Sports Central | Articles and Columns

« January 2015 | Main | March 2015 »

February 26, 2015

Marsel Ilhan Makes History Again

As you read the title, you may ask "Who is Marsel Ilhan?" He is a professional tennis player, currently ranked No. 104 in the ATP. He hails from Turkey, a country that neither had a male player ranked in the top 100, nor won a match in the majors. Until Ilhan.

Ilhan came into the pro scene in 2006 at the age of 19 and slowly began working his way up in the rankings, shattering record after record in his home country. In 2010, he finally became the first Turkish male player to earn a top-100 ranking. He did not stop there and went on to become the first Turkish male player to qualify for the main draw of majors. He even won a round in both the Australian Open and Wimbledon, breaking his own record for his country. In 2011, he reached a career-high ranking of 87. Since then, he has been out of the top 100 but continued competing in ATP events and challengers.

2014 was the year that marked his second surge. He qualified again for the main draw of Wimbledon and began recording quality wins and started making his climb back to top-100 ranking. In this year's Australian Open, after qualifying for the main draw, he became the first Turkish player to face a top-five player in the majors when he drew Stan Wawrinka in the first round. The match was played in the Rod Laver Arena and Wawrinka won in straight sets. Marsel admitted to having the jitters afterwards.

In this week's ATP Dubai Open, Ilhan yet again made history. After going through the qualifying draw and defeating Alexandr Zverev in the first round of the main draw, he faced the world No. 13 Feliciano Lopez. After a thrilling match, he came back from a set down to defeat the Spaniard 3-6, 7-5, 6-3. To put things into perspective, Lopez is not just any top-20 player. He is one of the feared players on the circuit, left-handed and mostly a serve-and-volleyer with an arsenal of awkward baseline strokes. He is known as a competitor who knows how to win close matches. Just look at his recent run to the round of 16 in the Australian Open. After winning two matches from match points down, only Milos Raonic could stop him after a nail biter that went five set, in which Lopez also saved match points in the fourth to extend the match.

Ilhan's win over Lopez marked the first time ever a male Turkish player defeated a top -15 player and the first time one reached the quarters of an ATP 500-level tournament. Later in the day, Ilhan connected via telephone with the Turkish television channel SportsTV. The excitement in his voice was bursting through the line. He said that he knew one day he was going to record a big win, but just did not know when and where. He then added "apparently, Dubai was it!" He was happy about the core group of Turkish tennis fans who support him wherever he goes: "Federer was playing at the same time, so there weren't many spectators, but I had great support. I am serving well, too, so that helps."

Now he will face yet another daunting challenge. The world No. 1 Novak Djokovic is his opponent in the quarterfinals. Ilhan modestly said that playing Djokovic would be a great experience. After continuously making history for his home country, nothing could top a win over the best player in the world, but a loss would not ruin his day. He is already guaranteed to have his name on another category in the history of men's tennis in his home country: that of the first Turkish male player to break the top-80 ranking when the rankings come out next week. More importantly, the impact that he has already had, and continues to have, on Turkish tennis is not measurable in numbers.

Posted by Mert Ertunga at 7:32 PM | Comments (0)

February 25, 2015

NASCAR Top 10 Power Rankings: Week 1

Note: the quotes in this article are fictional.

1. Joey Logano — Logano surged to the lead late at Daytona and held off Kevin Harvick, Dale Earnhardt, Jr., and Denny Hamlin to win his first 500.

"Oh what a feeling," Logano said. "I feel like this win validates my nickname. So, this is the greatest thing,hence 'Sliced Bread.' And enrollment in my fan club, 'Flour Power,' is growing exponentially.

"I guess I have to thank my father, Tom Logano, for much of my success. I fondly remember fondly being strapped unwillingly to the seat of a midget car at a very young age. I guess that was my introduction to racing 'restraint' systems."

2. Kevin Harvick — Harvick finished second in a tightly-contested Daytona 500, taking the runner-up spot behind Joey Logano.

"Logano is lucky I couldn't get close to his bumper," Harvick said. "After what he did to me in the Sprint Unlimited, I owed him. But I'm sure Joey doesn't want to mess with me. To Logano, I'm like a weight scale to Tony Stewart — he wants no part of it. If you're gonna tell Tony to 'step on it,' you might want to be very specific."

3. Denny Hamlin — Hamlin started 42nd and methodically worked his way to the front and into position for a last-lap run at Joey Logano. Hamlin came up short for the win, but posted a solid fourth as Toyota's top finisher.

"I tangled with Danica Patrick in the second Gatorade Duel," Hamlin said. "I found out that there's only one thing worse than racing with Danica, and that's talking to her."

4. Dale Earnhardt, Jr. — Earnhardt led 32 laps and fell back late before a strong, final charge gave him a third-place finish. On a restart with 19 laps to go, Earnhardt lot the draft and was shuffled back to 19th before charging back to the front.

"I let down the fans of Junior Nation," Earnhardt said. "When I fell back, you could hear the collective gasp emanate from the mouths of the Nation. What's worse, you could smell it."

5. Jimmie Johnson — Johnson overcame an early drive-through penalty, charging from the back of the field to claim fifth, joining Hendrick teammate Dale Earnhardt, Jr., who finished third, in the top 5.

"At first," Johnson said, "NASCAR officials wouldn't tell us why we were being penalized. Usually, they can't wait to tell us what we did wrong.

"We were penalized for having too many men over the wall. As we found out, it's easier to get over the wall than get over the hump."

6. Jeff Gordon — Gordon won the pole and dominated early, leading 87 laps at Daytona, but found himself mired in traffic late and vulnerable to the inevitable accident. It happened on the final lap, when the No. 24 was clipped and spun by Austin Dillon. Gordon finished 33rd.

"That's certainly not what I meant when I said this would be my last 'go-round,'" Gordon said.

"But let's be serious. Do you really think I'll never race in a 500 again? I just got a retirement gift from Mark Martin. It's a shirt that says, 'Retirement is for quitters.'"

7. Clint Bowyer — Bowyer gave Joey Logano a push to the front late at Daytona, a lead Logano maintained while Bowyer finished seventh.

"Penske drivers are always getting a 'push' when they least expect it," Bowyer said. "I don't think Logano's been pushed that hard by anyone except his father. Tom Logano is the Joe Jackson of NASCAR."

8. Casey Mears — Mears finished sixth at Daytona after starting 41st, giving Germain Racing a huge boost to start the season.

"The No. 13 car is sponsored by Geico," Mears said. "Usually, when you see a reptile in NASCAR, you're looking at one of the repulsive track owners.

"A good showing for me at Daytona always draws comparisons to my more famous uncle, Indy car great Rick Mears. I like to tell myself I'm just like him, and I am — he never won a Daytona 500, either."

9. Greg Biffle — Biffle quietly finished 10th at Daytona after qualifying eighth and avoiding trouble throughout the day. Biffle was the top finisher for Roush Fenway Racing, as Ricky Stenhouse, Jr. and Trevor Bayne finished 29th and 30th, respectively.

"With Carl Edwards gone," Biffle said, "I'm now the face of RFR. And that's scary."

10. Martin Truex, Jr. — Truex finished eighth at Daytona, giving Furniture Row Racing a strong start to the 2015 season.

"We had a great run," Truex said, "and it was great publicity for Furniture Row. By the way, Furniture Row has some of the best furnishings in the business, especially our tables, which are varnished to a brilliant sheen. You could say they all come with a 'top-10 finish.'"

Posted by Jeffrey Boswell at 11:43 AM | Comments (0)

February 24, 2015

Greatest NFL Quarterbacks: All-Underrated List

Earlier this month, Football Perspective hosted a Greatest QB of All-Time crowd-sourcing project, coordinated by Adam Steele. Readers named their top 25 quarterbacks, in order, and Adam tallied the votes to produce a list of the best QBs in history. There's some really interesting work at Football Perspective — you should check it out, especially if your interests lean toward stats — and its readers tend to be knowledgeable about football history, so the results of the crowd-sourcing made more sense than most such lists. There were a few people who got confused, and thought including Johnny Unitas and Joe Montana among a list full of guys from the last 20 years made it an all-time list, but by and large, the results of the exercise reflect a solid knowledge of the league.

However, there were several truly great quarterbacks who did not receive their due recognition among the voters. I want to highlight five of those players — four Hall of Famers and one not yet eligible — but all underrated by modern fans.

Norm Van Brocklin
Los Angeles Rams, 1949-57, Philadelphia Eagles, 1958-60
Crowd-sourced rank: 25

As time goes on, we simplify the past. The only quarterbacks of the pre-Super Bowl Era who get mentioned regularly on television are John Unitas and Bart Starr (both of whom actually played in multiple Super Bowls), and maybe Otto Graham or Sammy Baugh. Even more recent players, like Warren Moon and Jim Kelly, are dimly understood among many younger fans. Norm Van Brocklin was probably the best quarterback of the 1950s, given that Graham and Unitas only played half the decade apiece. But Graham and Unitas are the representatives of that era, and if you ever hear Van Brocklin's name on a telecast, it's probably in reference to his 63-year-old single-game record for passing yards (554), by far the oldest passing record in any category you'd actually want.

Van Brocklin was one of the great deep passers of all time. He led the NFL in yards per attempt four times, and he passed for the most yardage of the 1950s. He was also masterful at avoiding sacks. Although precise sack data for those years does not exist, sack yardage does, and it appears that Van Brocklin took sacks at less than half the rate of his contemporaries, by far the best of his era. Van Brocklin wasn't a scrambler, but like Dan Marino or Peyton Manning, he was exceptional at getting rid of the ball before pressure arrived.

It's a shame we don't talk much about Van Brocklin any more, because he distinguished himself in our favorite setting — championship games. The 1951 NFL Championship Game was tied, 17-17, in the fourth quarter, when Van Brocklin threw a 73-yard, game-winning touchdown pass. Nine years later, he led the Eagles to an NFL Championship, the only team ever to defeat Vince Lombardi's Packers in a championship game. Norm Van Brocklin (Rams and Eagles) and Tobin Rote (Lions and Chargers) are the only quarterbacks to win championships with two different teams.

Compare his style to: young Peyton Manning
Compare his career to: Warren Moon

For each of the quarterbacks in this article, I'll compare him to two more recent players: one with a similar playing style, and one with a similar career shape. Today's passing environment is so different from the 1950s, it's hard to compare anyone to Van Brocklin, but early-career Peyton Manning is a pretty good proxy: slow-footed but quick-witted, fast release and great at avoiding sacks, superb deep ball. Van Brocklin's career is much shorter than Moon's, but it's similar in that both were overshadowed by contemporaries. Moon, playing at the same time as Joe Montana, Dan Marino, and John Elway, was often overlooked, while Van Brocklin was less celebrated than Otto Graham and Bobby Layne. Both Moon and Van Brocklin were 9-time Pro Bowlers.

Appropriate All-Time Rank: about 15th

Over half the voters in Adam's project omitted Van Brocklin from their ballots. I don't expect everyone to rate players the same as I do, but if you don't recognize Van Brocklin as a top-25 all-time QB, you probably aren't qualified to compose a true all-time list.

Sonny Jurgensen
Philadelphia Eagles, 1957-63, Washington, 1964-74
Crowd-sourced rank: 27

The reason for Jurgensen's relative lack of recognition is obvious: his teams never won a championship. And yet, by every other measure, he is one of the greatest passers in history. I wrote about Jurgensen just last year, so I hope you'll forgive that I'm repeating myself.

Jurgensen was universally hailed as the best pure passer of his generation. Unitas said, "If I threw as much as Jurgensen, my arm would fall off. And if I could throw as well, my head would swell up too big to get into a helmet." Don Shula was in awe of his quick release: "Only Sonny Jurgensen and Joe Namath have been able to get rid of the ball as quickly as Marino." Vince Lombardi called Jurgensen "the best I have seen."

Jurgensen led the NFL in passing yards five times, twice setting the single-season record. He led in touchdowns twice, and his career passer rating (82.6) is the highest of his generation. Jurgensen (1957-74) and Unitas (1956-73) were contemporaries, but Jurgensen's TD/INT differential (+66) is substantially better than Johnny U's (+37). I don't believe Jurgensen was as good as Unitas, but it defies reason to rank Unitas 4th and Jurgensen 27th. Unitas is not overrated, but Jurgensen should rate a lot better than 27.

Jurgensen played on bad teams. He seldom had a rushing game, and most of his defenses were terrible. So he threw. And he threw beautifully: perfect spirals delivered to precisely the right location, reaching the receiver quickly but soft in his hands and easy to catch. Jurgensen wasn't a scrambler, and he never got to prove himself in the postseason — he never started a playoff game — so he fell behind Unitas, Fran Tarkenton, and Bart Starr in the overall "best quarterback" conversation, but his was the first (and usually only) name mentioned as the best pure passer.

After his retirement, NFL rules changes (such as the 16-game schedule and 5-yard bump rule) contributed to an explosion of passing stats, so Jurgensen's numbers no longer look impressive. Dan Fouts broke his records, and people started talking about Dan Marino as the greatest pure passer ever. And so Jurgensen's excellence has been largely forgotten. NFL Films did a 15-minute feature, which is available free online, Did You Ever See Sonny Play? If not, you're missing one of the finest quarterbacks ever.

Compare his style to: Dan Marino
Compare his career to: Steve Young

In terms of playing style, Marino is a terrific fit: the greatest passers of their generation, both with lightning-quick releases and exceptional downfield accuracy. The shape of Jurgensen's playing career, however, is eerily similar to Young's. Both spent four years backing up an established Hall of Famer, and each had some trouble staying healthy. But both quarterbacks, at the height of their powers, were dazzling. In an era of HOF QBs, Jurgensen stood out. He threw the most touchdown passes (207) of the 1960s, for a team that didn't score a lot of touchdowns.

Appropriate All-Time Rank: around 10-15

Jurgensen had nine surgeries during his career, and if he'd been healthy the whole time, he might be top-five. Jurgensen had an unusual number of great seasons, but his limited playing time means he didn't have an opportunity to pad the numbers with "regular-good" seasons. You would probably rank him a touch below where you place Roger Staubach and Steve Young, two other QBs who were brilliant players with brief starting careers.

Y.A. Tittle
Baltimore Colts, 1948-50, San Francisco 49ers, 1951-60, New York Giants, 1961-64
Crowd-sourced rank: 28

Yelberton Abraham Tittle (I know, right?) was a four-time Pro Bowl QB with the 49ers, but his Hall of Fame legacy was built in New York, where Tittle led the Giants to three straight NFL Championship Games — only to lose each one. The most important All-Pro teams in the early '60s were the United Press and Associated Press. UP named Tittle NFL MVP in '62, and AP named him NFL MVP in '63. He was a consensus All-Pro both years. Tittle threw 36 TD passes in 1963, a single-season record that lasted more than 20 years.

