edge. The Saints never really adjusted against Minnesota by keeping extra blockers in and giving Brees time to attack the vulnerable Minnesota secondary. If Indianapolis can force the Saints into passing situations and let Freeney and Mathis tee off, they should be able to duplicate the Vikings' results in the NFC Championship Game.

SPECIAL TEAMS

I don't know that either side has a definitive advantage on special teams. I suppose I might lean towards the Saints, because they have more dynamic returners, but I don't see this being a clear edge for either side. There's a huge experience gap between the kickers, with Indy's Matt Stover set to become the oldest player in Super Bowl history, and the Saints' Hartley nearly 20 years his junior. Stover gets the edge in reliability, but Hartley has a stronger leg.

THE FORECAST

Oddsmakers have installed Indianapolis as the early favorite, and it's hard to argue with that. It's easy, though, to overreact to last week's games, when the Colts looked unstoppable and the Saints looked shaky, lucky to advance. In their most important games this season, the Saints have always risen to the challenge, decisively stomping the Giants, Pats, and Cardinals. With two weeks to prepare for the Super Bowl, there's every reason to think they can turn in one more flawless performance.

Unfortunately for the Saints, that's what they need: a flawless performance. If they commit turnovers or can't make first downs or give up early TDs, they'll lose. The Colts have a better defense than the Saints do, and their offense won't give a game away like Minnesota's did. If the Saints win this game, it will be with turnovers and a big play on special teams, probably a return touchdown. Realistically, the Colts are going to score. You can't shut down that offense. The Saints need to make the most of their offensive opportunities. Third down success, a liability against Minnesota, will be crucial. The Saints need to be effective with their mid-range passing game, and they need to put together drives that keep Manning off the field.

The Colts probably need to fall behind early, so Manning can lead yet another (yawn) comeback. Actually, the Colts are fully capable of playing with an early lead, and turning it into a massacre. The offense, I'm convinced, will be fine. Ball control is paramount. The larger task falls to the Indianapolis defense. New Orleans is capable of putting a lot of points on the scoreboard, and the Colts have to contain that. Taking away the big play is great, but the Colts have shown that they can give up a couple of cheap scores and come back from them. What they can't do is allow the Saints to develop a rhythm on offense, marching down the field. There needs to be pressure on Brees and tight coverage on the receivers. Don't worry too much about getting burned: you've got Peyton Manning, and if you give up a quick six, he'll get it back.

I have all the respect in the world for the Saints, but I just don't see the Colts losing. They've been in this situation before, with a Super Bowl victory just three years ago and a ton more postseason experience than the Saints. Ultimately, what it comes down to is that I can't see the Saints stopping Manning. The Colts win Super Bowl XLIV, 31-24.

Posted by Brad Oremland at 3:35 PM | Comments (2)

The Year of David in a League of Goliaths

College basketball has as much parity this year as it has in a long time. With teams like North Carolina struggling, the road has been paved for some obscure teams to prove their talent on a national stage. But which of these teams stand out above the rest?

The "Davids"

Northern Iowa Panthers

This team has spent a good part of the past two weeks in multiple top 25 polls, which should be a fairly clear-cut sign that they've got some talent. Digging a little further shows just how dangerous this team really is. They've returned not only every starter from last year, but every player that scored even a single point in their first-round matchup with Matt Painter's Boilermakers. Considering they almost won that game, I can't imagine them faltering late this season, especially in the surprisingly weak Missouri Valley Conference.

The Panthers also have a physically dominating powerhouse in the paint in Jordan Eglseder, who stands at seven-feet tall. Even ignoring the irony of this "David" team having a Goliath of their own, the implications of Eglseder's presence are far-reaching. I'm not saying he automatically puts them on the same level as schools like Kentucky, Kansas, and other consistently great teams. What he really brings to the table is the ability to occasionally beat those teams at their own game, which together with the Panthers' experience and ability to play nearly mistake-free basketball, makes them as undesirable of an opponent as anyone in the county.

BYU Cougars

It might seem strange to have a team ranked in the top 10 listed as a "David" team, but with BYU, it makes plenty of sense. That's because while they've dominated the MWC for quite some time, they haven't been a major player in the national picture over the same period. As a matter of fact, they've failed to make it past the first round of the NCAA tournament since 1993.

On a more positive note, the Cougars haven't won less than 20 games since head coach Dave Rose arrived in 2005, a streak they've already extended this year, as they currently have a record of 20-1. They're also on a 15-game winning streak and averaging more than 80 points per game. The most impressive thing about this team is the starting backcourt, which, despite lacking a senior, is averaging 45 points per game. They can run with the best of them, and they probably will, deep into March.

Cornell Big Red

Unlike the other two teams on this list, Cornell has never had any success to speak of. Their back-to-back NCAA tournament appearances have doubled the number of trips to the Big Dance in school history, and they have yet to win once there.

On the list of things working in Cornell's favor is a starting frontcourt averaging 38 points per game. In their game against Kansas, which they almost won, this group outscored the Jayhawks' frontcourt by 24 points. Given that one of those players was All-American center Cole Aldrich, this domination was no small task.

Still not convinced? They've also amassed 16 wins in 19 games, and they play in a consistently anemic conference that won't make it very hard to reach 25 wins or more. Expect to see them in the tournament, and don't be surprised if they win multiple games once there.

If these three teams continue to live up to their potential, what teams will present the greatest challenge to their success in the NCAA tournament? The answer is fairly simple. In order to be the best, you've got to beat the best, and it's obvious which two teams stand head and shoulders above the rest.

The "Goliaths"

Kentucky Wildcats

It's hard to meet, let alone exceed, the expectations of Kentucky Wildcats fans, but John Calipari has his team at No. 1 in the polls, and looking almost unstoppable through 19 games this season. It should be fairly obvious to everyone why Kentucky is a "Goliath." They've won more games than any team in history, are currently the only undefeated team in the nation, and have the best player in college basketball, John Wall.

While Wall might be their greatest strength, he's also their greatest weakness in a way. What I mean is that when John Wall struggles, this team struggles. I know he isn't bad very often, but when he's had a hard time hitting shots this year, Kentucky has had a hard time winning games as comfortably as they should. It's not that they'll necessarily lose if John Wall isn't at full-throttle all the time, but they just might get upset if they aren't prepared for that possibility.

Kansas Jayhawks

This team isn't as talented as Kentucky, but I like their chances to win it all more than the Wildcats. This isn't due to anything other than experience, which they have plenty of, due to two preseason All-Americans, Sherron Collins and Cole Aldrich. This duo is in their third year together, and they both played on the team that won the national championship two years ago. Composure won't be an issue for this team.

The Jayhawks, like the Wildcats, find their weakness in relying on their strength too much. The loss to Tennessee proved that even when Collins and Aldrich are at their best, this team can lose without help from the rest of the team. If the role players on this team don't consistently hit shots, the Jayhawks won't have a chance to beat teams like Kentucky.

Posted by Paul Foeller at 11:02 AM | Comments (0)

January 25, 2010

Eighth is Enough

This is a fun time in the NBA. It is the height of speculation season around the league.

Which players will be named to the all-star team? Which players will be traded at the deadline? Which coaches are going to get fired? Which teams are going to tank to try and get a better draft pick?

But the most important question that can be raised around the league right now: which teams will round out the playoff picture in each conference?

With the league now past the halfway point of the season, "hot starts" and "better than we thought" are phrases of the past and it's time to look ahead to other clichés like "can they keep it up?" and "do they have what it takes?"

The second half of the NBA season is a different animal than the first half. Certain games have more importance in January and February than they did in November and December. As proof, look no further than the wildly-entertaining Thunder/Grizzlies game on Friday night.

The game certainly had a playoff atmosphere, and both teams played like they knew the importance of the game. It came down to the very last possession, and when it was all said and done, it looked like the Thunder knew that this was more than just simply a road game in January that got away.

For the first time all season, the Thunder and Grizzlies played a game that had playoff implications. For the two youngest teams in the league, it was the first time most of the players on the floor had tasted that their entire career. But if they can continue to play at a high level, it won't be the last.

And while teams like the Lakers and Cavs will be playing for home-court advantage throughout the playoffs for the rest of the season (important, but not exactly life or death), there are plenty of other teams that have a lot more riding on every game for the rest of the season.

Today, we'll examine a few of those teams. More specifically, the four teams that will be fighting for the last playoff spot in the West: Houston, Memphis, Oklahoma City, and New Orleans.

To be fair, those aren't the only four teams that could potentially finish eighth in the West and get the final playoff spot. As it stands right now, Houston would round out the playoff bracket, but they are just a game back of the sixth- and seventh-seeded Jazz and Suns, and only a game and a half back of the fifth-seeded Spurs. It's conceivable that one of those teams could fall back to the eighth spot, but I wouldn't bet on it.

On the flip side of things, the Clippers are four games back, and that's not exactly insurmountable with still 39 games left to play.

But for arguments sake, today we're going to look at the four teams that are within immediate striking distance of the eighth and final playoff spot.

Houston holds the spot for the time being, but Memphis and Oklahoma City are just a half game back, with New Orleans sitting a full game out of the playoffs.

Let's now take a more in depth look at these teams to try and figure out which of these four teams is the most likely to end up in the playoffs, and which three are going to end up on the outside looking in, with just a handful of ping pong balls in the draft lottery to show for their efforts this season.

Houston Rockets

Currently — 8th seed

Why They Can Make the Playoffs — Toughness

Ask most people in and around the league, and they'll tell you that no team plays harder than the Houston Rockets. They are gritty, determined, and play as a team. The not only lead the league in floor burns, but they rank up there in other important categories, as well.

The Rockets have the sixth-most offensive rebounds in the league, which helps make up for the fact that they rank 24th in field goal percentage. They are seventh in the league in assists, a testament to the unselfish brand of basketball that they've played all season.

They also rank in the top 10 in three pointers made, meaning that they can always shoot themselves back into a game if they get too far behind.

What They Must Overcome — No "go-to guy"

Let's face it, this is a superstar league. As nice a story as the "team game" makes, it doesn't result in much success. If you want to win and win big in this league, you have to have a superstar. You need a player than can put the team on his back and say, "I got this" when the game is on the line.

For as deep and as well-rounded as the Rockets are, they don't have anything close to a "go-to guy." The Rockets don't have anyone that ranks in the top 20 in points, rebounds, or assists. When the going gets tough, there's no telling who the Rockets can count on to get it going for them.

Getting solid contributions from everyone on the roster is nice, but for my money, I want a player that I can just get the ball to and get out of the way and let him win the game in the final four minutes.

The Rockets don't have that, and in my opinion, it's going to end up being the reason that they fall short of making the playoffs.

Prediction — The Houston Rockets will remain competitive, but unless they move Tracy McGrady for a proven scorer, they won't have enough firepower to maintain this 46-win pace, and fall just short of the playoffs (although still finishing well ahead of the 32 wins I projected in the preseason).

Oklahoma City Thunder

Currently — ½-game behind Houston for the 8th seed

Why They Can Make the Playoffs — Kevin Durant

What more can you say about this guy? He's had more 30-point games (25) than games in which he's scored under 30 (19). He's become a much better defender than he was a year ago, and he's leading the team in rebounding at 7.3 per game.

He's not just an up-and-comer and a surefire all-star; he's a bonafide superstar. And he's only 21-years-old.

What They Must Overcome — Inexperience

If you want to be more specific: inexperience at point guard. For as much as Russell Westbrook brings to the table, he has absolutely killed them late in games this season.

Here is just a sample of some of things that I've posted on the Sports Central Twitter page about Russell Westbrook over the past week:

"I believe Russell Westbrook just gave us two examples of what Doc Rivers would call "hero shots" in that game."

"I like Russell Westbrook's game, but not nearly as much as Russell Westbrook does."

"Surprise surprise. Westbrook takes a big shot for the Thunder ... and misses. Boobie Gibson makes OKC pay."

I don't want to sound like I'm piling on the guy, because believe it or not, I really do like Westbrook's game. He's lightning-quick, finishes well at the basket, and even his mid-range game is growing on me.

But with the game on the line, you can almost bet on Russell Westbrook taking the big shot. One day he's going to realize that it's okay to differ to arguably the best pure scorer in the game when your team absolutely has to have a basket.

But it doesn't look like that day is going to come this season.

Prediction — I can see this season for the Thunder playing out exactly how last season played out for the Bobcats. If you remember, Charlotte was right in the thick of the race for the eighth seed last season, then completely collapsed in the final month, losing seven of their last eight games, and missing the playoffs.

The Bobcats learned for that experience, made some roster adjustments, and now find themselves right in the thick of things, comfortably in the playoff picture in the east, just a game and a half back of the fifth seed.

That's the Thunder this season. They're really talented, but really raw. They'll learn from the inevitable mistakes they'll make in April and come back stronger than ever next season.

Unfortunately, that means one more trip to the lottery for Durant before he gets his first taste of playoff basketball.

New Orleans Hornets

Currently — One game back of Houston for the 8th deed

Why They Can Make the Playoffs — Experience

Remember, it's only been a season and a half since the Hornets finished with the second-best record in the West.

They got off to a rocky start this season (one that ultimately cost their coach his job), but they've turned it around lately. They are 20-14 under new coach Jeff Bower, and they are 9-4 in January. It's like the flipped the switch and remembered what it takes to play winning basketball again.

And of course, they still have Chris Paul. He's just quietly going about his business, putting up his usual 20-10 every night and coasting his way to his third straight All-Star Game. It's hard to bet against this guy. He's as fierce a competitor as there is in the league, and he's got the talent to back it up.

What They Must Overcome — Their schedule

There could be a different reason that the Hornets have had such a good month of January: the schedule-makers were very easy on them. Of the 13 games that they've played this month, only four have come against teams that would currently make the playoffs.

You know what that means: it's about to get a lot tougher.

If the Hornets are going to make the playoffs, they are going to have to run the gauntlet in the final month and a half of the season.

Starting March 1st, 15 of their final 22 games are against teams that currently have a winning record, including a five games in seven days West Coast road trip that is immediately followed up by a five-game home stand that features games against the Mavericks, Cavaliers, Blazers, and Lakers.

The Hornets had better keep taking advantage of their soft schedule while it lasts, because soon enough things are about to change drastically.

Prediction — The Hornets dug themselves too much of a hole with their 3-8 start. They are starting to hit their stride right now, but once the schedule toughens up, it's going to be hard to keep pace with the other three teams they are fighting with.

With money being such a big factor for this team, I don't see them making a push at the trade deadline for any big name players that could put them over the top because, let's face it, big-name players tend to make big bucks, and the Hornets are in no position to be spending big bucks right now.

Expect a close-but-no-cigar season for the Hornets followed up by an offseason filled with a lot of soul-searching and (most likely) some house-cleaning as they try to build a team decent enough to entice Chris Paul to stick around once his contract is up.

Memphis Grizzlies

Currently — ½-game back of Houston For the eighth seed

Why They Can Make the Playoffs — Offense

Averaging 104 points per game (fourth in the league), the Grizzlies are loaded with talent on the offensive side of the ball. They have five players that average double figures, and Zach Randolph and Rudy Gay at 20.9 and 20.6 points per game, respectively, rank 12th and 15th in the league in scoring. Throw in the fact that O.J. Mayo (18.1 points per game) can get crazy-hot at any time and they are one of the most dangerous offensive teams in the league.

The Grizzlies take the third most free throws per game of any team in the league, which is the easiest way to prevent any prolonged scoring droughts. They also average the most offensive rebounds per game, which means that even when their shots aren't falling they still find ways to constantly put pressure on opposing defenses.

What They Must Overcome — Defense

For as good as Memphis is with the ball, they are equally as bad on defense. They give up 103.9 points per game (seventh most in the league), and opponents are shooting 48% from the floor against them (only Golden State and New Jersey are worse).

As a team, Memphis has committed the third fewest amount of fouls of any team in the league, which leads me to believe that they are simply too soft on the inside. Obviously, committing fouls and allowing a team to beat you from the free throw line isn't exactly a recipe for success, but it sends a message to the opposing team that it's not going to be easy to score around the basket, which in turn could force a team to shoot from the outside more.

The good news is that improving on defense as the season goes on is a lot easier than improving on offense. Defensive specialists come much cheaper than elite scorers, so it theory it should be easier to land one at the trade deadline, much like how the Thunder acquired Thabo Sefolosha from the Bulls last season.

Also, an improvement on defense doesn't necessarily have to come by adding a new player. Sometimes, all it takes is a renewed commitment. Lionel Hollins has done a great job with this team so far. If he can get them to commit to playing harder on the defensive end for the second half of the season by tempting them with the real possibility of a playoff berth, we could be looking at a playoff team in the making.

Prediction — It won't be easy, but in my opinion, I think Memphis has the best shot at making the playoffs of any of these four teams.

They defend their home-court well, 16-5 overall to be exact, and they've won a franchise-record 10 consecutive home games. Like most middle of the pack teams, they struggle on the road, but they've developed a swagger and confidence that they can't be beat at home, which could lead to some huge wins late in the season.

The Grizzlies are going to need to continue to play well at home and rack up all the wins that they can in Memphis: eight of their final 12 games are away from home. But I believe that their recent success at home has this team thinking that they can beat anyone, and if they can carry that confidence over into road games, they could get some big wins away from home in the second half of the season.

With road games against bottom-feeders like Detroit, New Jersey, Minnesota, New York, and Washington all coming up in the next month, I believe that Memphis is going to turn things around away from home, continue to take care of business at the FedEx Forum, and slide into the eighth and final playoff spot in the West.

It looks like getting the eighth seed will earn the Grizzlies the right to get swept by the Lakers, which isn't exactly the best prize a team can ask for, but when your franchise has never won a playoff series, just getting in is a victory in itself.

When you're the youngest team in the NBA, as the Grizzlies are, you gotta start the process of making your team relevant again somewhere.

For this team, in this season, eighth is enough.

Posted by Scott Shepherd at 2:05 PM | Comments (2)

The Inconvenient Ruse of the Independent Contractor

There is not a single player inside of the top 35 of the Official World Golf Rankings at the Bob Hope Classic this week. If anywhere, they're in Abu Dhabi for the first leg of the European Tour's lucrative Desert Swing. Stars are lured to the Middle East with promises of sizable appearance fees, inching into the seven figures for golf superstars.

Since the PGA Tour does not do that, they can lose out to the Euro Tour when a rich sponsor is willing to do whatever it takes to get the best to their event. For the oil barons of the Middle East, money is little object.

The money lured Anthony Kim to the United Arab Emirates for the event and he was chastised for it by long-time PGA Tour veteran Scott McCarron.

McCarron told Golf Digest, "I think it sends a bad message when you're out chasing money over in Abu Dhabi. Are you helping the PGA Tour when you do that? Absolutely not."

Named to the 16-member PGA Tour Players Advisory Council — that really wields little power since player reps on the board can always be outvoted 5-4 — McCarron has not won on the PGA Tour since 2001. In other words, he is not one of the guys being wooed to play in Abu Dhabi for a hefty, up-front sum.

McCarron's contention is that Commissioner Finchem granted Kim a conflicting event exemption — effectively a doctor's note to skip out on playing the PGA Tour during any one week to play on another tour. A player can be granted up to three each year and the Commish rarely declines a request.

Finchem responded to press conference questions about a possible moratorium on those exemptions. He was not convinced about the volume of requests or their impact on the Tour as a whole.

The tournament director of the Bob Hope Classic disagrees, though. Speaking with Golf World magazine, Michael Milthorpe says his event needs defection protection from the Tour.

"I’d personally like to see the tour do a moratorium on them, until things pick up," Milthorpe said. "Support our events here."

Milthorpe, McCarron, and people of their ilk, are not only wrong, but turn their back on the notion (read: ruse) that PGA Tour players are "independent contractors."

The PGA Tour and its players like to claim that the golfers are "independent contractors" — as though they can just came and go as they please from the Tour. That notion is laughable. A PGA Tour member is not independent.

They have to play in 15 events per year. They are subject to random drug testing. Players must compete in pro-ams or participate in other sponsor events. Loyalty to the Tour is required for all but three tournaments per year. In other words, the "independent contractor" is more like an employee than a contractor.

Commissioner Finchem is a smart man. He realizes that the players truly are not independent contractors. The rubber stamp of the conflicting event exemption is a concept that is used to keep top players happy. Three times per year, the best players on Tour can cash in on their international fame in the form of a six- or seven-figure appearance fee overseas.

More often than not, the exemptions are used to appear in European Tour events with host nations and sponsors that are willing to shell out serious money to woo superstars. The practice is in no way relegated to the Desert Swing. It happens in China and Singapore and other places, too.

Likewise, there are European Tour events that refuse to engage in the practice. Those tournaments almost universally offer fewer points than the PGA Tour event held the same week. Only five FedExCup events offered fewer world ranking points than the Euro Tour event opposite it. Five out of thirty-three. Considering the global nature of the sport, the fact that the PGA Tour holds serve on World Ranking Points more than 80% of the time is very telling.

The only European Tour events that eclipse well-established PGA Tour events are during the Desert Swing. Oil money talks. Hell, as a member of the media, I would prefer to cover the Desert Swing than the Hope. For a three-week stretch during each of the last several seasons, the European Tour has taken the spotlight. So what? For the remainder of the season, only one other Euro Tour event will dominate headlines during the FedExCup. That is the BMW PGA Championship at Wentworth, which is the Euro Tour's version of the Players Championship and offers bonus World Ranking Points to the field. It is the homecoming of the European Tour year.

That homecoming is necessary because the European Tour's membership qualifications are very lax. A mere 11 events are required to be a Tour member and participate in the Race to Dubai. For elite players, that means the four majors and three WGCs co-sponsored by the Euro Tour, plus three other events and the Dubai World Championship.

The Race to Dubai was concocted by the European Tour as a way of keeping some its homegrown talent in Europe longer, and bring back some of the defectors that went to play the PGA Tour full-time. Just a mere few PGA Tour players took up associate Euro Tour memberships to play in the Race to Dubai. Effectively, that signaled that the PGA Tour has a very loyal base as it is. The money, the ease of travel, and the competition on the PGA Tour is superior to the European Tour.

Knowing this, pockets of the European Tour — the Desert Swing, Race to Dubai, et al — cater to the top players. Meanwhile, PGA Tour players like McCarron appear happy to swipe up the European-born talent. McCarron was not complaining that Rory McIlroy has decided to join the PGA Tour in 2010. He didn't balk at the scores of other players that cultivated their game in Europe and then brought it to America.

Why not? They're taking up spots in PGA Tour events that prevent rank-and-file guys like McCarron from having higher priority. Many players that hold dual memberships are in Abu Dhabi, including eight of the world's top 14. Why did McCarron focus his rage on Anthony Kim, one of three Americans in the field, instead of former major champion Todd Hamilton?

In all honesty, guys like McCarron really only want superstars to appear to help promote events in the short-term. For every guy ranked highly like Kim that appears in the Hope, McCarron's odds of being in the field get worse. The rank-and-file want loyalty only to the end that it helps them maintain opportunities to play. To McCarron, "supporting the PGA Tour" means "ensuring that second- and third-tier players have intramural tournaments."

Unlike the European Tour, the PGA Tour is very much influenced by the rank-and-file, the guys that have made millions of dollars, but never actually won a tournament. Happy with their lifestyle, they seek to preserve it when they feel threatened by the reality that a global tour is taking shape above them, operating outside of their reach and influence.

As Doug Barron said to me earlier this week, "Golf is a selfish game. You've got to look out for yourself."

Posted by Ryan Ballengee at 11:47 AM | Comments (1)

January 22, 2010

Sports Q&A: Cardinal Sins and Sexual Healing

Last week, Mark McGwire admitted to using steroids after years of refusing to discuss the matter. This week, it was reported that Tiger Woods has entered a sex addiction clinic in Mississippi. Are these forgivable offenses, and how will the public accept the circumstances of the two athletes?

Isn't it odd how un-newsworthy a player's admission of steroid use is when it comes several years too late, long after most rational people have concluded that said player did, in fact, use steroids? There's a phenomena we no longer see in baseball, and that's the "stunning revelation." Many have speculated that McGwire came clean to improve his chances of election into baseball's Hall of Fame. If McGwire thinks admitting steroid usage betters his chances of Hall admission, then he's fooling himself. If Hall of Fame voters are thinking correctly, then McGwire's admission should totally erase any chance he has of making the Hall. What, should you gain points for being a liar and a cheater, as opposed to being just a cheater?

Without the specter of steroids haunting him, McGwire's numbers would surely be Hall Of Fame worthy. Yes, 583 home runs is an impressive feat, but not when that's also the number of times Canseco mentions you in his books. McGwire's timely admission and apology is much like a syringe — slim and hollow.

McGwire was appointed as St. Louis Cardinals hitting coach back in October, and maybe his recent admission was an effort to clear his conscious before starting his new job in earnest. Is he even qualified to be a hitting instructor, much less a Hall of Fame inductee? He's got a .263 career batting average, so, on average, a Cardinal batter should heed his advice only 26.3% of the time. And, judging by his sketchy history of drugs and truth-telling, McGwire is extremely well-qualified to instruct players what not to do.

McGwire is just another in the long line of baseball players who have verified the literary prowess of Jose Canseco, who, like many of the players he's mentioned in his books, is a great "story-teller." The only difference is Canseco's "stories" are the truth.

In the case of Woods, it's hard to feel sympathy for someone who's addicted to sex, but it's darn sure easy to feel envy. I've got a feeling it's a might more easy to admit a sex addiction than it is to admit steroid use. If Woods and wife Elin Nordegren are truly in rehab together, the the tables will really be turned: she'll be the one needing all the tissue now. Ironically, even on a break from the game of golf, Woods is still determined to work on his "swing."

If Woods is firmly committed to "curing" his addiction, then he has a long road ahead of him, and it will take more than just repeated listening to a Marvin Gaye song, or abstaining from listening to 2 Live Crew. How difficult is a sex addiction to overcome? With steroids, you can just stop taking them. It's doubtful Woods can give up sex altogether, and even if he does, does than mean he's beaten the affliction? And will fans really care if he's overcome his problem? Will anyone say "It's amazing that Tiger Woods won the Masters after rehabilitating from that horrendous sex addiction?" No way. That's not heroic, as recovering from a knee injury to win a major, for example, would be.

Now, is Woods truly addicted to sex, or is this just a publicity stunt to shore up his image by portraying him as a "victim?" Maybe, but that's merely speculation. It's more likely a ploy to boost his marketability. If all goes well, the clinic has promised to name a wing in their complex after Woods, the location of which will be adjacent to the Wilt Chamberlain wing.

Can fans forgive Woods for his so-called "addiction?" For sports fans, it's easy to look past or ignore all of the people hurt by Woods' actions, and simply forgive him of his addiction because, unlike McGwire, it gave his game no advantage. Or did it? Word has it that Woods has been boasting to friends about adding "two feet in the air." Whether or not he's referring to his drives, or something else, is unclear.

Compared to Woods, people are more than likely to call McGwire "scum" for his mistakes. And that's wrong. McGwire's actions tarnished no one but himself, while Woods' decisions negatively affected a number of people. Woods' actions, in the eyes of the public, in no way blemish his victories on the PGA tour, including 14 majors. Unfortunately, that's human nature, and whether wrong or right, it's how fans think when it comes to situations of this nature.

Ultimately, the fate of the public personas of Woods and McGwire hinge on saying the right things. Unfortunately, there is nothing McGwire can say to regain the public's trust. That chance deteriorated completely in the near five years between McGwire's refusal to speak before Congress and his recent admission. His window of opportunity slammed shut long ago.

Woods, on the other hand, has addressed his issues, more or less, and while fans can still question his behaviors, it's highly doubtful his legacy will suffer because of them. Despite his troubles, Woods could be in a much worse predicament. Just ask McGwire.

Posted by Jeffrey Boswell at 11:58 AM | Comments (4)

Karrie Webb, Please Bring Back the LPGA!

While everybody in Australia is watching tennis, I'm hoping this Australian woman can bring back the enthusiasm of the LPGA Tour. I got into LPGA in 1999 because of Karrie Webb. Karrie was kicking major butt then. She won 5 majors and many tournaments from 1999-2001 period (now 7 majors and 36 LPGA tournament wins). But Karrie's personality appeals to me on a permanent basis. She has this determination and a insecurity mixed with a laid-back attitude. You just don't see this type of female in sports that brings fan attraction.

People in history will talk about Kathy Whitworth, Babe Didrikson, Betsy Rawls, Mickey Wright, and those other American "Fargo" golfers (yes, I'm going there). Great golfers and great people, but they were just something robotic and controlled by prejudicial forces. Louise Suggs comes to mind. Babe broke rules and norms and was hated by most white men and women for her success, but she had this fear about black people growing up in Texas. Therefore, she was dependent on white "haters" for acceptance.

I'm a fan of Grace Park, Se Ri Pak, and all those Korean golfers. The Johnny Yune type. Now that the LPGA is cracking down on them, you are starting to see them become what Babe Didrikson became — defensive and bigoted. Regardless whether you speak English or not, women, regardless of culture, still have to marry that "toad" man for acceptance and just maybe the toad will become a prince. Likewise, today's Korean golfers don't need to know English because they share the same "fear, work hard, and get respect" routine. The dependent Anglo-American way.

Karrie was different from those molds. She didn't have that societal conscience or that programming to be with a "toad." I know she was close-nit with her family, but it didn't come across as being snobbish or putting on heirs. Instead, it felt sincere and I watched her more. When her sexual orientation and her new partner were revealed, it didn't phase my love for her game. Yet when Rosie Jones came out, I didn't care or look. What is the difference between her, Annika Sorenstam, or Julie Inkster? And people complain about Ivan Lendl because he worked like a robot.

Karrie possesses that special charisma that only a few people do, much less athletes. The LPGA has got it all wrong in how they market a female player. Most athletes you watch because they have a chance to win, but if they lose, turn the clicker. With Karrie, regardless of the score, I just want to see her play. She just has an artist way about her game and herself. Of course with that cute accent, I have grown to adore that "chicken" neck, too.

In short, I love Karrie Webb. Bring back the noise.

Posted by Davan Mani at 11:17 AM | Comments (0)

January 21, 2010

NFL Weekly Predictions: Conf. Championships

Note: the quotes in this article are fictional.

NY Jets @ Indianapolis (-7½)

The Jets continued their postseason run with a stunning 17-14 win in San Diego over the two-seeded Chargers, a win that sends the Jets to Indianapolis for the AFC championship. Shonn Greene rushed for 128 yards, and Mark Sanchez won his second playoff game as a rookie, further validating his decision to forego his final year of college to enter the NFL draft.

"No one can doubt my decision to 'leave early,'" says Sanchez, "any more than they can doubt Brett Favre's decision to 'stay late.' For me, the lure of NFL riches overpowered the advantages of returning for my senior year at USC. Of course, it was a huge adjustment jumping to the NFL, where football becomes a full-time job, and your income is taxed. Classes for 'credit' take on a whole new meaning at USC."