Tittle retired as the all-time leader in passing yards and passing TDs. Those are holy marks, passed from Tittle to Unitas, then to Fran Tarkenton and Dan Marino, on to Brett Favre and now on their way to Peyton Manning. Tittle was not as exceptional as Unitas and Tarkenton and his other successors, but he was a productive QB for the better part of 18 seasons, a couple of them really outstanding.

In the reader rankings at Football Perspective, Tittle came in far behind Kurt Warner (17th). I don't see how you arrive at that, if you know about Tittle. Warner had something like 4-7 healthy seasons, depending on how you define healthy. Tittle had 18 healthy seasons. Warner succeeded with both the Rams and Cardinals, and had two or three great years. Tittle succeeded with both the Niners and Giants, and had two or three great years. Both played in three championship games, and that's where Warner has the edge — Tittle lost all three, and Warner has a win — but was that one game, and Mike Jones' tackle at the one-yard line, worth more than Tittle's longevity, and a decade as one of the better QBs in pro football? I just can't see it.

Compare his style to: Drew Brees, maybe
Compare his career to: Jim Kelly

Much more than most of his peers, Tittle relied on shorter, high-percentage pass plays. He did throw deep, especially when paired with Del Shofner in New York, but his game was more about accuracy than explosiveness. The Jim Kelly comparison is too obvious. Tittle's Giants went to three consecutive NFL Championship Games, and lost all three, none particularly close. Thirty years later, Kelly's Bills played in four straight Super Bowls, losing all four. Tittle played a lot longer than Kelly, so you could also compare him to someone like John Elway, who was a productive quarterback for years, and had most success near the end of his career.

Appropriate All-Time Rank: 15-30

If you really value longevity and production, Tittle is probably close to 15th. If you believe quarterbacks win championships, probably closer to 30th. With a broader approach, he's likely somewhere in the middle, maybe 20-25.

Bobby Layne
Chicago Bears, 1948, New York Bulldogs, 1949, Detroit Lions, 1950-58, Pittsburgh Steelers, 1958-62
Crowd-sourced rank: 31

Bobby Layne is one of those players who couldn't exist today. There are dozens of great Bobby Layne stories, and most of them involve alcohol. He had no respect for curfew, but he always had the respect of his teammates. Hall of Famer Yale Lary described Layne's leadership, "When Bobby said block, you blocked. When Bobby said drink, you drank." But Layne's partying never interfered with his on-field performance, and he was respected throughout the league. Rival coach Paul Brown called Layne "the best third-down quarterback in the game".

A colorful off-field persona can be a blessing or a curse, or sometimes both. When young fans begin to explore NFL history, their picture of Joe Namath is often as the flamboyant Broadway Joe, whose stats (173 TD, 220 INT, 65.5 rating) don't back up his Hall of Fame reputation. Namath's larger-than-life personality has come to define our memories of him, more so than his legendary quick release and the best deep ball of his generation. It's easy to make the same mistake with Layne, to focus on his drinking and his wobbly passes, ignoring his arm strength, athleticism, and leadership. It's hard to overstate Layne's reputation as a winner. Another Hall of Fame teammate, Doak Walker, gave the most famous quote on Layne: "Bobby Layne never lost a game in his life. Time just ran out on him."

On-field results support the idea of Layne as a guy who helped his teams win. The Lions won back-to-back NFL championships in 1952-53, and when Layne was traded to Pittsburgh, the Steelers recorded back-to-back winning seasons for the first time in franchise history. Layne was also an exceptional athlete. He was a brilliant pitcher in college, he kicked field goals in the NFL (and led the league in scoring in 1956), and he was a highly successful runner, probably the greatest all-around QB of the 1950s.

Compare his style to: John Elway
Compare his career to: Troy Aikman

There's no one else who really played like Bobby Layne, but Elway's intensity as a competitor, and his willingness to tuck the ball and run, probably compare the best among QBs of the last 25 years or so. Layne's leadership style couldn't have been more different from Aikman's, but they both commanded the respect of teammates and won multiple championships. Layne played for longer than Aikman, and he was more central to the offense — the Cowboys were a running team, while the Lions were a passing team.

Appropriate All-Time Rank: 10-30

Layne has very good stats, he was highly regarded around the league, and his team won multiple championships. No matter what criteria you prefer, he was a great player.

Donovan McNabb
Philadelphia Eagles, 1999-2009, Washington, 2010, Minnesota Vikings, 2011
Crowd-sourced rank: N/A

McNabb technically has no rank from the crowd-sourcing project, because a player needed to appear on at least 6.25% of ballots to qualify, and McNabb didn't. On the one hand, I understand that: McNabb isn't in my top 25, either. But the voting favored recent players, and McNabb ranked behind contemporaries like Kurt Warner (17th), Ben Roethlisberger (26th), Philip Rivers (30th), Tony Romo (32nd), Eli Manning (37th), Steve McNair (39th), and Drew Bledsoe (42nd). I might rank McNabb over all those players — though that could change in the near future. Several of those guys are still playing at a high level, and moving up the list quickly.

McNabb was one of the greatest passers of his generation. He threw twice as many TDs as INTs, and he had the lowest interception percentage of the 2000s (2.05%). In that decade, McNabb ranks 3rd in completions and yards (behind Peyton Manning and Brett Favre), and 3rd in TD/INT differential (Manning, Tom Brady).

McNabb was also one of the greatest running QBs of his generation. He is one of only five players with 30,000 passing yards and 3,000 rushing yards, joining John Elway, Steve McNair, Fran Tarkenton, and Steve Young. We usually evaluate QBs by their passing stats, but McNabb added 3,459 yards and 29 TDs as a rusher. That's a Pro Bowl quality season we're leaving out of his passing numbers.

The other really interesting thing about McNabb is his success on the team level. The Eagles were bad in the late '90s: 6-9-1, 3-13, 5-11. When McNabb became the starter in 2000, they went 11-5. McNabb passed for over 3,000 yards, led all QBs in rushing, and finished second in MVP voting. The 11-5 record wasn't a fluke; Philadelphia played in the next four NFC Championship Games. McNabb was sometimes seen as a choker because the team never won a Super Bowl, but his teams won a lot of playoff games.

If you have a guy with some of the best passing statistics of his era, who is also one of the best running quarterbacks in history, made five straight Pro Bowls before injuries became a problem, and took his team to five conference championship games, you might think it would be obvious that such a player was among the best of his generation. But we're still selling McNabb short, because unlike most productive QBs, he was not surrounded with talent.

McNabb had one season with Terrell Owens, and apart from that never played with a Pro Bowl receiver or an elite tight end. The one full season he played with Owens, McNabb's statistics exploded. He had two years with DeSean Jackson near the end of his career, and statistically, they were two of his best seasons. How much better would McNabb's stats be if he had thrown to Isaac Bruce and Torry Holt, or Marvin Harrison and Reggie Wayne? How many Super Bowls might the Eagles have made if McNabb were handing off to Marshall Faulk and Edgerrin James instead of Duce Staley? In 2000, Staley got hurt and McNabb himself led the Eagles in rushing. From 2000-03, McNabb single-handedly generated the offense on a team that won double-digit games every year.

I also wonder how differently we would view McNabb if he hadn't gotten hurt in 2002 and 2006. Both seasons, he was an MVP candidate until missing the final six games. In '02, he returned for the playoffs, but didn't look healthy in Philly's loss to the Buccaneers. If McNabb had stayed healthy, he might have won an MVP and a Super Bowl that year. Of course, he did get injured, and I don't advocate grading players on what they might have done — but I think we tend to forget how good McNabb looked, in both of those seasons. He might have been the best QB in the league.

McNabb is one of those guys who is better than his numbers show. He was a great passer, great runner, breath-taking playmaker, and every-year Pro Bowler who went to five conference championship games, and did all of it without great offensive teammates around him. He probably wasn't one of the top 25 QBs in history, but he's in the top 40, and among the very best of his generation.

No comparisons here. You remember McNabb.

Appropriate All-Time Rank: 20-40

It's so hard to judge recent players, before we really have perspective on their careers. I'd rank McNabb around 30-35 all-time, but it's plausible that I'm understating how much better he might have seemed with decent talent around him.

Posted by Brad Oremland at 4:21 PM | Comments (2)

February 23, 2015

No More Goliaths

In his 2013 book David and Goliath, Malcolm Gladwell revisits the title parable, suggesting David, the small shepherd, might not have been the stark underdog often depicted.

Gladwell carefully examines the fateful encounter, emphasizing David's advantage of an unorthodox approach to an unsuspecting warrior like Goliath.

No part of the sports calendar casts as many Davids and Goliaths as March Madness. And Gonzaga, the program from the plucky, Eastern Washington Jesuit school, has come to play the role of the shepherd over the better part of the past two decades.

Like the David of lore, Gonzaga has found unlikely sustained success through an unorthodox approach. Coach Mark Few would be crazy to try to recruit top American players against resource-wealthy powers like Kentucky, Duke, or Arizona. Instead, it collects overlooked players like Big-Blue-castoff Kyle Wiltjer. But this is not news.

Instead, in 2015, 27-1 third-ranked Gonzaga's tournament seeding is already generating pre-angst. In a pattern repeated by the Bulldogs as well as other Davids in seasons past, the glittery resume of an accomplished but lower-profile program likely won't be rewarded in tournament treatment as it would be from another conference.

By nature, March bubble discussion inevitably includes comparison between major-conference teams and slightly more accomplished nominees from lesser leagues. Somewhat bizarrely, much of the analysis often acknowledges — and ignores — that the big-conference team would likely win a head-to-head matchup while favoring the smaller-conference institution for an at-large bid.

And to this point, the Bulldogs, quite simply, don't have the basket of quality wins of major conference peers because their conference schedule is definitively weaker. If we excuse this deficit in competition as a faultless inheritance, we do so at the expense of the teams who do face more consistent tests during January and February.

For comparison, consider Arizona, sitting at no. 7 in the RPI, one place ahead of Gonzaga as of Sunday.

To date, Arizona has five RPI top-50 wins (including one over the Bulldogs), which compares fairly evenly with Gonzaga's 4-1 record against the top-50. But the drop-off in games against RPI 51-100 is stark; the Wildcats have played 11 and won eight games against this tier of competition, which makes up almost half of its schedule. The Bulldogs, on the other hand, have only faced four such contests. (This does not include the disparity in remaining games, as Gonzaga will likely face one more top-100 team before the conference tournament, while Arizona could see four.)

Might Few's team have more quality wins given more opportunities? Of course. But these hypothetical wins cannot outweigh real ones.

Maybe Gonzaga cannot control the quality of its conference schedule*, but is that Arizona's fault?

(*And even this claim has eroded in recent years, as teams like Butler and VCU have sought more exclusive league membership for their institution-defyingly strong basketball teams.)

We feel sympathy for the Gonzagas because we have all been underdogs at some point and loathe the seeming inevitability of our defeat in those moments. But that's not Goliath's fault.

In fact, the roles of David and Goliath have been greatly distorted as applied to college basketball. Goliath lacked the imagination to see the avenues of his own demise. Supremely confident in his hand-to-hand fighting skills, the warrior never considered his vulnerability to a less brutish strategy.

While highly seeded traditional powers often lose to unorthodox underdogs in the tournament, it rarely represents the Earth-shaking shock we believe. These are games played between developing young players in a sport where the best shooters on the best days miss plenty of shots.

And this is Gladwell's point. In the vernacular, we describe David vs. Goliath games as though our nominated shepherd had little, or no, chance of winning. But in the tournament, while these teams face disadvantages, they still often win. And even further, the Goliaths know what tactics their underdog opponents will employ; they have dozens of games of tape for reference.

And these Davids are hardly helpless. Most of them arrive at the NCAA tournament having won their conference tournaments. Players at less-heralded schools lead longer college careers than their NBA-tempted big-conference brethren. The familiarity of additional time playing together and in a system is a weapon of its own.

No program represents this better than the Zags. The program has built a new gym, plays marquee games in the non-conference schedule, and employs a coach lusted for by countless weightier programs every offseason.

College basketball's Davids might not stand level to its Goliaths, but their sling-arms are yoked.

Posted by Corrie Trouw at 4:46 PM | Comments (0)

February 19, 2015

NBA Week In Review

* Float Like a Butterfly, Dunk Like Lavine — Teenager Zach Lavine won the Slam Dunk Contest on Saturday at Madison Square Garden, then said he would beat LeBron James in a dunk contest. If there's one thing Lavine knows how to "throw down," it's a gauntlet.

* Charles Barkley and Analytics — Barkley made known his distaste for analytics in sports. Analytics are useful for Barkley, but only if it gets him from Point A to Point "BJ."

* Is This the Beginning of a "Turble" Relationship? DeMarcus Cousins Versus Charles Barkley — Cousins said he doesn't respect Barkley after Barkley criticized him on TNT about Cousins' alleged input on the hiring of George Karl. Whether it's "clout" or "pout," Cousins has too much of it.

* Kevin Durant Bashes the Media — Durant, in a media session at the All-Star Game on Saturday, said to reporters, you "don't know s---" in response to ongoing questions about the future of head coach Scott Brooks. Durant then placed himself on the injured list with hurt feelings.

* The Western Conference beat the Eastern Conference 163-158 in Sunday's NBA All Star Game in New York City. It was yet another loss for an Eastern Conference team at Madison Square Garden.

* "Saturday Night Live's" 40th Anniversary special beat the NBA All-Star Game in Sunday night's television rating. SNL's show drew a 14.2 rating, while the NBA game on TNT posted a 5.2. Apparently, the "SNL" special was like defense at the All-Star Game: laughable.

* This Week's NBA Finals Prediction — This is based on Jeffrey Boswell's NBA's "S.W.I.S.H." rankings (Statistical Weighted Index Summation Hierarchy), which takes into account very little to predict the Finals (based on data year-to-date and predicted future performance). Golden State over Cleveland in 7.

Posted by Jeffrey Boswell at 11:00 AM | Comments (0)

February 18, 2015

Are the Hawks the Last of Their Kind?

As this season sits at the All-Star Break, the league is perhaps at its most wide-open point in years. While the Warriors possess the league's best record, with incredible team numbers on both sides of the ball, they're hardly invincible in a beyond-stacked Western Conference.

In mid-February, there's a case to be made that any of eight teams in the West could be in the Finals, while any of the top five in the East could play into June. That's almost half of the league that has a legitimate title shot with only two months left in the regular season.

We couldn't say that last year. As dynastic as the NBA has historically been, I don't know if we've ever been able to truthfully say that.

One of the teams in that baker's dozen that looks the strongest is the Atlanta Hawks. As far as comparing preseason expectations to real performance, they're something like last year's Blazers, the surprise team of the league.

But unlike that Portland team that had an established star, a rising star, and a few key role players, the Hawks team that recently won 19 games in a row after sweeping the month of January has a decidedly more egalitarian roster.

With the Hawks, despite having four all-stars, there's not one big-time, casual fan-attracting player on the roster. In fact, if you look at various "Top NBA Players" lists, no Hawks appear until in the last parts of the top 25, or at all.

It's tempting to compare the Hawks to recent Spurs teams, since coach Mike Budenholzer was a longtime San Antonio assistant who runs a similar, extra-pass, team-oriented offense as San Antonio has for the past few seasons. But whereas the Spurs have players like Manu Ginobili, Tony Parker and Kawhi Leonard to create their own offense, the Hawks are perhaps even more reliant on passing.

While point guard Jeff Teague is one of the league's most prolific and successful drivers with the ball, most of the rest of the team isn't especially flashy, relying on making smart plays and finding the open man. At one point in the 19-game win streak, the Hawks had more 30-assist games in the previous two weeks than the rest of the league combined.

As far as NBA roster building goes in the salary cap years, it's much more common to see top teams in this or any era revolve around one, two or three stars, and try to fill the remaining 9-12 roster places with solid role players or need-filling attributes.

While Al Horford and Paul Millsap were all-stars in the past, it's highly unlikely that a general manager of a big- or even middle-market team would sign either as a franchise centerpiece. But when combined with a variety of team-first players that fit to a T in a system, they become as valuable as the names that lead the points per game charts, and reminiscent of a team like the Pistons of a decade ago.

But the biggest difference between when the Pistons won a title in 2004 and now is that there's loads more talent in the league, and it's nearly impossible to win playoff series largely on defense.

In the sports world, baseball is traditionally the sport where we talk about "Moneyball"-type strategies in building a winning team that exploits market inefficiencies. And there's a good reason for that. Where baseball in many cases is a more individual sport, basketball inherently involves more teamwork and a chemistry element.

Yet, the Hawks have exploited market inefficiencies in player salaries by paying their three best players, Horford, Millsap, and Teague, in the $8-12 million per year range, finding unbelievable value at a point well below the max salary. And Kyle Korver, who may merely be having the greatest 3-point shooting season in the history of the league, only costs the team $6.2 million this season, and about $11 million combined for the next two seasons.

Is this a replicable strategy? Goodness knows there will be attempted imitators if the Hawks win the title late this spring. But upcoming financial dynamics in the league may make it impossible.

Last October, the NBA signed an extension of its national TV deal with ESPN and Turner worth a massive, $2.66 billion per year for nine years. In comparison, the current TV deal is worth $930 million a season. Major League Baseball's national TV contracts are worth about $1.5 billion a year through 2021.

It doesn't take a genius to figure out that this means the salary cap is going up. Way, way up.
One article over All-Star Weekend quoted one unnamed team as believing that the cap would skyrocket to $91 million upon the expiry of the current TV deal in summer 2016, and go up to $127 million the next year. With the current cap at $63 million and projected to be $67 million next year, that would make for about a twofold increase in a matter of 24 months.

In that case, what quality players in their primes aren't max players? Even in the current climate, a player like Gordon Hayward (good, but hardly great or a top player) got the restricted free agent max last summer and no one really batted an eyelash.

When well-above-average players like Horford, Millsap, Teague, and Korver are on the market with millions and millions available to potentially any team, will a big-market but historical afterthought team like the Hawks have an opportunity to resign its best players? And will any team even be able to attempt to win a title spending like Atlanta in 2014-15?

Now, don't get me wrong, no one should feel sorry for NBA owners. They comprehensively won out in the 2011 lockout against the players, and the NBA's star has only risen since then. Players should have a greater percentage of basketball revenue, but having something like a max salary for individual players should go by the wayside.

Even with the max salary for unrestricted and restricted free agents sure to rise when the new cap figures get announced, an artificial number of players will be at that salary point. My hunch is that in order for much of any team to be competitive in a title race, they'll have to have a couple max players. If some teams get their way, the max might be set at such a point to where a large-market team could sign four or five.

With salaries at an artificial ceiling, the problem of overpaying many players below the top tier will continue to be an issue that gets worse, and it will make it much harder for GMs to build teams like the Hawks.

Enjoy this year's Hawks while they last. They may be the last contender for a while that's put together without a traditional star or max contract.

Posted by Ross Lancaster at 2:51 PM | Comments (0)

February 17, 2015

Over/Under: New NFL Coaches

Seven of the NFL's 32 teams have changed head coaches since the end of the 2014 regular season. Some will take over rebuilding teams, while a few step in to guide strong programs that for whatever reason changed course. Here, I'll briefly evaluate each new coach's situation, and guess how long he might hold his new job.

We'll go through the new coaches alphabetically. For each one, you'll find his new team, his job last year, and my estimate — in the form of an Over/Under betting line — of how long he'll coach the new team.

Todd Bowles

New York Jets
2014: defensive coordinator, Arizona Cardinals
Over/Under: 4.5 seasons

I wrote the outline of this article, including the Over/Under estimates, right before the Super Bowl. The figure for Bowles is ... generous. It suggests that Bowles will at least begin a fifth season as head coach of the Jets. That's higher than I would probably set the bar today, but I want to re-create my thinking from two weeks ago, to explain why I believe this hire will be successful.

Start with Bowles. He was a hot head coaching candidate; the Jets weren't the only team that wanted him. Bowles played in the NFL — he started on the team that won Super Bowl XXII — and he's been coaching for almost 20 years. He was interim head coach of the Dolphins for a few games in 2011, after Tony Sparano was fired, and he spent the past two seasons as Bruce Arians' defensive coordinator in Arizona. This year, Bowles was named Assistant Coach of the Year by the Associated Press, earning nearly twice as many votes (22) as second-place Rod Marinelli (12).

The Jets showed a lot of patience with Rex Ryan, so Bowles doesn't have to win the Super Bowl in 2016 to keep his job. I think there's an understanding in the organization and among fans that the Jets are a couple years away from contending, so you wouldn't expect a lot of pressure on the new coach to win right away. The biggest problem in New York has been the offense, and the quarterback position in particular. Bowles brought in respected offensive coordinator Chan Gailey, and there are some good young players on defense, so the pieces are in place for Bowles to succeed.

Jack Del Rio

Oakland Raiders
2014: defensive coordinator, Denver Broncos
Over/Under: 2.25 seasons

Del Río coached the Jacksonville Jaguars for nine seasons, leading them to the playoffs in 2005 and 2007. Since then, he's had a successful run as defensive coordinator of the Broncos. But it's hard to be optimistic about any Raiders coach. Including interim HC Tony Sparano, Del Río is Oakland's 10th head coach in the last 15 years. No Raider coach has lasted three full seasons since Jon Gruden from 1998-2001.

Will Del Río last longer than Bill Callahan (2 years), Norv Turner (2), Art Shell (1), Lane Kiffin (1½), Tom Cable (2½), Hue Jackson (1), and Dennis Allen (2½)? Immediate success is unlikely, because this team is terrible. Dennis Allen isn't Vince Lombardi, but the team didn't go 11-37 the last three years just because it was badly coached. There's not a lot of talent on the roster, the rest of the AFC West is very strong, and it will probably be at least three seasons before the Raiders can realistically expect to make the playoffs.

To make matters worse, there are persistent rumors about the Raiders returning to Los Angeles, or moving to St. Louis to replace the Rams when they return to L.A. Teams usually look for a fresh start when they change locations. The Browns fired Bill Belichick when they moved to Baltimore. The Rams fired Chuck Knox when they went to St. Louis. The Raiders dropped Art Shell, coming off a winning season, when they returned to Oakland. If the Raiders go 6-10 in 2016 and move to Southern California in 2017, Del Río isn't coming with them.

It's very shaky whether the new staff will last through three seasons. This evaluation isn't an indictment of Del Río, it's just the state of the organization.

John Fox

Chicago Bears
2014: head coach, Denver Broncos
Over/Under: 4.5 seasons

At first glance, this looks like a win-win hire. Fox led the Broncos to four straight division titles before his firing last month, and he had a good track record in Carolina before that. The Bears have to be excited about landing a proven coach. Conversely, the Bears have some really good players, and they're ready to win now.

The trouble for Fox is two-fold. First of all, expectations are pretty high, considering the team's poor record over the past two years. Fans expect Fox to improve on that immediately. Furthermore, everyone will expect Fox to sustain that success — which could prove difficult, since most of the team's good players are older, and the foolishly lavish contract presented to Jay Cutler last season limits the team's capacity to improve the roster through free agency. Basically, the Bears have to draft really well the next couple of years. That probably shouldn't inspire much confidence. As with the projection for Bowles, this is probably a touch too generous. If we were really offering odds on Fox's tenure, I'd set this Under around -130.

Gary Kubiak

Denver Broncos
2014: offensive coordinator, Baltimore Ravens
Over/Under: 4 seasons

Four the seven "new" head coaches have previous NFL head coaching experience: Del Río with the Jaguars, Fox with the Panthers and Broncos, Rex Ryan with the Jets, and Kubiak as HC of the Houston Texans. Houston won back-to-back division titles in 2011 and 2012, then got fired before the end of the 2013 season. He went to Baltimore (where he replaced current Lions coach Jim Caldwell) and succeeded beyond even the most optimistic expectations. Joe Flacco had a career year, Justin Forsett played like Ray Rice, and Steve Smith played his best football in several years.

So the Broncos have hired someone with very strong qualifications, and someone with links to the franchise. Kubiak spent a decade as John Elway's backup, and he was an assistant to Mike Shanahan on the teams that won Super Bowls XXXII and XXXIII. Cherry on top, the Broncos are great. They've won the AFC West four years in a row, and they were the second seed in the AFC playoffs this year. They have talent at every position, and you'd project them to succeed going forward.

That's both a blessing and a curse for Kubiak. He takes over a great team, where he can win right away. But he also assumes control of a team expecting success, and if Denver goes 8-8, he's going to face heat immediately. Peyton Manning's future with the team remains uncertain, and as soon as he retires, the structure of this team will alter dramatically. Kubiak's challenges will be (1) sustaining success in 2015, and (2) not falling off a cliff without Peyton.

Dan Quinn

Atlanta Falcons
2014: defensive coordinator, Seattle Seahawks
Over/Under: 3 seasons

I didn't like the quick hook for Mike Smith. He took over a 4-12 team that hadn't made the playoffs in three years, and led it to five straight winning seasons, including four playoff appearances. Injuries ruined the 2013 season (4-12) and the club failed to rebound in 2014 (6-10), but I don't think two mediocre years justify firing the winningest coach in franchise history. All this is to say, ownership has high expectations, so there's pressure for Quinn to produce quickly. On the other hand, he has the support of management, which eschewed the typical pressure to make a fast hire, waiting until after the Super Bowl so Quinn would be available. Certainly he's produced a strong résumé in Seattle.

The Falcons have unmistakeable talent on offense. Tony Gonzalez is retired, Roddy White is slowing down, and Steven Jackson has slowed down. But Matt Ryan is legit, and Julio Jones is a weapon. White can still play, and the line is alright. I noted in Week 17, "Whoever the team brings in will need to improve the run game and especially the defense, which ranked worst in the NFL in yards allowed." Quinn has achieved great defensive results, and it makes sense that the front office would have faith in him to address the problem. But there's a lot of work to be done, and I'm skeptical that the new coach can meet ownership's expectations before they lose patience and decide the problem is coaching.

Rex Ryan

Buffalo Bills
2014: head coach, New York Jets
Over/Under: 3.5 seasons

The most interesting, and most fun hire of the offseason: the flamboyant Ryan moving to a division rival. There were briefly rumors about the Jets hiring former Bills coach Doug Marrone, which would have been too much fun, the teams flipping coaches, like a challenge trade. Alas, the Jets hired Bowles instead. That's okay: Ryan is more interesting than Marrone anyway.

In 2014, the Bills had their first winning season since The Music City Miracle. With Kyle Orton at quarterback, the defensive line — Mario Williams, Marcell Dareus, Kyle Williams, Jerry Hughes — dominated opponents and put Buffalo in position to win. I like Ryan as a head coach; there are some things he does really well. But he's a strange hire, simply because the immediate challenge in Buffalo is exactly what Ryan failed to accomplish in New York: maintain a great defense while improving an offense that badly needs quarterback help. Orton retired following the season, leaving E.J. Manuel the presumptive starter in 2015.

No Bills coach has lasted four seasons since Marv Levy retired in 1997. Wade Phillips (29-19), Gregg Williams (17-31), Mike Mularkey (14-18), Dick Jauron (24-33), Perry Fewell (3-4), Chan Gailey (16-32), and Doug Marrone (15-17) have all resigned or been fired prior to completing a fourth season. Mularkey and Marrone simply left, without getting fired. The likelihood of Ryan still holding this job in 2019 seems pretty low.

Jim Tomsula

San Francisco 49ers
2014: defensive line coach, 49ers
Over/Under: 3.25 seasons

Obviously, this is a weird situation. The team fired an incredibly successful coach, Jim Harbaugh, and promoted Tomsula from within. Both coordinators left to accept other positions. The Niners have a ton of talent, especially their incomparable linebacking corps, and expectations are really high. Tomsula faces additional pressure because, although Harbaugh was unpopular within the organization, he was beloved by fans. If San Francisco doesn't come out of the gate strong, Tomsula is going to hear a lot of Harbaugh comparisons, all of them reflecting negatively upon himself.

The other side of the equation, however, is that this first-time head coach (not including his brief stint as interim coach after Mike Singletary's firing) has just taken over a very good team, one that can win right away. There's little to no rebuilding necessary in San Francisco. It's hard to fire a coach who's winning games, but it's easy to can someone who appears to be underachieving. The Niners have demonstrated very little patience with their coaches since Steve Mariucci — the run-down looks a lot like Buffalo's — so I'm not optimistic about Tomsula's future.

Posted by Brad Oremland at 2:27 PM | Comments (0)

February 16, 2015

How Much of a Bargain is James Shields?

James Shields needed just slightly longer to find new employment than Max Scherzer needed. At four years believed in the $75 million total range, the Padres might look to have a bargain on the surface. Look a little deeper, however, and it's just about what Shields really is worth as compared to what some thought he saw himself as worth.