"For Favre, it wasn't the money that brought him back. It was simply the love of the game and the lure of glory that enticed him. And speaking of 'lures,' a fishing excursion on Lake Minnetonka wasn't even necessary to make Favre commit to Minnesota. That's where our situations differ most; I chose to go 'hardship,' while Favre passed on the chance to go for a ride on the SS Hardship, which I believe is a sister ship to the SS Natch."

"As for the Chargers, we certainly seemed to have their number in the latter part of the game. We were well-prepared for it — we're getting quite used to teams that stop playing in the second half."

"I guess our defense deserves a lot of the credit; but ultimately, you have to fault the Chargers for shooting themselves in the foot, which is exactly what they wanted to do to Nate Kaeding. Of course, if Kaeding would have kicked like the Pro Bowl player he is, we would have lost. He's the new Mike Vanderjagt. 'Canadian Missed' made a name for himself in the regular season by hardly missing, then earned his nickname in the playoffs by always missing. The same goes for Kaeding. Call him 'Mister Again,' because he 'missed 'er, again.'"

"The historical significance of the Jets and Colts rivalry is not lost on me. I'm not sure who Namath's bold declarations have shocked more — the 1969 Colts, or Suzy Kolber. At least in the case of Super Bowl III, Broadway Joe wasn't to be denied. I'm not one to guarantee victory. Believe me, though, if I can bookend my career with a Super Bowl win and a drunken sideline proposition, I'd die a happy man."

The Colts dominated the Ravens 20-3 last Sunday, controlling the game against a foe that operated in similar fashion to the Jets. Like the Ravens, the Jets rely on a running game that, when clicking, allows for high percentage, play-action passes and dictates the tempo of the game.

"Obviously, we don't expect a shootout," says Peyton Manning. "But you never know — like the Saints did with Deuce McAllister, we could re-sign Marvin Harrison for an inspirational boost. Instead of 'bringing the wood,' Marvin could 'bring the steel.' You've got to love Marvin's entrepreneurial spirit — it's not enough simply to offer a drive-through car wash; Marvin's taken that a step further with his exclusive 'drive-by' service. God forbid Gilbert Arenas ever tries to collect a bet at one of Marvin's car washes."

"Anyway, we may be favored by seven points, but I firmly believe it will be a tight game, with the outcome not decided until the end. It will be like Lane Kiffin's tenure at my alma mater, the University of Tennessee — 'touch and go.' One thing's for sure — the Jets don't lack confidence. The players feed off the swagger and brashness of Rex Ryan, and let's face it, like Rex, they don't seem to ever be hungry. I'm sure Rex will give us some bulletin board material — heck, he gave his own team some when he said they were out of the playoffs when, in fact, they weren't. I'm not sure if Rex is aware of the date change, but he's already guaranteed the Jets participants will dominate the Pro Bowl."

"What's our key to victory? Winning. And having the same officiating crew that called the Ravens game. But seriously, I'll have to keep my eyes on Darrelle Revis. He's not only a 'shut down' cornerback, he's a 'shut up' cornerback, as Chad Ochocinco can attest. Revis made Ochocinco look ordinary; as receivers go, he's merely at 'si' level. I think he just goes by the name 'Chad' now. Revis' skills are top-notch. He's got more coverage than CNN, or a Kirstie Alley mu mu."

"But I think Reggie Wayne can handle himself just fine. We'll see what happens when a 'Hurricane' strikes Revis Island. If Revis takes Wayne out of the game, I have other options, like Dallas Clark and Austin Collie. If I need more, I'm sure I can find other receivers named after cities in Texas."

The Jets are playing like the team that started the season 3-0, while the Colts are playing like the team that started 14-0. Of course, you can't underestimate the Jets, but for a team that easily could have gone 16-0, the Colts don't seem to be getting enough credit.

For the Jets, it's all about "protecting" Mark Sanchez. In football, as in life, it's imperative to avoid getting a "Dirty" Sanchez. Of course, protecting Sanchez is two-fold — the offensive line will have to keep Indy's Dwight Freeney and Robert Mathis away, and the Jets will have to successfully run to give Sanchez manageable passing opportunities. If the Jets face too many 'third-and-Sanchez" situations, then they are in trouble, because their running game has faltered, and the Freeney/Mathis speed rush can go all out.

For the Colts, it all comes down to Manning. Against a defense like the Jets, it's hard to be spectacular. The Jets will guard against anything deep. But Manning doesn't need to be spectacular; he needs to be safe and efficient. It's unlikely the Jets will throw something at Manning he hasn't seen before. If they do, a few quick glances at some snapshots, and Manning will have it diagnosed.

Manning throws for 210 yards and 2 touchdowns, and the Colts force 2 Sanchez turnovers.

Indianapolis wins, 23-13.

Minnesota @ New Orleans (-4½)

The top-seeded Saints host the two-seeded Vikings in the thrilling conclusion of the NFC's "all-indoors" playoffs, with the climate-controlled Superdome the setting for the conference's final showdown. It will be Brett Favre's fifth appearance in the NFC title game, and his first in an indoor setting.

"It would suit me just fine in this game were at Lambeau Field," says Favre. "Heck, I'm undefeated there this year. I'm like many purists of the game who long for a game in below freezing temperatures on natural grass. I think the Fabulous Thunderbirds said it most eloquently in their 1986 hit 'Turf Enuff.'"

"But wins like this are the reason I wanted to play for the Vikings. I knew they had everything a quarterback would want: a powerful running game, a strong defense, a malleable head coach, and a wide receiving unit on the cusp of greatness. They sounded an awful lot like last year's Jets. I guess I did both teams a favor."

"Now, I didn't join the Vikings so I could run up the score on helpless defenses. Maybe we didn't need another touchdown with a 27-3 lead, but you can never underestimate the importance of taking a four-possession lead, even with only two minutes remaining. I, of all people, know how quickly things can change. Give me two minutes, and I can change my retirement plans three times!"

"Yeah, I know it was a fourth-down play in which I passed to Visanthe Shiancoe for a touchdown. Was it a classless act? I plead the 'fourth.' Ask anybody, excluding anyone in the Packers' or Jets' front offices, and they'll tell you I'm a class act. But what do you expect. Prince was at the Metrodome. There was bound to be some 'Controversy.'"

The Saints, like the Vikings, are riding high after a blowout divisional victory, a 45-14 demolition of the Cardinals. After Arizona scored on the game's first play from scrimmage, the Saints took over and dominated every phase of the game. Reggie Bush accounted for two scores, one on a 46-yard rush, and the other on an 83-yard punt return.

"Call it 'All Saints' Day,'" says Bush. "The Cardinals were no match for us on Saturday. Not on a day when we were rested, fired up, and carrying a baseball bat. Somewhere, Buford Pusser was smiling, as was Joe Don Baker, and the Beastie Boys, because we 'did it like this, we did it like that, we did it with a baseball bat.' And, judging by Arizona's effort, we could have done it with a wiffle ball bat. Suffice it to say, we brought the 'wood,' and the Cardinals brought the 'woodshed.'"

"If you saw the television broadcast of our game, you noticed that every time I made a play, FOX felt obligated to show my girlfriend, Kim Kardashian. Usually, it takes a sex tape for that many people to see her."

"Hey, speaking of tape study," says Drew Brees, "I've watched hours of film on the Vikings, and I found just as many holes. Sure, their defensive front is full of stars, most of which are full of 'Star Caps.' Jared Allen is a terror; I fear any man who sports a natural coonskin cap on his head. And the Williams boys are beastly. Kevin is a handful, and Pat is a sports bra-full. And Ray Edwards is an emerging force. After that, though, the Minnesota defense is much like a game at Jacksonville Municipal Stadium — the second and third levels are nearly empty. If I have time to throw, we'll win this game, and I only wish I could partake in the some Super Bowl bets."

Sunday's game may be one of the most entertaining and intriguing NFC title games of all-time. How could it not be? It's Brees versus Favre, Bush versus Peterson, and it all takes place in the Superdome. And, hopefully, there will be the added spectacle of FOX's Tony Siragusa patrolling the sidelines like a human Zamboni, glad-handing anything within arm's reach.

They call Adrian Peterson "All Day." In New Orleans, that's also what they call the Arizona defensive front, because they gave Brees "all day" to throw. Their defensive line is one heck of an offensive line. The Vikings' front won't afford Brees that luxury. At the very least, they'll force Brees to throw faster than he was accustomed to against the Cardinals.

On offense, the Vikings need a solid game from Peterson. Peterson is a threat to go all the way, and if he finds success early, the Saints safeties will be forced to creep in. Those two or three steps are all Favre needs to attack deep. Give Favre an inch, and he'll take a mile. Just ask Brad Childress.

Peterson rushes for 123 yards and a touchdown, and Favre out-duels Brees.

Minnesota wins, 31-27.

Posted by Jeffrey Boswell at 11:50 AM | Comments (1)

Just What Sports Needs, More Racism!

AABA is creating an All-White basketball league. Not the "Dancing Queen" people (that's ABBA), but the American Alliance for Basketball Alliance (listen, I know the acronym is the AABA, but I really don't care enough to look up what it really stands for, it means nothing to the rest of this piece). This will be basketball how it was played in the 1940s; hopefully, they will be bringing the short shorts back, as well.

The commissioner of the AABA, a man who calls himself "Moose" in a press release, claims it's not about hate.

"There's nothing hatred about what we're doing," he said. I'm not even sure that's an acceptable sentence grammatically, but I love it. It truly captures the essence of this Moose fellow. You can imagine he gave that quote while he was leaning on a half-completed fence, with a piece of straw in his mouth and a six-gun on his waist. Probably wearing a cowboy hat, enjoying the nice weather while his wife, with two fresh black eyes and improved sense of decorum, is working inside the house.

Anyway, he claims he doesn't hate people of color, but that the league will be there for while players to play fundamental basketball, which they like. Someone needs to inform Moose that a league based on selling the fundamental side of basketball already exists. It's called the WNBA and it makes a boatload of money (yeah, makes it disappear! Hey oh!).

Finally, there's an option for the guy who loves basketball, but just hates the prospect of making millions of dollars playing the bastardized version the NBA puts on. I've actually written in the past about how it would be awesome to have a racist team exist in one of the main four sports leagues ,but I never considered the prospect of having an entire league of racists.

When I first heard about this, I reacted the way you would when an 9-year-old tells you he's opening a lemonade stand. It's adorable in nature but is destined to be a disaster financially.

What I don't understand is why they don't go all out with their racism. It's pretty clear what this is, so why do they try and hide it? Go ahead and market your product to the ignorant and undereducated and really drive it home. Maybe we can have an AABA finals where the Klansmen take on the Overseers. Instead of a team bus, you can have the General Lee. Maybe at halftime they could have piñatas of our President or, if that's too educational, they could make fans shoot a half-court shot to win a GED.

"Would you want to go to the game and worry about a player flipping you off or attacking you in the stands or grabbing their crotch?" Moose said in a press release.

I think I would be more scared that a player or fan would attack me after discovering I've read an entire book.

Please don't misunderstand me, I think this is a fantastic idea and I hope they get a TV deal immediately. I would probably watch the first game just because the idea of a bunch of racists playing a game un-athletically, or "fundamentally," would be hilarious. I can't wait to see what type of player would actually suit up for a game like this. Whoever it is, they are probably wearing jean shorts with their team jersey. It would be like a sports version of the "Jersey Shore." You hate the people the show is about but you like the fact that you can watch it and know you're a better person than every single character.

And I hope whatever TV station snatches up this train wreck is already developing a second league to promote. The blacks-only NHL. Moose probably already has a slogan for that — "Blacks-only NHL ... when you have this many black guys in one place, more than just the ice is gonna get cut."

Posted by Mark Chalifoux at 11:36 AM | Comments (3)

January 20, 2010

The Hall of Why

As you probably already know, a couple of weeks ago, Andre Dawson was announced as the only player to be inducted into the Baseball Hall of Fame this year. I am only old enough to remember the Hawk as a part-time player in the mid-'90s, so I'll only judge Dawson's selection based on what I know — his stats and achievements.

From what I understand, he was one of the NL's most feared hitters and a five-tool guy who won a Rookie of the Year award and MVP during his career, as well as eight Gold Gloves. I am a big believer in on-base percentage, and Dawson only achieved a .323 mark in his big league career. Dawson had a good on-base plus slugging percentage number when compared to the league average, and especially in his prime.

After all, if Ozzie Smith could get in first-ballot with over 90% of the vote as a below average hitter and being one of the best defensive players of all-time, Dawson should get in for being great defensively and above average offensively. So, all things considered, with the information I have at my disposal, I would vote for Dawson on my hypothetical Hall of Fame ballot. It's not an open-and-shut case, but I would vote for him.

Apparently, the baseball writers needed much longer to make up their mind on Dawson. Eight years longer, in fact. Excruciatingly obvious, Dawson's numbers didn't change in the past 13 years. Mind you, they are paid to cover baseball and most likely all saw Dawson's career in its entirety. On Dawson's first ballot, he received 45.3% of the vote, about a 32% decrease from what he obtained in 2010. That number is a good omen for Roberto Alomar and Barry Larkin, who received 73.7% and 51.6%, respectively, in their first time on the ballot.

But even having to say phrases like that is patently absurd. A Hall of Famer should be something that you can tell or can't tell within a couple years of their retirement, barring circumstances that we are all too familiar with by now.

It would be one thing to make players wait if the voters were voting for the maximum 10 players allowable every year, but they're not. Between Dawson's first year on the ballot and this year, the average number of players selected by each voter was about six.

If you were making an all-decade team (both leagues included) for the '90s, you could do much worse than to put Larkin as your shortstop and Alomar as your second baseman. In fact, I would definitely lean in that direction when considering the whole of the decade, despite the efforts of A-Rod, Derek Jeter, and Nomar Garciaparra at short during the latter years of the '90s; and Craig Biggio and Jeff Kent at second.

Alomar was a career .300 hitter, had solid OPS numbers, made 12 consecutive All-Star Games in a row, and won 10 Gold Gloves, a record for a second baseman. I suppose, as ridiculous as it may seem for someone's Hall of Fame credentials, Alomar may have been penalized for his incident in 1997 with umpire John Hirschbeck. Larkin had very similar offensive numbers to Alomar, also made 12 All-Star Games, won an MVP award, was the best in the NL at his position and was the definitive player on his franchise for a generation. I don't know why Larkin didn't get more support than he did, but maybe the lack of eye-popping offensive numbers has something to do with it. However, Larkin did win a shortstop-record nine Silver Slugger Awards during his career.

Yet, why do we even care about the Hall of Fame so much?

One answer could be that we like to see the legacy of our favorite players and best players from the eras of sports we watched verified to some greater extent by some greater body. And that, I suppose, is an acceptable answer. However, there is so much controversy regarding Hall of Fame voting, and it is such a media circus every time it comes around, in football and baseball especially. It seems like the media coverage of the most prominent halls of fame in sports have gotten away from celebrating the careers of the inductees to the controversy about who gets in and who gets snubbed.

My point is that the greatest players in any sport, and the players the fans agree are the best should not need validation for their careers from a group of sportswriters who may have an agenda to serve, and fans (including me) should stop getting outraged by the system and its shortcomings.

It seems realistic, though, that I will be annoyed once again when Jeff Bagwell and Larry Walker fail to get in on the first ballot. This is the system the baseball writers have created.

Posted by Ross Lancaster at 11:14 AM | Comments (0)

January 19, 2010

NFL Divisional Roundup

Five Quick Hits

* A devastating earthquake rocked the island of Haiti last week. The NFL is one of many organizations supporting aid to the region. For an easy way to donate to the Red Cross efforts, you can text "Haiti" to 90999 and $10 will be added to your next phone bill.

* Chicago Bears DE Gaines Adams died of cardiac arrest Sunday morning. Adams, a former first-round pick of the Buccaneers, was 26.

* Bill Cowher needs to stop drinking on the set. This Saturday, he referred to the Colts Antoine Bethea as Elvin Bethea, talked about the Colts' no-huddle defense, and called Robert Mathis "Reggie." After the games, Chin.

* In the fourth quarter of the Baltimore Bowl, Greg Gumbel called a receiver open. He was double-covered and the pass intended for him was intercepted. I am pretty tired of announcers calling every receiver "open" or "wide-open."

* At the beginning of the season, new Denver defensive coordinator Mike Nolan was a genius. Now he's not with the team anymore.

***

Divisional Roundups

Cardinals @ Saints

Turnovers are always important, but they seemed to be especially so in this year's divisional round. All four victorious teams won the turnover battle, a combined +9 in this round and +18 for the playoffs as a whole. That means that so far this postseason, the winning team has an average advantage of +2.25 turnovers.

The Cardinals were +8 during their Super Bowl run last season, and +2 in their win over Green Bay last week. Protecting the ball and forcing turnovers have been keys to Arizona's success, and that fell apart with two early turnovers that effectively doomed their chances against New Orleans. Arizona also lost two starting defensive backs before halftime. It would be easy to say that Arizona lost because of injuries and turnovers.

There's some truth to that, but it would diminish the excellence of the Saints' play. In particular, their offensive line completely outplayed Arizona's front seven. Reggie Bush had perhaps the best game of his career, looking like the player we all thought he would be coming out of college. Bush and the Cardinals' Tim Hightower, who scored on the first play from scrimmage, gained a combined 171 yards on a total of 11 rushes.

The Saints won by 31, so let's not pretend this game was ever likely to end in an Arizona win, but it's hard not to think that the Cardinals were affected by last week's overtime win against Green Bay. They looked tired, beat up, and unfocused in New Orleans. Also, for future reference, please don't trust any playoff predictions I make involving the Cardinals. In 8 years covering the NFL, I am 0-6 predicting Arizona postseason games and 52-27 for all others.

Ravens @ Colts

All season, the blueprint for keeping things close against the Colts has been to play good defense and control the clock with a strong running game. Baltimore accomplished only the first. Any time you hold an opponent to 20 points, you're giving yourself a chance to win. When you hold a great offense like Indianapolis' to 20 points and under 300 yards, that's borderline heroic.

The Colts' offense and Ravens' defense both played basically the way you'd expect. This game was decided by the exceptional play of the Indianapolis defense and the horrid efforts of the Baltimore offense. Joe Flacco made poor decisions, Raven receivers dropped 5 passes, the whole unit looked slow, and the play-calling was questionable. Twice as many passes as runs? I'm pretty sure that wasn't in the gameplan. The Colts led in time of possession by almost 8 minutes. To have a good chance to win the game, Baltimore probably needed an edge of at least 8 minutes in its own favor.

This game was actually closer than the score indicates, and the unsung hero is surely Pierre Garçon. Ed Reed's third-quarter interception return into Colts territory had the potential to turn the contest, and Garçon's forced fumble just took the air out of the Ravens.

Cowboys @ Vikings

The good was Minnesota's line play. The bad was the Dallas pass-blocking. But let's start with the ugly: Minnesota running up the score. I remember a time, not too long ago, when kids were encouraged to get involved in athletic competition partly so they would learn good sportsmanship. Uh, don't let those kids watch the Vikings. In Week 17, they went for it on 4th-and-goal, scoring a touchdown that increased their lead to 41-0. This weekend, late in the fourth quarter, with a 27-3 lead, they took shots into the end zone on 4th-and-7 and later on 4th-and-3.

Don't tell me you can't complain, that you need to stop it if you don't like it. There's a point at which you call off the dogs if you have a little bit of class, and the Vikings don't. This kind of thing is indefensible. It's bullying, and there's nothing "sporting" about it.

The game was a rout basically in every way, but nowhere was this more apparent than in the dominance of Minnesota's front four over the Dallas offensive line. Tony Romo was constantly under pressure, committing 3 turnovers and having I don't know how many passes knocked down at the line. Late in the game, he was trying too hard to make a big play. The Vikings boast a stout run defense, but the air attack was such a disaster that I don't understand why the Cowboys didn't shift more attention to the ground game. No one has ever accused them of being poor run-blockers.

Jets @ Chargers

The only competitive game of the weekend, this one was also unique in another respect. Very few games have an obvious goat, a single player who choked under pressure or cost his team the game. This one did: San Diego kicker Nate Kaeding. One of the best at his position in the NFL, Kaeding missed only 3 field goals all season. He missed 3 more on Sunday. One of those was understandable, a 57-yard prayer before halftime. The others were chip shots, 36 yards and 40, respectively. Kaeding hadn't missed from that distance in two years. You expect a pro to make those kicks, and if either one had gone in, San Diego probably would have made it to overtime.

Norv Turner is taking heat for calling an onside kick at the end of the game. I thought it was a good idea, it just didn't work out. That's what is known as a calculated risk. This game had an obvious goat, and it was the kicker, not the coach.

The Jets won this game the same way they always do: with top-notch defense and conservative offense. They didn't panic when they couldn't move the ball early, and eventually a few plays came their way. The offensive line did a great job of keeping pressure away from Mark Sanchez, and creating opportunities for Shonn Greene.

After three epic blowouts, it's hard to say that any one thing might have turned those games, but I think several of the losing coaches suffered from lack of aggression. Reggie Bush's punt return TD sealed Arizona's loss, and I don't think he ever should have gotten the opportunity. I know it was 4th-and-6 from the Arizona 38, but down 24 with only 22 minutes left, you've got to make something happen. If you go for it and fail, hey, you were gonna lose anyway. Make it, and things could turn around.

I understand why the Cardinals chose to punt, but the Cowboys' misplaced trust in Shaun Suisham is downright puzzling. Why would you let him try a 48-yard field goal on 4th-and-1? I'm sure Suisham is a nice guy, but he's one of the least reliable kickers in the NFL, and he doesn't have a big leg. There's no way his chances of hitting a long kick are better than the chances of making a yard. Later on, Suisham attempted a 49-yarder when a punt would have been more prudent. I don't blame the kicker, I blame the coach.

The Chargers let struggling kicker Nate Kaeding attempt a field goal on 4th-and-2. That's not crazy, but it's hard not to think that going for it would have maximized San Diego's chances of winning.

Championship Game Forecasts

Vikings @ Saints

The matchup to watch is Viking DE Jared Allen vs. Saints LT Jermon Bushrod. Allen feasts on weak tackles, and Bushrod got schooled in the Week 15 loss to Dallas. New Orleans is a much better pass-blocking team than the Cowboys, but if Minnesota gets the same kind of pressure it did last weekend, the Saints don't have a chance. It's unreasonable to expect that kind of repeat performance, but if the Vikings are going to win, they do need to get pressure with their front four. They also have to take care of the ball. Adrian Peterson is a fumbler, and Brett Favre is always a turnover risk in the playoffs.

The Saints need to rise to the occasion. They've played their three best games when the stakes were highest: against the Giants in Week 6, the Patriots in Week 12, and the Cardinals last weekend. Minnesota is no pushover, and if the Saints play the way they did in December, they'll lose. Protecting Brees is paramount. So is a fast start to keep the crowd active. Home field advantage was a factor for both teams last weekend, and the Superdome is quickly gaining a reputation as the loudest stadium in the NFL. The Vikings were 9-0 at home this year, but 4-4 on the road.

These were the two best teams in the NFC this season. They're both capable of outplaying good opponents. The Saints haven't given anyone reason to doubt them in big games, and the Vikings' road record doesn't inspire confidence in this kind of environment. New Orleans by a touchdown.

Jets @ Colts

A rematch of the Week 16 game in which the Colts pulled their starters. You can bet that if the Jets win, some commentators will crow about how the Colts regret not finishing the game and keeping New York out of the postseason. The thing is, that game was close, and there's no guarantee Indianapolis would have won with the first team in. The Jets match up well against Indy, and when they protect the ball, they can keep it close against anyone.

Peyton Manning has had some rocky games this year, and the Jets' defense can make anyone look bad. If the defense can do to Indianapolis what it did in San Diego, the Jets will have a real chance in this game. The offensive formula seems to be ball control with one or two big plays. Turnovers can absolutely doom this team, so Sanchez has to take care of the ball. I believe turnovers will be even more important than usual in this game. The Jets aren't good enough to overcome them, and the Colts can't afford to give New York a short field.

The Colts need a good day from their offense. If they turn the game into a track meet, the Jets won't be able to keep up. It's really important to capitalize on scoring opportunities. If you cross midfield against the Jet defense, you need to put points on the board. Then again, if the Colts' defense plays the way it did against Baltimore, this game will be a blowout.

The Jets are not to be underestimated, but I think the Colts have a little too much firepower. Indianapolis by 4.

Posted by Brad Oremland at 11:58 AM | Comments (0)

Pac-10 Basketball in Disarray

Take a look at this week's Associated Press men's basketball rankings.

1. Texas
2. Kentucky
3. Kansas
4. Villanova
5. Syracuse
6. Michigan State
7. Duke
8. Tennessee
9. Pittsburgh
10. Kansas State
11. West Virginia
12. Georgetown
13. Purdue
14. Brigham Young
15. Gonzaga
16. Temple
17. Clemson
18. Wisconsin
19. Georgia Tech
20. Northern Iowa
21. Ohio State
22. Mississippi
23. Mississippi State
24. North Carolina
25. Baylor

Notice anything missing?

The Pacific-10 Conference. It's not there, vanished like "Yes, We Can" and Harry Reid's NAACP Lifetime Achievement Award.

Now I'm not going to go researching when the last time the Pac-10 was totally shut out of the AP rankings (last week), because frankly, historical context is overrated in sports. Who cares when the last this happened was?

The fact is the only Pac-10 team anywhere near the AP top 25 is Arizona State, languishing between Old Dominion and Marshall at the bottom of the "Others Receiving Votes" section.

What in the name of John Robert Wooden is going on here?

Now if this was football, I could understand it. The Pac has some quality football history, but it's in spurts. The Pac-10 is a basketball conference. Always has been, always will be.

And that's what makes the current predicament so damn odd. Take a look at the conference standings after last weekend's games. Just six games into the conference season, every team already has at least two wins and two losses. The difference between first-place ASU (14-5, 4-2 Pac-10) and last-place UCLA (7-10, 2-3) is a paltry game and a half.

Think about that again: First-place Arizona State, last-place UCLA. That pretty much tells you everything you need to know about the upside-down nature of the Pac-10 in 2010.

(Funny note on UCLA — I'm friends with former Southwest Missouri State star center Danny Moore, who led SMS to the 1999 Sweet 16 and still keeps close tabs on college hoops. And we were talking about the Pac-10, and UCLA came up. Danny's description of UCLA: "A bunch of white guys with knee braces." That's a long way away from three consecutive Final Fours for Ben Howland and crew.)

If you were just looking at team-by-team RPI rankings according to ESPN's InsideRPI Daily, you'd have a hard time differentiating between the Pacific 10 and some mid-major conferences.

Here, give it a shot. Which of the below conference RPIs belong to the Pac-10?

Conference A: 15, 65, 72, 88, 90, 108, 128, 142, 228, 264

Conference B: 25, 53, 56, 61, 71, 94, 133, 156, 167, 196

Conference C: 19, 23, 41, 43, 98, 126, 160, 200, 227

The answer: Conference B, with Cal leading the way at 25, followed by Washington (53), USC (56), ASU (61), Arizona (71), Washington State (94), Stanford (133), Oregon (156), UCLA (167), and Oregon State (196).

The other two mystery conferences: the Missouri Valley is Conference A, led by Northern Iowa (15). The Mountain West is Conference C, with New Mexico and BYU near locks for March Madness.

And considering some of the lopsided defeats suffered by Pac-10 schools at the hands of Mountain West schools (BYU especially), you can argue the Pacific-10 — the self-proclaimed Conference of Champions — isn't even the best basketball conference in the West.

Further, it's no stretch to say the Pac-10 is a one-bid league right now. And every single team is so flawed that you can't possibly predict who is going to come out of this mess.

California was looking good until they got waxed on Saturday by enigmatic Washington, who itself had just lost to Arizona by 17 six days earlier.

Arizona State currently sits in first and has won four in a row, but can you really trust a team that lost 47-37 to USC a few weeks back?

Arizona has some really talented kids, but they haven't won more than two games in a row all season.

Washington State has perhaps the Conference Player of the Year in Klay Thompson, but it's a long drop to their next best offensive weapon. Stanford is trying to find a way for the Lopez brothers to regain their eligibility (and I'm guessing Brook, star of the 3-412 New Jersey Nets, wishes he could). Oregon should have fired Ernie Kent a long time ago. USC is bound for a Kevin O'Neill burnout. Oregon State got hammered by 51 in their own gym by independent Seattle. And UCLA is a bunch of white guys with knee braces.

That's it. There's your 2009-2010 Pacific 10 Conference. It's a mess and there is no quick fix.

Unless maybe somebody buys John Calipari and his next big recruiting class. It seems to have done wonders for Kentucky.

In any event, Pac-10 fans better pay close attention to the first weekend of the NCAA tournament this year, because it looks real unlikely any Pac school will be around for the second.

Posted by Joshua Duffy at 11:41 AM | Comments (0)

January 18, 2010

Revisiting Preseason Predictions

If you know me, or have been reading this column each week for the past two and a half years or so, you know that at this time of year, there are only two things on my mind: NBA basketball and awards shows.

The best part this time of the year it is that starting this weekend we're about to get a big dose of both in the coming months.

The NBA is about to take control of sports headlines with the All-Star Break and the trade deadline fast approaching. Once we get past that, it's the race for the playoffs, and then the best two months in sports: the NBA playoffs.

On the other end of the spectrum, awards season in Hollywood just kicked off this week. We've already had the Critic's Choice Awards and the Golden Globes (my personal favorite because it covers both film and TV and everyone there is hammered), and we're not far off from the Grammy's and the Oscars.

And of course, with the Oscars, comes my third-annual NBA Oscars column. I'm thinking about going all out for it this year, too. I'm going to call each one of my readers at 5 AM and announce the nominees a week in advance, so that should be exciting.

To me, what makes the start of award season in Hollywood great is the same thing that makes the start of the NBA season great: everyone thinks they know what's going to happen, but you never really know for sure until it's all said and done, and there's sure to be a few surprises.

Before the Golden Globes on Sunday, I was sitting around with my roommates reading off the list of nominees in each category, trying to predict who would win. It's not unlike what a lot of people do during the NBA preseason.

That leads us into today's column. As you may recall, back in October, I did my annual season preview of the "82 Things to Watch For This NBA Season." I promised to look back at those predictions to see which ones were right and (more importantly) which ones were dead wrong.

Because, let's face it, when you make 82 predictions in the preseason, there are bound to be plenty that fall into each category.

Here now is a look back at some of the good, the bad, and the ugly from the "82 Things to Watch For This NBA Season."

The Good

The Lakers and Cavs will finish first in their respective conferences.