In essence, Shields gets a $5 million a year raise over the $13.5 million he made with the Royals last season. They looked at him as the ace who could lead them back to a Promised Land they hadn't seen since the Reagan Administration. He didn't, quite, and the Royals probably couldn't afford to keep him if he was really seeking $100 million on a multi-year deal.

Which, apparently, he was. His agent Page Odle is said to have been shooting for a six-year/$120 million-or-thereabout package for the big right-hander ... when he wasn't trying for $125 and five years, that is. Something like that. Basically, Scherzer/Jon Lester money.

Considering the dollars compared to the pitcher's reality — Big Game James never existed, but New Old Reliable probably does — any team agreeing to either of Odle's suggested targets would have had Shields until he'd be two years older than either Scherzer or Lester will be at the end of their big deals. Shields might have gotten a little more money if he'd jumped earlier on slightly higher season-by-season dollars said to have gone his way, but then we might be talking about a hosing instead of an actual or alleged bargain.

What are the Padres getting for the coming four years? Shields's most obvious ability is the innings he dines upon. Starting in 2007 he's been in the top ten in innings pitched seven times and led the league in 2013, his first year in Kansas City. What have his teams gotten for that much workhorse?

* Generally, he's the same pitcher without his defenses as he is with them. His fielding-independent pitching lifetime (3.77) is a sliver above his 3.72 ERA. This could prove problematic for the Padres, who still have defensive holes despite the arguable best pitcher's park in baseball. And Shields losing the hop on his once-formidable changeup while going too often to a cutter that isn't quite good enough to use that often should be a big concern entering spring training.

* He's had one season in which his ERA fell below 3.00, his 2.82 in 2011 coming in 0.60 below his fielding-independent pitching, an indication that in 2011 Shields really put his defense to work on his behalf despite his 3-to-1 strikeout-to-walk ratio that season. (It was the same season in which he led the American League with four shutouts.)

* He's been hittable throughout his career — with a lifetime 8.8 hits per nine rate; his 2014 was of a piece with it, which probably had the attention of the more advanced thinkers on the Giants entering the World Series — even if he has found ways to win. (Jon Lester, who splashed big signing with the Cubs before 2014's end, has a comparable hits-per-nine rate, but Lester has pitched mostly in home parks far less advantageous to pitchers.)

* Shields's postseason jacket especially erases his reputation as Big Game James. In four lifetime postseasons and nine postseason series his ERA is 5.46; his walks/hits per inning pitched (WHIP) rate is 1.53; his hits per nine is 11.9. Only once in any postseason did he post a shutout performance, beating the Phillies with five and two thirds of shutout ball in Game 2 of the 2008 World Series, and he came out for Dan Wheeler after surrendering back to back singles following two inning-opening outs. (It was the Rays' only win in the set.) It was the best postseason performance of his career.

* Shields typically pitches better in the second half of a season than the first, but in last October's postseason he didn't account for himself very well. Let's run it down once again:

AL wild card game: Shields faced Lester, surrendered an early 2-run homer to Brandon Moss, then held fort until he opened the Oakland sixth with back-to-back baserunners (leadoff single, walk) before he was lifted for Yordano Ventura. Ventura would look impressive soon enough during the Royals' postseason run, but pressed into sudden duty at the outset he surrendered a 3-run homer to Moss to open a 5-run Oakland inning, inadvertently setting the table for the surrealistic meals that ended in the Royals' staggering win.

AL division series: Shields started Game 3 against the Angels' C.J. Wilson. Perhaps exhausted from their staggering regular-season run (the Angels upended the faltering A's midsummer and ran away with the division and the league while they were at it despite injury issues compromising their rotation), the Angels could have faced a scrubwoman with an arthritic shoulder and still been swept. MVP Mike Trout opened the proceedings with a solo bomb on 1-0 in the first, but the Royals battered Wilson in the bottom of the inning with Alex Gordon's 3-run double. From there it was no contest, despite Albert Pujols's leadoff blast off Shields in the fourth.

By the time Shields's assignment ended after six, the Royals had a fat 7-2 lead and could serve balls up to the plate on tees, though Nori Aoki poking home the Royals' eighth run with a single through the infield gap wasn't entirely unwelcome. It didn't exactly auger well that Shields pitched better with a fat lead than he had when the wild card game was closer.

League Championship Series: Game 1 — Shields opened against the Orioles' Chris Tillman. The Royals staked him to an early 4-0 lead, but Adam Jones singled home a run in the third, and the Orioles brought themselves to within a run off Shields in the fifth with an RBI double and a two-run single and his night was over. The Orioles eventually tied things at five and it took a 10th inning and a pair of bombs to put the Royals up for keeps, en route a second straight series sweep and a more staggering eight straight postseason game wins.

World Series: Game 1 — Shields v. Madison Bumgarner. The Giants made sure their man didn't have to break a sweat, jumping Shields for three first-inning runs thanks to Pablo Sandoval's RBI double (which Buster Posey tried and failed to make two, getting nailed at the plate on a nifty series of relay throws) and, immediately following, Hunter Pence's full-count flog over the right center field fence. Shields surrendered another run in the fourth on an RBI single following a wild pitch and his night was over. The Royals lost the game 7-1.

Game 5 — Shields had a rematch with Bumgarner with the Series tied at two games each. He gave a far better account of himself this time around. He worked with a two-run deficit and generally kept the Royals close despite a few unexpected defensive pores, but he was going on a night Bumgarner could have thrown grapefruits and the Royals couldn't hit him with trees.

That was Shields's best performance in that postseason and it went for naught. The Series returned to Kansas City — the Royals smashed the Giants in Game Six (Ventura, Jason Frasor, and Tim Collins combined for the 10-0 shutout) but ran into Bumgarner out of the bullpen in Game Seven — and Shields wasn't likely to appear again, even out of the bullpen.

Shields has been a good pitcher in his career and has approached greatness from time to time, and he has a decent chance of doing likewise for the life of his Padres deal. Approaching 33, and assuming all his previous time, work, and pitches don't take a serious toll yet, Shields — who's never suffered anything worse than a hamstring cramp in his major league career — will probably give the Padres their money's worth as just what he happens to be.

It isn't Big Game James, alas. If it was he'd have gotten closer to and beyond a nine-figure deal without raised eyebrows and perhaps a lot sooner than he finally did sign. "All of it sets up not just a fascinating season with the new-look Padres," writes Yahoo! Sports's Jeff Passan, "[but i]t also flashes us forward to November, when free agency kicks off and the pitchers survey the market. There will be alpha dogs and those who think they're alpha dogs, and James Shields showed the danger in confusing the latter with the former."

Shields has a deserved reputation as a clubhouse motivator, and it isn't unlikely that he gave the Padres a hometown discount (he hails from southern California), but the Padres aren't getting a guaranteed must-win lock.

Shields was worth 3.3 WAR to the Royals last year and might be worth that to the Padres this year and for most of his new deal. But if the Padres — whose offseason makeover has been enough to put them in the wild card discussion at best given they share a division with the Dodgers and the Giants — are looking for Big Game James, Shields himself may be looking harder. Big Game James doesn't live here anymore, if he ever really did.

Posted by Jeff Kallman at 1:16 PM | Comments (0)

February 12, 2015

NASCAR 2015 Predictions

* Kurt Busch debuts the No. 007 car at Daytona and executes a last-lap pass of Denny Hamlin to win the 500. In post-race interviews, Busch goes on a 10-minute rant and bad-mouths the entire NASCAR community, earning him the nickname "American Sniper."

Busch then fires his agent on the spot and when asked, refuses to divulge the name of his new representative, instead saying he/she is a "secret agent." Busch also decrees that his spotter should be called a "spy" for the rest of the season.

* Clint Bowyer, in the No. 15 5-Hour Energy Chevrolet, leads with two laps to go at Richmond on April 25th, but falls asleep and crashes out, finishing 39th. The following week at Talladega, Bowyer's car sports a brand new, one-race sponsor, "8 Hours Sleep."

Bowyer makes the Chase For the Cup and wins the Chase opener at Chicagoland, but fades afterwards, with no finishes in the top 10 in the remaining nine races.

* Tony Stewart throws a punch at Brad Keselowski after the two tangle at Sonoma, leading NBC to introduce the "Fist Cam" the following week at Daytona on July 5th. The "Fist Cam" is a small camera deployed in one of two places: either on the fist of the driver deemed most likely to take a swing at someone, or on Keselowski's face.

The "Fist Cam" delivers its best footage at Martinsville on November 1st when Danica Patrick throws a haymaker at A.J. Allmendinger, leading to the ESPN.com headline, "The Swinger and the 'Dinger."

* At Kid Rock's pre-race concert at Daytona, the "American Bad Ass" performs his new single "First Kiss," then urges fans in attendance to kiss the person to their right. An all-out brawl ensues, and NASCAR waves a giant red flag, resulting in a three-hour delay to the start of the race.

* Kevin Harvick's quest to repeat as Sprint Cup champion gains the unofficial tag line "This Bud's For 2" in a contest on Twitter sponsored by Harvick's wife Delana. "This Bud's For 2" beats out a host of other slogans, such as "Two-Timing S.O.B." submitted by a Brooke Gordon, "Make It Reign," the Al Unser, Jr.-inspired "I'll Have a Double," and "Two Knock-Knock-Knocks on Kevin's Door."

Harvick qualifies for the Chase For The Cup, but slumps after a shove from Brad Keselowski sends him over the edge, of the stage at a Jason Aldean concert at Spartanburg, South Carolina in September.

* Carl Edwards gives Joe Gibbs Racing its first win of the season by winning at Texas on April 6th. Edwards performs his signature back flip, but flubs the landing and sprains his left ankle. Edwards misses two races recovering, and to add insult to injury, Aflac denies his claim for worker's compensation, saying the accident did not take place on the job.

* TMZ posts some candid photos of NASCAR CEO Brian France frolicking in the raw on the beaches of Saint-Tropez. The photos, titled "The 'South' of France in the South of France," create a stir in NASCAR circles and embarrassment to the France family.

France files a suit, claiming mistaken identity, and TMZ is forced to submit an apology, which they do on their website, where they say "they sincerely regret mistaking France for some other pudgy white man."

The Charlotte Observer comically joins the paparazzi act when they post a scandalous headline reading "France Caught Topless!" along with a photograph of the France cruising in his vintage 1955 Thunderbird convertible.

* Dale Earnhardt, Jr. faces a misdemeanor drug charge at a traffic stop after offering a lift to a few stranded, good-for-nothing Earnhardt fans in Daytona Beach. At his court date in April, an understanding judge throws out the charge, famously quipping that 'there's no way 'Little E' is going to jail for a 'little E.'"

Earnhardt wins three races, including May's race in Charlotte, and later stars in NASCAR's most entertaining commercial, in which Jeff Bridges pilfers a Mountain Dew from Junior's cooler, to which Junior replies, "Dude, the Dew?"

* At Loudon on July 19th, Bill Belichick of the New England Patriots serves as the race's Grand Marshal, blandly ordering the drivers to start their engines. After the race, Belichick is impounded, later becoming the first Grand Marshal in NASCAR history to fail inspection.

* In May, Kyle Busch's wife, Samantha, signs a modeling contract with Venus Swimwear. Coupled with Kyle's No. 18 sponsorship, the couple becomes the living embodiment of the "Men Are From Mars, Women Are From Venus" adage.

Busch starts the Chase For the Cup in fourth place, but his title hopes are dashed when he wrecks in "The Big One" at Talladega in October.

* Jeff Gordon dominates at Indianapolis, leading 127 laps en route to his sixth Brickyard 400 victory. In Victory Lane, an ecstatic Gordon douses his crew with a new Brickyard staple, carbonated milk, from the good people at Gordon's longtime sponsor of Pepsi.

The win propels Gordon to two more wins prior to the Chase, and he starts atop the points standings at Chicagoland. Gordon wraps up the title at Homestead, out-dueling Jimmie Johnson, Denny Hamlin, and Brad Keselowski.

* Kyle Larson wins his first Sprint Cup race, taking the No. 42 Target Chevrolet to victory at Pocono on June 7th. Larson is later named cover boy for the 2016 release of NASCAR's video game, which ultimately is pulled from the shelf after a 6-year-old gamer finds hidden footage which features former NASCAR driver Jeremy Mayfield racing around the fictional town of Tweaksville trying to procure meth.

The game finds new life when Rockstar Games, the makers of Grand Theft Auto, expresses an interest in the Mayfield-Tweakville plot line and decides to make it the premise of their "Grand Theft Auto VII: Cranked" game.

* On August 8th, Brad Keselowski's girlfriend, Paige White, gives birth to the couple's first child, a son named "Roger" after Roger Penske, with the middle name "Edward" after a character in a series of vampire novels. The birth certificate is notarized before either parent recognizes the child's initials to be "R.E.K."

Posted by Jeffrey Boswell at 9:22 PM | Comments (0)

February 11, 2015

The Granddad of All Pops

Let me be one of the last to say congratulations. On Monday night, Spurs coach Gregg Popovich became the ninth NBA head coach to lead his team to 1,000 regular season victories. While the five-time champion didn't stray from his stoicism in the face of this achievement, every sports outlet from San Diego to Bangor is in the process of heaping praise on the Association's longest (current) tenured coach. Even though my writing is a fraction of a pixel on the Internet canvas, I'd like to offer an idea of how rare his air is getting.

In the modern age of basketball, you can say only a couple of pro coaches have achieved at a higher level than Pop ... Phil Jackson and Pat Riley. Over the last 18-plus seasons, the Spurs' leader has notched victories at a rate few can match. His .684 winning percentage is second to Jackson among coaches that have been on the sidelines for 10 seasons or more (fifth-best when you include all NBA coaches).

The success over 82-contest "marathons" is nearly unprecedented. Going into October of 2013, Popovich had won 50 games or more in each of the last 15 seasons, including the 66-game, strike-shortened 2011-2012 season. The only reason that stretch isn't at 17 years is due to the other strike-shortened season (50 games in 1998-1999 ... his first championship year).

As far as making it to the "second season," he has also been the model of consistency. In their 18 previous attempts, Pop-led teams have made the playoffs 17 times. Only two men with that amount of tenure have been as successful. Jackson is one (made it in each of his 20 seasons). Red Auerbach is the other (made it in 19 of his 20 seasons running the Celtics).

Once he's in the postseason, the numbers only continue to stagger the mind. Realizing that the playoff structure has changed over the existence of the Association, it still holds weight that Popovich's 149 postseason wins are third most among all coaches (behind Jackson and Riley). He comes in at a meager seventh on the winning percentage list, but five of the coaches ahead of him (Butch Van Breda Kolff being the exception) have at least one championship on their resumes. And even though it took him more than a "hot minute" to amass his five rings, the fact that his teams won titles 15 years apart only amplifies that notion of consistency.

Like all great coaches, Popovich had some help along the way. He acknowledged that fact after Monday's historic victory. If fate didn't lead him to an interim stint where David Robinson got injured, then Tim Duncan doesn't basically fall in their lap. With no Duncan (the consensus NCAA Player of the Year in 1997), it's hard to tell whether this franchise would have gotten off the ground after Robinson's retirement. However, Pop does deserve a lot of credit for his own skills in developing players. Who in their right mind could have foreseen the impact French point guard Tony Parker (28th pick in the 1st round of the 2001 Draft) and Argentinian shooting guard Manu Ginobili (28th pick in the second round of the 1999 draft) would have in, now, more than two dozen combined years of NBA experience.

Through all of his success, though, it's one trait of Popovich that causes me to salute his greatness above all the others. When it comes to coaching, there are those that choose to teach through a certain system/way of thinking. Some others go through their own learning curve, finding different solutions to issues and implementing changes when necessary. Riley famously did this during his time on the bench. While in charge of the Lakers, his "Showtime" offense would run and gun with anybody out there. After switching coasts, Riley's focus turned defensive. As coach of the Knicks and Heat, his teams were better known for their tenacity, grit, stinginess, and, at times, boorish behavior.

The Spurs of the last 15 years basically reflect that kind of change, only flipped around. During their five-season heyday of 2002-2007, the team ranked in the top three in the NBA for points allowed per game (3rd, tied for 1st, 1st, 2nd, and 1st, respectively). Their offense? Let's just say that being in the top half was a good showing, with their high water mark being 98.5 ppg in '06-'07.

But over the last two seasons, watching a San Antonio game has become quite a different experience. The organization still stresses playing better than average defense (papg: 11th in '12-'13, 6th in '13-'14). However, the offense has really kicked in. After setting a scoring average mark of 103.0 ppg in '12-'13 (good for 4th in the league), they upped it to 105.4 ppg last season (still good for 6th in the Association). In my opinion, this change in style of play shows that a man like Pop isn't interested in making players fit one way of thinking. He can adapt and adjust to several situations. For me, that's a sign of what makes a coach elite.

So, with a new milestone in place, the league's current "Dean of Head Coaches" can look ahead to defending another title. However, Gregg Popovich, you should really take a moment or two of reflection. For a man known by his rather terse answers to sideline reporters, you taken quite a long, tedious trek to add three zeroes to the end of that initial "1" you earned more than eighteen years ago. For that, we raise a glass and say "Čestitam!"

Posted by Jonathan Lowe at 4:16 PM | Comments (0)

February 10, 2015

SC's 2005-14 NFL All-Decade Team

It isn't quite fair that we judge players by round numbers, not just in stats (like 1,000 yards) but in years. Players are overhyped because they had the most of something from 2000-09, and under-appreciated if they do the same thing during a different 10-year span. To give fair due to players who hit their peaks mid-decade, we've named a 2005-2014 NFL All-Decade Team. Updating these things every year would probably be overkill, but once every five years seems reasonable to me.

Below, we'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. We named two defensive tackles and two inside linebackers, since both 3-4 and 4-3 defensive schemes are common. The fullback position is virtually extinct, so we've chosen three wide receivers instead.

If you're interested, you can compare this list to our 2000-09 NFL All-Decade Team.

Quarterback: Peyton Manning (IND/DEN)
Second Team: Tom Brady (NE)
Honorable Mention: Drew Brees (SD/NO), Aaron Rodgers (GB)
Overrated: Eli Manning (NYG)
Underrated: David Garrard (JAC/NYJ)

Choosing the four best quarterbacks of the last 10 years is easy; the only question is how to rank the top three, all of whom are nearly equal. Brees is ahead statistically, because Manning and Brady both missed a year on injured reserve:

There are statistical arguments to be made for any of them: Brees on sheer volume and production, Manning on efficiency, Brady for avoiding turnovers. Each has one Super Bowl victory, and one Super Bowl MVP, in the last decade (Brady's others came prior to '05), so it's hard to find much difference there.

They're all exceptional by the eye test. Manning's probably ahead by a little, but Brady and Brees are plenty impressive. Manning seems to have played with the best offensive teammates, but it's hard to tell, because every receiver he throws to becomes a superstar. His success with both the Colts and Broncos makes it hard to dismiss Peyton as a product of his supporting cast.

Here's how the Associated Press first-team all-pro selections break down from 2005-14: Manning 5, Brady 2, Rodgers 2, Brees 1. My own selections were: Manning 3, Brady 3, Rodgers 2, Brees 1, Philip Rivers 1. Brees may be the most consistent, but Manning and Brady were more exceptional. I also believe that a lot of what Brady and Brees do well never would have happened without Peyton Manning. He changed the way this position is played at the highest level.

Eli Manning played great in the two most important games of his career, but other than that he's barely been above average. His reputation is wildly out of line with what he's produced on the field. In contrast, I don't believe it's a coincidence that the Jaguars got terrible the same time they released Garrard. In 2010, Garrard went 8-6 as Jacksonville's starting QB. He averaged 197 net yards per game, with 28 TDs, 19 turnovers, and a 90.8 passer rating. In 2011, Blaine Gabbert and Luke McCown combined to go 5-11, and averaged 144 net yards per game, with 12 TDs, 21 turnovers, and a 62.2 passer rating. That's a difference of more than 50 yards a game, and 18 TD/TO, with the same blockers and receivers. Garrard never got to play with top talent, and never got the respect he deserved.

Running Back: Adrian Peterson (MIN)
Second Team: LaDainian Tomlinson (SD/NYJ)
Honorable Mention: Frank Gore (SF), Marshawn Lynch (BUF/SEA)
Overrated: Rashard Mendenhall (PIT/ARI)
Underrated: Thomas Jones (CHI/NYJ/KC)

Peterson has established a historical legacy. From his Rookie of the Year season in 2007 through 2013, he rushed for at least 970 yards, a 4.40 average, and double-digit TDs every year. Other than his injured 2011 and suspended 2014, All Day rushed for over 1,250 yards every year. The last full-time running back to average 4.4 or higher seven years in a row was Joe Perry from 1948-58. The only other player in history with seven straight seasons of double-digit rush TDs was LaDainian Tomlinson (2001-09). Peterson was a three-time All-Pro, and NFL MVP in 2009, when he rushed for 2,097 yards and averaged over 6.0 per carry.

Tomlinson scored more TDs (102) over the past 10 years than any other player in the NFL. He's an easy second choice. But the last two spots, the honorable mentions, were awful to choose. I considered Gore, Lynch, Steven Jackson (STL/ATL), Chris Johnson (TEN/NYJ), Jamaal Charles (KC), and Maurice Jones-Drew (JAC/OAK).

Gore and Jackson were the two leading rushers of the decade:

1. Frank Gore, 11,073
2. Steven Jackson, 10,712
3. Adrian Peterson, 10,190
4. Marshawn Lynch, 8,695
5. Chris Johnson, 8,628

But other than maybe Peterson, no runner this decade was more explosive than Chris Johnson and Jamaal Charles. Johnson's 2009 was probably the best season by any RB in the last 10 years, and he had five more 1,000-yard seasons to go with it. Charles, Peterson, and Tomlinson are the only two-time all-pro RBs of the last 10 seasons. Highest yards per carry, 2005-14:

1. Jamaal Charles, 5.49
2. Tiki Barber, 5.15
3. Adrian Peterson, 4.96

Marshawn Lynch is the hardest runner I've seen in 30 years. This guy breaks off a legendary run at least once a season, and dozens of other highlight-worthy plays. If you watched a reel of the 10 best plays by Gore, Jackson, CJ2K, Charles, Jones-Drew, and Lynch, Beast Mode would blow the others away. It's easy to underrate Jones-Drew, because he's been pretty useless the last three years. But before that, he was an effective runner inside and outside, a good receiver, and a touchdown machine — only LT and Peterson had more TDs.

Choosing the honorable mention RBs shouldn't be the most time-consuming part of a project like this, so eventually I just went with Gore on longevity and Lynch on the eye test. You could easily go in a different direction.

From 2005-09, Thomas Jones rushed for at least 1,100 yards every year. The only other players with five consecutive 1,000-yard rushing seasons over the last decade were Chris Johnson and Steven Jackson. Jones was the only offensive weapon for the 2006 Bears who went to the Super Bowl and the 2009 Jets who went to the AFC Championship Game. Fred Jackson (BUF) is also really underrated. Selecting Mendenhall as the most overrated RB of the last 10 years might not be entirely fair. But I still remember this exchange from the 2010-11 playoffs:

Jim Nantz: "You said to me this week you thought Mendenhall was one of the top 10 backs in the league."
Phil Simms: "I don't even think that's a question."

Mendenhall wasn't among the top 30 rushers of the past decade, he averaged 3.9 yards per carry, and he wasn't a productive receiver. And contrary to Simms' assertion, he never had a top-10 quality season. It's a shame Mendenhall's career was cut short, but it wasn't headed in the right direction anyway.

Wide Receiver: Calvin Johnson (DET), Andre Johnson (HOU), Reggie Wayne (IND)
Second Team: Larry Fitzgerald (ARI), Steve Smith (CAR/BAL), Anquan Boldin (ARI/BAL/SF)
Honorable Mention: Brandon Marshall (DEN/MIA/CHI), Roddy White (ATL), Wes Welker (MIA/NE/DEN)
Overrated: Terrell Owens (PHI/DAL/BUF/CIN)
Underrated: Boldin

We've named three honorable mentions at this position, because these nine wideouts were far ahead of anyone else. Marques Colston (NO) would rank 10th, but each of these players has at least three seasons better than any of Colston's. Marshall has incredible talent; I still remember the first game I saw him play. You could tell right away he was special. Welker always seems to make a play when his team needs it. He has the most receptions in the NFL over the last 10 years. White had six consecutive seasons of at least 1,150 yards.

Calvin Johnson is a marvel. He's not only broken Jerry Rice's single-season record for receiving yardage, he set the two-year and three-year records, as well. Megatron routinely makes jaw-dropping plays, and he's the most dangerous receiver at least since Randy Moss. Andre Johnson gained the most receiving yards over the past decade, and he had a tremendous peak from 2008-12, including three seasons with over 1,550 yards. Wayne gained more first downs than any other receiver in the past 10 years, and he made a ton of jaw-dropping catches, particularly those that require dragging a foot in bounds — he's the best at that.

Fitzgerald scored 81 receiving TDs over the past 10 seasons, and he was brilliant in the 2008-09 postseason. He rates behind Wayne and the Johnsons because there are no years in which it's apparent that he was the best WR in the NFL. There are 50 all-pro voters, and Fitzgerald has never gotten even 25 votes in a season. In fact, for his whole career, Fitz has garnered 47½ all-pro votes. I name three all-pro wideouts each season, and I've only chosen Fitz once. He's been consistently great, but the first-team players were more outstanding.

Steve Smith just won't go away. He's an incredibly determined playmaker, and he's less self-destructive than Terrell Owens. Anquan Boldin spent three years of his prime in Baltimore, when the Ravens were a running team. So Boldin blocked, and made catches on third down, and was the outstanding offensive player on a team that won the Super Bowl. His numbers aren't huge because of the teams he's played on, but he's such a consistent contributor, in all phases, and he's absolutely a guy you want on your favorite team. Boldin is comparable to Hines Ward.

Tight End: Antonio Gates (SD)
Second Team: Jason Witten (DAL)
Honorable Mention: Tony Gonzalez (KC/ATL), Rob Gronkowski (NE)
Overrated: Jermichael Finley (GB)
Underrated: Chris Cooley (WAS)

This position presents the same problem we had at quarterback: choosing the best tight ends of the last 10 years is easy; the question is how to rank the top three, all of whom are fairly equal. Witten gained the most yards, but Gonzalez picked up the most first downs, and Gates scored the most TDs. Here, look:

Witten hasn't missed a game all decade, and he's the best blocker of the three. Gates was the most explosive, the best play-maker. Gonzalez was incredibly consistent, the go-to receiver on third down, the guy who wouldn't fumble, good for over 850 receiving yards in eight of his last nine seasons. They're really close.

I chose Gates because, at his best, he was the most dangerous player. Witten earns the second-team nod due to his yardage total and blocking. Although it seems like he had fewer impact seasons, Witten had as many 1,000-yard receiving years (4) from 2005-14 as Gates and Gonzalez combined (2 each). I began 2014 with Vernon Davis (SF) penciled in for the second honorable mention, but Gronkowski passed him with a season that earned unanimous all-pro selection. Davis has been up-and-down, and other than maybe Gates, no tight end has played at a higher level than Gronk.

Every August for years, I would hear about Jermichael Finley. I feel like the hype should have been that he would finally stay healthy and/or play up to his potential, but I don't even remember it being acknowledged that he had fallen short in the past. He was a top-five tight end on fantasy draft boards, based on nothing tangible. Something similar is happening now with Kyle Rudolph. Don't draft him in fantasy. Chris Cooley may be best-known for accidentally posting a photo of his wang, but he was a productive receiver and a pretty good blocker. Heath Miller (PIT) is underrated, but he's also kind of famous for being underrated. Cooley, although he's a hero in Washington, is more truly under-appreciated. Witten is also underrated. He's had at least 700 receiving yards for the last 10 seasons in a row. The only other players to do that were Anquan Boldin and Larry Fitzgerald.

Center: Nick Mangold (NYJ)
Second Team: Jeff Saturday (IND/GB)
Honorable Mention: Nick Hardwick (SD), Brad Meester (JAC)
Overrated: Maurkice Pouncey (PIT)
Underrated: Meester

Mangold and Saturday, I think, are pretty obvious. They made six Pro Bowls each. Saturday was a key for the Colts' offensive dynasty, maybe their most important player outside of Peyton Manning. But Mangold is simply the most dominant center in the league. A nine-year starter, he's quick, a textbook run blocker, and he can handle defensive tackles one-on-one.

I'm not sure Meester was actually underrated, because I think most people know he was a good center. But Meester never made a Pro Bowl. Neither did Dominic Raiola (DET), who started the most games (155) of any center this decade. Meester edged Raiola and Jonathan Goodwin (NO/SF) for the last honorable mention. Maurkice Pouncey is a good center, and he's getting better — 2014 was probably his best season yet — but he's already a two-time all-pro, and he hasn't been that good.