If I had to compare this to an award season prediction, it'd probably be "Avatar will clean up this season because everyone in Hollywood is on James Cameron's balls." It isn't exactly going out on a limb, but it's still a prediction nonetheless.

The Lakers came out of the gate strong, thanks to a very home-heavy early schedule and a determined Kobe Bryant. The Cavs stumbled out of the gate initially, losing their first two games, before turning it on in December going 13-3, including an impressive win on Christmas Day in L.A. over the Lakers.

There may be a few surprises in the standings of each conference right now, but not at the top. The Lakers and Cavs are right where we expected them to be at this point.

The Allen Iverson experiment will end poorly in Memphis.

Compare this prediction to, "If Robert Downy or Meryl Streep win an award, expect them to come off as a complete pompous-ass in their acceptance speeches."

Which means, basically, if you know anything about any of the people involved, you know what's going to happen.

Well, sure enough, Downy and Streep won Golden Globes, and their smugness was through the roof while accepting their awards.

Iverson? He lasted all of two weeks with the Grizzlies before retiring and resurfacing with the 76ers.

Kevin Durant will lead the league in scoring.

I'm putting this one in the "good," even though technically, it's wrong. Durant is second in the league in scoring at 29.6 per game, behind Carmelo Anthony's 30.0.

If this were a Hollywood prediction, it'd be on par with "the guy who played the Jew Hunter in 'Inglourious Basterds' will win all sorts of awards."

Christoph Waltz, like Durant, is just that good.

Last season, Durant averaged 26 points per game after Scott Brooks took over in Oklahoma City, and you could see Durant developing all the tools to become and elite NBA scorer. This season, he simply put it all together night in and night out.

Now, he's one of the most unstoppable scorers in the game, with more 30-point games (22) than any other player in the league.

At just 0.4 behind Anthony for the league lead, Durant is a real threat at just 21-years-old to be the youngest scoring champ in NBA history.

The Bad

Indiana Pacers projected record at 41-41.

Here's what I wrote in October: "Maybe it's asking too much for all of these guys to stay healthy for an entire season, but if they do, don't be surprised if the Pacers are a .500 team and earn the right to get swept by the Cavs."

It was, in fact, too much to ask.

The Pacers have been riddled with injuries, and now there are talks that Larry Bird might be inclined to blow the whole team up and start over.

On paper, I still like the Pacers. But the fact is that they just cannot stay healthy. Their problem last season was that they couldn't get Danny Granger, Troy Murphy, and Mike Dunleavy healthy. Last season, they missed a combined 90 games.

At the halfway point of this season, they've missed a combined 40 games.

It looks like more of the same for the Pacers.

Flip Saunders will win Coach of the Year.

Now, after everything that's gone on in Washington, it seems more likely that Flip will be fired or resign than to win Coach of the Year.

The Gilbert Arenas thing isn't Flip's fault. The Antawn Jamison injury/inevitable trade isn't Flip's fault. The lack of decent big men on the roster isn't Flip's fault.

Still, just because Flip isn't necessarily to blame for the woes in Washington doesn't exactly make this prediction any more correct.

Shaq will not be able to accept his role as second-fiddle to LeBron.

Surprisingly, Shaq has said and done all the right things since getting to Cleveland ("Shaq vs." notwithstanding).

I predicted that he'd demand the ball more, throw Kobe under the bus before the Christmas Day game, and take a little injury vacation at some point in the season.

Well, as of the halfway point of the season, he's done none of that.

There's still time, but for now, it looks like come April I'll be eating crow on my "Big Predictable" moniker for Shaq.

The Ugly

Detroit Pistons projected record 41-41.

Even at the time, I couldn't make any sense of the Detroit roster, saying "I hated what the Pistons did this offseason."

Yet, for some reason, that didn't stop me from expecting them to be a .500. I don't know how many more ways I can say it, but Joe Dumars screwed up big time this offseason. I don't know how he ever talked himself into thinking that spending $100 million on role players was the answer to all the Pistons' problems, but he did.

Now, the Pistons sit as the 11th-best team in the East, behind such powerhouses as New York and Charlotte, at an almost embarrassing 14-25 record. They can't stay healthy, they can't score, and they can't defend.

I don't know what's worse for the Pistons, the fact that they are a threat to win the lottery, that if they do win the lottery, they'll probably pass on John Wall because they have Rodney Stuckey, or the fact the Dumars will somehow convince the people of Detroit that it was the right thing to do.

I don't ever plan on killing someone, but if I do, I want Joe Dumars to defend me during my trial. He can convince the people of Detroit anything.

Houston Rockers projected record 32-50.

You want a Hollywood comparison for this one? Projecting the Houston Rockets to be 22-18 right now is like saying six months ago, "I kind of like that lady from VH1's 'Charm School' to win an Oscar next year." People would have thought you were crazy.

Yet, here we are, and the team with no superstar is in the thick of the playoff race and Mo'nique is cleaning up at the award shows. These are strange times, indeed.

And for the record, I am willing to admit that I missed this one badly. The Rockets play hard, they play together, and they defend. You can win regular season games that way.

But in no way am I buying this team as a playoff threat. Essentially, they've overachieved to this point of the season to even get to the eighth seed. They need to keep overachieving just to get in the playoffs. They are a nice story because they're better than we thought, but that doesn't necessarily make them good.

And the winner for ugliest prediction of the year...

New Jersey Nets projected record 35-47.

Ouch. For two seasons in a row, I said all I like about the Nets is that Jay-Z owns 1.8% of the team.

Based on that, I should have predicted that they would win 1.8% of their games.

It's hard to imagine that I could pick a team to finish 12 games below .500 and still be off on their win total by 25 games or more, but that's exactly where we are right now with the Nets. I thought they'd be bad, I had no idea they'd be epically terrible.

They are on pace to win the fewest games in a season in NBA history.

As much as I'd like to take credit for seeing that coming, no one could have predicted that.

Posted by Scott Shepherd at 11:36 AM | Comments (1)

Merry-Go-Round Proves Telling

It may be technically impossible on the West Coast, but a hurricane has somehow made landfall over Los Angeles. And through the eye of the storm, there can be seen a glance at the realities of college football.

Personally, as a USC graduate who spent four years in college during Pete Carroll's glory years, I have an obvious interest in the proceedings. I have certain feelings about issues and parties involved. But the events of this coaching merry-go-round don't merely involve USC, but reflect the broader football landscape and illustrate a few lessons any program/observer can take to heart.

1. If you think you have a Bobby Bowden or a Joe Paterno, think again.

I'm not saying that it can't happen in this day and age. But it's incredibly unlikely. I present a list of highly successful coaches that would truly shock me if they weren't coaching there in five years (obviously barring a sudden allergy to winning): Jim Tressel, Frank Beamer, Bob Stoops (maybe). That's it. (Mack Brown at Texas already has an heir apparent tabbed; this does not signal a long remaining tenure.)

There is too much money floating around in salaries these days for coaches to be loyal, and too much money in revenue floating around for administrations to be loyal. College football has officially attained swinger status thought to be exclusive to the NFL. Just ask Miami, Michigan, LSU, Auburn, Notre Dame, Nebraska West Virginia, Cincinnati, Louisville, Utah, Oregon State, and USC. Each of them had a coaching change within two years of a BCS appearance this decade, not even including firings for non-football reasons.

In Carroll's case, sanctions and hostilities with Mike Garrett may have played roles. (We'll get to those later.) But he never denied a return to the NFL was a possibility. Many coaches will flatly deny their interest in another job until the ink on their new contract is drying. Anyone who knows Carroll knows he is among the most competitive people alive ... and that he always squirmed at the mention of his mediocre NFL legacy.

And yes, every successful college coach turned NFL coach has registered somewhere between mediocre and disastrous. And yes, if anything, that probably makes the task more appealing to Carroll.

2. There is no good time for a coach to take a promotion ... as far as the program is concerned.

It is completely unrealistic to think coaches will never leave a job for a more appealing one. Considering the 365-day recruiting calendar, though, there is never a good time for a breakup.

Carroll was no different, and there was certainly disappointment. But there are varying levels of acrimony. USC fans, by and large, understood Carroll's omnipresent competitive itch, respected his considerable charity work in the community, and most importantly, recognized his remarkable resurrection of a lifeless powerhouse.

Let's just say this wasn't a Brian Kelly. Kelly was not the first to leave a team before a BCS bowl game. (It's now happened to two of the last three Big East winners.) Still, Cincinnati was also undefeated, enjoying by far the best season in program history, and with a win, could have at least argued a claim to a national title. So he bailed for the money and prestige of 6-6 Notre Dame.

Lane Kiffin coached a bowl, but he started a riot in Knoxville when he bailed after a single season. Never has a 7-6 coach received so much hatred directed at him for leaving. But again, he saw the USC job as more appealing, so off he went. (There were no reports of riots in Ruston when Derek Dooly was poached from Louisiana Tech by Tennessee in the classic domino effect.) So while Kelly's crime was premature timing, Kiffin was guilty of a one-night stand.

3. Recruiting violations never land on the right people's head ... but someone has to pay.

Let's say for the sake of argument that USC is going to get slammed by the NCAA next month and Carroll becomes football's [John] Calipari. Who is hurt by such sanctions? Current players who likely had nothing to do with the violations, the incoming coaching staff, and the school/fans. (Okay, so in Lane "Secondary Violation" Kiffin's case, maybe that's fair; but in general, it isn't.)

Notably absent: agents illegally paying players, head coaches with most direct oversight who freely bail on the crippled program. Thank you, NCAA, for your complete lack of teeth in attacking a problem at the source.

And yet, should USC be blasted, there is a clear and punishable villain, and the fan base rightfully has torches and pitchforks at the ready. Athletic director Mike Garrett has been around since 1993. Hiring Pete Carroll and presiding over the rise of the football program has been his most recognizable "success." Of course, Carroll was his fourth choice and assistant AD Darryl Gross reportedly had pushed even harder for the hire. Oh, and Garrett allegedly helped run Carroll off.

On top of that, a proud baseball program languishes without a playoff birth since 2005 and just the one since 2002. (That's a 64-team tournament.) The basketball program just slapped itself with major sanctions, with Garrett announcing it via pre-recorded Internet message so as not to face the tough questions of reporters (like whether this was to take pressure off the football program under investigation). The alumni base has no confidence in him or respect for him at this point; there really are few Garrett-defenders to be found.

And with various e-rumors on all fronts, it's hard to say whether the hiring of Kiffin almost immediately indicated Garrett's and Kiffin's confidence that the sanctions will be manageable or even negligible (if Garrett even had a say in the hire, another point of debate), or whether Garrett is putting the last nail in his own coffin by hiring an NCAA lightning rod in advance of a hearing on potential violations.

For now, while still seeking Garrett's head on a plate, the fan base is generally optimistic, perhaps more so over Kiffin's imports. Assistant Ed Orgeron returns (master recruiter/former USC defensive line coach), and Monte Kiffin stays with his son (one of the best defensive minds of a generation). Fans are divided on Kiffin (sold on recruiting, i.e. able to avoid recruiting fallout of Carroll's loss, not so much on X's and O's, scared of his penchant for attracting the wrong kind of attention). Then again, they weren't exactly sold on Carroll, so who knows.

In short, USC ends up dealing with some problems that are pretty standard in college football ... just not necessarily all at once.

At least former Trojan Mark McGwire had the decency to bump the Carroll defection from the front page. Too bad I'm also a Cardinals fan. Ugh.

Posted by Kyle Jahner at 11:34 AM | Comments (0)

January 14, 2010

NFL Weekly Predictions: Divisional Round

Note: the quotes in this article are fictional.

Arizona @ New Orleans (-7)

Arizona's thrilling 51-45 overtime win over the Packers set up a showdown with the NFC's top seed, New Orleans, in a game that is sure to feature an abundance of scoring. The Cardinals' 51 points were the most in team playoff history, and sent a warning shot that they are capable of taking down a Saints team that has struggled defensively lately.

"Obviously," says Sean Payton, "the more we hear 'three-and-out' from our defense, the less likely we are to hear 'one-and-done.' We respect the Cardinals' offense, but we don't fear it. Consequently, we don't fear or respect the Cardinals' defense. Those guys have to be tired, not necessarily from being on the field against the Packers, but from running off the field after all those Green Bay touchdowns."

"Indeed, there will be plenty of firepower in this game, probably enough to warrant an indefinite suspension in the NBA. And, much like Gilbert Arenas suggested in his locker room, Kurt Warner and Drew Brees will have the opportunity to 'choose their weapons' from numerous offensive talents. This is the kind of game that gives defensive coordinators nightmares, and whets the dreams of offensive coordinators."

"Inactivity is of course a concern for us. It's been a month since we've played a meaningful game, and even longer since we've won one. That's why we've been blaring 'Rust Shaker' by Wreckx-N-Effect over the loud speakers during practice. What's that? It's 'Rump Shaker?' I'll be damned."

Warner may again be a part of another epic quarterback showdown, and if he tops his performance from last week, the Saints and Brees are in deep trouble. Warner was 29-for-33 for 379 yards and 5 touchdowns, as the Cardinals continually confused the Packers with various formations, particularly "bunch" setups, which led to wide-open lanes in the middle of the field.

"I doubt even Steve Nash has seen that many 'picks' in a game," says Warner. "Sure, we all know picks are illegal, so there's a science to getting away with it. To successfully complete a legal pick against a defender, you've got to 'rub him the right way.' You tell a defender you plan on doing that, then he's usually either too disgusted or taken aback to cover you. That's our secret."

"Last Sunday's game would have been a great one to call my last. But there's still work to be done this year. After that, I'll take stock, evaluate my health, weigh my options, talk with my coaches, then let my wife Brenda make the decision on my future. I'm not sure I have the necessary drive to come back next year. Then again, I may. Should I choose to ride off into the sunset, there's the possibility that, along the way, I'll make some stops at the homes of some quarterback-needy teams, thereby 'driving' up my price and forcing the Cards to ante up to keep me happy."

This should be a high-scoring game. Sure, that's stating the very obvious, so just consider it an homage to Mark McGwire. Once again, it looks as though the great Jose Canseco was right. He did inject McGwire then; maybe he injected McGwire again, this time with truth serum. For McGwire, that's called going from "puncture" to "perjure."

Anyway, back to Cardinals who don't do drugs. The key to winning this game are mismatches. At least that's what the NFL Network's Brian Baldinger says, and he's got more football knowledge in his crooked right pinkie that most experts have in their straight right pinkies. Arizona presents more matchup problems. For that reason, and in honor of McGwire's honesty, I'll take Arizona.

Warner out-duels Brees, the Cards win the rushing battle, and Neil Rackers, who blew a chance to beat the Packers in regulation with a wide-left kick, oddly enough fails to find a "hooker" in New Orleans, and drills a 43-yard kick for the game-winner. One week after vanquishing a Heisman "poser" in Charles Woodson, the Cards turn back a Heisman "poseur" in Reggie Bush.

Arizona wins, 41-38.

Baltimore @ Indianapolis (-6½)

Baltimore manhandled the Patriots, 33-14, rushing for 234 yards and 4 touchdowns, including 159 and 2 TDs by Ray Rice, and thoroughly dominated to Patriots to such a degree that the home fans booed their team in the first quarter. Now, after a wild card round full of regular-season matchups, Saturday night's Ravens/Colts contest is the lone rematch among the four divisional games. It's a game Ray Lewis, foaming at the mouth, has been anticipating since the Colts took a 17-15 decision in Baltimore on November 22nd.

"Settle the score," froth the Raven. "Settle the score."

"Consider the Patriot mystique a thing of the past. In fact, consider the whole team 'a thing of the past,' because they're old and broken down. 'Team of the Decade' my foot; it's more like 'Team of the Decayed.'"

"It was a great feeling to hear the Patriot fans boo their team. And Tom Brady didn't seem too happy about it. Did he say 'Boo hoo' or did he say 'Boo who?' I'm sure, before Tom was neutered by his Brazilian bombshell, he was pursued by his share of the raven-haired persuasion. Last Sunday, he wilted under pressure of the 'Raven-harried' persuasion."

"New England found that revenge is best served with a large helping of Rice. Indianapolis will discover that revenge is a dish best served 'Colt.' As dinner guests go, we're 'bad company.' It matters not that the game is in Lucas Oil Stadium, home of the finest luxury suite attendants in all of football, the 'Personal Lubricants.' We owe the Colts, not only for this year's loss, but for their win in Baltimore on their way to the Super Bowl XLI. The Colts are soft. They're a lot like the Patrots — if you ride 'em for eight seconds, they'll lose their fight. For the Colts, payback's a 'hitch.'"

The Colts earned a bye as the AFC's No. 1 seed, and have not played a meaningful game in three weeks. Peyton Manning, who was awarded his fourth league MVP award last week, knows that a quick start for the Colts is imperative in the quest to keep the Ravens at bay.

"I'm certainly honored to be named MVP again," says Manning. "Now when I hold up four fingers, it's not just an indication of the number of fingers not graced with a Super Bowl ring. But I try to be as humble as possible when accepting awards. Thanks are in order for my teammates, coaches, family, and fans, and especially to Kanye West, who interrupted my acceptance speech, which was truly a humbling experience. I booted him off the stage, however. Mike Vanderjagt isn't the only 'idiot' kicker. Now I know how Taylor Swift must have felt. Or, as Kanye calls her, Taylor 'Swiff.' Anyway, Kanye's intrusion did get Beyonce on the stage, where she urged me to 'put a ring on it.' I assume she was talking about my finger and not hers."

"We are certainly well-rested. Offensively, I expect us to come out energized and active, and I expect the Ravens defense to fully commit to slowing us. If The Who's Keith Moon were alive today and were an NFL analyst, I think he'd be proud to say that Baltimore will attempt to put 11 'horse' tranquilizers on the field. And I would tend to agree with Moon that 11 of those won't nearly be enough."

"If anything, we're well prepared for the Ravens. Jim Caldwell, whose name is synonymous with 'anonymous,' may not make a sound, but he can put together a sound game plan. Offensively, we'll just have to take what the Ravens give us. Hopefully, unlike the Patriots, we'll be man enough to take it."

Manning is a master of finding favorable matchups, and if the Ravens happen to show him something he hasn't seem before, he'll just make it look like he's seen it before. The Ravens dominated a Patriots team with limited weaponry; Manning has too many options to stop. Of course, all that is moot if the Colts allow the Ravens to trample them with their running game. Chances are Indy will do whatever it takes, short of suiting up Bob Sanders, to stop the run and force Joe Flacco to throw.

Indianapolis wins, 23-17.

Dallas @ Minnesota (-3)

After whipping the Eagles, 34-14, the Cowboys continue to roll, having won four in a row, a streak in which their defense is surrendering just under 8 points per game. Next up is a date in Minnesota, where the Cowboys expect to give the NFC North champion Vikings a stern test.

"We have no doubts the Vikings will be ready for a 'stern test,'" says Tony Romo. "Heck, they undergo a 'stern test' before every boat excursion on Lake Minnetonka. There, a 'stern test' entails calling all the talent to the back of the SS Natch, a 'booty call,' if you will. I'm not sure if they're asked to swab the deck, but if it were me, I'd ask to 'swab their cheeks.' I hear those chicks are looser than Adrian Peterson's grip on the ball. But I'm sure the Vikings get sick of tired references to the sex boat scandal. So, in honor of their wishes, I'll talk no more about it. 'Oral discourse' is the last thing they need on their boat rides."

"Now, with a win over the Eagles to clinch the division, plus a win over those same Eagles in the playoffs, this month has definitely been one to be proud of. So much so that our owner has taken to proudly calling himself 'January Jones.' And Jerry's so confident, he's promised Wade Phillips that if we beat the Vikings, then win the NFC title, then capture Super Bowl XLIV, he'll consider him as head coach next year."

The Vikings finished the regular season at 12-4, and will be backed by a raucous, 63,000-strong Metrodome crowd. Brett Favre brings a wealth of playoff experience to the Vikes, and Minnesota will likely need Favre's leadership and calming influence to reach their first conference title game since 2001.

"I know this franchise and this city are desperate for a playoff victory," says Favre. "I want to be the man responsible for ending the futility that has dogged this team. I'm capable of doing that. I can be called a pain-killer just as well as I can take one."

"Defensively, we'll need to get pressure on Romo. Most of the responsibility for that falls on Jared Allen. He'll have to be on top of his game to beat Flozell Adams. As you know, Adams can be a dirty player. Just ask Justin Tuck, who's been a victim of Adams' 'bro-mestic' violence. The Eagles got very little pressure on Romo, and Adams' play had a lot to do with that. That was in a night game; Adams will be even tougher on Sunday afternoon, when he becomes a 'day tripper.' That'll just be one of the 'hurdles' Jared will face, and I'm confident he'll overcome it. Jared's pretty darn good at 'jumping' white tails; I hope he's equally as proficient at 'jumping' black men."

The Cowboys are on such a hot streak that you can draw almost only one conclusion — that it will end. But leave it to Favre to be responsible for keeping something going that should have ended long ago. Favre's 2 turnovers are the Vikings' undoing, and Romo plays error-free, throwing for 312 yards and 2 touchdowns.

Dallas wins, 28-23.

NY Jets @ San Diego (-9)

To punch their ticket to the AFC title game, the Chargers will have to first overcome the upstart Jets, who validated their playoff berth with a bruising 24-14 win in Cincinnati last week. In all likelihood, the Jets will test the heart of the Chargers defense with the same running attack that has served as the catalyst for New York's late-season push.

"That's what they want us to think," says Norv Turner. "Rex Ryan is no fool, except when it comes to the science of playoff elimination. The Jets physically dominated the Bengals, but don't underestimate their finesse game. Let's face it, they're not going to ride their defense and running game all the way to the Super Bowl. Sure, they can open up a can of whoop ass, and Mark Sanchez can open up a hot dog bun, but can they also open up the playbook? That's what we'll have to find out by forcing Sanchez to do more. Sure, he's been an inspiration to this team, but don't be fooled by the chants you hear. It's not 'Rudy! Rudy! Rudy!' you hear. It's 'rudi-, rudi-, rudi-mentary.'"

"Sure, the playbook's been simplified for me," says Sanchez. "But why pass when we have the league's top-ranked running game? More importantly, the success of our running game doesn't hinge on Braylon Edwards catching the ball. He may be good at 'catching hell' for a disorderly conduct charge, but his ability to 'catch balls' is criminal."

"Don't forget, just over a year ago, I was still in college at USC, where the playbook is no piece of cake, but I mastered it anyway. And although I'm only making marginally more money now, I plan to do the same with the Jets' playbook."

"Now, I think our win over the Bengals, and the Ravens' upset of the Patriots, is a testament to true parity in the NFL. How's this for parity? There's a team left in the playoffs representing each of the NFL's eight divisions. We're the true Cinderella team of this year's playoffs, and she's sporting a wicked playoff beard right now."

The Chargers will be led into battle by their unquestioned leader, Philip Rivers, who passed for 28 touchdowns and led the AFC with a 104.4 passer rating. A deeply religious man, Rivers adheres to strict Christian guidelines, except on those occasions in which some acid-tongued trash talk is warranted to rile an opponent, a heckler, an atheist, or Jay Cutler.

"And on the seventh day," says Rivers, "God said, 'Let there be smack.' I feel equally as comfortable 'preaching the gospel' as I do 'talking the shit.'"

"Confidence is something I don't lack, and I feel confident about our Super Bowl chances. Heck, so does every sportsbook. This team has really come together at the right time. Call it a 'communion' if you choose to associate it in a religious context. There was no eating of the 'body of Christ' or anything creepy like that, although Shawne Merriman did offer Tila Tequila as a sacrifice. Talk about a communion 'waif.' Of course, we refused. Like Merriman, she's done way too many 'sack' dances."

The Chargers won't win this game with their running game. The burden firmly rests on the shoulders of Rivers. San Diego ranked 31st in the regular season in rushing offense. Sure, LaDainian Tomlinson can still produce, but only when the Charger passing attack puts him in position to fall in the end zone from the one-yard line. Rivers might as well concede that he won't be able to throw in the direction of Darrelle Revis. Revis has proven that he can shutdown any superstar, and Chad Johnson. Antonio Gates has always been an integral part of the Charger offense; he'll be even more important on Sunday.

Can the Jets run on San Diego? Absolutely. But this game will boil down to red zone efficiency and turnovers (what game doesn't?).

San Diego wins, 19-16.

Posted by Jeffrey Boswell at 11:55 AM | Comments (2)

A Cruise Around the Sports Blogosphere

I was just about finished with my article, an NFL playoff predictions one, when I fell asleep. When I woke up, I groggily closed the active window to see what the time was. Bye, article.

It was about how five of the eight teams left at this point are really kind of suspect, with the Colts, Chargers, and Cowboys above the fray, and owing to the fact that the 'Boys are 5-0 with a score margin of 99-31 in their last five games, four against playoff teams, they were going to win the Super Bowl.

But there is something unavailingly depressing about trying to remember and recreate what you have typed, so screw it. I'm going to write something new.

Let's take a spin around the blogs.

Remember when Deadspin was trailblazing? Now it's "Access Hollywood: Sports Edition." As of this writing, they have two front page stories up about Colt McCoy proposing to his girlfriend. There's also a Tiger Woods story, and a content-free blurb about mean statements from disgruntled Volunteer fans on Lane Kiffin's wife's Facebook page. Gah!

The Bleacher Report is doing a fun-ish thing and ranking all the possible (16) permutations of Super Bowl matchups.

Oh, wait. It's a slideshow. Grrrrr! HULK NOT LIKE SLIDE SHOW! HULK WANT ALL CONTENT ON ONE PAGE! HULK BLAME CRACKED MAGAZINE FOR SURFEIT OF SLIDE SHOW PRESENTATIONS! HULK SMASH!!!

So let me spoil it for you. The writer calls for the Saints/Jets to be the least likely combo, and Vikings/Colts to be the most likely, because that would be "two quarterbacks who can will their teams to win and know how to grasp victories from the jaws of defeat."

Hahaha! Good one. And true if we are talking about Week 4 of the regular season. Of 2002.

Free Darko has a couple retro-ish basketball videos up, but they aren't as good as this poster.

I mean, yeah, Michael Jordan's great, but he's just the right bower to the mighty left of one ORLANDO WOOLDRIDGE.

I also love the '70s-esque placement of the script and numbers of the jerseys. Someone help me do a show called "Before They Were Sports Stars." No, it wouldn't sappily go back to their childhoods, it would go back to the time when they were just pretty good. If they were on a different team, too, that's a plus. Here are some announcer-isms I can imagine from the show.

"The Jerome Bettis kid has a chance to be the best Ram running back since Cleveland Gary!"

"Mark Brunell is a fine backup, perhaps the best in the Pac-10, but it would take John Elway to justify pulling Billy Joe Hobert!"

"Nice pick by the Hornets, Kobe Bryant at 13th. That's sure to take some of the sting of Kerry Kittles and Shareef Abdur-Raheem being off the board."

"Next year, the Cardinals should think long and hard about making Albert Pujols the everyday third basement, even at the expense of Placido Polanco."

Every Day Should Be Saturday has an amusing fake press conference with new Texas Tech coach Tommy Tuberville.

Something has always bothered me about Tuberville, and that something is this: if your name is "Tommy Tuberville," you should not me a distinguished-looking 50-something gentleman. You should either be a 450-pound bail bondsman from Topeka or a 15-year-old piccolo player who's always getting stuffed into lockers.

Finally, The Mid-Majority has a poetic read about college basketball and the boroughs of New York City. He makes the case that the NCAA has it in for NYC and always has. Why are NCAA tournament games never held in Madison Square Garden? Why has their been no Final Four anywhere close to New York since 1986? Did you know no NYC team has made it to the NCAAs since 2004?

He even gives brief public transportation tips to get to each of the school's gyms. I'm a cheap bus ride away and I like the Ivy League vibe. Maybe this year I will take the subway to "their Levian Gym ... hidden so far beneath its three-digit-street campus that it might as well be in Queens, or China."

Posted by Kevin Beane at 11:26 AM | Comments (0)

January 13, 2010

Mark McGwire and the Ugly Truth

"There it is! Sixty-two! Touch first, Mark, you are the new single-season home run king!"

It may have taken some 11 years, but Mark McGwire has finally taken announcer Joe Buck's advice and touched base with all of us.

It was over a decade ago that Mark McGwire hit 70 home runs in one year, captured our hearts, and breathed some much-needed thrills and excitement back into the national pastime after the strike. It was almost five years ago that he stated flatly to a grand jury before Congress that he wasn't here to talk about the past. This presented America with a conflict that resonated long after all of the March Madness games of that day had been forgotten.

We have been conflicted about our views on Big Red ever since.

Just yesterday, McGwire came out and confessed to us much of what we already knew in an interview with Bob Costas on MLB Network. Perhaps there was really nothing newsworthy to come out of this, yet it stirred up plenty of old emotions and arguments nonetheless.

McGwire took 100 mph heat for repeatedly pleading the fifth, causing much frustration and outrage from fans angry at feeling double-crossed. The magical home run race of 1998 went from being an innocent children's bedtime story with a happy ending to a twisted cautionary tale that played fast and loose with our loyalties, our trust, and our fondest memories. Naturally, this made many want to point the finger. Sometimes the index, often the middle.

Sympathy comes in short supply in a jaded culture. Yes, McGwire was admitting fault with his repetition, but what few seemed to see was a man trapped. It was clear on his face that he knew the implications and the ramifications of his testimony, that he was greatly pained by this, and that he could find no other sensible option.

Throughout his baseball career, Big Mac had always carried himself with great pride, integrity, and a willingness to be the role model that the media asked of him, not unlike Cal Ripken, Jr. When he all but disappeared from public view following the testimony, it only made sense. Aside from the fact that he no longer had any obligation to be in front of a camera until now, that pride and integrity had been shattered, and Mark was likely spending his time somewhere coping with great shame, unable to discuss the matter without great difficulty. No one had to tell McGwire that he had just let down millions of little kids around the globe, he knew that, and it's a safe bet that this bothered him far more than it could bother you or me.

During his interview with Bob Costas on MLB Network Monday night, McGwire's tearful and remorseful demeanor confirmed this notion, as he choked out the words, "Today was the hardest day of my life." Through the intermittent sniffling, McGwire claimed that he took steroids starting in 1993 and '94 to overcome the various injuries that had him perpetually on the disabled list. This part is all well and good. But there are several other elements of the interview that are troubling, to say the least.

I do not doubt Mark McGwire's sincerity, but a sincere man can still be misguided. For McGwire to believe that steroids played no role in his massively inflated ability to crush a baseball is highly questionable. His head and body in the late-'90s could be described much the same way. Throughout the '80s and the early-'90s, he could have been described as strong and muscular, but still lean, not quite imposing yet. By the late-'90s, he was the ballplayer who would have been the best candidate for the cover of Muscle & Fitness.

He continually cited his God-given abilities as the sole reason for his home run prowess, even as he continued to put up all his best career numbers in his mid-to-late 30s before quickly breaking down thereafter. Big Mac, in his older state, seems to be a man who is not dishonest as much as he is in denial.

I also could not imagine this being an appeal by Mark to get into the Hall of Fame. McGwire has too far a way to go with the voters to believe that this will change everything or anything. He also does not appear egotistical enough to crave the glory of induction over the simple piece of mind that this confession will allow him.

The other element to this is now an ongoing he-said, he-said with Jose Canseco, baseball's unofficial Devil's Advocate. Canseco alleges some sensational things to be true about McGwire's steroid use that Mark claims never happened. Heads says Jose has continually been right before about most of his allegations. Tails says Canseco is always going to want to sensationalize the truth since he is so fond of selling books on this matter. Time will tell who is ultimately right.

What struck me most, however, is the fact that Canseco actually agreed with McGwire about his God-given abilities to the point of saying, "I think Mark McGwire had so much natural given ability and an incredible swing that he probably would have broken those records anyway.” Even Jose himself will take Mark's side on that one. If it's true, it is a greater shame than anything Mark has ever felt.

What's worse is, time won't tell us the truth on this matter. We will simply never know.

Posted by Bill Hazell at 11:15 AM | Comments (2)

The British Underdog

The upcoming 2010 Australian Open tennis tournament won't start until January 18. Most media hypes scrutinize the top and well-known players: Roger Federer, the Williams sisters, Justine Henin, Maria Sharapova, Rafael Nadal, and others. They hype their potential to either win or command attention. Lower seed or qualifying players don't get much attention unless they beat a top-seeded player. If you don't have the potential to win often, no one cares.

Nevertheless, my hype goes to this junior turned pro named Laura Robson from England.

The girl is only 15 and turned pro at 13 (she still plays juniors). She hasn't won much, though. She will play a qualifying tournament to enter the Australian Open against a top seed. It's hard luck for these type of players. But because her career is just starting, these youngsters do get wild cards to play in major tournaments. How they are judged is a matter of debate. Though she is citizen of Great Britain, her birthplace is Australia. See the connection? Even so, she is only allowed a certain amount of wild cards to tournaments on a yearly basis. Likewise, you have to apply for these entries on a lottery attempt. Some tournaments will give you one, others will not.

If she doesn't make the tournament by qualifying, she deserves a wild card simply because of her left-handed serve. That serve alone is worth the price of admission. You don't know where it's going to go? To her own side? Her opponent side? To the stands? But when it goes in, it is tough to return. It either comes hard or soft with wicked movement. The spin of the ball is that of cricket bowler or a baseball pitcher that throws the slider. The returners can't tell where she is going to locate her serve because her motion is tough to read. She reminds me of a baseball pitcher, Billy Wagner. Very unpredictable.

She is well-coached, has powerful ground strokes (two-handed backhand and forehand), great attitude, and great composure under pressure. Her main edge is that she is one of the few lefties on tour. However, she is very slow in her lateral movements and has a gunslinger mentality for low-percentage shots in odd situations. Likewise, she doesn't have a go-to shot in tough situations. Finally, she needs time to gain more match-play experience.

With the upcoming Australian Open, media always mention about top players who can win the tournament or not. Low seeds or qualifiers don't get much press before a tournament, but only during a major if they win against a top seed. My hope is that Laura Robson from England gets some attention due to her potential in being a top player and an unpredictability that entertains and thrills fans. As of now, she just played the Hopman Cup representing Great Britain along with Andy Murray. Doubles, anyone?

Posted by Davan Mani at 11:00 AM | Comments (0)

January 12, 2010

NFL Wild Card Roundup

Five Quick Hits

* Great HOF Finalists this year. It hurts to choose just six, but my favorites are: Don Coryell, Russ Grimm, Dick LeBeau, Jerry Rice, Shannon Sharpe, and Emmitt Smith.

* Chad Ochocinco is not a man of his word?! That's shocking!!!

* I don't like Jim Mora Jr., but I also don't like firing coaches after one season.

* Pete Carroll's previous NFL experience does not inspire confidence. He was fired as coach of the Jets after one season. During his three years in New England, the team finished with a worse record in each successive season. It made the Super Bowl two years before he took over and again two years after he left.

* The biggest coaching move this week may not have been Mike Shanahan replacing Jim Zorn in Washington or Carroll taking over in Seattle. Texans OC Kyle Shanahan, who coordinated the fourth-ranked offense in the NFL last season, left to join his father in DC. That's a real loss for Houston. Cincinnati's Mike Zimmer may join the staff, as well.

***

Wild Card Roundups

Jets @ Bengals

This game featured two teams with similar styles, and one of them was clearly better than the other at this point in the season. Both teams ran effectively, but the Jets could throw when they had to. Cincinnati kept trying, with very few positive results. Carson Palmer averaged 2.8 net yards per pass attempt. That's the third-lowest mark of his career. The lowest came last week, a perfect 0.0, also against the Jets.

The Bengals were dealing with significant injuries, and you just don't see a lot of wins from banged-up teams at this time of year. But let's give New York the credit it deserves. The Jets came in with a great game plan, and executed it very well. They dealt with setbacks, and they seemed like the hungrier, more confident team. Rex Ryan and his staff deserve a lot of credit for the way they prepared their team. This defense makes New York a potential threat to everyone else in the playoffs. This team is not as good as the 2000 Ravens, but there's certainly a comparison to be made.

Placekicker Jay Feely did a surprisingly good job filling in for punter Steve Weatherford. His average looks awful, but he kept punting from beyond midfield and landing his kicks inside the 20-yard line. Field position is a big deal in games like this. I don't believe this affected the outcome, but Shayne Graham missed a pair of very makeable field goals. The Bengals might want to invite another kicker to camp next year, just in case.

Eagles @ Cowboys

An ugly game that set a postseason record for combined penalty yards (228) and featured 5 turnovers, not to mention the Eagles' offense and defense. There was no defense in the second quarter (34 combined points) and no offense in the other three (14 combined points). The Cowboys were controlling the game even before they began dominating the scoreboard, and the outcome was never really in question.

The Eagles were thoroughly and embarrassingly out-coached in this game. The offense struggled against Dallas in all three games this season (10 ppg) and never effectively adjusted. The defense came in blitzing, which the Cowboys clearly expected. Heck, Tony Romo said all week that he expected it. Dallas was ready, attacking the blitz with draws and counters to Felix Jones. The coaches protected Tony Romo alternately with extra blockers and three-step drops. Great gameplan from the Cowboys, and no effective adjustments from Philadelphia.

In fairness to the Eagles, Dallas looks awesome right now. People are finally starting to appreciate the Dallas defense, which ranked second in the league in points allowed and has been playing at an even higher level recently. In contrast, Philly's defense was slumping at the wrong time. Maybe it was that December/January curse everyone has been talking about. It's migrated from Dallas to Philadelphia! Sorry, couldn't resist one last shot at the mythical late-season curse. This is the first time an Andy Reid/Donovan McNabb team has ever lost its first playoff game.

Ravens @ Patriots

I don't like Bill Belichick as a person, but I respect him as a coach. I believe he is easily the best coach of the last decade — no one else is close — and one of the top 10 coaches in NFL history. But I also wonder if he's losing his touch. From 2001-04, with Charlie Weis and Romeo Crennel as his coordinators, Belichick was 9-0 in the postseason. Since then, without them, he is 5-4. Now, going 5-4 in the playoffs is nothing to be ashamed of. Anything over .500 is good. But Sunday's game marked the first time a Belichick/Brady team has ever lost its first playoff game. It was Brady's first home loss since November 2006, and the team's first postseason loss at home in more than 30 years. Those are striking statistics, but I really think this is less about Belichick than the players. This team is old, doesn't have depth behind the starters, and doesn't have much balance. It's time to rebuild.

I don't mean to deflect credit from Baltimore, but it's hard to send too much praise toward a team that — speaking of unbalance — completed only four passes in its last game. Joe Flacco was 4-of-10 for 34 yards and an interception against the Patriots. He was bailed out by his running game and defense. It's very hard, though, not to think that John Harbaugh and his staff out-coached the Patriots here. If you know your opponent desperately wants to run the ball and avoid passing, how do you not devote extra resources to stopping the run? When New England was on offense, Randy Moss was quiet and Julian Edelman was no substitute for the injured Wes Welker. The Pats went 0-4 without Welker this year.

Packers @ Cardinals

This was a strange game. It began as a blowout, turned into a wild comeback, and ended on an improbable defensive touchdown. The contest broke postseason records for total points (96) and combined first downs (62) and is one of only a handful of postseason games with over 1,000 yards of offense (1,024). The second half of the game was exciting, but the first half looked like just another rout, and at no point did we see anything resembling professional-level pass defense.

The one defensive player who deserves recognition is Karlos Dansby. He tipped a pass that led to an interception, caused a fumble, and scored the game-winning touchdown. If anything could overshadow Dansby's brilliance at the beginning and end of the game, it was the performance of the quarterbacks. Kurt Warner threw more touchdown passes than incompletions, a remarkable accomplishment. Aaron Rodgers passed for 422 yards and scored 5 TDs (4 pass, 1 run), with a 121.3 passer rating.

Rodgers seemed a little uptight when the game began, but settled in and looked really impressive leading his team back from a 21-point deficit. When Green Bay fell way behind, Rodgers actually seemed to settle down. Maybe it didn't feel like a playoff game — which he'd never been in — any more, instead just feeling like a comeback effort, which he knew he could do. Greg Jennings also sparked the comeback, with several really exceptional plays. Mike McCarthy and his special teams coaches did a great job spotting Arizona's vulnerability to an onside kick and executing it at the right time.

Ultimately, though, the Cardinals won this game because Green Bay couldn't stop their offense, and their defense made more plays. Arizona's unlikely playoff run last season was fueled by turnovers, and the team is off to a similar start this time around.

Divisional Forecast

Cardinals @ Saints

The Saints fell apart at the end of the regular season. Maybe they used the bye week to get healthy, refocus, and come up with a masterful game plan against the Cardinals. On the other hand, maybe they used it to sit around and eat pretzels. That's what I would do with a bye week.

I think turnovers will decide this game. These are both high-powered offenses, and potentially vulnerable defenses that live off the big play. The Saints need to slow the game down. They don't want to get into a shootout with the Cardinals. That means re-establishing the running game. New Orleans won with a balanced attack early in the season, and lost late in the year when the offense was all about passing. The x-factor might be Arizona DB Michael Adams, who repeatedly got picked on against Green Bay. New Orleans should plan to do the same thing. On defense, pressuring Warner will be key. He never looked uncomfortable against Green Bay, and if the Saints let him stand back there and throw, they're going to lose.

The Cardinals need to force turnovers. That's the top priority. On offense, they want to do what they did last week. Run to set up play-action and keep Warner comfortable in the pocket. They want to make the Saints one-dimensional, force them to throw early and often. That may sound strange against the top-rated passer in the league, but it's a different ballgame when you know what's coming. The stars need to come up big on defense. Last week it was Dansby. This week, look for Darnell Dockett or Adrian Wilson to step up and make a big play that gives Arizona the edge. A good start would help take the crowd out of the game.

New Orleans looked decidedly mediocre the last month of the season, and I have more faith in the Cardinals. They've been here before, they're confident and playing well. Arizona by 10.

Ravens @ Colts

Hardest game of the week to call. The Ravens are a bad matchup for Indianapolis. They play a 3-4 defense, which the Colts traditionally struggle against. They have a great ground game, and teams that can run the ball and control the clock have given Indy problems this season. On the other hand, maybe it's a bad matchup for Baltimore. They've lost seven in a row to Indianapolis, including a 17-15 home loss in Week 11.

The question is whether the January 16th Colts are the same team as the November 22nd Colts. I don't think they are. Indianapolis hasn't tried to win a game in a month, since their 35-31 Week 15 win against Jacksonville. We've seen this movie before. In 2005, 2007, and 2008, the Colts rested their starters at the end of the regular season, and all three years, they lost their first playoff game. I've gotten burned picking Indy to match expectations in the playoffs too many times. I picked them to beat the Patriots in '04. I took them to top Pittsburgh in '05. I had them beating the Chargers in '07 and '08. No more. I'm taking the Ravens.

How is Baltimore going to win? The same way it did against New England. The offense will revolve around Ray Rice and Willis McGahee. I might even try to get Le'Ron McClain involved as a ball-carrier. Both Rice and McGahee are capable of big plays, but Rice is the key. His speed should be deadly on the FieldTurf in Indianapolis, and the threat he presents as a receiver could cause real problems for the blue and white. The Ravens will pass just enough to keep the Colts honest, and take advantage if they try to stack nine men in the box. Look for a couple of surprise deep-shots in the later quarters when the Colts expect a run.

On defense, Baltimore has to pressure Peyton Manning. That's easier said than done, but it's absolutely critical that they keep him out of a rhythm, and the best way to do that is by hitting him. For the Ravens to back up the upset pick, they need multiple sacks and probably a couple of turnovers. I don't know how healthy Ed Reed is, but he has to make a play.

If the Colts win, it will be with good defense on first and second down. They need to put Baltimore in passing situations. That's where Indy's defense is strongest and the Ravens' offense is weakest. The offense has to show balance early. Without a running game, or at least believable play-action, I don't think the Colts can hold off a strong Baltimore defensive unit. Manning has to stay calm and in control, and he'll need to spread the ball around. That's not a problem. The issue is pressure. If it's there, the Ravens win. If not, Indianapolis advances. I'll say Baltimore wins on a late field goal. Ravens by 3.

Cowboys @ Vikings

The Vikings lost three of their last five games, including a pair of blowouts and an upset loss to Chicago in which Baby Jay Cutler looked like Tony Romo. Now they have to face the real Tony Romo, who has been positively on fire recently, with a passer rating over 100 in six of his last seven games. Scarier than Romo, though, is the Dallas defense. No unit has played better over the last month. Not the Colts' offense, not the Chargers' offense, not even the Jets' defense.

For Minnesota to win, Adrian Peterson needs to come up big. He needs to break a couple of long runs and pick up the tough first downs on short yardage. I'd also try to get him in space with some short passes. The Cowboys' front seven are so good that holes could be hard to come by, but you can't let All Day be a non-factor. The Vikings also need big plays out of their passing game. When the team started 10-1, it was beating opponents with Peterson's running, but also with deep passes to Sidney Rice and Percy Harvin. They'll also need accurate medium-range throws to bail them out when Peterson is unproductive on early downs. You can't beat the Cowboys if you can't convert a couple of 3rd-and-8s. Limiting turnovers will be paramount. An interception and a lost Peterson fumble, and this game is over.

The Cowboys just need to do what they did against Philadelphia. The Vikings have an imposing run defense, so the Dallas offense may center around Romo. The short passes they used last week should be effective again, and I'd test the middle of the field, where LB E.J. Henderson is out. I'd also test Antoine Winfield early. He's coming back from injury, so maybe he's fully healthy now and playing up to his usual standards, but Winfield was a real liability in coverage at the end of the season, and could be a weak spot the Cowboys can exploit. This game will be won or lost, though, by the Dallas defense. If it plays the way it has been, the Cowboys are going to win, and it probably won't be close. I think the game is decided by the end of the third quarter, and Dallas wins by two touchdowns.

Jets @ Chargers

Let's get this out of the way early: I believe San Diego is the best team in the playoffs and the Jets are the worst. So yes, I'm taking the Chargers. However, I do think the game will be close, and if San Diego underestimates the opponent, Rex Ryan could start to look like a prophet instead of a cocky lunatic.

A New York win begins with the defense. Ideally, the team would clone Darrelle Revis. One of him would cover Vincent Jackson, and the other would take Antonio Gates. Failing that, I'd put Revis on Jackson and double-cover Gates. It is absolutely critical to prevent San Diego's ground game from picking up any momentum. These guys start running the ball effectively, and it's over. The Chargers have a ton of weapons, so New York needs something close to a perfect game defensively. That's actually not out of the question.

The bigger worry is offense. There's no secret what the Jets will do. They're going to run when they can and pass when they have to, hoping they get a short field from the defense and a big play out of Brad Smith or Shonn Greene. San Diego does not have a good run defense, so this could be effective. Mark Sanchez has to avoid turnovers, especially in the red zone, and ideally he wouldn't throw more than 15 times. It's up to the Chargers to stop the run. They know it's coming.

What San Diego has to do is outscore the Jets. Duh, right? What I mean is that the Bolts' defense is not good enough to win this game, so the burden is on the offense to make things happen. Ball control is essential. The Jets will have trouble driving, so you can't give them a short field that leads to easy points. The Chargers don't have a lot of defensive depth, so they can't get killed on time of possession. Establishing the run would be great, but that might be a pipe dream in this game. More realistically, the Chargers should run when they can and keep the Jets honest with screens and draws. This offense has a lot of weapons, and Norv Turner has to devise a gameplan that makes them too much for the Jets to deal with. Defensively, just stop the run. Do that, and you'll win. Sanchez cannot carry the Jets, so you have to put them in a position where Sanchez has to make plays.

This is a tough matchup for San Diego, but the team has been here before and knows what it needs to do. Chargers by 4.

I picked three road winners in this round. The last time home teams went more than .500 in the divisional round was the 2004 season.

***

Finally, a Sports Central tradition, our annual All-Loser Team: an all-star team made up entirely of players whose teams missed the postseason.

2009 NFL All-Loser Team

QB Matt Schaub, HOU
RB Chris Johnson, TEN
FB Lousaka Polite, MIA
WR Andre Johnson, HOU
WR Steve Smith, NYG
TE Vernon Davis, SF
C Brad Meester, JAC
G Justin Blalock, ATL
G Chris Snee, NYG
OT Michael Roos, TEN
OT Max Starks, PIT

DT Brett Keisel, PIT
DT Tony Brown, TEN
DE Julius Peppers, CAR
DE Andre Carter, WAS
OLB Brian Cushing, HOU
OLB Elvis Dumervil, DEN
ILB Patrick Willis, SF
ILB Jon Beason, CAR
CB Cortland Finnegan, TEN
CB Brandon Flowers, KC
FS Jairus Byrd, BUF
SS Yeremiah Bell, MIA

K Sebastian Janikowski, OAK
P Dustin Colquitt, KC
KR Joshua Cribbs, CLE

Honorable Mentions: Maurice Jones-Drew (RB, JAC); Steven Jackson (RB, STL); Aaron Schobel (DE, BUF); Randy Starks (DE, MIA); LaMarr Woodley (OLB, PIT); Champ Bailey (CB, DEN); Andre' Goodman (CB, DEN); Dashon Goldson (FS, SF)

Offensive Loser of the Year: Chris Johnson, RB, TEN
Defensive Loser of the Year: Patrick Willis, ILB, SF
Most Valuable Loser: Chris Johnson

Posted by Brad Oremland at 11:52 AM | Comments (0)

The 2000s' All-Decade College Hoops Team

College basketball is a sport of change. Basketball players play, on average, significantly less in college than any other sport. Because of that emphasis on transition, it can be hard to think of who is among the best.

Even though we've only played nine-and-a-half seasons for this decade, I think the best players of the 2000s have proven they will not be overtaken by a stellar second-half by anyone playing in 2009. Note: players who only played one season will not be considered. True, that takes away great players such as Carmelo Anthony. But I'm looking to group together the best of those players who contributed something more significantly to their alma mater.

First-Team All-Decade Team

G Dwayne Wade, Marquette
G J.J. Redick, Duke
F Joakim Noah, Florida
F Tyler Hansbrough, North Carolina
C Nick Collison, Kansas

Second-Team All-Decade Team

G Stephen Curry, Davidson
G Jay Williams, Duke
F Adam Morrison, Gonzaga
F Luke Harangody, Notre Dame
C Emeka Okafor, Connecticut

Wade and Redick were two of the most dominant players of their day in the college game. Wade was an incredibly accurate shooter, scoring on 49% of his career shots for the Golden Eagles. But it isn't his proficient shooting that made him all-decade worthy, but the fact that his presence on the Marquette team just simply made them better. In his first season on the team, he led the Golden Eagles in scoring with 17.8 ppg, led the conference in steals at 2.47 per game, and accumulated averages of 6.6 rebounds per game and 3.4 assists per game. Marquette finished with a 26–7 record, the school's best record since the 1993–94 season.

Anyone who watched Redick in the middle of this decade could see the man's uncanny ability to find open spots on the perimeter. His four years at Duke were marked by incredible improvement. As a freshman, he scored 15.0 points per game. By the time he was a senior, he was scoring over 27 points a game. This progression won him the 2005 and 2006 ACC Men's Basketball Player of the Year. Sadly, Wade and Redick's professional careers are in stark contrast. Wade won a championship in 2006 and is a five-time NBA all-star. Redick is a role player for the Orlando Magic, scoring an average of less than 10 points per game.

The best players of the decade are the best players in the postseason and it's because of Noah's and Hansborough's play in the paint that Florida and North Carolina won a combined four championships this decade. He was the 2006 Final Four tournament's Most Outstanding Player and was named an All-SEC player for 2006 and 2007, Florida's two national championship seasons.

Hansbrough is a model of consistency as his four years at North Carolina were dominant from start to finish. Hansbrough averaged 20 points and 8 rebounds a game over four years. Yea, we know. But it's the way he got his points that was legendary. He out-muscled opponents, sometimes leaving them to look like little children. Some would argue Hansbrough's place in the talk of greatest basketball players of all-time, but I think you'd be hard-pressed to find someone who would argue that he's the best player of the 2000s.

Oh, and by the way, for a North Carolina men's player to have his jersey retired, he must win at least one of six national player of the year awards: the Associated Press, the U.S. Basketball Writers Association, the National Association of Basketball Coaches, Sporting News, the Naismith Award, and the Wooden Award and wait until his class has graduated. Hansbrough won all six. His jersey's been retired.

And why should Collison be honored as the best center of the decade? Apart from helping Kansas reach two consecutive Final Fours (2002-2003; Collison finished his career as the leading scorer in the history of the Big 12 Conference and averaging a double-double with 18.5 points and 10 rebounds per game).

Why aren't Stephen Curry and Jay Williams first-team, all-decade players? Curry is a great story: overachieving athlete that was repeatedly a stone being thrown at Goliath's (or Duke's, or North Carolina's) head. Yes, he was in the top 10 of scoring all three years at Davidson, but if helping his team get to the Elite Eight once in four years is your claim to fame, you're not All-Decade worthy. And Williams is a phenomenal player, but his offensive success is more likely caused by his being surrounded by an entire team (Chris Duhon, Mike Dunleavy, Dahntay Jones, and Carlos Boozer) of future NBA players.

Why did Gonzaga's Morrison and Notre Dame's Harangody only make it as second-teamers? Aside from his junior year where he led the nation in scoring with 28.1 points per game, Morrison wasn't an All-Decade player. Many credit him to putting Gonzaga on the map, but didn't Matt Santangelo, Richie Frahm, and Casey Calvary do that a couple of years before Morrison arrived? Harangody is probably the only player on the list who could benefit from having this article written after the tournament. Aside from holding most of Notre Dame's shooting records, the only way Harangody can crack the first team is by leading the Fighting Irish to a national championship this season, which probably won't happen.

And Emeka Okafor was good in his three years at Connecticut, but his play was more a product of all the great big men going straight to the NBA more than any other position. He did not have to face Dwight Howard, Amare Stoudemire, and many more and that helped him look more dominant than he may have actually been.

Posted by Ryan Day at 11:35 AM | Comments (1)

January 11, 2010

NBA Trade Winds Blowing

When you make a list of "82 Things to Watch For This NBA Season" as I did this preseason, at this point in the season, there are basically three categories in which the predictions fall.

The first two are obvious: I was either right or I was wrong. There are some cases where there is a bit of a gray area, but overall, it was a hit or miss situation. We'll cover all of those things at a later date. I plan on revisiting some of the best and worst of this season's predictions as we get closer to the All-Star Break and the halfway point of the season.

Then there's the third category that a prediction can fall into: we just don't know yet.

Some we won't know until the regular season ends, some until after we crown a champion in June.

But for some of the predictions that I made that fall into the "we just don't know yet" category, there's a subtitle "but we're about to find out."

No prediction falls into the "We're about to find out" category more than the number No. 61 on the countdown: "This will be one of the most active trade deadlines in recent memory."

I wrote that back in October, under the assumption that once all 30 teams have a better understanding of where they stand in the playoff race, plenty of teams will be trying to put themselves in the best possible position heading into the mythical summer of 2010.

As the subtitle I just created indicates, we're about to find out whether I was right or not about this being an active deadline.

That's because, for all intents and purposes, the "trade deadline activity" starts this week in the NBA. There are a couple of reasons why the trade winds are going to start blowing this week.

First of all, teams know where they stand at this point in the season. Whether it's a team in limbo like Toronto that needs to make a decision on Chris Bosh, a team like Houston that has the surprising potential to be a buyer in this market, a middle of the road team like the Thunder possibly ready to take the next step, or a team like the Knicks who have made their salary cap-freeing intentions known for two years, everyone has a pretty good idea which direction they prefer to go this trade deadline.

Secondly, there are no more quirky contract stipulations holding certain players back. Players that signed with a new team this offseason became eligible to be traded around Christmas time. Players with only partially guaranteed contracts were either optioned for the remainder of the season this week or waived, as teams had until January 10th to decide whether or not to take on the remainder of said players' contract.

And the third reason why trade talks are about to heat up, last week's D-League Showcase. All 14 D-League teams got together in beautiful Boise, Idaho for the annual D-League Showcase, in which GMs, front office members, and scouts gathered to watch a week's worth of D-League basketball in the hopes of discovering a diamond in the rough, or at worse, officially make some players on their team officially available via trade.

You see, when you get nothing but NBA front office people gathering in one place for an entire week roughly a month before the trade deadline, there are bound to be some trade talks.

And while we may be a few weeks away from finding out whether the prediction of this being one of the most active trade deadlines in recent memory is correct, we are right in the heart of speculation season.

Here are just a few of the players that have had their names bounced around the rumor mill as it concerns this season's trade deadline. Of course these are just rumors that I've come across this week, and there's a good chance that some or none of these things happen, but it's always fun to play "what if," right?

Chris Bosh

Bosh is probably the biggest name and best player that has the potential to be moved before the February 18th deadline. He is set to be one of the most coveted free agents this offseason, and many people around the league believe that due to the unlikelihood of him re-signing with the Raptors, Bosh's days in Toronto are numbered.

There have been some interesting rumors surrounding where Bosh might eventually end up. ESPN's Marc Stein reported this week that there are several teams interested in Bosh, including the Houston Rockets. The Rockets have a very interesting trading chip in their own right with Tracy McGrady and his $23 million expiring contract, but Stein writes that McGrady wouldn't necessarily have to be included to get Bosh away from Toronto.

Another wild rumor is that the Raptors and Lakers have discussed a Bosh for Andrew Bynum deal. While it sounds interesting initially because of Andrew Bynum and Pau Gasol's oil and water relationship on the court, I don't think that there's any way Dr. Buss opens the checkbook up wide enough to pay Bosh what it's going to take to keep him in L.A.

The Lakers already have the highest payroll in the league and are a championship-caliber team. Why would they open up the possibility of having neither Bynum nor Bosh (if Bosh bolts via free agency after this season)? It's too much of a gamble, and I don't see the Lakers making anything more than a small move if anything at the deadline.

Other teams that may potentially have interest in Bosh: Dallas, Chicago, Miami, and New York. All four are possible destinations for Bosh in free agency, so if the right deal is made available, these teams might try to lure Bosh away from Toronto early and get a three-month head start on the courtship process.

If I had to guess, right now I'd say that there is a 60% chance Bosh gets moved.

The Raptors are right at .500 right now and sitting as the sixth seed in the East. That might not be good enough to assure Chris Bosh returns, but it's certainly no reason to fire sale, either.

Plus, ESPN knows that blockbuster trades make for good ratings. Look for them to continue to fuel the Bosh flames for as long as they can, hoping that someone will bite.

Al Jefferson/Danny Granger

Depending on who you believe, either the Pacers or the Timberwolves balked on an Al Jefferson for Danny Granger trade this week, but a few different outlets were reporting that there were definitely talks ongoing.

Minnesota is saying that they are committed to Jefferson, but the fact that he doesn't mix well with Kevin Love and with the Wolves in pretty rough shape, Minnesota could be in desperate need of shakeup. Don't be shocked if Jefferson's name pops up a few more times before trade season is over.

As for Granger, I really have no idea. I don't know that there are too many people out there that have any idea what Indiana's plan for the future is, or if they even have one.

The Pacers are 11-25 and are constantly hindered by injuries. How long can they play the "let's wait until we get all our guys healthy" card before they decide it's time to blow it up and start all over?

Tracy McGrady

As I mentioned earlier, McGrady is very intriguing because, on top of the fact that he was once an all-star several times over and an NBA scoring champ, he also has a $23 million contract that comes off the books after this season.

The Rockets have sent McGrady home and are said to be shopping him, but they also said they won't take back "B+" talent for him.

The name Andre Iguodala has popped up a few times, but "B+ talent" is being generous when it comes to Iggy, but if that's the best that comes their way by February 18th, the Rockets might be tempted enough by the possibility of a playoff push to acquire a player like Iguodala.

However, if I were to guess, I don't think the Rockets are going to trade McGrady. They are asking for an arm and a leg, and frankly, he's not worth that much. The reason that any team would want him is because of the cap relief that comes with him.

Well, guess what? McGrady doesn't need to be traded to get the cap relief that he represents. The Rockets could very well decide that they are happy being a slightly-above .500 team without Yao, and take T-Mac's $23 million and try to build a supporting cast for Yao in the summer of 2010.

Antawn Jamison

A cloud of rumors has been cast over all of Washington, DC over the past week or so, and not all of them involve Gilbert Arenas.

While reports are that with Wizards are doing all that they can to void what's left of Arenas' $111 million contract, they might also be willing to trade off any or all of their roster and start building from scratch.

The rumor that keeps circulating is that the Wizards and Cavs might be discussing a possible Jamison for Zydrunas Ilgauskas' expiring contract.

Even though they sit at 29-10, it's pretty much been decided that the Shaq and Big Z together experiment isn't going to work out. Shaq and his four NBA titles makes him a more valuable asset to the Cavs this postseason than the ringless Ilgauskas, so if one of them has to go, and my money is on Big Z.

Adding Jamison to the Cavs not only gives them another huge weapon, but serves as yet another reminder to LeBron that Cleveland is his best option if winning a title is what matters most to him, and that this team is very committed to doing whatever it takes to win with him.

***

Those are just some of the early trade winds that are blowing around the NBA. With 38 more shopping days until the deadline, expect plenty more big names to be talked about before it is all said and done.

If any of the above mentioned players get moved between now and February 18th, it could really reshape the playoff landscape for the remainder of the season.