Guard: Logan Mankins (NE/TB), Jahri Evans (NO)
Second Team: Steve Hutchinson (SEA/MIN/TEN), Chris Snee (NYG)
Honorable Mention: Kris Dielman (SD), Josh Sitton (GB)
Overrated: Evans
Underrated: Andy Levitre (BUF/TEN)

Mankins is probably the greatest offensive lineman of the last 10 years, at any position. Apart from his disappointing 2014 with the Buccaneers, Mankins has been excellent whenever he's been on the field — which might be more often than you think. I was surprised to find that Mankins played the second-most games of any offensive lineman of the decade. I'm a little conflicted about rating Evans alongside him on the first team. Certainly Evans has been a fine player, and his arrival in New Orleans (in 2006) coincides with the rise of the Saints as an offensive powerhouse. It's amazing to look back and see everyone the Saints added in '06: Sean Payton, Drew Brees, Marques Colston, and Evans all remain with the team, and all have been terrific. That's before we even get to Reggie Bush and Roman Harper, but staying on topic ... I think Evans has been a little overrated, almost every year. But he's a nine-year starter and four-time All-Pro, and most of his competition didn't play the full decade.

Hutchinson and Snee are an easy 3-4. Hutchinson helped Shaun Alexander and Adrian Peterson become stars, blocking for Chester Taylor during his 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. The Giants won two Super Bowls without exceptional skill players: their championship teams were built on the offensive line and defense. Snee was the best player on those great o-lines.

Rounding out the top 10, I've got Dielman, Sitton, Brian Waters (KC/NE/DAL), Justin Blalock (ATL), Carl Nicks (NO), and Alan Faneca (PIT/NYJ/ARI). Dielman played only seven seasons, but he made four consecutive Pro Bowls before head injuries forced an early retirement. Levitre, a second-round pick in 2009, didn't have a great 2014, but has previously shown flashes of becoming one of the top guards in the NFL.

Offensive Tackle: Jason Peters (BUF/PHI), Andrew Whitworth (CIN)
Second Team: Joe Thomas (CLE), Matt Light (NE)
Honorable Mention: Duane Brown (HOU), Michael Roos (TEN)
Overrated: D'Brickashaw Ferguson (NYJ)
Underrated: Light

The 2005-09 seasons were sort of a rebuilding period for offensive tackles. Jonathan Ogden, Walter Jones, Willie Roaf, and Orlando Pace all had their best years behind them, all retiring during that period. The stars who would take their places hadn't fully risen yet, but the renaissance has finally arrived. Peters, when he's healthy, is a marvel. He's big and strong, but also very athletic. Peters and Thomas made the most Pro Bowls — seven and eight, respectively — of any offensive linemen over the last decade. Joe Thomas has made the Pro Bowl every year of his career, and that's careless voting: no one is that consistent. I've never liked Thomas quite as much as everyone else does, but he's been a really consistent high-level performer. He's an excellent pass blocker.

But so is Whitworth. He's been doing it longer than Thomas, and his team has positive results to show for it. Offensive tackles don't win or lose games by themselves, but if Thomas were as good as his reputation, the Browns wouldn't have a bottom-of-the-league offense every year.

Matt Light was the best tackle of the dark years, the guy who protected Tom Brady's blind side during the record-setting 2007 season. Brown's arrival in Houston coincided with the team becoming competitive. He's effective both as a run blocker and pass protector. Roos and Jordan Gross (CAR) are sort of similar: guys who played basically the whole decade, until this past season, when Gross retired and Roos spent most of the year on IR. But they've played well for teams that were successful in different eras and with different styles. Other than maybe Whitworth, Gross was probably the most consistent OT of the decade. He was the starting left tackle for a team that went 12-4 with Jake Delhomme, and for a team that went 12-4 with Cam Newton. Joe Staley (SF) and Gross nearly edged Roos for the final honorable mention.

D'Brickashaw Ferguson was a pretty good player for a few years, but high draft picks at the non-stat positions are almost always overrated. Voters who are unable for any reason to evaluate line play seem to base their votes on name recognition, and those are the guys with name recognition. Nationally, I don't think Matt Light was ever really regarded as an elite tackle. Maybe he just stood out in an era without much competition, but it seems to me he deserved more credit. I'd be shocked if Light is ever taken seriously as a Hall of Fame candidate, for instance.

Defensive Tackle: Justin Smith (CIN/SF), Vince Wilfork (NE)
Second Team: Haloti Ngata (BAL), Darnell Dockett (ARI)
Honorable Mention: Ndamukong Suh (DET), Kevin Williams (MIN/SEA)
Overrated: Richard Seymour (NE/OAK)
Underrated: Jonathan Babineaux (ATL)

Selecting a defensive line is tricky, 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. I'm grouping players by what they do, not by their position titles. This section could really be considered Interior Defensive Line.

Justin Smith was a good defensive end with the Bengals, but he found his niche with the 49ers. Smith is the key player on that defense, the one who creates opportunities for the linebacking corps behind him. Those guys are great, but they're able to showcase their abilities because of Smith's work up front. Smith has also continued to generate sacks while working inside and creating opportunities for teammates. Wilfork is a mountain, a disruptive force inside whenever he's healthy.

Ngata has been a good player nearly the whole decade, while Dockett has quietly dominated in Arizona. He's made three Pro Bowls, but not attracted as much acclaim as peers like Ngata and Williams. Suh is a dirty player, of course, but he's a remarkable talent. He breaks through the line, disrupting plays in the backfield, more often than any other DT of this era. Wilfork and Suh are the two guys who, on their best days, are virtually unblockable.

Seymour is a future Hall of Famer, but great players are always overrated near the end of their careers. Seymour's best years came in the early '00s. Babineaux has been the best player on a poor defense for most of the past decade. He's never made a Pro Bowl or an AP all-pro team, but he's a playmaker who creates problems for opponents. Brett Keisel (PIT) has also been badly underrated. He nearly beat Williams for the final honorable mention.

Defensive End: Jared Allen (MIN/KC/CHI), Julius Peppers (CAR/CHI/GB)
Second Team: J.J. Watt (HOU), Robert Mathis (IND)
Honorable Mention: Calais Campbell (ARI), John Abraham (NYJ/ATL/ARI)
Overrated: Dwight Freeney (IND/SD)
Underrated: Campbell

Allen and Peppers are no-brainers. Allen had by far the most sacks of any defensive lineman (125). He had three 15-sack seasons, and two more with 14.5. He's the most dominant pass rusher since Reggie White and Bruce Smith. Peppers had 95.5 sacks, just behind Mathis (97), but Peppers also had eight interceptions and four touchdowns. He's an athletic marvel, well-rounded and — above all — a playmaker.

J.J. Watt has only played four seasons, but he's been all-pro in three of them, Defensive Player of the Year in two, and the only unanimous DPOY in history. Watt is the only player since 1982, when the stat became official, with two 20-sack seasons. And sacks might not even be the strongest aspect of Watt's game. He routinely makes the most tackles of any lineman, he knocks down the most passes, he beats the most double-teams. Watt is on pace to become the most dominant defensive lineman in the history of the sport. Robert Mathis is the undisputed master of the strip-sack, with 39 forced fumbles from 2005-13.

Most sacks by defensive linemen, 2005-14:

1. Allen, 125.0
2. Mathis, 97.0
3. Peppers, 95.5
4. Mario Williams, 91.0
5. Abraham, 90.5
6. Elvis Dumervil, 90.0
7. Trent Cole, 85.5
8. Osi Umenyiora, 77.0
9. Freeney, 71.5
10. Justin Tuck, 65.5

The question, I suppose, is why Abraham and Campbell rate ahead of Mario Williams (HOU/BUF) and Elvis Dumervil (DEN/BAL). Abraham had six 10-sack seasons, plus a seventh with 9.5. Williams is comparably inconsistent, an up-and-down player who can be brilliant, but who has disappeared at times. Dumervil is a great player, but he's behind on longevity and he doesn't make enough big plays that aren't sacks. Campbell's case is hard to explain statistically. He's only played seven seasons, and he's a 3-4 DE, which limits his edge rushing opportunities and his sack totals (43.5). But Campbell has been a key contributor for one of the best defenses in the league. He's produced 6 or more sacks in every season since his rookie year, with high tackle and passes defensed totals. He fits a little better here than at DT, and he's been remarkable.

Freeney was a good player, but he made five Pro Bowls in the last 10 years, most of any defensive lineman besides Julius Peppers. That's implies a higher level and greater consistency of performance than he's demonstrated. For most of the past decade, Mathis was the superior playmaker on that defensive front.

Outside Linebacker: DeMarcus Ware (DAL/DEN), Lance Briggs (CHI)
Second Team: Terrell Suggs (BAL), Karlos Dansby (ARI/MIA/CLE)
Honorable Mention: James Harrison (PIT/CIN), Clay Matthews III (GB)
Overrated: Brian Orakpo (WAS)
Underrated: Chad Greenway (MIN)

In recent years, both the Associated Press and the Pro Bowl voters have focused on pass rush specialists, thus ignoring half the league: the teams that play a 4-3 alignment, in which OLBs are expected to make a lot of tackles and play pass coverage. In a given season, a top pass rusher might make 50 tackles and double-digit sacks, while the best space players make nearly 100 tackles, with a handful of sacks and/or INTs. I don't believe that one is clearly better than the other.

In this case, the top two outside linebackers are obvious. DeMarcus Ware leads the NFL in sacks (127) over the past decade, with eight seasons in double-digits, including 19.5 in 2011 and 20.0 in 2008. Ware is already a first-ballot Hall of Famer. Briggs was a 7-time Pro Bowler, an every-year standout on a defense that has often been among the best in football. Briggs distinguished himself both as a run-stopper and in coverage.

I'm tired of Suggs, as much style as substance. He's been a good player throughout his career, but his reputation is based as much upon his dance-for-the-cameras persona as it is upon his performance as a player. You could probably win a bar bet with this: over the last 10 seasons, which NFL player made the most solo tackles? It's Karlos Dansby (825), just barely ahead of London Fletcher (823). Dansby also recorded at least one sack every season, plus 15 interceptions, 4 of them returned for TDs. Suggs had 40 more sacks, but 400 fewer tackles and less than half as many INTs. I know T-Sizzle's a better interview, but was he a better player?

There were three strong candidates for the honorable mentions: Harrison, Matthews, and Greenway. Harrison made 5 Pro Bowls, 2008 Defensive Player of the Year, and a length-of-the-field interception return in Super Bowl XLIII. Matthews made 5 Pro Bowls as well, in just six seasons, and he lost the 2010 DPOY award by two votes. Both Harrison and Matthews are primarily pass rushers, and Harrison (in a full decade) only out-sacked Matthews by 9.5. Greenway is a 2-time Pro Bowler who was a strong candidate several other times. He's never been the best OLB in the league, but he's been in the top 10 almost every year. He's more solid than flashy, and he's been overshadowed by more famous teammates.

Really, all the space players, the guys who aren't pass rush specialists, are underrated. The one pass rusher who hasn't gotten enough recognition is Shaun Phillips (SD/DEN/TEN/IND). Phillips started 152 games, third-most among OLBs, recording 77.5 sacks (fourth-most) and three seasons with double-digit sacks. It's a shame that outside of the AFC West, casual fans probably don't know who Phillips is. The lack of recognition for Phillips is particularly galling given the spotlight for some of his fellow pass rushers. Orakpo only had four healthy seasons, with a career-high of 11 sacks. How he has made three Pro Bowls and an insurance commercial, I don't know.

Inside Linebacker: London Fletcher (BUF/WAS), Patrick Willis (SF)
Second Team: Brian Urlacher (CHI), Derrick Johnson (KC)
Honorable Mention: Jerod Mayo (NE), Jon Beason (CAR/NYG)
Overrated: Ray Lewis (BAL)
Underrated: Daryl Smith (JAC/BAL)

Fletcher led all linebackers in interceptions (17) and passes defensed (71), ranking second in solo tackles (823) and first in assists (435). He famously never made a Pro Bowl, until making four in his last five years. Patrick Willis has officially made seven Pro Bowls, with five first-team all-pro selections. I looked back at my own votes and counted three Pro Bowls with one all-pro year. Perhaps the fairest count is somewhere in between, but I'm sure it's closer to my evaluation. Willis was a first-round draft pick who played well as a rookie, and he benefitted from that reputation for years. In 2013, the media finally caught on that he was the second-best inside linebacker on his own team. Still, he's been a good player nearly the whole decade. During the decade, Willis led the NFL in tackles per game (6.54).

Urlacher retired following the 2012 season, but he was a dynamic playmaker in the late '00s. Mayo has a similar story: didn't play the whole decade, but all over the field when he was out there. Derrick Johnson's career has an odd shape: as a rookie in 2005, he played outside linebacker, and he was excellent. That draft class also included Shawne Merriman, DeMarcus Ware, Lofa Tatupu, LeRoy Hill, and Odell Thurman (64 tackles, 4 FF, 5 INT), which limited Johnson's exposure — in another year, he would have been a Rookie of the Year contender. After a couple of productive seasons, the Chiefs struggled as a team and Johnson's star faded. He re-emerged as a dynamic inside linebacker, and remained so until spending last year on injured reserve.

Beason's promising career has been derailed by injuries. He came in the same year as Willis, and he was all over the field — tackles, interceptions ... after starting every game his first four years, he played only 8 in the next three seasons combined. The Panthers finally cut him, and he played well for the Giants, though again he's had trouble staying healthy. But this is a guy who performed at a really high level, consistently, before the injuries.

The rest of the top 10: Daryl Smith, D'Qwell Jackson (CLE/IND), DeMeco Ryans (HOU/PHI), and Paul Posluszny (BUF/JAC). Smith toiled in obscurity in Jacksonville, and he's overshadowed by famous teammates in Baltimore. He's never made a Pro Bowl. Ray Lewis is an all-time great, but his best years were in the late '90s and early '00s. Over the past decade, he got a lot of credit he didn't deserve, because announcers latched onto him. Several play-by-play men have this infuriating habit of only announcing who made the tackle if it's a big star. As in, "Tackle made by ... guess who, Ray Lewis." The result is that the audience, many of whom are casual fans, believe that the stars are the only ones making plays. The last 10 years, no one got more of that than Troy Polamalu and Lewis.