But these players really just represent the tip of the iceberg. There are dozens of trade rumors that will be explored between now and the deadline. Some of them will be more accurate than others, but I stand by my prediction that when it's all said and done, this will be a very active NBA trade deadline.

The good news is, whether I'm right or wrong, we're about to find out.

Posted by Scott Shepherd at 11:28 AM | Comments (2)

College Football 2009: Year in Review

So long, 2009. And from a college football standpoint, frankly, good riddance.

The last season of the decade* made its biggest headlines for what its teams and players didn't do. LeGarette Blount and Oregon didn't keep their composure at Boise State in 2009's opening act. Defending Heisman winner Sam Bradford didn't make it out of his 2009's first half, effectively ending his (and the Sooners') season before it really began.

Tim Tebow and Florida didn't look nearly as good as previous incarnations, especially in their win over Tennessee when they didn't really make Lane Kiffin stop running his mouth. Of course, Kiffin and his Vols didn't exactly sing Rocky Top all night after beating the Gators as he had previous projected. And just this week, Texas quarterback Colt McCoy didn't last a full series in the title game against Alabama, while the Tide themselves didn't invoke memories of greatness in anyone who watched one of the ugliest championship games of the BCS era.

*(Is there a lamer argument than the "Is 2009 the end of the decade or 2010?" I think, deep down, this is many people's effort to channel the classic "Seinfeld" episode where Newman plans a major party for the "last day of the millennium," only to have Jerry deflate his plans by pointing out that he had booked December 31, 2000 instead of 1999. And to get further off-topic, how would Newman never realize he had booked the 2000 date? Did he never look at a contract? He sent out invitations, so wouldn't he have written or realized the date at some point?)

With all of the returning and new stars, there was potential for a great 2009 season somewhere. Unfortunately, it never showed up.

But instead, 2009 will be remembered as the year of overstayed welcomes. Bradford, McCoy (to a lesser extent), and Tebow (okay, to almost no extent) all spurned dates with Sunday football to try to reprise their brilliant individual 2008s. The trio went 3-for-3 in failing that task and getting hurt* in the process.

*(File this is in the 20/20 hindsight folder, but given how Oklahoma and Texas were ravaged by the injury to a single player, wouldn't you expect coaches to season their backup quarterbacks a little better? I'm not suggesting full-blown rotating quarterbacks, especially when your starter is a Bradford or McCoy. But teams rotate players in and out at every other position. Why couldn't Garrett Gilbert have gotten a dozen series mixed in during the first halves of run-of-the-mill Big 12 games? It seemed like Thursday night, especially in the first half, the Texas offense was a Bugatti Veyron broken down on the side of the road with a flat tire.)

Alabama and Florida unimpressively treaded water at the top of the polls through the regular season like two heavyweights dancing circles around each other in the early rounds. Given their top-shelf 2008 SEC Championship match, we waited all year for another better game. Instead, the Tide dusted the Gators early, leaving a Tebow-flavored trail of crocodile tears in their wake.

Mike Leach, Texas Tech's unorthodox swashbuckler of a coach who earned a handsome contract extension for the Red Raiders' rise to prominence in 2008, was forced to walk the plank out of Lubbock after allegations he mistreated at least one player. Forgive me for multiple "Seinfeld" references in one column, but Leach should have taken a tip from George Costanza and left the room on a high note. It wasn't going to get any better than 2008 at Tech.

Fortunately, 2010 will be different in college football. For one, the game will shed a thick layer of old stars before kicking off next year. Four of the five Heisman finalists, plus the 2008 winner, will be gone. Sure, Mark Ingram will come back as a solid favorite, but consider that Bruce Feldman on ESPN.com placed Oregon State's Jacquizz Rodgers as his early favorite. That's how wide open it'll be behind Ingram.

But also gone, more importantly, will be our ridiculous expectations. This season fell flat because we wanted more from the teams and players after a mostly satisfying 2008. Hey, if 2008 Florida/Texas/Bradford was great, how much better will they be in 2009, right? So before our preseason magazines hit newsstands this spring and summer, it'll be a blessing in disguise to wonder about who we see on the cover. Jeremiah Masoli? Landry Jones? Dion Lewis? After Ingram, my guess is as good as yours.

And it's this dichotomy that separates college football from the NFL. The sport has a life cycle. We see players, coaches, and programs grow over time, succeed or fail, and eventually fade into the ether of memory or tattoo our recollections as legends. The 2009 season and most of its components will likely be soon forgotten in favor of its more enjoyable peers. I can't tell you why 2010 will be great — but that's exactly why I know it will be.

Posted by Corrie Trouw at 11:18 AM | Comments (5)

January 9, 2010

Sports Central's 2009 NFL All-Pro Team

With the 2009 regular season over, it's time to honor this season's most outstanding players. This column exists to explain the reasons I chose certain players, or didn't take others, and to give recognition to those who just missed the list. If all you care about is who made the team, you'll find a list at the end.

This year, we have 12 players on offense and 13 on defense. Fullbacks have been gradually phased out of the base offense, with most teams preferring to use a third wide receiver or second tight end. Therefore, we named three WRs and two TEs, but no fullback. There's simply no one at that position who's deserving of all-pro recognition this season. Because of this trend on offense, though, all teams need a good nickel back, and our all-pro team has three cornerbacks. Finally, some teams use one DT and two ILBs, while others use two DTs and one ILB. We have two players at both positions.

Our choices are listed in order, so you'll know which receiver is third, which tight end is second, and so on. Also, don't miss our NFL All-Decade Team.

Quarterback: Drew Brees (NO)
Last Year: Philip Rivers (SD)

Three candidates stood head-and-shoulders above the rest: Brees, Rivers, and Peyton Manning (IND). All three of them sat in Week 17, and I think Aaron Rodgers (GB), Tony Romo (DAL), and Matt Schaub (HOU) have statistics just as good. Manning is probably the smartest player in the game. He's in total control of his offense, and he demands perfection from both himself and his teammates. Manning consistently leads the NFL in fewest sacks taken, and he hasn't lost a fumble in two years. This season, he ranked 2nd in passing yards and tied for 2nd in passing TDs.

Rivers creates plays. There are good quarterbacks who can hit open receivers, and there are great ones who can hit a guy even when he's covered. Rivers is one of the latter. His decision-making, leadership, toughness, and accuracy are all top-notch, and he has evolved into a really exceptional player. Rivers led the NFL this season with 42.8% of his passes going for first downs, and 64 completions of 20 yards of more. Many fans don't realize that Rivers actually runs a different offense than most of the league. He and Rodgers both play in the old Don Coryell system that calls for downfield throws, rather than the Bill Walsh "West Coast" Offense that stretches the field horizontally. The Coryell system usually results in lower completion percentage and more interceptions, with the benefit of more yards and TDs. Rivers led the NFL in yds/att and yds/comp, kept his INTs in single digits, and only took 25 sacks. That's remarkable.

Manning is my favorite player to watch. When he's at the top of his game, he makes plays no one else is capable of. Rivers was even better this season than he was last year, when I named him league MVP as well as my all-pro QB. So why Brees? I think he did the most with the least. Manning has Reggie Wayne and Dallas Clark. Rivers has Antonio Gates and Vincent Jackson. Marques Colston is a nice player, but he ain't Reggie Wayne. Throwing to a motley crew of decent-but-not-outstanding receivers, Brees posted the best passer rating in the league and led his team to the best record in the NFC. When Brees came to New Orleans, the Saints immediately turned from laughingstock to contender, and I don't think any player means more to his team.

Running Back: Chris Johnson (TEN)
Last Year: DeAngelo Williams (CAR)

The 10 greatest RB seasons in NFL history:

1) Jim Brown, CLE, 1958
2) O.J. Simpson, BUF, 1975
3) O.J. Simpson, BUF, 1973
4) Jim Brown, CLE, 1963
5) Walter Payton, CHI, 1977
6) LaDainian Tomlinson, SD, 2006
7) Chris Johnson, TEN, 2009
8) Steve Van Buren, PHI, 1945
9) Barry Sanders, DET, 1997
10) Jim Brown, CLE, 1965

No one disputes that Johnson is the fastest RB in the league, maybe the fastest at any position. No running back since Tony Dorsett, maybe no running back ever, has been able to outrun defenders the way Johnson does. He's also very good at reading blocks, and his cutting ability is exceptional. He is quite simply the most dangerous player in the league right now.

Fullback: N/A
Last Year: Mike Sellers (WAS)

This just isn't an important position for most teams any more. It's a part-time job, in for a handful of plays, like special teams ace. I don't name one of those, either. If you really want an all-pro fullback, Lousaka Polite (MIA) and Brad Hoover (CAR) are my favorites.

Wide Receiver: Andre Johnson (HOU), Reggie Wayne (IND), Wes Welker (NE)
Last Year: Andre Johnson (HOU), Steve Smith (CAR), Roddy White (ATL)

Johnson is a singular force. He is the second receiver in history with back-to-back 1,500-yard seasons (Marvin Harrison, 2001-02). This season, he led the league by over 200 yards. How many wide receivers can make plays like this? Wayne looks like Harrison did in his prime. He's the best route runner in the NFL and always seem to know where he is on the field. No one is better at the toe-tap on the sideline, and no one makes more jaw-dropping catches. Wayne led the NFL in first down receptions this season (73), followed by Welker (71). Johnson tied with Larry Fitzgerald (ARI) for 3rd (69). I love Fitzgerald, but he just didn't have the same kind of production as the three I chose.

Welker was a close call over his teammate Randy Moss (NE). Moss is the one who scares defenses, the one you have to double-cover. But Welker this year tied the 2nd-highest single-season reception total in history. He had more catches, more yards, more first downs, fewer fumbles. He led all wide receivers in yards after catch, by a huge margin of 166. I think the Welker/Moss tandem is comparable in some ways to the old Art Monk/Gary Clark combo in Washington. Clark was the deep threat, the guy who terrified defenses. Monk mostly stayed underneath, breaking reception records and moving the chains. They were both great. This year, Welker is the pick.

Tight End: Antonio Gates (SD), Vernon Davis (SF)
Last Year: Tony Gonzalez (KC), Jason Witten (DAL)

Gates is the hardest to defend. He led all tight ends in receiving yards (1,157) and first downs (61). He also led in catches of 20 yards or more (18) and ranked second in yards per reception (14.6), which aren't normally important categories, but they demonstrate the explosiveness that sets Gates apart from other tight ends. He's not just a check-down option, he's a deep threat. No one at the position makes more big plays.

Davis actually finished 5th among TEs in yardage and receptions, but he led everyone in touchdowns. The tight ends with more yardage than Davis all had 1,000-yard teammates to draw attention away from them, but Davis was the only serious weapon on San Francisco's struggling offense. He's the one who drew double-teams, the guy defenses game-planned against. They couldn't shut him down. Dallas Clark (IND) probably had the best pure receiving statistics, but he plays in a system that facilitates big numbers, and he's seldom asked to block.

Center: Nick Mangold (NYJ)
Last Year: Nick Mangold (NYJ)

Kind of a down year for centers, with lots of players who were good but none really great. Mangold is a textbook run blocker, very quick, and he gets far less double-team help than most centers. Jeff Saturday (IND) remains the anchor of the Indianapolis line, a smart and instinctive blocker who seldom gets beaten. It's sometimes difficult to evaluate linemen who are surrounded by great teammates, but Jonathan Goodwin (NO) had a nice season and is worth keeping an eye on.

Guard: Logan Mankins (NE), Jahri Evans (NO)
Last Year: Chris Snee (NYG), Kris Dielman (SD)

Maybe this is just bad timing. Steve Hutchinson (MIN) was the best guard of the decade, and I only chose him for an all-pro team once. I was all set to pick him again this season, but Hutchinson slumped at the end of the season. Maybe if Hutch had gotten off to a slow start and come on late, I'd still pick him, but his recent play is hard to ignore right now, and I can't rate him higher than third. Mankins is the dominant player on the league's second-ranked offense. Evans is one of several standouts on the first-ranked. I actually think Carl Nicks (NO) is just as good, but Mankins and Evans gives me one left guard and one right guard.

Offensive Tackle: Michael Roos (TEN), Max Starks (PIT)
Last Year: Michael Roos (TEN), Ryan Clady (DEN)

Roos was an easy choice as the best tackle in the league. There's no one I'm crazy about in the second spot. Starks made some mistakes, but not a lot of them, and he dealt with a shifting cast next to him at left guard. Pittsburgh's offensive line gets a lot of unmerited criticism because Ben Roethlisberger gets sacked a ton. That's more because of Big Ben's style of play than because of inadequate blocking. Watch their Week 17 win against Miami: Ben had forever to throw, but he still got pulled down three times, because he counts on that kind of protection and rarely throws the ball away. You could even "blame" the coaches. The Steelers throw downfield, and long pass plays take a while to develop. This offense ranked 7th in the NFL in 2009, and that doesn't happen without good play on the line. Am I absolutely convinced that Starks was the 2nd-best tackle in the league this year? Truthfully, I'm not, but he's definitely top-10. Jake Long (MIA) is still learning, but he played well most of the time. If you want a right tackle, consider quietly consistent Ryan Diem (IND).

Defensive Tackle: Darnell Dockett (ARI), Jay Ratliff (DAL)
Last Year: Kevin Williams (MIN), Haloti Ngata (BAL)

Arizona's defense features several budding stars, but it begins with Dockett. He moves around on the line, sometimes at end, other times over the nose. Dockett is quicker than most linemen, strangely elusive, and never gives up on a play. He also rarely subs out. Dockett is probably the hardest-working defensive lineman in the league. Ratliff is the heart of the Dallas defense, a disruptive player who occupies blockers and forces his way into the backfield. He recorded 6 sacks this season — a terrific number for a nose tackle — and forced 2 fumbles, with a league-leading 4 fumble recoveries.

Williams was very good again, but he faces double-teams less often than other elite DTs, and he became ineffective late in the season (7 tackles and no sacks after Week 10). Several other good candidates dropped out of contention due to injuries. Kris Jenkins (NYJ) missed half the season, Domata Peko (CIN) hasn't played in a month, and Vince Wilfork (NE) missed the last three games. Brett Keisel (PIT) is very underrated.

Defensive End: Jared Allen (MIN), Julius Peppers (CAR)
Last Year: John Abraham (ATL), Aaron Smith (PIT)

No one really ran away from the crowd at this position, and I think there were at least eight strong candidates. I would have liked steadier play from Allen, who had half an all-pro season, with 10 sacks through the first eight weeks and just 4.5 sacks in the last eight. Even without great second-half production, Allen still stood out as a playmaker, with 42 solo tackles, 14.5 sacks, 5 forced fumbles, 3 fumble recoveries, 4 passes deflected, an interception, a safety, and a touchdown. Allen is one of the few premier pass rushers who makes a real effort to stay solid against the run.

The other spot was harder to choose, with Peppers narrowly edging Will Smith (NO), Andre Carter (WAS), Trent Cole (PHI), Aaron Schobel (BUF), Robert Mathis (IND), and Dwight Freeney (IND). Peppers managed double-digit sacks despite playing on one of only six teams to face fewer than 500 pass attempts this season. Yeah, Freeney had more sacks, because the Colts got passed on 91 more times. Peppers tied Allen, Mathis, and Justin Tuck (NYG) to lead all defensive linemen in fumbles forced (5). He also recovered a fumble, knocked down 5 passes, and intercepted another 2, running one of them back for a touchdown.

Smith picked up 13 sacks, Carter and Cole tied to lead all defensive linemen in solo tackles (48), Schobel picked up twice as many sacks (10) as any of his teammates, Mathis forced 5 fumbles, and Freeney recorded 13.5 sacks. Freeney and Mathis both created problems for opponents, but they sub out a lot and played very little at the end of the season. Neither is a good run defender, and they both benefit from often knowing that the opponent has to pass.

The best 3-4 defensive ends are Johnny Jolly (GB, 10 pass deflections), Randy Starks (MIA, 7 sacks), and Shaun Ellis (NYJ, 6.5 sacks). Baltimore's whole line is very good, but I don't think any of them were all-pro caliber this year.

Outside Linebacker: Brian Cushing (HOU), Elvis Dumervil (DEN)
Last Year: James Harrison (PIT), DeMarcus Ware (DAL)

Lots of good pass-rushing candidates this year, but Dumervil trumped them all, easily leading the league in sacks. I would have liked to see more consistency from him, and he was not particularly sound against the run, but it's hard to argue with 17 sacks. I'm much happier about selecting Cushing, whose phenomenal rookie season included 5 sacks, 4 interceptions, 2 forced fumbles, double-digit pass deflections, a safety, and leading his team in tackles. This guy did everything.

Cushing stood alone as a 4-3 OLB, but several other pass rushers had very good seasons, notably a pair of Steelers — LaMarr Woodley (PIT) and Harrison — plus a pair of rookies — Brian Orakpo (WAS), who actually does play in a 4-3, but is basically a pass rusher, and Clay Matthews III (GB) — and an old standby, DeMarcus Ware (DAL). Woodley and Ware are my favorites from that group, and I wouldn't argue with one of them over Dumervil.

Inside Linebacker: Patrick Willis (SF), Jon Beason (CAR)
Last Year: James Farrior (PIT), Jon Beason (CAR)

Willis, working behind an improved defensive line, had his best season as a pro. Middle linebackers need speed, and Willis has it. He's also improving in pass coverage, this year intercepting 3 passes and returning one for a touchdown. Beason is cut from the same cloth. He's all over the field as a tackler, very sound in pass coverage, and he makes big plays: 3 sacks, 3 INTs, 2 fumble recoveries, 1 forced fumble.

I also like a trio of 3-4 ILBs: David Harris (NYJ), a master of the inside blitz; Keith Brooking (DAL), all over the field at age 34; and Nick Barnett (GB), who has quietly evolved into one of the best interior linebackers in the NFL.

Cornerback: Darrelle Revis (NYJ), Charles Woodson (GB), Sheldon Brown (PHI)
Last Year: Charles Woodson (GB), Will Allen (MIA), Nnamdi Asomugha (OAK)

Revis and Woodson probably were the best defensive players in the league this season. Revis has become absolutely the premier shut-down corner in the league. He contained the best receivers he faced like no other CB all decade: Andre Johnson, 4 catches for 35 yards. Randy Moss, 4 for 24 and 5 for 34. Carolina's Steve Smith, 1 for 5 yards. Roddy White, 4 for 33. Reggie Wayne, 3 for 33. Incredible stuff. Woodson's stats are the stuff of offensive coordinator nightmares: 9 INT, 3 return TDs, 18 passes defensed, 2 sacks, 4 forced fumbles. That kind of play-making wins games.

Brown was a tough call in the final spot, just edging Leon Hall (CIN), Johnathan Joseph (CIN), Dominique Rodgers-Cromartie (ARI), and his own teammate Asante Samuel (PHI). Samuel is a gambler who knows what he's doing. He intercepted 9 passes, tied for the league lead. I would actually argue, though, that Samuel wasn't even the best CB on his own team. Brown knocked down more passes, gained more yardage on INT returns, scored two touchdowns, and is good at playing the run. Samuel would be my dime back, followed by the Cincinnati tandem.

Free Safety: Darren Sharper (NO)
Last Year: Ed Reed (BAL)

Sharper intercepted 9 passes and broke the single-season record for INT return yards (376), scoring 3 touchdowns. Nick Collins (GB) and Jairus Byrd (BUF) had great seasons, but not that great.

Strong Safety: Adrian Wilson (ARI)
Last Year: Chris Hope (TEN)

Other than a healthy Troy Polamalu, no strong safety is better at pass defense than Wilson. He's also sound against the run and has a gift for big plays. Every year, this guy is at or near the top of the leaderboards for his position. This season: 5 INTs, 2 sacks, 2 fumble recoveries, and a forced fumble. Arizona's defense does not rank well statistically, and reminds me of Minnesota's. Both units are loaded with stars, but neither ranks as a top-5 defense. The Cardinals have Dockett, Wilson, Rodgers-Cromartie, Karlos Dansby, Calais Campbell ... how is this not a top-10 unit? Am I giving these guys too much credit? I don't think so, but I also can't explain the numbers.

Kicker: Sebastian Janikowski (OAK)
Last Year: Ryan Longwell (MIN)

Janikowski made all the kicks you're supposed to, but he also went 6-for-8 from 50 yards and beyond, including a 61-yarder, the fourth-longest field goal in history. He didn't have any kicks blocked and did a good job on kickoffs. Nate Kaeding (SD), who led the league in scoring, would be my second choice.

Punter: Ben Graham (ARI)
Last Year: Jeff Feagles (NYG)

I put more time and effort into selecting a punter than any other position. Yes, I know it's stupid. There were six strong candidates this year: Graham, Mike Scifres (SD), Dustin Colquitt (KC), Brad Maynard (CHI), Mat McBriar (DAL), and Sav Rocca (PHI). I like Colquitt a little better than the other cold-weather kickers, Maynard and Rocca. He had a much better net average and he tied for second in the league in fair catches.

The other three make for an interesting comparison. They all play for good teams, all in warm weather. McBriar has always had the leg, but this year he really punted strategically. He avoided touchbacks, he got air under the ball, and he still booted it deep. Scifres is the best punter in the game, and there's nothing he doesn't do well. I could pick him every year and it would never be a bad choice. This year, he only booted 2 touchbacks and worked hard to limit return opportunities, but he also gave up some long returns, including the first regular-season TD return of his career. Graham had the deepest kicks and was a master at pinning opponents deep. You could make a case for the other five, but this year, Graham is the pick.

I looked at Shane Lechler (OAK), the leader in both net and gross average. He kicks really far. He never pins opponent deep, though. Lechler had 8 punts downed inside the 10-yard line, compared to 12 touchbacks. Graham had 16 punts inside the 10 and 3 touchbacks. That's twice as many deep kicks for Graham, but four times as many touchbacks for Lechler. Graham was eight times better at pinning opponents deep. Lechler played with a terrible offense and usually had the whole field to work with. Graham played on a great offense and frequently had to shorten his punts to stay out of the end zone. Lechler got no hang time, and 78% of his punts were returned or touchbacks. This is Graham's weakest area, too, and his rate was 58%. Lechler is a good punter, probably in the top 10. He's not the best, and it's irresponsible to claim that he is if you haven't studied the issue.

Kick Returner: Joshua Cribbs (CLE)
Last Year: Clifton Smith (TB)

Pleasantly easy choice this year. Cribbs led the NFL in return TDs (3 KR, 1 PR). He was also top-five in KR yards, KR avg, PR yards, and PR average. Something else I like about Cribbs is that he doesn't protect his punt return average. He had 38 returns and just 3 fair catches this season, the best ratio in the league.

Special Teamer: N/A
Last Year: N/A

I don't name a special teams specialist, but let's throw out an honor roll — not necessarily all-inclusive — of the best guys I've seen this season: Joshua Cribbs (CLE), Kassim Osgood (SD), LaRod Stephens-Howling (ARI), Tracy White (PHI). I am a big fan of good special teams play. In fact, other than Joe Buck, nothing in football frustrates me more than bone-headed special teams plays.

Five players repeat from my 2008 all-pro team: Andre Johnson, Nick Mangold, Michael Roos, Jon Beason, and Charles Woodson.

Offensive Player of the Year: Chris Johnson (TEN)
Last Year: Andre Johnson (HOU)

The top quarterbacks all had great seasons, but Johnson had a historic one. No other player stood out so clearly at his position.

Defensive Player of the Year: Darrelle Revis (NYJ)
Last Year: James Harrison (PIT)

Charles Woodson (GB) and Darren Sharper (NO) had great seasons, made a ton of plays for their teams. No one was more dominant than Revis. For him to consistently shut down top-flight receivers the way he did was phenomenal, a rare achievement.

Most Valuable Player: Drew Brees (NO)
Last Year: Philip Rivers (SD)

It's sometimes frustrating not to have a record of the close calls here, so I'm taking a page from MLB and naming a top 10:

1) Drew Brees, QB, NO
2) Peyton Manning, QB, IND
3) Philip Rivers, QB, SD
4) Chris Johnson, RB, TEN
5) Darrelle Revis, DB, NYJ
6) Tony Romo, QB, DAL
7) Aaron Rodgers, QB, GB
8) Charles Woodson, DB, GB
9) Antonio Gates, TE, SD
10) Adrian Peterson, RB, MIN

There are some great players who have an argument to make this list. The problem is that I interpret "most valuable" as the guy who means the most to his team, that they couldn't succeed without him. Houston teammates Matt Schaub and Andre Johnson are a good example. How can you really be "most valuable" if one of your teammates is also on the list? Is it a little unfair that players can drop on account of their teammates? Maybe so, but that's what MVP means to me.

I've already explained what I like about most of these players, and I have nothing bad to say about them. Chris Johnson was the most outstanding player in the league this season, but was he really as valuable to his team as Brees, Manning, or Rivers? I don't believe so. You can succeed without a premier running back, but you can't win with a crappy QB. Unless you're the Jets, I guess. Maybe Revis should be higher.

Offensive Rookie of the Year: Percy Harvin (MIN)
Last Year: Matt Ryan (ATL)

I think I'm spoiled. We've had unusually strong rookie performances the last few years, and now I expect every year to produce a Matt Ryan or Adrian Peterson. There's no one near that caliber this season, but Harvin was a solid performer at wide receiver (925 yards from scrimmage, 6 TD) and a standout on special teams (1,156 KR yds, 27.5 avg, 2 TD). Johnny Knox (CHI) was a poor man's Harvin: 527 receiving yards, 29.0 KR avg, 6 total TDs. I don't know if any offensive rookie was more exciting than Mike Wallace (PIT), who averaged 19.4 yards per reception and scored 6 TDs. Michael Oher (BAL) and Phil Loadholt (MIN) showed promise on the offensive line.

Several rookie special teamers merit recognition. Kickoff specialist David Buehler (DAL) led the NFL in touchbacks. Ryan Succop (KC), this year's Mr. Irrelevant, only missed one kick from under 50 yards, and none under 40. LaRod Stephens-Howling (ARI) returned a kickoff for a touchdown and was a wizard in kick coverage.

Defensive Rookie of the Year: Brian Cushing (HOU)
Last Year: Jerod Mayo (NE)

One of the greatest classes in history for rookie defenders, the best since at least 2005. Cushing was a superstar, the best OLB in the league this season. Brian Orakpo (WAS) and Clay Matthews III (GB) both had double-digit sacks. Jairus Byrd (BUF) tied for the league lead with 9 interceptions. James Laurinaitis (STL) quietly played well for an awful team. Rey Maualuga (CIN) started 15 games for the fourth-ranked defense in the league.

Coach of the Year: Norv Turner (SD)
Last Year: Tony Sparano (MIA)

The Chargers overcame injury problems and a slow start to finish tied for the 2nd-best record in the NFL, entering the playoffs with an 11-game winning streak. Turner, long renowned as an offensive guru, oversees one of the best units in the league, and has helped Philip Rivers develop into an elite quarterback. Turner's promotion last season of Ron Rivera to defensive coordinator has helped steady that unit through injuries to some of its best players.

Maybe it's unfair to punish Jim Caldwell (IND) for a decision that seems to have come from the general manager's office, but I just can't disagree more with not attempting to win the last two games of the regular season. Sean Payton (NO) managed to hold the ship together for most of the season, even as injuries piled up. Marvin Lewis (CIN) led his team to a division title, against all expectations and through a pair of deaths that affected the team.

Assistant Coach of the Year: Dom Capers (GB)
Last Year: Mike Mularkey (ATL)

As usual, there were several strong candidates. Capers installed the 3-4 defensive scheme in Green Bay this year, and the team improved from 20th to second in yards allowed and 22nd to seventh in points allowed. That kind of transition seldom produces positive effects quickly, and the front office definitely shares credit for bringing in the right players, but Capers did an admirable job.

Mike Zimmer (CIN) was a very close second, turning an average defense into an elite one in his first year on the job. Larry Coyer (IND), in his first year with Indianapolis, did some good things as well, but I really like the old stand-bys, offensive coordinator Tom Moore (IND) and offensive line guru Howard Mudd (IND). Marvin Harrison retires, Anthony Gonzalez gets hurt, and the offense doesn't miss a beat. Mike Heimerdinger (TEN) and Dan Henning (MIA) did a nice job coordinating offenses with limited weapons, as did Bill Callahan (NYJ) and Brian Schottenheimer (NYJ). Finally, Steve Crosby (SD) consistently oversees great special teams play.

2009 All-Pro Team

QB Drew Brees, NO
RB Chris Johnson, TEN
WR Andre Johnson, HOU
WR Reggie Wayne, IND
WR Wes Welker, NE
TE Antonio Gates, SD
TE Vernon Davis, SF
C Nick Mangold, NYJ
G Logan Mankins, NE
G Jahri Evans, NO
OT Michael Roos, TEN
OT Max Starks, PIT

DT Darnell Dockett, ARI
DT Jay Ratliff, DAL
DE Jared Allen, MIN
DE Julius Peppers, CAR
OLB Brian Cushing, HOU
OLB Elvis Dumervil, DEN
ILB Patrick Willis, SF
ILB Jon Beason, CAR
CB Darrelle Revis, NYJ
CB Charles Woodson, GB
CB Sheldon Brown, PHI
FS Darren Sharper, NO
SS Adrian Wilson, ARI

K Sebastian Janikowski, OAK
P Ben Graham, ARI
KR Josh Cribbs, CLE

Off POY — Chris Johnson, TEN
Def POY — Darrelle Revis, NYJ
MVP — Drew Brees, NO
Off Rookie — Percy Harvin, MIN
Def Rookie — Brian Cushing, HOU
Coach — Norv Turner, SD
Assistant — Dom Capers, GB

When it comes to beating the NFL point spreads, nobody does a better job than the handicappers at BetFirms.com.

Posted by Brad Oremland at 11:21 AM | Comments (0)

January 8, 2010

Sports Q&A: Putting the "Arenas" in "Arsenal"

Washington Wizards players Gilbert Arenas and Javaris Crittendon allegedly drew guns in a "standoff" in the Wizards locker room, an incident the NBA, as well as federal and state officials, are investigating. Arenas claims the incident was all in good fun, and accounts of the situation have been blown out of proportion. What's the real story, and what fate awaits Arenas, as well as the NBA?

Usually, when someone recounts a situation involving guns as "all in good fun," then that person is, in most cases, delusional or just plain stupid. Arenas is at least one, and probably both. To his credit, though, at least he didn't describe the situation as a "barrel" of fun.

Apparently, on December 21st in the Wizards locker room in the Verizon Center, Arenas put three guns on a chair and asked Crittendon to "pick one." Whether or not Crittendon actually chose one of Arenas' guns, or one of his own, is unclear, but reports indicate the two "drew" on each other. Is this what happens when two "point" guards face off. Thankfully, no rounds were exchanged, which is surprising seeing that Arenas has never passed up a "shot" before. If there's one thing Arenas I well-known for, it's his itchy trigger finger.