Cornerback: Darrelle Revis (NYJ/TB/NE), Charles Woodson (GB/OAK)
Second Team: Charles Tillman (CHI), Asante Samuel (NE/PHI)
Honorable Mention: Ronde Barber (TB), Antonio Cromartie (SD/NYJ/ARI)
Overrated: Champ Bailey (DEN)
Underrated: Leon Hall (CIN)

Revis is a four-time all-pro, the most dominant shutdown corner since Deion Sanders. Woodson, who spent the last couple years at safety, followed a different model: ballhawk. He had almost twice as many INTs (44) as Revis (23), he was one of only four CBs with over 600 INT return yards, and he led the NFL in INT return TDs (9). Woodson also forced 19 fumbles from 2005-14, tied with Brian Dawkins for second-most of any defensive back. The leader in that category was Tillman ... with 39. Tillman also led all CBs in tackles (629) and ranked second in INT return yards (648) and TDs (8).

I think people forget about Asante Samuel. He's a four-time Pro Bowler, and he led the NFL in interceptions (48) and PDs (142) this decade. Barber is obviously listed for what he did in the earlier part of the decade, but even in his final season, he recorded 71 solo tackles, a sack, and 4 INTs, with 160 return yards and a touchdown. Not bad for an old man.

The top five at this position are clear, but the last spot was a toss-up, with Cromartie edging Bailey, DeAngelo Hall (ATL/OAK/WAS), Johnathan Joseph (CIN/HOU), Rashean Mathis (JAC/DET), Terence Newman (DAL/CIN), and Ike Taylor (PIT). What separates Cromartie is the combination of big years, seasons when he was one of the top CBs in the league, and consistency; once he got playing time, he never really had a down season or an injury year. Hall might be seventh on my list, purely on the strength of his stats: 41 INT, 129 PD, 9 FF, 14 FR, 1,099 return yards, 8 return TDs. Hall is a gambler, which facilitates all those big plays, but holy cow, he's made a lot of them. Richard Sherman (SEA) has only played four seasons, but he's a virtual lock for 2010-19. It wouldn't be crazy to sneak him into that last honorable mention.

Champ Bailey was a very good player from 1999-2006, maybe even a great player. But at the end of his career, his Hall of Fame reputation wildly exceeded his performance. He gave up too many plays, and he didn't make enough positive ones. Leon Hall has never made a Pro Bowl, even in his 6-INT '09 season.

Free Safety: Ed Reed (BAL/HOU/NYJ)
Second Team: Eric Weddle (SD)
Honorable Mention: Ryan Clark (WAS/PIT), Darren Sharper (MIN/NO)
Overrated: Earl Thomas (SEA)
Underrated: Clark

Ed Reed is the one of the greatest defensive playmakers in history. He's a 7-time Pro Bowler, the decade leader in INT return yardage, and an obvious choice. Weddle seems to be the second-best free safety every year, but that adds up. He's well-rounded: a sound tackler, an effective ballhawk, and dangerous with the ball in his hands. Such players are sometimes underrated, but Weddle is so good that his reputation is actually pretty strong, especially among AP voters, who named him first-team all-pro in 2011 and 2014.

Clark just might be the most consistent safety of the past decade. Well, that's probably Weddle, but Clark second. He was a standout starter on the greatest defensive dynasty of the decade, and never complained that Troy Polamalu got all the attention. In both '05 and '09, Sharper had nine INTs, over 250 return yards, and multiple return TDs. He may be a bad person, but he was a great player. Brian Dawkins (PHI/DEN) had his best seasons in the early 2000s, but he's probably fifth, behind Sharper.

Earl Thomas is a very good player, but he doesn't make a lot of plays at the line of scrimmage, and he's not a real ballhawk in the secondary. Thomas averages three INTs a year, which is fine, but not spectacular. To some extent, I think he's ridden a halo effect from the Legion of Boom.

Strong Safety: Troy Polamalu (PIT)
Second Team: Adrian Wilson (ARI)
Honorable Mention: Quintin Mikell (PHI/STL/CAR), Antoine Bethea (IND/SF)
Overrated: LaRon Landry (WAS/NYJ/IND)
Underrated: Chris Hope (PIT/TEN/ATL)

Honestly, Polamalu is more overrated than Landry. He was genuinely outstanding from 2005-10, and he's had a Hall of Fame career, but announcers go to comical lengths to cover up his mistakes and give him credit. Polamalu's playing style is easy to appreciate: frenetic, anticipatory, geared towards the highlight play. But it's not a style that ages well, so Polamalu has spent the last few seasons struggling to stay healthy, and barely missing on a lot of plays he would have made earlier in his career. I remember a particular game in which Dan Dierdorf, announcing for CBS, kept making up scenarios in which Polamalu would have made fantastic plays. It's not healthy to deify players like that.

Wilson made five Pro Bowls, and he was first-team all-pro in 2009. Wilson was a very smart player, good at everything, but especially dangerous on blitzes: he made 22.5 sacks this decade, most of any defensive back. Mikell, in his best seasons, was always around the ball, making tackles and knocking down passes. Bethea's numbers were a little warped playing in Indianapolis, with opponents passing a lot in comeback attempts, but this year in San Francisco, he proved himself a true standout, taking control of the Niners' secondary.

Hope started 16 games for Pittsburgh in the '05 Super Bowl season, but spent his prime years out of the spotlight in Tennessee. He had two seasons with over 80 solo tackles, and he intercepted more passes than most strong safeties.

Kicker: Sebastian Janikowski (OAK)
Second Team: Phil Dawson (CLE/SF)
Honorable Mention: Stephen Gostkowski (NE), Robbie Gould (CHI)
Overrated: David Akers (PHI/SF/DET)
Underrated: Rob Bironas (TEN)

When I began this project, I had Janikowski first-team, Gould second-team, with the honorable mentions going to Dawson and Adam Vinatieri (NE/IND). Going back to look at their records, I shifted some of that around.

In this era, kickers don't miss a lot. Extra point percentage is about 99%, and field goal percentage is in the low 80s. A good kicker makes all the short stuff, but really distinguishes himself by connecting on long field goals. If the team can count on someone to hit a 55-yarder, that's the guy you want.

And that guy is probably Sebastian Janikowski, who made more 50+ field goals (41) than anyone else this decade. It's not even particularly close; Dawson is next (29). For what it's worth, the highest mark in the '00s was Jason Hanson, with 27. Janikowski's efficiency on long kicks doesn't look impressive (55.4%), but that's largely a function of how many really long kicks he attempted. Coaches would let him kick from 60. If you look at the season-by-season long for each kicker, Janikowski blows away the pack.

Dawson, who made the most field goals of the decade (254), was a very close second. Gostkowski and Gould both made 243 field goals, despite playing in tough weather conditions. Gostkowski led the NFL in scoring (1,179) and field goal percentage (86.8), but he did not attempt a lot of long field goals (13/17). I'm all for efficiency, and maybe Gostkowski's limited by coaching strategy — the Patriots seldom need to attempt long field goals — but ultimately, he hasn't done what Janikowski and Dawson did. Gould had 10 field goals blocked this decade, which I believe was the most of any kicker. But he was efficient and productive every year until 2014.

Gould barely edged Matt Bryant (ATL), Bironas, and Vinatieri. Bironas and Vinatieri excelled at mid-range field goals. Bironas made the most 40-49-yard kicks (70) of the decade, and Vinatieri had the best FG% in that range (81.7%). Vinatieri slipped because he made the fewest field goals of the players I considered, he didn't make many long kicks, and he didn't kick off. David Akers was a great kicker last decade. Toward the end of his career, he began to miss too often.

Punter: Mike Scifres (SD)
Second Team: Dustin Colquitt (KC)
Honorable Mention: Sam Koch (BAL), Brett Kern (DEN/TEN)
Overrated: Shane Lechler (OAK/HOU)
Underrated: Koch

Let's get this out of the way: Scifres led the NFL in blocked punts over the last decade. I tend to put most of the blame for that on his teammates and coaching staff. Scifres had a good net average (39.2), but he distinguished himself more with precision than with distance. Scifres is among the best punters in history at pinning opponents near the goal line. Over the past 10 seasons, he had nearly five times as many punts down inside the 20 (249) as touchbacks (51). He also generates a lot of fair catches, and he's very good at directional kicking and putting the ball out of bounds without sacrificing distance.

Colquitt is cut from the same cloth, and he plays in tougher weather conditions. I prefer Scifres mostly for his excellence pinning opponents deep. Something the two players share is that they've overcome short fields. Punt from your own 20-yard line, and you can bomb the ball as far as possible. But punt from somewhere near midfield, and you have to make sure you don't kick a touchback. Among players with at least 250 punts, no one faced more short fields than Scifres, with Colquitt close behind. Both saw nearly half their kicks down inside the 20 or touched back in the end zone.

Koch has no weaknesses. He's quietly been among the best punters in the NFL for years. Kern, another master at pinning opponents deep, edged a pair of newcomers for the final honorable mention. They didn't make the cut this time, but Matt Bosher (ATL) or Tim Masthay (GB) is going to be the All-Decade punter of the '10s.

Lechler is the most celebrated punter of the last 30 years, maybe ever. From 2005-14, 16 NFL players punted at least 570 times. Probably that seems like an odd cutoff, 570, but no one else is close (Mat McBriar is next, 527). Basically, there were 16 really active punters over the last decade. They're listed below, ranked by their ratio of punts down inside the 20-yard line (I-20) to touchbacks (TB).

Lechler is an extreme outlier, more than a full standard deviation below the next-worst. Lechler also ranked worst of the 16 in percentage of punts returned or touched back (64.1) and in return average allowed (10.7). He's spent a decade and a half bombing kicks downfield, without regard for directional kicking, the location of the coverage team, or even the end zone. I never thought I would say this about a special teamer, but Lechler is one of the most overrated players in the history of football.

Return Specialist: Devin Hester (CHI/ATL)
Second Team: Joshua Cribbs (CLE/NYJ/IND)
Honorable Mention: Leon Washington (NYJ/SEA/NE/TEN), Adam Jones (TEN/DAL/CIN)
Overrated: Jacoby Jones (HOU/BAL)
Underrated: Cribbs

Hester has set the NFL record for return TDs. He's probably the greatest punt returner of all time. A bit more on him below.

Cribbs is an obvious selection, likely the greatest kickoff returner of this era. His 2007 season might be the best-ever overall performance by a return specialist. Cribbs returned 59 kickoffs for 1,809 yards (30.7 avg) and 2 TDs, with 30 punt returns for 405 yards (13.5) and another TD. Compared to that year's league averages (22.6 KR, 9.1 PR), Cribbs gave the Browns an extra 474 yards of field position on kickoff returns and 132 yards on punt returns. That's 606 yards, the highest single-season total for any returner in history. From 2005-09, Cribbs had a KR TD every season, and his 11,113 career KR yards rank third in history. Until recently, it wasn't obvious whether Hester or Cribbs would have the better returning career.

Cribbs and Washington are tied for the career record for KR TDs (8). Jones edged Darren Sproles (SD/NO/PHI) and Leodis McKelvin (BUF) for the final HM. Sproles has the most return yardage, the most TDs, and the lowest fumble percentage. McKelvin has the best averages but the fewest returns. Jones, the artist formerly known as Pac-Man, is one of the best punt returners in history. He has a great average (10.4) despite that he almost never fair catches.

If Jones would just fair catch when there's a defender nearby, he might average 15 yards per punt return. Instead, he always tries to gain yardage. He also has a great average on kickoff returns (26.5).

Jacoby Jones drives me crazy. He's a very talented return man, but he just refuses to down kickoffs in the end zone, and it costs his team 100 yards every season. Hester is overrated, too. He's a home run hitter, but he also strikes out too much. I believe he's the second-best kick returner in history, but his reputation is as the undisputed leader. It's at least worth having a discussion about this.

Special Teamer: Kassim Osgood (SD/JAC/DET/SF)
Second Team: Matthew Slater (NE)
Honorable Mention: Eric Weems (ATL/CHI), Corey Graham (CHI/BAL/BUF)
Overrated: nobody
Underrated: everybody

Osgood is the greatest special teams ace since Steve Tasker. And the "since Steve Tasker" qualification is starting to look like a close call.

Slater has only played seven seasons, but he could be even better than Osgood. He is always around the ball on kickoff and punt returns. Beyond that, this is a tough position to rate, because many of the best special teamers get promoted off of special teams. Graham, for instance, parlayed his special teams excellence in Chicago into a nickel back role with the Ravens and Bills.

Offensive Player of the Decade: Peyton Manning (IND/DEN)
Runner-Up: Tom Brady (NE)
Honorable Mention: Drew Brees (SD/NO), Adrian Peterson (MIN)

Peterson was the most outstanding at his position, but after a decade defined by the passing game, in which almost every passing record has been broken — including the career, single-season, and rookie records for attempts, completions, yards, touchdowns, and passer rating — I have to go with quarterbacks.

Defensive Player of the Decade: DeMarcus Ware (DAL/DEN)
Runner-Up: Jared Allen (MIN/KC/CHI)
Honorable Mention: Julius Peppers (CAR/CHI/GB), Ed Reed (BAL/HOU/NYJ)

After complaining about over-glorification of pass rushers, now I've chosen Ware, Allen, and Peppers as the top three defensive players of the decade. Ware and Allen played the whole decade at a high level. They averaged over 12 sacks per season. Peppers' contributions were more varied, but no less significant. Reed tops Darrelle Revis and Charles Woodson as the greatest defensive back of the decade. Among non-rush LBs, I'd take Lance Briggs over any of the inside linebackers.

Coach of the Decade: Bill Belichick (NE)
Runner-Up: John Harbaugh (BAL)
Honorable Mention: Sean Payton (NO), Marvin Lewis (CIN)

Belichick led the Patriots to three Super Bowl appearances, including a 16-0 season, and a victory in Super Bowl XLIX. The Pats replaced assistants, turned over their whole roster besides Tom Brady and Vince Wilfork, and posted a winning record every season.

After Belichick, it's close, and there are different directions you could go. The closest misses were Andy Reid (PHI/KC) and Tom Coughlin (NYG). Reid joins Jim Caldwell, John Fox, and perhaps Bruce Arians (depending on your definition) as the only head coaches to lead two different teams to the playoffs.

I did not choose Coughlin because my mom would never forgive me. She hates Tom Coughlin. Also, she thinks he is ugly. Coughlin is the only head coach to win multiple Super Bowls in the last 10 years, but his teams have had too many down seasons in between. The playoff runs were impressive, but I feel like a truly great coach should reach the playoffs more frequently. Belichick was 9-for-10, and the year he missed, New England went 11-5. Harbaugh's Ravens are 6-of-7, Payton's Saints are 5-of-8, and Lewis 6-of-10. The Giants have made the playoffs only once in the last six years. Lewis took over a Cincinnati team that hadn't made the playoffs in over a decade, that was routinely the worst in the NFL, that was being run into the ground by ownership, and that had never in its history made back-to-back playoffs. He led them to the postseason in '05, '09, and every season from 2011-2014.