The dispute started over a gambling debt related to a card game. It seems that Crittendon contended he had a winning hand, while Arenas disagreed. I'm not sure what the card game was, but I'm guessing Crittendon found out that his seven of diamonds didn't beat Arenas' 'nine of millimeters.' Personally, I'm impressed with Arenas' homage to the Wild West. Heck, I though card-playing, gun-toting lawlessness went out of style in the 1800s. I bet Doc Holliday and Wyatt Earp are looking down upon this proudly. And, judging by the sparse attendance for Washington games, I'm guessing the two icons would bet they could "outdraw" the Wizards.

No matter how the league handles it, the incident and subsequent publicity are a black eye for the NBA. But not for the NFL. Finally, former New England Patriots tight end Zeke Mowatt is free from being the most infamous professional athlete to "whip out his jammy."

For NBA commissioner David Stern, it's no laughing matter. By possessing guns in a team facility, Arenas broke a rule of the collective bargaining agreement. If Stern truly wants to make an example, he should crack the whip of justice by asking Arenas and Crittendon to take several paces, turn, and don't come back for awhile. That's the message Stern sent on Wednesday when he suspended Arenas indefinitely. Maybe Arenas' guns weren't loaded, but Stern indeed dropped the hammer as far as discipline was concerned.

When the Washington franchise, formerly known as the Bullets, changed their name to the Wizards in 1995, it was to avoid the violent connotations to guns that the nickname "Bullets" suggested. Who would have envisioned that 14 years later, two "Wizards" would be waving guns at each other. That's about as unlikely as it would have been for two "Bullets" to be waving magic wands at each other.

Arenas' tenure as a Wizard may now be limited due to his transgressions. Is a trade a possibility? Arenas' is certainly talented, as his 22.7 points per game average would suggest. He's a streaky shooter, and is often deadly from long range, but please, don't call him "semi-automatic." But do other teams want the baggage that comes with such a controversial star? It's safe to say the Heat and the Blazers want nothing to do with Arenas.

So why did Arenas feel the need to store guns in his locker? He claims he wanted them out of his home to keep them away from his children. That's a "hollow" point, although we must applaud Arenas for his safety concerns. In the Arenas household, there should absolutely be no guns, or at least not until the children are old enough to play cards, or Russian Roulette. But who needs more maturing in this situation, Arenas' kids, or Arenas himself?

So far, Arenas has done little to take responsibility for his actions, and instead has displayed a nonchalant, almost jovial attitude throughout the ordeal. "Contrition" doesn't seem to be in his arsenal. (Wouldn't it be really cool if Arenas appeared at a press conference to discuss the gun issue while wearing an Arsenal soccer jersey? I doubt Stern would find in humorous.)

So, beyond Arenas' punishment, what will the ramifications of this incident hold for the league? Will players have to submit to a frisking before they enter their own locker rooms? Will fans think twice before they yell "shoot" at games? Will a player's three-point shooting percentage be judged against the caliber of weapon he carries? Will players who ask a colleague to "hand me a magazine" be ordered to "be more specific?" Will "shooting the breeze" be banned in the NBA? Who knows? Whatever happens, it can all be blamed on Arenas.

Posted by Jeffrey Boswell at 11:26 AM | Comments (2)

January 7, 2010

NFL Weekly Predictions: Wild Card Round

Note: the quotes in this article are fictional.

NY Jets @ Cincinnati (-2½)

The Jets and Bengals kickoff the first of three Week 17 rematches in Cincinnati, where the Bengals will try to rebound from a humiliating 37-0 loss to those very Jets. Cincy rested several starters, while others played sparingly, and New York easily locked up the number five seed.

"After such a lopsided win over the Bengals," says Rex Ryan, "we could very well see Mark Sanchez on the cover of Tiger Beat magazine, again. Not that Mark deserves all of the credit, or any of it for that matter, but he was an efficient 8-of-16 for 63 yards passing, was flawless on handoffs, and surreptitiously devoured a hot dog on the sidelines. I can spot a winner a mile away; Mark can do the same of a wiener. Maybe the 'Sanchise' is a nickname he can't live up to, but 'Fran(k)-chise' is one I can certainly get behind. "

"Obviously, there are those who think we don't deserve to be in the playoffs after having two wins fall into our laps. We can't concern ourselves with those people. You can't question our effort. We wanted this more than any other team, except for the Colts and Bengals, apparently. We may be overrated right now, but we're here because we were underrated at the time. Sure, making the playoffs look easy when the two teams standing in your way end up sitting. There's a fine line between effortless and effort-less."

The Bengals certainly can't be confident about entering the postseason with a 37-0 loss, and they definitely aren't counting any 'Most Likely to Succeed' votes for the playoffs, but at least Saturday's game is at home, where Cincy was a healthy 6-2 this year.

"'The Jungle' has been kind to us," says Carson Palmer. "I know our crowd will be behind us. They're a lot like Chad Ochocinco — they never shut up. Plus, they've got just as many catches against Darrelle Revis as Chad does. I seriously doubt Chad will change his name back to 'Johnson' like he said he would if Revis shut him out. But he should, and quickly. That way, when Revis shuts him out again on Saturday, Chad can change it back to 'Ochocinco.'"

"Despite last week's debacle, we're still favored, and that's as it should be. I know Ryan's using that as a motivational tool to fire up his team. Call him the 'Round Mound of Sound (Bite). I hear Rex is telling his team he's got a 'gut feeling' they'll win. From Rex, I guess that would be called an 'upset stomach.'"

"I'm confident we can put this loss behind us. We've spent the better part of this entire year 'putting things behind us,' such as our three AFC North rivals. Personally, my 1-of-11, 0-yard, 1-interception stat line is one I'd like to erase from my memory. I'm amazed that such a line even warrants a 1.7 passer rating. It's one that Jake Delhomme could likely outdo ... blindfolded. After a performance like that, I'm not sure I'm even qualified to play drums for Def Leppard."

Indeed. Palmer's right arm has become about as useless as his left. And his performance last Sunday was so awful it begs the question: was he sandbagging? Is Palmer involved in a secret fraternity of USC quarterbacks, and was it Palmer's turn to make a fellow Trojan look good? If that's the case, then even Todd Marinovich got a boost of self-esteem.

Saturday afternoon will be different, though. The Bengals will have Cedric Benson back, and in what is sure to be a low-scoring affair, Palmer will be charged with nothing more than delivering the ball to Benson. And that's good, because Revis will be on Ochocinco like blanco on arroz.

Benson rushes for 94 yards and a touchdown, and the Bengals force 2 Sanchez turnovers.

Cincinnati wins, 19-14.

Philadelphia @ Dallas (-4)

With the NFC East title on the line, the Cowboys overwhelmed the Eagles, blanking Philadelphia 24-0 and setting up a return match on Saturday night in Dallas. Dallas hasn't won a playoff game since 1996, and recent failures in the postseason haunt a franchise that prides itself on playoff glory.

"Lately," says Tony Romo, "playoff prestige has eluded us. I guess you could say there's a glory 'hole' where that's concerned. And speaking of 'glory holes,' unless you make seven figures and/or are intimately involved with Jerry Jones, then that's the only way you'll be able to see this game. And even that will cost you $250."

"But right now, we're riding a wave of momentum not seen for the Cowboys since the Bills were AFC champions. But really, I don't see anything stopping us from my first playoff win except, let's see, history, and maybe a botched field goal attempt. Heck, even if I get the hold down flawlessly, there's no guarantee our kicker will make the kick."

Just a week ago, the Eagles were viewed as a legitimate threat in the NFC, but all that changed after Sunday's lethargic performance in Dallas.

"We know we disappointed a lot of people last Sunday in Dallas," says Donovan McNabb. "Not only legions of Eagles fans, but football purists, as well. We were the last hope to put a kink in what is now the NFC 'all indoor playoffs.' As it is, the NFC playoffs will see more 'roofies' than a Sebastian Janikowski date."

"We understand the difficulty of beating a team that's already whipped us twice already. We'll have to play better than we did on Sunday. Frankly, our play last week sickened me. Mind you, I didn't blow chunks, but I felt like it. It's one thing to upstage the Dallas star, as Terrell Owens did as an Eagle; it's another thing to upchuck on the Dallas star. The Cowboy image has seen enough tarnish over the years, what with drug issues, recent playoff failures, Leon Lett, and Emmitt Smith playing a gray-bearded invalid on a 'Just For Men' hair-coloring commercial."

In a bizarre series of events in the first quarter, the Cowboys have a promising opening drive stalled by a penalty on Flozell Adams, who is flagged 15 yards for stomping on the face of teammate Andre Gurrode. It's the first penalty in NFL history in which a player is charged with fouling his own team. Wade Phillips unsuccessfully argues that the penalty should be offsetting, but fails to convince the officials. DeSean Jackson returns the ensuing punt 57 yards to set up an 11-yard touchdown pass from McNabb to Brent Celek.

The impatient Dallas contingent, sensing another playoff disaster, serenades the team with a chorus of boos. But Jerry Jones is ready, and has the public address system pipe in the audio of Jones ambiguously rambling about the future of Wade Phillips. Jones' double-talking jive has a calming effect on the 'Boys, and they storm back, driving for the tying score on their next possession.

Romo throws for 220 yards and 2 scores, and the Cowboys win, 27-21.

Baltimore @ New England (-3½)

Despite a 34-27 loss to the Texans in Week 17, the Patriots clinched the AFC's No. 3 seed when the Bengals lost 37-0 to the Jets on Sunday night. Many, including Pittsburgh's Lamar Woodley, had suggested the Bengals and Patriots would "lay down" just to spite the Steelers and keep them out of the playoffs.

"When have I ever done anything for spite?" says Bill Belichick. "Sure, Woodley's right about the Bengals; they did lay down. We, however, held a 27-13 lead over the Texans. Would that be considered a 'lay down?' No. But soon after assuming that lead, we sat our starters. I believe you'd call that a 'de-lay down.' Sorry, Lamar. This year's playoffs won't be sporting Wood.'"

"Truthfully, it's hard to comprehend the downfall of the Steelers, going from Super Bowl champions to mere onlookers. That's going from one extreme to another, much like Omar Epps going from the role of a street thug in the movie Juice to the role of a doctor in television's House. And let's face it, Epps is a dead ringer for Mike Tomlin. And I'm sure if Tomlin would have called for an onside kick with a lead on Dr. House's watch, House would have taken two Vicodan and called him an 'idiot' until morning."

The Ravens played the Patriots tough in a 27-21 loss at Gillette Stadium in October. This time, though, the Ravens defenders won't have to concern themselves with covering pesky wideout Wes Welker, who was lost for the year after injuring his knee against the Texans.

"You always have to know where Welker is on the field," says Ray Lewis. "Usually, it's 4 yards or less from the line of scrimmage. Welker's absence will allow us to devote more coverage to Randy Moss. Welker's the 'short' to Moss's 'long,' not only in length of receptions, but stature as well. Welker represents the 'Lollipop Guild,' and if we can get physical with Moss, it's likely he'll be representing the 'Lolly-gag Guild."

"All this just means Moss will be carrying more of the load, and, as someone who carries the weight of the world on his shoulders, he should be used to it. Ironically, the 'weight of the world' weighs approximately the same as a case of Olde English malt liquor. Now, I disagree with the Carolina Panthers defensive backs who doubted Moss' effort. Heck, I've heard about Randy's struggles growing up. So I don't question Moss' 'hustle.'"

"Of course, in Welker's absence, the Pats will have to find someone else to work the underneath routes. I guess Tom Brady will have to find another 'safety valve.' Tom's a resilient fellow. He'll have as little trouble finding a valve as he does finding 'hose.'

In their 27-21 loss to New England in Week 4, the Ravens got decent pressure on Brady, sacking him three times. And with reports that Brady's been playing with three broken ribs and a broken index finger, Baltimore's desire to attack the Patriot signal-caller will be even more ravenous. But Bill Belichick may be an asshole, but he's no fool. Priority number one will be to protect Brady. Luckily for the Pats, that's also priority number one for the officiating crew.

New England wins, 21-20.

Green Bay @ Arizona (-2½)

With a Minnesota win earlier in the day sealing their playoff seeding, the Cardinals rested several starters, while others played sparingly, in a 33-7 loss to Green Bay. A Vikings' loss would have given Arizona the opportunity for the No. 2 or 3 seed, but now, the Cards, as the No. 4 seed, will welcome the Packers back to Glendale for anticipated revenge.

"I've been waiting for the 'second coming,'" says Kurt Warner. "And here it is."

"A win would have been a worthless endeavor. You've heard the saying: 'No gain, no vain.' Win or lose, we knew we'd be playing again at University of Phoenix Stadium, the glorious home of the Cardinals. Still, losing 33-7 there under any circumstances is akin to laying a 'nest' egg. Who knew 'sitting' Cardinals would so easily become 'sitting ducks?'"

"But, I can only do what the coach tells me. Ironically, when God says 'rest' on Sundays, I don't, but when Ken Whisenhunt does, I do. When I say I answer to only one 'higher being,' I'm of course referring to Ken. "

"As for the Packers, we surely have our work cut out for us. Hopefully, Coach Whisenhunt will create only one game plan for this contest."

The Packers appear to be the only wild card team with the balance, health, and momentum to mount a serious Super Bowl run. Green Bay has won seven of their last eight, and boasts the NFL's second-ranked defense.

"I'm not sure anyone has noticed," says Aaron Rodgers, "but almost every team that Brett Favre has ever played for made the playoffs, including two from which he's retired. I'm not sure any other player in history can say that. Kudos to Brett, though. Even when he's not a member of a team, it's still all about Brett."

"I expect crowd noise to be a factor in Sunday's game. Of course, it will be a pro-Cardinals contingent, but I expect there to be a throngs of Favre fans there, as well. After all, the area has a huge retirement community."
"Of course, we don't expect the Cardinals to hand a win to us like they did last Sunday. We know we didn't see their best last week. Matt Leinart looks more intimidating under a hot-tubbing co-ed than he does under center. I believe that's the earliest Leinart's seen mop-up duty."

Aaron Rodgers throws for 275 yards and 3 touchdowns, and the Packers survive a late Arizona run to win, 31-27.

Posted by Jeffrey Boswell at 4:33 PM | Comments (1)

Dolphins Fans Get What They Deserve

"The most humiliating and demeaning experience of my life."

That's how one Miami Dolphins fan described Don Shula's 80th birthday party and the season-ticket holders that were there are irate. Why? As far as I can tell, they are irate because God didn't bless them with enough intelligence to avoid paying to go to lame functions.

Eighty fans were randomly selected to pay $80 to attend Shula's 80th birthday party (oh, that's cute, see what they did with the 80s?). The fans were upset because the VIPs, you know, the people the party was for, got to sit in the main area and had a nice dinner. The fans were relegated to a balcony and were fed partly-cooked hot dogs.

I can understand why that would upset people. Especially because the answer from the Dolphins is amazingly weak. They claim they told the fans they would be on the balcony and that food was never part of the deal. So they were selling tickets, at $80 bucks a pop, to watch a birthday party. That may be one of the most arrogant, douchiest things I've heard a sports team doing this year.

Paying money to go to that, though, is the douchiest thing I've heard a sports fan doing this year. Why would you ever expect to get the same treatment as the VIPs at a party you had to pay to go to? They are VIPs for a reason. They should have just labeled the two groups "people at the party who were supposed to be there" and the NIPs.

Does someone pay for that for an ego boost? For the story?

"Hey, man, you'll never guess what I did this weekend, it was wild. I went to the 80th birthday party of a man I've never met. There were so many celebrities there, oh man, we sang happy birthday, it was wild. Better than Vegas. What's that you say? You don't believe I was there? Ha, I've got proof. Let me show you my receipt..."

It's sad that 80 people would want to do this, but I think the line wouldn't even stop there. What if they started selling tickets to other events?

"I just bought second-level seats to Shula's daughter's wedding!!!"

"Dude, that's neat, but I just nabbed tickets to [Tony] Sparano's nephew's First Communion party."

About the only parties fans should be buying tickets for are the ones at the Playboy Mansion. And I say that only because I've been (hey, look at me, I've been to Playboy Mansion! I'm so cool!) and from what I hear, people that do buy the limited tickets to those things are treated fairly well. And at least that's a story you can tell people. "Hey, I was at the Playboy Mansion" is infinitely better than "hey, I was at an old man's birthday party!"

Those fans can be upset but they should be happy, because this can serve as a wakeup call that their lives are sad and pathetic. It's not too late for them to turn it around and do something great. And when they do, they can charge admission to their own birthday parties.

Posted by Mark Chalifoux at 1:17 PM | Comments (1)

January 6, 2010

Realigning College Football's Conferences

The Big Ten announced last month that it would be seeking an expansion from 11 to 12. Many teams have been floated around as possibilities, many from the Big East (Syracuse, Cincinnati, Rutgers, Pittsburgh, Louisville) and the Big 12 (Missouri, Iowa State).

Meanwhile, Boise State has another undefeated season that will end in nothing other than being the underdog champion for another season. TCU loses only to Boise State after an amazing season and fans are left wondering when will one of these non-power conference teams, one of these mid-major teams get a shot at the title.

My prediction: never.

Sad prediction, I know. But college football, more than any other sport in existence, seems to be a sport of tradition. Teams have played each other every year for 100 years or more. They play for more than pride. Often (especially in the Big Ten), they play for random trinkets of old — Paul Bunyan's Axe, the Little Brown Jug, and the list goes on and on.

College football decision-makers are wary of change because it means leaving behind traditions that have existed for their entire lives and longer and once a tradition is broken it may be impossible to get the magic back.

What these decision-makers need to realize is that fans (at least most fans) care far more about good football than they do about tradition. There are exceptions to this of course. For example: I want to see the Army vs. Navy game every year until I am dead and gone. I think that is a worthwhile tradition that shouldn't be touched. But I think there must be a way that we can keep some of the greatest traditions alive and make better football.

I suggest two things: realignment and consistency.

Consistency: every major conference (if not every conference) should have the same number of teams. I suggest 12. These 12 teams should be split into two divisions of six and six, or however it is seen to be fitting. This is how the SEC, Big 12, and ACC currently operate.

The question is how do we get the Big Ten, Pac-10, and the Big East to jump on board with this notion and what teams do we give them?
I believe the following teams deserve a look to make the jump into a major conference: Boise State, Utah, BYU, and TCU. There are others I would hear arguments for, but those four can hardly be denied. They've all made huge strides in the past decade and look promising for the future.

Boise State and BYU could easily transition into the Pac-10 ... well, not completely easily, but they are within the basic range of the region.
Utah wouldn't be too much of a stretch for Pac-10, but they are more in the Big 12 region, as is TCU. That would require a realignment that might be difficult with all the politics involved.

The thing that makes the most sense geographically would be to move Iowa State into the Big Ten, increasing them to 12 teams and putting TCU or Utah in the Big 12. That, unfortunately, leaves one team out and two more spots to fill out the Big East.

Now we're most certainly stuck. The possibilities I've offered so far would be difficult enough. What I'm about to offer as a possibility next is nearly impossible.

Making room for both Utah and TCU in the Big 12 means moving both Missouri and Iowa State into the Big Ten. Unfortunately, this means moving a team out of the Big Ten and who is the most sensible team? Penn State.

Though Penn State is a perennial powerhouse in the Big Ten, their foes on the field and their foes in recruiting are very different. Sure, there is some overlap, but Penn State spends a lot of time fighting with Pitt, Rutgers, Syracuse, and Cincinnati over players. I would hate to see Penn State leave the Big Ten and I certainly don't think they ever will, but for the good of college football, I think it might be the best thing.

That leaves on open spot in the Big East and who should fill it other than Notre Dame, a team that's sat far too long in the independent category of college football. They are a team that champions the idea of tradition in college football. Are they still worthy of being that team?

That would leave us with six power conferences of 12 teams each. Having such continuity between conferences would allow for a much easier implementation of another thing that is vastly against tradition — a college football playoff.

Conference champions only, top two ranked teams get byes, operating much like one-half of the NFL playoff system, leaving us with far fewer teams who can claim a piece of the title.

Posted by Andrew Jones at 11:39 AM | Comments (4)

January 5, 2010

NFL Week 17 Power Rankings

Five Quick Hits

* Best announcers this season: Mike Tirico and Sam Rosen. I don't like any of the analysts, but I guess Ron Jaworski wasn't terrible.

* Unusual sanity in this year's Pro Bowl selections. The wrong punters are going, but what else is new? Almost all of these guys are deserving.

* The Jets led the NFL in yards allowed, points allowed, and rushing. Fine, they can't throw. They can't be taken lightly.

* Matt Schaub led the NFL in passing yards this season. If you could trade a pair of second-round picks for a top-10 quarterback, is there ever a time you wouldn't?

* Super Bowl XLIV: San Diego Chargers over Dallas Cowboys.

***

"It's one thing to take a whippin'. It's another to embarrass yourself." So said Cris Collinsworth on Sunday night, and it's that philosophy that's driving my wild card playoff predictions. Since the 2002 realignment, six playoff teams have lost their regular season finale by at least 20 points. Only one of those six (the 2004 Philadelphia Eagles) won a playoff game. Is it different when you're basically playing the B team? I don't think it is. If you accept losing one game, it's hard to make yourself win the next one. Look at the Colts' repeated postseason failures after resting players. Do I think the Cowboys, Jets, and Packers will steamroll their opponents the same way they did in Week 17? Of course not. But I do think they're all likely to win.

Since these are the last rankings of the season, please remember these are intended to evaluate end-of-season power and don't necessarily reflect a team's accomplishments over the entire season. Brackets show last week's rank. Please check back tomorrow for my all-pro team and end-of-season awards.

1. San Diego Chargers [1] — This team is not invincible. It has a weak running game and the defense is middle-of-the-pack. What make this team exceptional are its passing game and special teams. The offensive line and wide receivers are plenty good, as is Darren Sproles, but this team's success is first and foremost about Philip Rivers and Antonio Gates. Rivers is as good as any quarterback in the league right now, and Gates is borderline uncoverable. The Chargers also have the best special teams in the league, with Nate Kaeding, Mike Scifres, and Kassim Osgood all at or near the top of their respective positions. Sproles is a dangerous returner, too.

2. Dallas Cowboys [5] — Just last week, I wrote that "Dallas probably isn't balanced or consistent enough to make a Super Bowl run," and this week I picked them to make the Super Bowl anyway. Can the Cowboys really win three straight against good opponents? They swept Philadelphia this season, and I believe they'll make it 3-0 when the Eagles return to Dallas on Saturday. I have little faith in the Vikings, and I think the Cowboys' passing attack will create problems for Minnesota. I don't think the Saints will win a game, I don't think the Cardinals can win in Dallas, and I don't think the Packers are battle-tested in big games to win an NFC Championship on the road. Am I confident in all of this? No, but it's the direction I'm going.

3. Green Bay Packers [4] — Since realignment, teams that win their final regular season game by at least 14 are 17-7 in their playoff openers. The Packers outscored opponents by 164 points this season (second only to New Orleans, +169) and have won 7 of their last 8 games. If I'm Green Bay, I'm pulling for the Cowboys to beat Philadelphia, which would send the winner of Green Bay/Arizona to New Orleans. The Saints are slumping, and the Vikings gave Green Bay problems this year.

4. Baltimore Ravens [8] — Pass defense isn't a weakness any more. It was early in the season, with the Ravens getting horrendous play from their cornerbacks in particular. They finished third in the NFL in both points and yards allowed, eighth in pass defense, and sixth in opponents' passer rating. Unfortunately, Baltimore's offense has withered while its defense has thrived. Joe Flacco has thrown for under 200 yards in three of the last five games, and this team won't be able to score if it can't run effectively. I think the Ravens can beat New England if Ed Reed is healthy, but even if he plays, I suspect it won't be at 100%.

5. Philadelphia Eagles [2] — Defense is slumping at the wrong time. They allowed 19.6 ppg in the first 12 games, 25.5 since. Six of their last eight opponents have scored at least 20. Philadelphia averaged 29.5 points against teams other than Dallas, and just 8.0 against the Cowboys. The Eagles rely on big plays, so when an opponent shuts down DeSean Jackson and doesn't turn the ball over, Philly struggles. Missing center Jamaal Jackson is a big deal when Jay Ratliff lines up over his replacement. Dallas by a touchdown.

6. Arizona Cardinals [6] — This year's Cardinals are better than last year's, and they're a dangerous opponent in the playoffs, but Green Bay is a terrible matchup, especially if Anquan Boldin doesn't play. The Packers are an okay running team, but they're a great passing team, and Arizona struggles to defend the pass. The Packers also have great pass defense (68.8 passer rating allowed), and the Cardinals can't run the ball. Green Bay by 7.

7. Tennessee Titans [7] — Overcame their 0-6 start to finish 8-8. Chris Johnson is a phenomenal talent, the best running back in the league. This year he rushed for over 2,000 yards and became the first player ever with over 2,500 yards from scrimmage in a season. LenDale White isn't nearly the same kind of player, but I hope the Titans will work White into the game occasionally so CJ can get some rest. This franchise has historically cut short the careers of its most promising runners (Earl Campbell and Eddie George) by overworking them. It would be a shame if the same happens to Johnson.

8. Indianapolis Colts [3] — "You play to win the game. Hello? You play to win the game. You don't play it to just play it. That's the great thing about sports. You play to win. And I don't care if you don't have any wins, you go play to win. When you start telling me it doesn't matter, then retire. Get out. 'Cause it matters ... this whole conversation bothers me."

9. Pittsburgh Steelers [10] — Done in by injuries. Everyone knows about Troy Polamalu, but the team also lost standout DE Aaron Smith, who went on injured reserve after five games. Guards Chris Kemoeatu and Darnell Stapleton, both of whom started in last year's Super Bowl, played a combined 12 games this season. Missing the postseason may turn out to be a blessing in disguise, allowing this team to get totally healthy in preparation for another deep postseason run in 2010.

10. Houston Texans [11] — Secured the first winning season in franchise history and continue to make progress as an organization. Losing Alex Gibbs and/or Kyle Shanahan — the team's top offensive assistants — would be a major blow, but is a distinct possibility if Mike Shanahan returns to coaching. Houston won its last four games in a row.

11. Carolina Panthers [12] — How a team with Steve Smith finished 27th in passing offense is one of the great mysteries of our time. The surprising extension given to Jake Delhomme last offseason looks worse than ever after the team's success with Matt Moore. Carolina finished as one of the hottest teams in the league, winning three in a row and outscoring its opponents 90-26. Jonathan Stewart ran for over 100 yards in all three games, and partners with DeAngelo Williams to give the Panthers the top RB duo in the NFL heading into next season.

12. New England Patriots [9] — They went 0-3 without Wes Welker, but 8-0 at home. Tom Brady reportedly has a broken finger and three broken ribs, though Bill Belichick has denied this rather forcefully. These aren't the unbeatable Pats of 2003-04, but I think there's enough magic left for a home win over the Ravens, who were 3-5 on the road on this season. Pats by a field goal.

13. Minnesota Vikings [16] — Reclaimed some momentum entering the postseason. In fact, they flat-out ran up the score. Up 34-0 with 6:18 remaining in the third quarter, Minnesota went for it on 4th-and-goal. They made it, increasing the lead to 41-0. That's cold. Adrian Peterson led the league in touchdowns this season (18).

14. New Orleans Saints [15] — Maybe they can get things sorted out during the bye. In the last five games, the Saints went 2-3, didn't hold any opponents under 20 points, and tallied their three lowest point totals of the season. Their last good game was November 30th. Can they recapture momentum a month and a half later? Injuries were part of the problem, but getting a couple guys healthy may not be enough for New Orleans to hold off the dangerous NFC wild card winners.

15. Atlanta Falcons [19] — Closed the season with three straight victories. Against a much tougher schedule than they faced last year, the Falcons gritted through and finished with a winning record. In the offseason, I'd like to see them add a defensive playmaker: a guy who will get 10 sacks, someone who returns interceptions for touchdowns. John Abraham is getting old, and Brent Grimes showed promise, but needs help.

16. New York Jets [20] — Routed the Bengals. I know Cincinnati didn't care about winning, but they didn't want to get humiliated on national television. The starters played the first half, and were out-gained 250 yards to 7. Time of possession was 24:50-5:10. First downs were 16-1, with Cincinnati's on a 5-yard illegal contact penalty. Giants Stadium will be razed this offseason, and the Bengals finished 0-11 there. David Harris sprained an ankle in the win, and would be a major loss if he can't play next weekend.

17. Miami Dolphins [13] — Played one of the hardest schedules in the league, with 12 games against opponents at or above .500. This is a young team with a lot of promising players, and upgrades at a few key positions could make it a contender next season. Backup QB Pat White, who suffered a scary-looking injury on Sunday, has been released from the hospital and should be okay. Classy move by CBS to cover the injury instead of going to commercial. They even stopped scrolling scores, just focusing on the gravity of the situation.

18. San Francisco 49ers [21] — Finished 8-8 and made real progress this year. The heart of this team is its young defense, and tight end Vernon Davis emerged as a major weapon on offense. That said, the Niners were one of only six teams to average under 300 yards per game this season, and they need an explosive downfield threat in the passing game. San Francisco won three of its last four.

19. Cincinnati Bengals [18] — I don't see how they can beat the Jets. Vegas has them as a favorite, which worries me. I'm still picking New York. Cincinnati's starters got pushed around on Sunday night, and they were dominated on the line. I know the Bengals had injuries, and I know they weren't showing everything. That kind of line play isn't something you can turn on and off. Everyone knows what the Jets are going to do; it's a question of whether you can stop the run and whether you can score on them. I'm not convinced that Cincinnati can do either. Jets by 6. The Bengals haven't won a playoff game since the 1990 season.

20. Cleveland Browns [22] — The Browns were terrible last season. They were terrible this year, too. The difference is that this time Cleveland ended on a four-game winning streak. How many teams have a longer winning streak right now? One, the Chargers. You'd have a hard time convincing me that Eric Mangini doesn't deserve a second year. It's easy enough to fire him then if he has another crappy season, Mr. Holmgren. Right now, I don't see how you can argue that this team isn't moving in the right direction.

21. Chicago Bears [25] — Progress in some areas, regression in others. Let's start with the good: Chicago's pass defense improved this year. It netted fewer interceptions, but made up for that with more sacks and many fewer yards allowed. The bad was a running game that most weeks went nowhere. This team planned to build around Matt Forte after last year's success, and neither Forte nor his blockers satisfied expectations. In between was new QB Jay Cutler. He easily led the NFL in interceptions and cost the Bears a couple of games pretty much single-handedly. But he also opened a new dimension to the offense — deep passing — and played better at the end of the season. If confidence was an issue, feeling like he had to prove himself to the Chicago fans, that's something he can work out of.

22. New York Giants [17] — Suffered two really embarrassing losses to close out the season, going down by a combined 85-16 in the final two weeks. First-year defensive coordinator Bill Sheridan was fired after the Giants allowed 427 points, third-worst in the NFL. In 2008, the team allowed just 294 points, fifth-best.

23. Tampa Bay Buccaneers [23] — I didn't think Raheem Morris was a particularly wise hire as head coach, and the team did not play well under his direction this year. But it's unreasonable to expect immediate success from any new coach, and if he was worth giving a chance to one year ago, he deserves another season or two to prove that. Bill Walsh went 2-14 as a rookie head coach. Chuck Noll was 1-13. Bill Parcells finished his first season 3-12-1. Okay, Morris is probably the next Jim Zorn, not the next Chuck Noll. He deserves another year.

24. Oakland Raiders [27] — Reports indicate that owner Al Davis plans to fire Tom Cable just one year after he was promoted to full-time head coach. The team tied for its best record since 2002, and Cable has the best winning percentage (a ghastly .321) of the last four Raider HCs. How is this team ever going to be successful if it changes coaches every season?

25. Denver Broncos [14] — Are we going to start talking about the Broncos in December like we did about the Cowboys the last couple of years? They haven't had a winning record in December since 2005! Snark aside, that was quite the collapse after 6-0 and 8-4. This team has serious issues on run defense and in its passing game. Losing Brandon Marshall may be inevitable at this point, but that would be a huge setback. He's a talented kid.

26. Kansas City Chiefs [31] — Ranked one spot behind a team they just beat by 20 points. I hate doing that. Here's the thing: I didn't really know what to do with Denver, KC, Oakland, and Washington. The Chiefs and Raiders both beat Denver in the last three weeks. Washington beat them, too, though that was forever ago. Washington also crushed the Raiders last month. But Washington bombed in its last three games, while Denver played tough against some good teams and finished with about twice as many wins as the other three. It's a tough call, I think, but at this point in the rankings, 24-27, how much do we really care?

27. Washington Redskins [26] — Jim Zorn wasn't much of a head coach, but he handled an awful situation with grace and class this year. There is a clear good guy (Zorn) and bad guy (Daniel Snyder) in the way Zorn's job status was handled. Mike Shanahan appears to be a lock as Zorn's successor. Maybe I'm the only one, but I don't think Shanahan is a good hire. He won two Super Bowls, but that was over a decade ago. Why not hire Tom Flores while you're at it? How successful is Shanahan going to be without John Elway, Terrell Davis, Rod Smith, Ed McCaffrey, Shannon Sharpe, and the best offensive line in the league? Not very, I suspect.

28. Buffalo Bills [28] — They've already fired interim head coach Perry Fewell, who went 3-4 after Dick Jauron was fired in midseason. With Bill Cowher reportedly uninterested in the job, the Bills should probably try to retain Fewell at least as defensive coordinator. Buffalo's pass defense was exceptional this season, the one strength this team could build around going forward. I'd like to see Trent Edwards get another chance as quarterback next season, with a real offensive line and a pass-catching tight end acquired through the draft or free agency. The problem wasn't Edwards (who had a better passer rating than Ryan Fitzpatrick), it was his help.

29. Seattle Seahawks [29] — Seven teams were outscored by over 100 points this season: Seattle (-110), Cleveland (-130), Kansas City (-130), Tampa Bay (-156), Oakland (-182), Detroit (-232), and St. Louis (-261). The Seahawks will have the sixth selection in next year's draft, their second straight year in the top 10. Seattle lost its last four games in a row.

30. Jacksonville Jaguars [24] — Closed the season with four consecutive defeats. Their defensive line, the heart of a unit that led the team to playoff performances in '05 and '07, is awful. Jacksonville finished last in the league in sacks, by a wide margin. If the Jags collected an extra sack every game, they still would have finished 29th. That needs to be addressed.

31. Detroit Lions [30] — The defense remains terrible. At least they won a game this year. Matthew Stafford, Kevin Smith, and Calvin Johnson all have a future if the Lions can put some blockers around them.

32. St. Louis Rams [32] — Worst teams of the decade:

10) 2001 Carolina Panthers, 1-15, -157 points
9) 2002 Cincinnati Bengals, 2-14, -177
8) 2003 Arizona Cardinals, 4-12, -227
7) 2004 San Francisco 49ers, 2-14, -193
6) 2000 Arizona Cardinals, 3-13, -233
5) 2009 Detroit Lions, 2-14, -232
4) 2000 Cleveland Browns, 3-13, -258
3) 2008 St. Louis Rams, 2-14, -233
2) 2008 Detroit Lions, 0-16, -249
1) 2009 St. Louis Rams, 1-15, -261

Yeah, I know, the Rams won a game. They played an easier schedule. Last year's Lions were frequently competitive, and this year's Rams seldom were. They lost by an average of 27-11. They had a terrible defense, and one of the worst offenses in history. The 2009 Rams were the worst team of the '00s.

Posted by Brad Oremland at 11:04 AM | Comments (1)

The Glass Slipper Search

It's never too early to look for Cinderella.

As college basketball moves into the conference slate, it's definitely time to start penciling down those hidden teams — the ones that created chaos by hanging tough with the big boys, the ones that you have when March Madness rolls around. The ones pegged fairly low in March, but end up in the Sweet 16 a week later (or in Davidson's case, the Elite Eight). The teams that cause celebration in some brackets and sheer agony in others.

The teams I generally like have a few things in common. They usually have good balanced scorers, a dependable point guard (most likely a senior), and usually have either recent tournament experience or have hung tough or beaten some bigger names. They also won't get massive media attention, meaning you won't find a Butler or Gonzaga on this list.

So here's four teams to keep a look out for glass slippers.

Northern Iowa — I love Missouri Valley teams, and right now, UNI is at the top of the conference and on the list. The Panthers are 13-1, with wins over in-state foes Iowa State and Iowa, as well as Boston College. They've got four players who average in double figures, solid shooting from three-point range, and a team loaded with veteran leadership. This team doesn't turn the ball over much, so UNI won't beat themselves. Teams like the Panthers are nightmares for up-tempo teams that are turnover-prone, and half-court teams thanks to their shooting. Keep an eye on Ali Farokhmanesh, UNI's sharp-shooting guard. He might be a name to remember come mid-March.

Rhode Island — The Rams (11-1) are fresh off a win over Oklahoma State and are riding a very high wave into conference play. You have to love a team with a veteran leader at guard, and Keith Cothran is the key to the Rhode Island machine. The Rams have great shooters, including three in Cothran, F Delory James, and G Akeem Richmond, and play a deep rotation that makes them tough to wear down. The Rams have an assist-turnover ratio above one, and not one player on the team averages more than three fouls a game, impressive for a fast-pace squad. The smallest state could provide the biggest March surprise.

South Alabama — Knock off two SEC teams (even if Arkansas isn't that good this year), and you can garner some attention. South Alabama plays a deep bench; nine players play over 12 minutes a game, and while they lack size, they can really fly up and down the court. The biggest concern for the Jaguars is when you go to the assist-turnover ratio (a nice component when checking tournament teams out), the ratio is under one, meaning a ball control team could give the Jags trouble. However, if USA can up their tempo and control the ball just slightly better, they could be very, very tough this March.

Tulsa — Didn't think I'd forget the Golden Hurricane, did you? Tulsa could be the team everyone ends up talking about. TU has two blowout wins over Big 12 teams, thrashing Oklahoma State and Colorado, and except for a massive egg laying against Nevada, has played quite well this season. The Hurricane play a deep rotation, have solid leadership from their guards and normally are solid shooters. The one thing you have to watch from Tulsa is their ability to shoot from behind the arc. When Tulsa is ice cold and they have to rely on Jerome Jordan too much, they can be vulnerable. However, when Tulsa's guards are lighting it up, like they were against Oklahoma State and Colorado, they are near impossible to beat.

Will these teams hold true to what they've done so far? Conference play will definitely unravel more of the story as we continue to progress towards March!

Posted by Jean Neuberger at 11:00 AM | Comments (3)

January 4, 2010

NBA Year in Review: 2010

All last week, magazines, newspapers, television, and websites all rolled out their "...of the Year" and "...of the Decade" editions.

Even Sports Central got in on the action, with our NFL All-Decade Team, our MLB Anti-Team of the Decade, and of course there was the three-part NBA All-Decade Team that ran last fall.

The fact is reading about an all-decade team is fun. Reading about the best plays/players/games of the year is fun.

So why should the fun be limited to just the last week of December? Why can't we keep this ball rolling?

Today, that's exactly what we're going to do. We're counting down the best headlines in the NBA for the Year 2010.

It's the NBA Year in Review: 2010.

It's been a year that's featured some truly bizarre incidents in the locker room, on the floor, and on the bench, but we'll get to all that in a minute.

First, we start off with the biggest headline of 2010 in the NBA:

Nate Robinson Receives Lifetime Achievement Award

At least, you think that'd be the headline after watching Nate Robinson's postgame interview with the MSG Network after the game on Friday.

Here's the setup: Nate Robinson got in Mike D'Antoni's doghouse a few weeks back and has been buried at the end of the Knicks' bench for about a month, receiving 14 consecutive DNP – Coach's Decision.

At some point during that time, Robinson demanded a trade. So far, there have been no takers.

On Friday, for the first time in exactly one month and for what seems like no rhyme or reason whatsoever, Mike D'Antoni decided to play Nate Robinson again.

Robinson responds by scoring 41 points and dropping 8 assists off the bench on the Hawks in a thrilling OT victory for the Knicks.

That right there should be the end of the story. It's a story of a lesson learned and how hard work will eventually put you back on the right path, right?

Of course not, not when Nate Robinson is involved.

Here is the postgame interview that Robinson did with Tina Cervasio of MSG after the game. I don't ask for much, but please take three minutes of your time and watch this; I promise it'll be worth it (it's the video on the right under the heading "112-108 Win Over Atlanta (1/1").

All finished?

Good. For those of you that took the time to watch it, here's the answer to the question you have: he thanked 23 people in the interview!

For those of you that didn't watch, that's what you missed. Think about that for a second: in a three-minute interview, he thanked twenty-three different people.

That's the stuff legends are made of at award shows. If this were the Oscars, the band would have cut him off less than half way through his speech.

Which begs the obvious question: why the hell is he thanking people?

I understand that he must have been pumped up. He hadn't played in a month and he just carried the Knicks on his back to an overtime win against one of the best teams in the Eastern Conference on the road. He has every right to be excited.

But really, twenty-three people?

And if we're being honest here, 23 is selling it short. I only counted "all the people on Twitter" and "all the people on Xbox" as one person thanked each (although it sort of evens out because I counted all three times he thanked God).

If you want to know why Nate Robinson has been buried on the bench for a month, why he was in the doghouse, and why no one is trading for him, look no further than this interview.

He called the benching "humbling experience," and turns around in the same interview and gives an acceptance speech for having a good game.

Some players get what it takes to succeed in this league, and some players don't.

Nate Robinson will always fall into the "don't" category.

Shake 'n bake, baby.

Kobe Does It Again

On the same day the league presented Robinson with his award, Kobe Bryant did what Kobe Bryant does. With the Lakers down by two and time running out, Kobe hit a three-pointer as time expired to give the Lakers the win at home over the Kings.

It was the third time in 31 days that Bryant has hit the game-winner as time expired. My guess is that 95% of NBA players won't hit a shot like that in their entire career. Kobe is doing it on a regular basis this season.

At some point over the past few years, Kobe has been sort of handed the "player you want taking the last shot" title, without really having a huge body of evidence to support it. Sure, he's hit a ton of huge shots in his career, and he certainly would have been number one on my list coming into this season, but you could have made the case for other players.

Not anymore. Kobe is hands down the best finisher in the game, and it's not even close.

As I was watching LeBron miss a tough three that would have sent the game into OT against the Bobcats on Sunday, I turned to my brother, smiled, and said, "Kobe hits that."

I was only half-joking.

Kobe's closing in on Jordan for the greatest finisher ever. That's not blasphemous to M.J., it's just a fact. No need to debate it. Just enjoy it.

Tim Duncan: Sixth Man of the Year

You can, and some people have, make the case that Tim Duncan was the player of the decade of the 2000s in the NBA. He was as consistently dominant over the 10 years as any big man has been since Wilt, and he collected three rings along the way. Over the course of the past 10 seasons, he cemented his legacy as the greatest power forward to ever play the game.

So where does a player who was so good for so long in the 2000s start of the 2010s? On the bench, of course.

Wait. What?

That's right, for just the second time in his 1,088-game career (including playoff games), Tim Duncan came off the bench for the Spurs in Toronto on Sunday.

The Spurs went on to lose the game, 91-86. Duncan finished the game with 21 points and 12 rebounds in 29 minutes, but admitted after the game that not starting was "tough to swallow."

That's the most controversial thing Tim Duncan has ever said, and I agree with him.

I actually don't hate the logic behind the move. Gregg Popovich said that Duncan had played more minutes than he would have liked the night before, and that he wanted to give him his rest in the first quarter instead of the fourth.

That, in a weird way, makes sense.

What doesn't make sense: not playing your best player to start the game and then falling down 8 points after the first quarter.

I don't care who your opponent is, you never want to give any team a decent lead and let them play from ahead the entire game. Why not just rest Duncan to start the second half?

There are plenty of times throughout a game where you can find rest for players. The first few minutes of the game isn't one of them.

I'll do my best Vincent Vega impression here and say to Gregg Popovich, "I respect you man, you know that."

But this move, for the life of me, makes no sense.

It's hard to question a guy with four rings, and I don't want to overstate the importance of a road game in early January, but I just don't get it.

I guess the old saying it true: Pop works in mysterious ways.

A Mexican Standoff in Washington D.C.

I buried this headline as far down as I could, because deep down, I know that's how David Stern would want it. Surely the last thing the Commish wants is his newly "cleaned up" NBA making the top story because of teammates pulling guns on each other in the locker room, but alas, here we are.

Here's what we know: Gilbert Arenas has three guns locked in his locker at the Verizon Center, and somehow the team, the league, the local police, and even the Feds, caught wind of this and now everyone is pissed.

The rumors are that Arenas pulled a gun on teammate Javaris Crittenton over a dispute stemming from a gambling debt, and Crittenton then pulled a gun back out in self-defense.

Then there's the rumor the Arenas placed all three guns on a chair and told Crittenton to "pick one."

There's also a rumor that the two were arguing over who had the biggest gun (my favorite of all the stories I read, by the way).

Basically, all we know is that we don't really know what happened.

And that Gilbert Arenas is going to be in a lot of trouble.

Apparently, it's clear as day in the collective bargaining agreement that players are not to have weapons of any kind on NBA property.

Not only is Arenas facing the possibility of criminal charges, but he's also assuredly looking at a lengthy suspension and even the possibility of the Wizards voiding his $111 million contract.

It may take a few more days or so before all the facts come out on this one, but believe me, the league is going to make an example out of Arenas.

The NFL has had way too many embarrassing/tragic incidents involving guns over the past few years, and the NBA isn't about to go down that same road.

Maybe, and most likely, the rumors about exactly what happened are overblown, but the fact of the story is that NBA players (in you're crazy if you think Arenas and Crittenton are the only two) are bringing guns with them to the arena, and that is a recipe for disaster.

It needs to stop, and David Stern will make Gilbert Arenas poster child for what happens when you bring guns to the arena.

I suggest following Gilbert Arenas on Twitter, not just because it has the Stephon Marbury train-wreck-in-progress appeal to it, but because after the end of this week, it might be the last you hear from Agent Zero for long, long time.

2010, what a wild year it was. Can't wait to see what 2011 brings us!

Posted by Scott Shepherd at 11:39 AM | Comments (0)

Tennis' Decade of Recovery

While I find it ultimately useful and educational — not to mention fun — to examine a certain period in tennis, the ultimate challenge arrives when I attempt to "grade" that period in comparison to the other similar ones in my analysis. Hence, looking back at the first 10 years of the new millennium and grading its place in history seemed exciting. We just finished the first decade of the 21st century. What did it mean to the tennis world? How did it compare to other decades?

I figured that I would only take into account decades that involved "Open Tennis." So I decided to take into consideration the 1960s, along with the next four decades, including the one that ended last week. As I advanced further in this exercise, it became obvious that this last decade paled in comparison to some of the others, but at the same time, it was also apparent that it could be the beginning of a brand new cycle of promising times to come.

As I mentioned above, the '60s presented a special problem. For more than half of the decade, professionals and amateurs could not compete together, resulting in major discrepancies when analyzing facts. How can you simply stick to the fact that Pancho Gonzales never won a Slam in the decade because he was a professional, and therefore not consider him as one of the best players of the decade? In 1968, at the French Open, the first Slam tournament of the Open Era, a 40-year-old chain-smoking Gonzales, playing only part-time tennis for the previous few years, reached the semifinals before losing to Rod Laver. Speaking of Laver, how do we account for the fact that he won a Slam in 1962, then came back and won it again in 1969 in the Open era? Can anyone in the right mind put Laver behind Roy Emerson, who won 12 Slam tournaments in the decade, compared to his 11 titles?

For a modern tennis fan, the '60s were in one word bizarre. How bizarre? Consider these examples: Jean Borotra, one of the original and legendary French Musketeers of the 1920s, was still playing competitive tour tennis even though his age was past his 60s. The winner of the 1965 Lyon tournament, a Swiss player named Mathias Werren, three years of before the start of Open tennis, took home three sets of Babolat Strings for the title. Forty years later, the tournament since then having become part of the ATP calendar, Andy Roddick accepted a winner’s check for $78,000 along with the title. For his travel expenses, Werren was reimbursed 300 Francs in 1965; in 2005, Roddick was guaranteed $150,000, whether he won the tournament or not.

In the '60s, there were no tiebreakers, so in 1969, you had a 41-year-old Gonzales playing a five-hour long match against Charlie Passarell in which the first set score was 24-22. Thank god, they got a 10-minute break after the third set! Furthermore, at the same Wimbledon, players stood at game changes. Yes, you read it right. Recently, I watched (again) a replay of 1969 Wimbledon final between Rod Laver and John Newcombe; they were drying their racket grips and drinking a bit during each game change, casually standing on their feet! In 1967, a Wall Street lawyer, Eugene Scott, who played tennis only on weekends due to his nine-to-five workdays, made it to the semifinals of Forest Hills before losing to Newcombe, and went on to become one of the most influential figures in tennis for the next three decades.

With all its oddities, the '60s remain arguably the most important decade in tennis because it was the end of the amateur era and the beginning of the Open era; a milestone in the history of tennis. Although this is the very character of the '60s, which makes it hard to compare to the others, it is also the one that makes it revolutionary and places it one step ahead of the others. It would be the '70s that would collect the fruits of the '60s' labor.

During the '70s, tennis' popularity would reach its apogee. Starting the decade in 1970 was Margaret Court, who completed the first Grand Slam in the Open Era by a woman, an accomplishment that only Steffi Graf could equal to this day. Filled with great personalities such as Billie Jean King, Martina Navratilova, Arthur Ashe, Chris Evert, Ilie Nastase, Vitas Gerulaitis, Jimmy Connors, John McEnroe, and Bjorn Borg, the trend toward the breaking of sexist and racial barriers was accelerated, producing some of the best rivalries that tennis has ever seen — like Navratilova vs. Evert, Borg vs. Connors — tennis became frontpage sports news and its stars enjoyed Hollywood type of attention.

The '80s began as promising as the '70s when McEnroe and Borg provided couple of historic Slam finals in Wimbledon and U.S. Open. However, Borg suddenly retired a year later and then Navratilova vs. Evert rivalry became more and more one-sided in the years to come, with the former winning 19 out of 22 matches in a three-year span (1982-85). Personalities such as Boris Becker were not enough to tickle the fancy of the tennis crowd, who were addicted by now to the boorish behaviors and fiery tempers of McEnroe, Nastase, and Connors, and yet had to settle, or not settle, for mechanic and bland characters such as Mats Wilander, Ivan Lendl, and Stefan Edberg — it mattered little if they possessed great skills or if they were nice guys.

On the women's side, the emptiness in the middle of the decade was temporarily forgotten by the exciting entry of Steffi Graf into the scene. But the excitement would soon be extinguished after multiple repetitions of the same scenario: Graf dominating anyone and everyone in the latter years of the decade. At the end of the '80s, everyone realized that the '70s left some big shoes to fill and that the obvious decline was perhaps inevitable.

Then came the '90s, during which most tennis authorities and fans could not help but talk more about the "heyday" of tennis rather than the current happenings in it, which is never a good sign. One of the greatest players of all-time not to have an on-court personality, Pete Sampras, dominated the men's scene. His main rival, Andre Agassi, only showed up sporadically throughout the decade, never beating Sampras at the U.S. Open and earning only one win in a Slam final against him.

TV ratings sank lower and lower, some late-round matches in Slams began to be televised on tape-delay. On the women's side, tragedy struck with the stabbing of Monica Seles and halted completely the development of possibly the best rivalry in women's tennis outside of Navratilova vs. Evert. The '90s was a decade during which everyone looked for something to happen, someone to emerge, just something, anything. It never came.

Thus, tennis entered the new millennium at its lowest point in the Open era. It really could not get any worse; the question was rather “could it get better, please?” The women showed every sign that it could. Jennifer Capriati made a comeback for the ages, winning three Slam tournaments in the beginning of the decade. But by that time, the Williams sisters were on top of the tennis world to stay. Two talented players from Belgium, Justine Henin and Kim Clijsters, were added to the mix, along with a slew of players from Russia. Women's tennis had all the ingredients for a fantastic recipe; talent, personalities, and drama.

A rivalry resembling Navratilova vs. Evert was still not to be, but the quality of tennis reached new levels, especially once the other players began to catch up to the Williams sisters, who seemed to widen the gap between them and the others in the earlier half of the decade. As the decade ended, Clijsters re-entered the tour and it seems that her compatriot, Justine Henin, is joining her with her own comeback beginning this week in Brisbane. Serena was still the best player in the world, but she was far from being alone at the top. The pieces seemed to be in place for some thrilling competition to flourish in the upcoming years.

On the men's side, signs of recovery began with the most unexpected run to the Wimbledon title of a wild card, outside-the-top-100 crazy guy named Goran Ivanisevic. Very soon, however, the tennis world witnessed the arrival of arguably the best player of all-time, Roger Federer. A year or two later, Rafael Nadal, "un-arguably" the best clay-court player of all-time, joined Federer. Together, they created the best rivalry that men's tennis has seen since the golden years of late-'70s and early-'80s.

The main difference between then and now was that these two guys actually happened to be class acts, modest champions who respected the game and its fans, and furthermore, to whom profanity and outrageousness were foreign concepts. A few sporadic and interesting characters gravitated around the two champions, notably Lleyton Hewitt, Marat Safin, Novak Djokovic, and Andy Roddick. Late in the decade, Andy Murray and Juan Martin Del Potro arrived to complement the best top 10 men's tennis has seen since mid-'70s.

The next few years will prove crucial in the cycle of tennis popularity. This past decade was not only a decade of recovery, but also a decade that put forth solid foundation for what could possibly be the second golden age of tennis. As long as tennis stays away from scandals, drug-related incidents and unnecessary criminal activities such as cheating, I have no doubt that we are about to witness some of the most remarkable years in the history of the Open era.

Looking forward to 2010 and beyond...

Posted by Mert Ertunga at 11:32 AM | Comments (7)

January 2, 2010

Sports Central's NFL All-Decade Team

This has been a (mostly) good decade for the NFL. We've had parity, but we've also had the first 16-0 season and the first 0-16 season in league history. We've had great Super Bowls and a legitimate dynasty in New England. And of course, we've had great players.

Below, I've named a first- and second-team all-decade player at each position, as well as a couple of honorable mentions. Each section also includes a listing for the most overrated and underrated player at that position. A word on the "overrated" listings: overrated doesn't mean bad. In fact, most of the overrated players listed are actually quite good — they've just been overhyped. I named two defensive tackles and two inside linebackers, since both 3-4 and 4-3 defensive schemes are common.

Quarterback: Peyton Manning (IND)
Second Team: Tom Brady (NE)
Honorable Mention: Donovan McNabb (PHI), Drew Brees (SD/NO)
Overrated: Eli Manning (NYG)
Underrated: Jeff Garcia (SF/CLE/DET/PHI/TB)

During the decade, Peyton Manning made nine Pro Bowls and seven all-pro teams. He was first-team all-pro four times, won three NFL MVP Awards, and was named MVP of Super Bowl XLI. He led all QBs in completions, yards, touchdowns, TD/INT differential, and passer rating. He won more games as starting QB than any other player in any decade. He had the best play-action fakes, threw the best deep ball, and was the best at avoiding sacks. He was the ultimate field general, more in control of his offense than any player since John Unitas. He runs probably the greatest two-minute drill in the history of the game and has led more great comebacks than any other QB, in any decade. Easy call.

Brady, Brees, and McNabb have comparable regular-season statistics, but Brady is ahead on post-season performance. Brady is the Bart Starr to Manning's Unitas. As long as I'm making HOF comparisons, how about Brees to Dan Fouts and McNabb as a poor man's Fran Tarkenton? Brett Favre will be a first-ballot Hall of Famer, but his best years were in the '90s.

Eli Manning is above average, and he really did play well in the 2007 postseason. But he is not, and never has been, a great NFL quarterback. Unless it's mindless Manning worship, I can't understand why announcers constantly make him out to be so much more than he is. Garcia has gotten stuck in a couple of hopeless situations, but he's played well everywhere he's been, and no quarterback has more will to win. Garcia struggled with injuries partially because he consistently put his body on the line to help his team.

Running Back: LaDainian Tomlinson (SD)
Second Team: Tiki Barber (NYG)
Honorable Mention: Priest Holmes (BAL/KC), Marshall Faulk (STL)
Overrated: Mike Alstott (TB)
Underrated: Kevin Faulk (NE)

Tomlinson is among the greatest running backs in history, and no one else this decade is close. He rushed for 12,489 yards and 138 touchdowns. He caught over 500 passes and added almost 4,000 receiving yards, plus another 15 touchdowns. He rushed for double-digit TDs every season. One year he caught 100 passes. In 2006 he broke the single-season touchdown record. He ran for over 1,000 yards eight seasons in a row. This is Tomlinson first, daylight second.

Four players this decade rushed for more yards than Barber (Tomlinson, Edgerrin James, Jamal Lewis, and Clinton Portis). James and Lewis played the whole decade, while Barber retired in 2006, and his per-year contributions were much higher. If he had kept playing, it is plausible that Barber might have rushed for more yards than Tomlinson. We'll never know. What we do know is that Barber contributed much more than just rushing yards. He was one of the great receiving backs in history, and he led all RBs this decade in yards per carry (min. 1000 att.), with an excellent 4.85. Barber was also a valuable punt returner early in the decade.

Close calls after LT. I think Barber has to be in there, but Holmes and Marshall Faulk only played for half the decade. If someone prefers Shaun Alexander, James, or Portis, I wouldn't argue. He's not a good choice after only two seasons, but Chris Johnson is special. In 2002, Sports Illustrated's Dr. Z named Tomlinson one of the 30 best RBs of all time, after just 1½ seasons. That's the kind of confidence I have in Johnson.

Mike Alstott was the kind of player every team wants. But he wasn't a great blocker, and he wasn't a true fullback. Alstott frequently lined up at tailback, and his duties — primarily running and receiving — were those of an RB, not a fullback. Alstott was a good player, but mislabeling his position created an absurd level of undeserved hype. Kevin Faulk is probably as responsible for the Patriot Dynasty as any player this side of Tom Brady and Richard Seymour. He always seemed to make a play when the team needed one.

Fullback: Tony Richardson (KC/MIN/NYJ)
Second Team: Lorenzo Neal (TEN/CIN/SD/BAL)
Honorable Mention: Dan Kreider (PIT/STL/ARI), Mack Strong (SEA)
Overrated: nobody
Underrated: Richardson

In the 2000s, Richardson blocked for Priest Holmes, Larry Johnson, Adrian Peterson, and Thomas Jones. He is as accomplished a lead blocker as anyone, and proved himself in several different systems. In 2000, before the Chiefs acquired Holmes, Richardson stepped in to lead the team in rushing, averaging 4.7 yards per attempt and adding almost 500 receiving yards. He is the most complete fullback of this generation: a superb blocker, a capable runner, and a good receiver.

Neal didn't rival Richardson as a threat with the ball in his hands, but no back this decade has surpassed him as a blocker. Neal helped make stars of Eddie George, Corey Dillon, and especially LaDainian Tomlinson. No one else is close to Richardson and Neal, but Kreider and Strong played well for years.

Wide Receiver: Torry Holt (STL/JAC), Marvin Harrison (IND)
Second Team: Randy Moss (MIN/OAK/NE), Terrell Owens (SF/PHI/DAL/BUF)
Honorable Mention: Hines Ward (PIT), Reggie Wayne (IND)
Overrated: Owens
Underrated: Derrick Mason (TEN/BAL)

Holt led all receivers this decade in receptions (868) and receiving yards (12,954). He posted eight 1,000-yard seasons and is the only player in history with six straight 1,300-yard campaigns. Harrison was a close call over Moss. Harrison had more catches, while Moss gained more yards and scored more TDs. I chose Harrison because of his steadiness and reliability. He opened the decade with 7 consecutive seasons of at least 1,000 yards and 10 TDs. His three-year stretch from 2000-02 is among the best by any wide receiver in history: each season, he caught over 100 passes, with more than 1,400 yards and more than 10 TDs. The only other player to have more than one season like that was Jerry Rice (1994-95). Harrison was the best I've ever seen at the toe-tap on the sideline, and he was a smart player who read defenses to find the weak point. The play that exemplifies Harrison's intelligence for me was the 2004 playoff game against Denver in which Harrison went to the ground with a catch, then got up and ran 30 yards for a touchdown since no one had touched him.

Moss and Owens scored the most receiving touchdowns in the '00s, 120 and 113, respectively. They joined Holt as the only receivers with over 11,000 yards. They also played for a combined seven teams and were known as much for their perceived character issues and off-field troubles as for their in-game brilliance — Owens in particular. Their play-making abilities demand spots on this team.

No one really questions that Ward was the best blocking receiver of the decade. The strange thing is that he wasn't noticeably great at anything else. He doesn't have great hands, and he's downright slow for the position. He does run good routes, though, and he's smart and tough. Ward consistently excelled in an offense that was usually geared toward the run and didn't facilitate big stats. Wayne has taken over where Harrison left off; he is the most complete receiver in the league, and no one makes more jaw-dropping catches. Andre Johnson, Chad Ochocinco, Steve Smith (CAR), and Mason round out the decade's top 10.

Mason finished the 2000s with the second-most catches (behind Holt) and fourth-most yards (Holt, Moss, and Owens) of any WR. He had eight 1,000-yard seasons, tied for the most in the decade. Mason never played in a pass-oriented offense, but he consistently performed at a high level, and led his team in receiving yards nine times. A good argument could be made that Mason was one of the top four WRs of the decade, and he certainly has never gotten the credit he deserves.

Tight End: Tony Gonzalez (KC/ATL)
Second Team: Antonio Gates (SD)
Honorable Mention: Jason Witten (DAL), Alge Crumpler (ATL/TEN)
Overrated: Jeremy Shockey (NYG/NO)
Underrated: Brandon Manumaleuna (STL/SD)

Gonzalez is as easy and obvious a choice as possible. During the decade, he amassed 828 catches for 9,939 yards and 67 TDs. That's comparable to Hines Ward (811 rec., 10,002 yards, 71 TD). Only Torry Holt had more catches than Gonzalez over the last 10 seasons. Gonzalez is such an exceptional receiver that his blocking — which is unspectacular but respectable — has gotten an unfair bad reputation. He can block when called upon to do so, but it doesn't make sense to keep such a dynamic receiver in as a blocker.

Gates and Witten played just over half the decade, six seasons each. They were dominant enough during that time to easily surpass others with more experience. They join Gonzalez to form the top three in both receptions and receiving yards. I chose Crumpler for the last honorable mention because of his consistency and well-rounded game. He's never had the one really outstanding season, but he was a consistent contributor.

Shockey is good, but he's not in the same league as Gates and Witten, and his best days are behind him. Manumaleuna has been the premier blocking tight end of the decade, the closest thing we have to a modern-day Don Warren. He's not the impact player the receivers are, but he doesn't get enough credit. You could say the same thing about most blocking specialists, but Jim Kleinsasser deserves particular recognition, as well.

Center: Kevin Mawae (NYJ/TEN)
Second Team: Olin Kreutz (CHI)
Honorable Mention: Jeff Saturday (IND), Tom Nalen (DEN)
Overrated: Matt Birk (MIN/BAL)
Underrated: Casey Wiegmann (CHI/KC/DEN)

Mawae and Kreutz were the best at the beginning of the decade, and they're still effective today. Kreutz has perhaps been a bit steadier, but Mawae was better at the top of his game. Saturday was the constant on the Colts' line, a key to their success in the '00s. Nalen didn't play the whole decade, but was a difference-maker when he was in. Shaun O'Hara and Wiegmann deserve recognition, too. Birk is a good center. Specifically, the seventh-best center of the decade. His reputation puts him in the running for number one, and that's just not an accurate reflection of his play.

Guard: Steve Hutchinson (SEA/MIN), Alan Faneca (PIT/NYJ)
Second Team: Will Shields (KC), Brian Waters (KC)
Honorable Mention: Kris Dielman (SD), Logan Mankins (NE)
Overrated: Larry Allen (DAL/SF)
Underrated: Waters

Hutchinson and Faneca are an easy 1-2. Hutchinson helped Shaun Alexander and Adrian Peterson become stars, helping Chester Taylor to a 1,216-yard season in between. The Seahawks allowed 27 sacks in Hutchinson's last season with the team, compared to 49 in their first year without him. Faneca made his 9th straight Pro Bowl this year, and was a particularly ferocious run-blocker.

Shields retired after the 2006 season, but he and Faneca were the clear standouts in the first half of the decade. Shields' linemate Waters somehow remains anonymous to most NFL fans despite four Pro Bowls and two first-team all-pro selections. Faced with the choice, I'm going quality over quantity for this team, so a quartet of young players — Dielman, Mankins, Jake Scott, and Chris Snee — join Marco Rivera (who retired in 2006) and Mike Goff to complete my top 10. Allen is one of the greatest guards in NFL history, but his best seasons came in the 1990s.

Offensive Tackle: Walter Jones (SEA), Jon Runyan (PHI/SD)
Second Team: Jonathan Ogden (BAL), Orlando Pace (STL/CHI)
Honorable Mention: Willie Roaf (KC), Willie Anderson (CIN/BAL)
Overrated: Chris Samuels (WAS)
Underrated: Ryan Diem (IND)

This is a dark period for offensive tackles. There's no Art Shell or Anthony Muñoz in this generation. Ogden was the best, but he was never the same after his 2004 injury and retired following the '07 season. Roaf, a close second, only played for half the decade. That leaves Jones, a capable pass protector and bruising run blocker, to take the top spot. Runyan was a steadying force on an offense that consistently ranked among the league's best. He started every game from 2000-08. Anderson was a particularly skilled run blocker.

Pace was a very good player whose reputation always exceeded his performance. Samuels was an above-average player whose reputation (6 Pro Bowls!) is wildly out of line with his actual play. Offensive linemen who are drafted in the top five and are not obvious failures are almost invariably overrated. Diem has been the Colts' starting right tackle for the last nine seasons. They haven't succeeded in spite of him.

Defensive Tackle: Richard Seymour (NE), La'Roi Glover (NO/DAL/STL)
Second Team: Aaron Smith (PIT), Pat Williams (BUF/MIN)
Honorable Mention: Trevor Pryce (DEN/BAL), Kevin Williams (MIN)
Overrated: Albert Haynesworth (TEN/WAS)
Underrated: Kelly Gregg (BAL)

Defensive line selections were the hardest part of this project, because there are really four or five distinct positions: nose tackle (3-4), defensive tackle (4-3), defensive end (3-4), pass rushing defensive end (4-3), and arguably rush linebacker (3-4), as well. The first three all have effectively the same duties, so I've grouped them together under this heading. Thus, Seymour, who is actually a 3-4 defensive end, is listed at tackle. Am I happy with this arrangement? Not really, but I think it's the best solution possible.

Let's run through a quick top four at each. NT: Kris Jenkins, Jamal Williams, Casey Hampton, Vince Wilfork. DT: Glover, Pat Williams, Kevin Williams, John Henderson. DE: Seymour, Smith, Pryce, Shaun Ellis.

Seymour isn't the player he used to be, but early in the decade, he constantly disrupted offensive gameplans. He could rush the passer inside or outside, he was very hard to move on running plays, and he had great instincts and vision. Kevin Williams and Glover made their mark as pass rushers without being soft against the run. Pryce, who has played DT and both DE positions, was first and foremost a pass rusher, but he became a sound run defender, as well. Smith, Hampton, and Brett Keisel formed the foundation for Pittsburgh's defense, which has ranked among the top 10 every season this decade. Pat Williams was a reliable run-stuffer in Buffalo, but he's really come into his own in Minnesota, blowing up plays in the backfield and drawing double-teams to create opportunities for his teammates.

Haynesworth had a couple of big seasons, but he wore down late in games and always seemed to fade at the end of the season. He's not reliable enough. All the NTs are underrated — including by me, I guess, since I didn't select any — but Gregg has been a rock for the Ravens all decade, with hardly any recognition. Jenkins spent most of the decade as a 4-3 DT with Carolina, but has really excelled as a nose tackle with the Jets, proving to be a huge disruptive force inside. He's had problems staying healthy, but no one busts more plays in the backfield.

Defensive End: Jason Taylor (MIA/WAS), Michael Strahan (NYG)
Second Team: Jared Allen (MIN/KC), John Abraham (NYJ/ATL)
Honorable Mention: Julius Peppers (CAR), Dwight Freeney (IND)
Overrated: Jevon Kearse (TEN/PHI)
Underrated: Andre Carter (SF/WAS)

Maybe this is unfair, but only 4-3 DEs are listed here. Taylor and Strahan are obvious choices, the most consistent players at their position. Each won Defensive Player of the Year, Strahan in 2001 and Taylor in '06. Taylor recorded by far the most sacks this decade. Strahan only played 70% of the decade, but he and Ray Lewis had more impact than any other defensive player in the first half of the '00s, with Strahan averaging more than 15 sacks from 2000-03. He missed some time with injuries and retired while he was still a good player, but Strahan continued to make plays and create opportunities for his teammates throughout his career.

Allen is without question the greatest DE of the last five years, the best pass rusher off the line. Only Taylor recorded more sacks this decade than Abraham. Peppers and Freeney were both rookies in 2002. They missed the first two seasons of the decade but have more than made up for it since. Peppers' size and athleticism were simply too much for most opponents to deal with. The guy's wingspan is about half a mile. Freeney was famously vulnerable against screens and the run, but he dictated strategy to opposing offenses, forcing them to change their gameplans, and helped the Colts hold leads by making dropbacks a hazard to all enemy passers.

Rounding out the top 10: Carter, Leonard Little, Simeon Rice, Aaron Schobel. Carter has three double-digit sack years but has never made a Pro Bowl. Schobel would be famous if he didn't play in Buffalo. Kearse blew everyone away with his rookie season in 1999. He was less spectacular this decade, ranking 22nd in sacks.

Outside Linebacker: Derrick Brooks (TB), DeMarcus Ware (DAL)
Second Team: Keith Bulluck (TEN), Julian Peterson (SEA/DET)
Honorable Mention: Lance Briggs (CHI), Takeo Spikes (CIN/BUF/PHI/SF)
Overrated: LaVar Arrington (WAS/NYG)
Underrated: Spikes

Brooks is number one by a mile. He made eight Pro Bowls, garnered four first-team all-pro selections, and won Defensive Player of the Year in 2002. Junior Seau and Brooks are easily the best non-rush OLBs of the last 25 years. The Ware selection needs explanation, since he only played half the decade. I feel that Ware is hands-down the standout OLB of the last five years. He leads the NFL in sacks during that time (64.5), beating Jared Allen (62.0) for the top spot and leaving other linebackers in the dust (Joey Porter is next with 48.5). I've picked Ware for the Pro Bowl every year of his career, plus two all-pro selections and my DPOY award in 2008. That's a decade's worth of impact squeezed into five seasons, and it's remarkable.

Bulluck led all OLBs for the decade in games played, tackles, interceptions, and passes defended. Peterson and Briggs, with five selections each, join Brooks as the only OLBs to make half the Pro Bowls this decade. Peterson probably had the most balanced skills and responsibilities of any elite OLB in the '00s. He and Mike Vrabel were the only players among the top 10 at the position in games played, tackles, sacks, interceptions, and passes defended. Joey Porter and Willie McGinest also deserve recognition.

Arrington showed flashes of brilliance, and ended Troy Aikman's career. The consistency wasn't there, nor was discipline. Spikes was a great player in space, third among OLBs in the decade in both tackles and INTs, trailing only Brooks and Bulluck. He played mostly for bad teams and moved around a lot, so he never got the notoriety his play merited.

Inside Linebacker: Ray Lewis (BAL), Zach Thomas (MIA/DAL)
Second Team: Brian Urlacher (CHI), London Fletcher (STL/BUF/WAS)
Honorable Mention: Keith Brooking (ATL/DAL), James Farrior (PIT)
Overrated: Lewis
Underrated: Farrior

Even though I think Lewis is the most overrated ILB of the decade (just edging Urlacher), he's a clear number one. After that, it's close. How do you separate these guys? Thomas doesn't have great stats, so maybe I'm giving him undue credit for his high level of play in the late '90s. I think the real reason is that Thomas was basically finished after seven seasons this decade: injured in 2007, part-time player in '08, inactive in '09. Thomas actually was better, when he played, than anyone except Lewis. Quality over quantity.

Urlacher had the most obvious weakness among these six, trouble shedding blockers. With a couple of good DTs in front of him, though, the man was a terror. A converted safety, he was formidable against the pass and very quick for the position. Tackle statistics continue to be a little sketchy, but Fletcher led all players this decade, by almost 200. Fletcher famously has never made a Pro Bowl, an unfortunate slight for a player who will turn 35 next year and has probably played his best football already. Fletcher played on the awful Ram defenses of the early 2000s before moving to the AFC, where he was trapped behind Lewis and Thomas. In both Buffalo and Washington, he had limited opportunities to impress a national audience. In 2006, Fletcher was 3rd in the NFL in tackles, with 2 sacks, 4 interceptions, and 2 touchdowns. Forget the Pro Bowl, that's an all-pro quality season.

Brooking and Farrior probably should be on the second team somehow, but then I'd feel bad about leaving off Urlacher and Fletcher. Brooking is a great team player who will do whatever the club needs. He has played inside linebacker in a 3-4 and middle linebacker in a 4-3, even moving to outside linebacker in 2004 and making the Pro Bowl there. He has all the qualities you like to see at this position: intelligence, quickness, toughness, and leadership. To an average fan, Farrior's name is probably the least recognizable among these six, but if you've watched the Steelers in the last 10 years, you've seen Farrior blitzing through the line to break up a play in the backfield and stuffing inside runs at the line of scrimmage. He probably made more tackles behind the line of scrimmage than anyone else this decade.

A word on Lewis: it's tempting to fight the never-ending hype and off-putting self-promotion by insisting that Lewis wasn't really all that great. It's tempting, but it's not true. Lewis got credit for a lot of things he didn't really do, and his leadership qualities were blown out of proportion, but he was the greatest playmaker at his position since Jack Lambert, maybe since Dick Butkus. He was exceptional in pass coverage, actually underrated in this aspect of his game. Lewis had a gift for being where the ball was. He rarely missed the routine plays, and he made more big plays than anyone. This guy is an all-time great.

Cornerback: Ronde Barber (TB), Charles Woodson (OAK/GB)
Second Team: Champ Bailey (WAS/DEN), Patrick Surtain (MIA/KC)
Honorable Mention: Asante Samuel (NE/PHI), Dre' Bly (STL/DET/DEN/SF)
Overrated: Bailey
Underrated: Shawn Springs (SEA/WAS/NE)

Barber and Rodney Harrison are the only DBs in NFL history with at least 25 interceptions and at least 25 sacks. Or, they're at least the only ones since 1982, when sacks became an official stat. Barber led all CBs this decade in games, tackles, sacks, interception return TDs, and fumble return TDs. Relatively speaking, he didn't get a lot of interceptions (33, t-6th), both because opponents tended to stay away from him and because he wasn't a reckless gambler: he'd rather concede the catch and make the stop than give up an easy touchdown diving for a ball he probably couldn't reach. With the ball in his hands, Barber was an underrated and dangerous scoring threat. He was the best cornerback of the decade, and no one else was close.

When it came to high-impact plays and terrifying offenses, no one topped Woodson. He ranked third in interceptions, second in INT return touchdowns, and first in INT return yards. He also tied Bly for most fumbles forced, 20. Woodson is a smarter gambler and better tackler than Bailey, who led all CBs in both interceptions and getting burned deep. Bailey was awful on returns, averaging just 9.5 yards per INT return (compared to 16.0 for Woodson and 15.9 for Barber), fumbling four times, and getting run down by Ben Watson in a playoff game. Bailey is probably the single most overrated player of the decade at any position.

Surtain, in his prime, was an offensive coordinator's nightmare, combining the best elements of a shut-down corner and a ballhawk. He was sound against the run, didn't give up anything deep, and made the offense pay for throwing at him. Samuel is a debatable selection, with only 83 career starts. He's also a gambler who can be beaten deep. But he and Woodson are the premier play-making CBs in the game today. In the last four seasons, Samuel has 29 INTs and Woodson 27. No other CB is over 18. Samuel's playmaking ability earns him a spot on this list.

Bly has been up and down, and he's gotten picked on sometimes. But he made opponents pay, and that's what we look for at this position. Bly ranked among the decade's leaders at this position in INTs (2nd), INT return yards (2nd), INT return TDs (t-5th), passes defended (t-2nd), fumbles forced (t-1st), fumble recoveries (1st), fumble return yards (2nd), and fumble return TDs (t-2nd). Springs wasn't that kind of playmaker, but how did he not make any Pro Bowls this decade?

Free Safety: Brian Dawkins (PHI/DEN)
Second Team: Darren Sharper (GB/MIN/NO)
Overrated: Sean Taylor (WAS)
Underrated: Dawkins

This is the only position without any honorable mentions. Dawkins and Sharper stand alone, and it would be misleading to imply that anyone else is close. It may sound strange to call a well-known player like Dawkins underrated, but some people act like there's a question about whether he should be a Hall of Famer. There is not. Dawkins is among the best ever at the safety blitz, and one of the hardest hitters at any position (26 forced fumbles, by far the most of any DB this decade). He was a good pass defender who knocked down more balls (108) than any other safety in the decade, and a true team leader. Sharper intercepted by far the most passes of any player this decade (58), also leading the league in INT return yards (1,330) and TDs (9).

It feels wrong to say anything unkind about the dead, so let's just say that Taylor was a very talented player who never had a chance to fully develop his skills and whose reputation, through no fault of his own, sometimes outstripped his performance.

Strong Safety: Ed Reed (BAL)
Second Team: Rodney Harrison (SD/NE)
Honorable Mention: Troy Polamalu (PIT), John Lynch (TB/DEN)
Overrated: Roy Williams (DAL/CIN)
Underrated: Adrian Wilson (ARI)

Reed is a natural free safety, but he spent several seasons at strong, and I needed to get him into the lineup, which would have been tough with Dawkins and Sharper at the other safety position. Reed is already among the greatest ballhawks in history, and some of his best performances have come in the postseason. It's probably fair to say that Sharper and Reed were the premier defensive playmakers of the decade.

Harrison was the prototypical strong safety. Not a great pass defender, he made his mark with ruthless run-stops, quarterback blitzes, and bone-jarring hits. Lynch was a poor man's Harrison. Both were big hitters, but Lynch didn't have Harrison's quickness and was never a threat with the ball in his hands. Polamalu was a phenomenal playmaker, but after only 72 games, I can't justify putting him ahead of Harrison.

Williams had a great college career and quickly solidified his reputation in the NFL with big hits and a pair of INT touchdown returns as a rookie. He made too many mistakes, though, and was a liability on passing plays. Wilson is finally starting to get a rep in line with his performance, this season earning his third Pro Bowl berth. He's a very smart player, better in coverage than most strong safeties, uncannily accurate at diagnosing run plays, and positively terrifying on blitzes.

Kicker: Adam Vinatieri (NE/IND)
Second Team: David Akers (PHI)
Honorable Mention: Matt Stover (BAL/IND), Jason Hanson (DET)
Overrated: Jason Elam (DEN/ATL)
Underrated: Ryan Longwell (GB/MIN)

I feel like a little bit of a sell-out for going with Vinatieri, but the significance of his postseason accomplishments just can't be overstated. I don't believe that any kicker in history has had more impact deciding championships. Vinatieri was an above-average regular season kicker, and his battles against the New England weather are rightly legendary.

What do you want from a kicker? You want a guy who will make everything under 40 yards, who can handle pressure, and who has a big leg for 50-yarders and kickoffs. But how do you prioritize those things? How you answer this question determines your choices at this position.

Akers has put up good numbers despite the poor kicking conditions in Philadelphia and has no real weaknesses to speak of. He led the NFL in scoring from 2000-09. There's a good argument for Stover as the best kicker of the decade. He led the NFL in field goals made (269) and field goal percentage (87.1%) despite working out of the tough AFC North. He dropped on my list because of leg strength. Stover only made six 50-yard FGs, with a long of 52, and was no good on kickoffs. Hanson was stuck in Detroit all decade, which limited his opportunities, but he led the league in 50-yard field goals (27) and did a nice job on kickoffs.

Elam has been coasting on reputation for most of the decade. Not that he isn't good, but his name recognition is out of line with a level of play that was merely average. And don't forget that those long kicks are easier in the thin air at Mile High. Longwell and Kris Brown are the only kickers to play every game this decade. Longwell was the only kicker to make over 400 extra points this decade, and he was an impressive 20/32 from 50 yards and beyond.

Punter: Mike Scifres (SD)
Second Team: Brad Maynard (NYG/CHI)
Honorable Mention: Jeff Feagles (SEA/NYG), Brian Moorman (BUF)
Overrated: Shane Lechler (OAK)
Underrated: Maynard

I know everyone else is picking Lechler. It's a lazy pick, by people who aren't paying attention. Lechler has been an above-average punter all decade, but he's not the best, and it's not close. Lechler does one thing very well: he bombs the ball downfield. He's got as big a leg as anyone. What he doesn't do well is everything else. He doesn't have a lot of hang time, he's no good at directional kicking, and he can't keep the ball out of the end zone.

Lechler's stats, including net average, are inflated because he plays for the Raiders. Oakland seldom gets bad weather. Compare that to Chicago, New York, and Buffalo, where the kickers fight frozen footballs and gusting winds. Just as importantly, the Raiders have been terrible for most of the decade (.382). If your team goes three-and-out from the 20, you've got the whole field to work with. Someone like Scifres, whose Chargers have gone .688 during his time there, frequently punted from the opponents' territory and had to shorten his kicks to keep them out of the end zone.

Lechler has an awful 2:1 ratio of touchbacks to punts down inside the 20. Compare that to Scifres (5:1), Maynard (4.5:1), Feagles (6:1), and Moorman (3.5:1), and it's apparent that Lechler doesn't even try to keep his kicks out of the end zone. Two-thirds of his punts come back on returns or touchbacks, compared to less than half for Scifres and Feagles. Lechler's punts were returned an average of 11.2 yards, compared to 8.7 for Scifres, who was worst among the punters of I did select. That's a huge difference, 2.5 yards per punt return.

Scifres led all punters in net average and lowest percentage of punts returned. He didn't play the whole decade (2004-present), and I did hold that against him, but Scifres may be the highest-impact punter in the history of the league. His performance in last year's playoff game against the Colts almost single-handedly turned the game in San Diego's favor. He punted six times, and all six ended inside the Colts' 20-yard line. Five of his punts went at least 50 yards, and the other was fair-caught inside the 10. How many punters can lay claim to being the MVP of a playoff win?

Underappreciated Maynard led all punters this decade in net yards. He was great at avoiding touchbacks and really limited opponents' return opportunities (52.7% returned or touched back, 7.8 yard PR avg allowed). He, Feagles, and Moorman consistently excelled in difficult conditions. Moorman didn't give up a punt return TD in 700 kicks.

Kick Returner: Dante Hall (KC/STL)
Second Team: Joshua Cribbs (CLE)
Honorable Mention: Devin Hester (CHI), Allen Rossum (GB/ATL/PIT/SF/DAL)
Overrated: Michael Lewis (NO/SF)
Underrated: Derrick Mason (TEN/BAL)

Hall led the league in kickoff return yards (10,136) and combined return TDs (12). The player who once earned the nickname "The Human Joystick" was the best overall returner of the decade, averaging 23.8 yards returning kickoffs and 10.5 on punts. Cribbs recently broke the record for career KR TDs (8) and also scored 2 PR TDs, leaving him behind only Hall and Hester (11) in combined return TDs. Cribbs averaged 26.7 yards on KRs and 11.2 on PRs. He was incredibly savvy in all phases of special teams and an absolute terror in the open field. He only played half the decade, or he would probably rank ahead of Hall.

Hester made his mark primarily as a punt returner, with an 11.4 average and 7 TDs. He averaged a respectable 22.8 on KRs, with 4 more TDs. In the 2006 and 2007 seasons, Hester was more feared than any returner since Gale Sayers and Travis Williams. Rossum never inspired the same kind of fear in opponents as Hall, Cribbs, and Hester, but he was consistently a top-level return man, and his 7 combined return TDs rank fourth in the decade.

I don't like saying unkind things about return men. Special teamers are the guys who are happy just to be in the league, hard workers and people we should be happy for. But Lewis really made his reputation on one great year and never did much else. Fans forget that Mason was used as a returner early in his career, returning both a kickoff and a punt for touchdowns. His single-season record for net yardage still stands.

Offensive Player of the Decade: Peyton Manning
Runner-Up: LaDainian Tomlinson

Manning may well go down as the greatest quarterback in the history of the game. I know some people don't like him or choose to blame him for things outside of his control, but if you don't enjoy watching Manning play, you're cheating yourself of an opportunity to fully appreciate something incredible. At the top of his game, Manning was literally amazing to watch. Tomlinson probably deserves to rank as the 5th-best RB in history at this point. He doesn't excel at one particular thing like Barry Sanders did, and he doesn't have Emmitt Smith's numbers or rings. But he was a complete back, skilled in every area an RB should be, and he wildly outdistanced his peers.

Defensive Player of the Decade: Ray Lewis
Runner-Up: Derrick Brooks

Tougher calls here, with Ronde Barber, Jason Taylor and Brian Dawkins very much in the running. Give Ed Reed one more healthy season, and I might have taken him. I've already indicated that I feel Lewis is overrated and overexposed. I don't particularly like him, to be honest. He was a dynamic, rare player who won DPOY in 2000 and still stood out at the end of the decade. Brooks was incredibly consistent and a clear standout at his position.

Coach of the Decade: Bill Belichick (NE)
Runner-Up: Tony Dungy (TB/IND)
Honorable Mention: Andy Reid (PHI), Jeff Fisher (TEN)

Belichick led the Patriots to three Super Bowl victories and a 16-0 season, sometimes with groups that didn't have much talent on paper. He consistently got the most out of players, and he surrounded himself with talented assistants. I have a tough time right now evaluating Dungy fairly, because I'm still mad about the Colts giving up on their season, and Dungy is the guy who set the precedent for that. His teams repeatedly lost playoff games they should have won, and that falls on the coaching staff. Dungy also has not impressed me on NBC. His ideas are extremely conservative, never deviating from conventional wisdom, and I believe they demonstrate a real lack of critical thinking. That's why Belichick has won three rings with Tom Brady and a prayer, while Dungy has done less with more.

All that said, Dungy did a lot of things right. He hired great assistants, and his coaching tree will be a major part of his ultimate legacy. Dungy won more games this decade than any other coach, including Belichick, and no one has ever accused him of cheating.

Team of the Decade: 2007 Patriots
Runner-Up: 2004 Patriots

Yeah, I know my Team of the Decade lost the Super Bowl. Over the course of a whole season, no team in the decade was as good. If they played the Super Bowl in Week 1, or Week 9, or Week 17, the Pats would have won. That was a remarkable team, more talented than the groups that did win the big one. The 14-2 Pats of 2004 played easily the hardest postseason schedule of the decade, knocking out 12-4 Indianapolis, 15-1 Pittsburgh, and 14-2 Philadelphia to capture their third Super Bowl of the decade. Best non-Patriot team: the 2001 Rams, another Super Bowl loser.

Sports Central NFL All-2000s Team

QB Peyton Manning
RB LaDainian Tomlinson
FB Tony Richardson
WR Torry Holt
WR Marvin Harrison
TE Tony Gonzalez
C Kevin Mawae
G Steve Hutchinson
G Alan Faneca
OT Walter Jones
OT Jon Runyan

DT Richard Seymour
DT La'Roi Glover
DE Jason Taylor
DE Michael Strahan
OLB Derrick Brooks
OLB DeMarcus Ware
ILB Ray Lewis
ILB Zach Thomas
CB Ronde Barber
CB Charles Woodson
FS Brian Dawkins
SS Ed Reed

K Adam Vinatieri
P Mike Scifres
KR Dante Hall

Second Team

QB Tom Brady, RB Tiki Barber, FB Lorenzo Neal, WR Randy Moss, WR Terrell Owens, TE Antonio Gates, C Olin Kreutz, G Will Shields, G Brian Waters, OT Jonathan Ogden, OT Orlando Pace, DL Aaron Smith, DT Pat Williams, DE Jared Allen, DE John Abraham, OLB Keith Bulluck, OLB Julian Peterson, ILB Brian Urlacher, ILB London Fletcher, CB Champ Bailey, CB Patrick Surtain, FS Darren Sharper, SS Rodney Harrison, K David Akers, P Brad Maynard, KR Josh Cribbs

Get winning NFL picks at BetFirms and win more money this year by beating the NFL odds each week.

Posted by Brad Oremland at 11:59 AM | Comments (5)

What the Spiel?

The best analyst in football is Chris Spielman for ESPN. He is an educator of football fundamentals to us fans. He mentions terminologies such as "eight in the box" and "closing the gate" but unlike other former player-turned-analyst, he simply explains his view without killing the game's moment. I admire his zeal of being the best and expecting the same from others. Sometimes it leads to issues but in a good way. However, I resent his lack of warmth to his own school's football history concerning players before him.

In his playing days, Chris rode guys who didn't play to their potential or who didn't have in confidence in what they did. Likewise, he does the same to himself and expects himself to be the best whether then as a football player or now as an analyst. He rode Pam Ward hard due to her awkwardness. Though he said he was honored to be part of the first woman doing play-by-play in college football, he kept interrupting her and second-guessing her analysis during action.

It doesn't matter if it's a man or woman, he does the same thing to his current broadcasting partner, Bob Griese. Unlike Pam, Bob will fight back, but sometimes to his detriment. The Juan Pablo Montoya comment was due to the fact that Chris was riding him hard and Bob wanted to get him back. Before you get on Bob's comment (he deserved the suspension), I want you to consider what Chris and fellow announcer Sean McDonough said some two years back.

Chris and Sean have great chemistry and mutual love for each other's work (on the lines of Conrad Dobler and Dan Dierdorf). Though great at what they did, they made a "jerk comment" to ESPN studio broadcaster Dari Nowkhah. Dari is Iranian-American. During a Division I-AA playoff game between Richmond University and Appalachian State, Chris and Sean made comments about the expensive tuition at Richmond. Meanwhile, Dari was studio host of that game, doing updates of other I-AA games and news. When Dari finished his highlight, the two asked him if his parents could afford a school like Richmond in a sarcastic tone. Dari said, "I don't know what you meant by that."

Chris dedicates himself to his faith, family, and Ohio State football. He is biased when Ohio State plays and is honest about. My issue is that he talks as if he invented the linebacker position at Ohio State. He doesn't exactly embrace Ohio State history concerning players who wore his No. 36, like Tom Cousineau and Marcus Marek, with the same passion as his game analysis. As for other linebackers, such as Randy Gradishar, Ike Kelley, Mark Stier, Dirk Worden, and Stan White, he treats them like kryptonite as he does Woody Hayes and that 1968 Ohio State team. But Earle Bruce to the current Buckeyes, that's a different story.

Now, Spielman knows a lot of players and facts. He embraces Ohio State traditions such as jumping off the lake before a Michigan game and singing fight songs. Yet when it comes to past players, he doesn't embrace it like fellow analyst and friend Matt Millen does for his alumni school, Penn State, or college football in general. Matt wishes he played with leather helmets, no face masks, and played two-way football. He may not know everything, but he wants to. He will mention names of the past without force or being pushed. Simply put, Matt wishes he was there when Jack Ham or Dave Robinson played and shares that passion with the audience.

Chris, I'm glad you're back. Football fans need you to bring the truth and the education of fundamental football. I appreciate your passion and your candor towards anyone who doesn't bring out their best. Sometimes I think you take it too far, but I understand your zeal. However, I want you to appreciate others who made you what you are today and give them reverence with the same passion as your game analysis of fundamental football.

Posted by Davan Mani at 11:58 AM | Comments (0)