Lewis is one of only seven head coaches with four consecutive playoff berths in the last decade: Belichick, Coughlin, Harbaugh, Lewis, Fox, Tony Dungy, and Mike McCarthy.

Sports Central NFL All-Decade Team

QB Peyton Manning
RB Adrian Peterson
WR Calvin Johnson
WR Reggie Wayne
WR Andre Johnson
TE Antonio Gates
C Nick Mangold
G Logan Mankins
G Jahri Evans
OT Jason Peters
OT Andrew Whitworth

DT Justin Smith
DT Vince Wilfork
DE Jared Allen
DE Julius Peppers
OLB DeMarcus Ware
OLB Lance Briggs
ILB London Fletcher
ILB Patrick Willis
CB Darrelle Revis
CB Charles Woodson
FS Ed Reed
SS Troy Polamalu

K Sebastian Janikowski
P Mike Scifres
KR Devin Hester
ST Kassim Osgood

Second Team

QB Tom Brady, RB LaDainian Tomlinson, WR Larry Fitzgerald, WR Steve Smith, WR Anquan Boldin, TE Jason Witten, C Jeff Saturday, G Steve Hutchinson, G Chris Snee, OT Joe Thomas, OT Matt Light, DT Haloti Ngata, DT Darnell Dockett, DE J.J. Watt, DE Robert Mathis, OLB Terrell Suggs, OLB Karlos Dansby, ILB Brian Urlacher, ILB Derrick Johnson, CB Charles Tillman, CB Asante Samuel, FS Eric Weddle, SS Adrian Wilson, K Phil Dawson, P Dustin Colquitt, KR Josh Cribbs, ST Matt Slater

Posted by Brad Oremland at 4:32 PM | Comments (0)

February 9, 2015

The Cinderella List

Wichita State. Dayton. Florida Gulf Coast.

Cinderella has moved all over the country in the past few years. The question is, for bracket crunchers everywhere come March, where will she set up base this year? While we're all penciling in Kentucky, Virginia, and Wisconsin for those 1 vs. 16 matchups, it's time to take a look at five teams who could burn brackets all over the nation.

Northern Iowa — Okay, so the Panthers (22-2) are ranked 14th, so maybe they're not the team that should "sneak up" on people. However, they make the list because UNI is one of those teams that could go past the Sweet 16. Ben Jacobsen's team is dangerous behind the arc, tough on defense and Seth Tuttle really can take over a game. The last time UNI was dancing, they knocked off Kansas, who was heavily favored to win the whole tournament. This is not a team to take lightly, regardless of seed.

Wyoming — When a team has a solid assist to turnover ratio, they're always a little dangerous in March and the Cowboys fit the mold perfectly. The UW inside game is anchored by the "juniors" Larry Nance, Jr. and Derek Cooke, Jr. They're a little undersized, so if the perimeter shot isn't there, they could become vulnerable to an early exit. However, Riley Grabau and Charles Henderson, Jr. (yes, they have another one!) are capable of having good games behind the arc and if they do, Wyoming becomes a very difficult out.

Stephen F. Austin — The Lumberjacks (19-3) are once again in the March Madness picture. Currently on an 18-game winning streak, the Jacks have great shooters in Jacob Parker and Thomas Walkup and a fantastic floor general in 5-9 Trey Pinkney. They're good in up-tempo games but have no problem winning in slower, half-court games as well. SFA has recent experience in March Madness and won't be afraid of anyone come dance time.

Iona — The Gaels (18-6) could be the best Cinderella candidate of them all. They are a nightmare matchup for most teams as they play a deep bench for a very high-octane attack. Six Iona players currently shoot better than 40 percent behind the arc, with a seventh, A.J. English, not far behind. They pass the ball well, they force turnovers and create mass chaos on the court. Don't be surprised if Iona makes some real noise.

Wofford — Currently on a seven-game winning streak, the Terriers (20-5) already have a win over N.C. State to their credit. History has shown that a Cinderella can rise due to a team having one phenomenal player ... does Weber State's Harold Arceneaux ring a bell? The Terriers have a similar potential star in Karl Cochran, a 6-2 guard who leads the team in points, rebounds, assists, steals ... even blocks! Cochran is the catalyst in the Terrier machine that has surged to the top of the Southern Conference. If he peaks next month, he might become a household name.

February might bring some new teams to replace the current ones. For now, though, I wouldn't take my eye off any of these squads ... they have what it takes to destroy a bracket or two.

Posted by Jean Neuberger at 6:18 PM | Comments (0)

February 5, 2015

Super Bowl XLIX Aftermath

Was Seattle's decision to pass on second and goal from the Patriots one-yard line the worst decision in Super Bowl history?

No. The decision to pass wasn't the bad idea; the manner in which Seattle chose to pass was the defining, and wrong, decision. With three plays left from the one, the absolute last thing you want to happen is a turnover. Throwing a pass into the middle of a defense already aligned expecting a play up the middle was risky at best.

Of course, had Russell Wilson completed the pass to Ricardo Lockett, the decision would have been unceasingly hailed as a masterpiece of strategic ingenuity. And Bill Belichick would have been vilified for not using timeouts to save time for what would have been a last gasp effort for the Pats to get into game-tying field goal range.

As it is, Pete Carroll will have to face the music for his decision. And, on that note, here are the top ten songs that Pete Carroll does not want to hear:

1. "I Ran": A Flock of Seagulls
2. "If I Could Turn Back Time": Cher
3. "Sabotage": The Beastie Boys
4. "Running Down a Dream": Tom Petty and the Heartbreakers
5. "Run to You": Bryan Adams

Were the Patriots expecting a pass?

It certainly looked like it. They say "hindsight is 20/20," and New England's Malcolm Butler would agree, because his vision was so good, he saw right through Seattle's plan to throw from the Patriots one-yard line.

So, what should the Seahawks have done?

The options are limitless. Of course, there's giving the ball to Lynch. And from what I've seen this year, the Seahawks have plenty of running plays that don't go up the middle. And, assuming Lynch was stopped on second down, the Seahawks could have called a timeout, their last. They would likely not need another timeout, because their final two plays would likely be passes into the end zone.

Passing on second down was a viable option, but that pass needed to be one that ended up either in the hands of a Seahawk or out of the end zone.

Now, the most fitting play would have been lining up an offensive lineman as tackle-eligible, while lining Lynch up as ineligible. But who says an ineligible receiver can't run the ball? For added confusion, a lateral to lynch would have really thrown off the Patriots.

Would another coach have done things differently?

Absolutely. For example, Green Bay's Mike McCarthy would have ran Lynch straight up the middle on second and third down, then kicked a field goal on fourth and goal.

Will anyone watch NBC's "The Slap?"

How could you not watch a show called "The Slap?" If you're not watching "The Slap," you should be slapped.

I commend NBC for producing a series based on an adult slapping a child, and I commend the NFL for having the balls to use their most-watched game as advertisement for such, even after a season replete with domestic and child abuse controversies.

Can Wilson recover from such a devastating interception?

Yes, but only with the guidance of his Lord and savior Jesus Christ. Now, Russell and J.C. feel a higher level of kinship, because they've both been crucified.

Is Tom Brady the greatest quarterback of all-time?

Brady now has four Super Bowl wins, placing him in the company of Terry Bradshaw and Joe Montana. But can you call him the greatest of all time? I say no. Take away the benefit of the "Tuck Rule," and arguably the biggest set of blunders in Super Bowl history, and Brady has only two Super Bowl wins.

How was the halftime show?

For users of LSD and other hallucinogenics, it was overkill.

Katy Perry was awesome, in a supporting role for Missy Elliott.

Interestingly enough, Missy "couldn't stop the rain;" the Patriots, however, could "stop the reign," Seattle's, that is.

What was the best commercial aired during Super Bowl XLIX?

I would call it a tie, between all the commercials that didn't feature a dead child.

Here is a list of Nationwide's proposed new slogans:

"Nationwide, a kid just died."

"Nationwide, we have no pride."

"Nationwide, outrage'll subside."

"Nationwide, come on, we tried."

"Nationwide, we want to hide."

"Nationwide, WTF?!"

What's the early forecast for Super Bowl L at Levi's Stadium in 2016?

In only the second rematch in Super Bowl history, the Patriots and Seahawks will meet again in Santa Clara, California.

This time, the Seahawks are 100% healthy and the Patriots enter banged up after a tough AFC Championship win at Indianapolis. And Lynch, under a new contract, which stipulates he has veto power over any play calls made at or near the goal line. Lynch scores two TD's, and a 106-yard Richard Sherman interception return for a touchdown with under a minute left puts the exclamation point on a 34-17 Seattle win.

Posted by Jeffrey Boswell at 11:40 AM | Comments (0)

February 4, 2015

Wins, Losses, and the Cruel Dichotomy

By now, football fans have replayed and rehashed the last three significant plays of Super Bowl XLIX dozens of times: Jermaine Kearse's improbable catch; Marshawn Lynch's run to within the breath of the goal line; and of course, Russell Wilson's ill-conceived and ill-executed intercepted slant pass.

On each of these plays, minute deviations would have yielded dramatically different results. And yet, the (playoff) rules of the NFL force a binary outcome: there must be exactly one winner and exactly one loser, subtlety and representative distribution be damned.

More than any sport, NFL football is a casino table game, carefully crafted to level competition through violent roster turnover and rules concentrating the game's influencers to a few positions. It's NBA Jam with the diabolically maddening "computer assistance" turned way, way up.

This institutional parity serves the league well. Relatively high year-over-year turnover keeps most franchises within view of the playoffs and close games hold the industry's attention for creepingly longer windows.

However, the sport's affinity for the level is lost on much of the football media. While the statistical revolution of baseball has only partially spread through NFL coverage for a variety of reasons, football shares baseball's coven of orthodoxy protesting new ways to think about the game. Some question the comprehensiveness of just-a-little-too-perfect valuation stats. Others bemoan a shift in influence from sports-lovers to Excel jockeys. And some, to be painfully frank, got into sports writing because they have no ability or interest in the nuances of early high school math and statistics and must fight sophistication out of self-preservation.

But most of all, the torch- and pitchfork-waving crowd storming the Castle of Stats value narrative. And put simply, honest and effective stats make unique narrative construction a lot harder.

Columns are far easier to write when teams' true natures are treated as fixed quantities only hidden by a few mystical, unpassed hours.

To some, the Patriots' victory Sunday was an inevitable destiny. Maybe they were inspired by Deflate-Gate or some ambiguous revenge for having lost the last Super Bowl played in greater Phoenix. For others, this game somehow tips the scales of Bill Belichick and Tom Brady's legacy.

These are, of course, ex post facto conclusions. Had one of any number of things happened differently in the game, particularly in its last minute, these narratives would have been reversed. "Motivations" would have been branded as "distractions" or "curses." Belichick and Brady's unparalleled run would be derided for three consecutive Super Bowl losses. With a wealth of puzzle pieces on the table in front of you, it is much easier to create the picture you are seeking out.

In reality, many games, including Sunday's thriller, are much closer to draws than decisive results. The Patriots have now played in six Belichick/Brady Super Bowls, winning by margins of three, three, three and four while losing by margins of three and four. Were those four wins by less than a touchdown so much different from the two losses by less than a touchdown?

And this is where teams that repeatedly find success are so impressive. Yes, championships are the goal, but when margins are as slim as they were on Sunday (and if you watched the NFC playoffs this year, you know they often are) we cannot overlook the role of luck. The best way to avoid striking out at luck's cruel hands is to maximize your opportunities.

Brady and Belichick are perfect examples. While they have amassed four Super Bowl wins together, they have lost twice on Super Sunday and three times in the AFC Championship. In total, the duo has made the playoffs 12 times in 14 years, each time giving themselves a chance to win three or four close games against equally matched competitors. Sometimes they win that series of coin tosses; most others, they lose along the way.

So are we wrong to focus so narrowly on wins and championships? Of course not. In the NFL, as in life, certain moments and outcomes are most influential by orders of magnitude. Partial credit is a figment of academia.

But getting near the end has value in real life. The Seahawks came about as close to winning the Super Bowl as a team can without raising the Lombardi Trophy. The lost opportunity will haunt those players because they recognize not only how near they were to the win, but also how far they came to get there.

Posted by Corrie Trouw at 5:09 PM | Comments (0)

February 3, 2015

Leaving the Australian Open Behind

The Australian Open provided enough thrills throughout the two-week long tennis festival, and concluded with Serena Williams and Novak Djokovic confirming their statuses as the best players on their respective tours. The first major of the 2015 season also allowed the players to step back and evaluate the state of their game and adjust their expectations based on what they have seen from other players. We witnessed the arrival of Madison Keys to big-time tennis on the one hand, and realized on the other that Eugenie Bouchard and Simona Halep, who did arrive earlier than Keys, still have some steps to climb in order to win their first major title.

Most evaluations on the day after the finals of a major focus on the last few days and the well-known names, and overlook a few so-called "lessons-to-learn" that get pushed aside by other news during the week. Understanding the possibility that others may have mentioned one or more before, here are three conclusions that stood out in my mind.

Challenging the Canon in Men's Doubles

The final match of the men's doubles draw featured two unseeded European teams. The Italians Fabio Fognini and Simone Bolelli defeated the Frenchmen Nicolas Mahut and Pierre-Hugues Herbert in straight sets to win their first major title in one of the most unexpected outcomes in Melbourne. How they did it, was even more astonishing. Fognini and Bolelli proved that one of the most common presuppositions in men's doubles, that a doubles team cannot win if they "stay back," is simply inaccurate.

They constantly played return games with both staying back. They chose to trade rallies in which their opponents aimed to put the ball away at the net while the Italians stayed at the baseline, looking to pass or lob. Fognini and Bolelli rarely used serve-and-volley on their service games. The server exclusively stayed back on second serves and seldom came to the net after first serves. Their plan on service games was to win the points rallying crosscourt with one player up and one player back, and to hit passing shots if the Frenchmen approached the net. It was very elementary, the kind of tactic that you see at club level tennis, yet effective and suited to their strengths. Now they have their names engraved forever as major winners in doubles.

The "Real Young Guns": Far From Ready For "Big-Time" Success

Milos Raonic, Grigor Dimitrov, Kei Nishikori are often labeled "newcomers" or "next generation of players" in men's tennis There is no doubt that they present formidable challenges to the elite players, although it took time for them to get to that stage. The players often grouped under the term "young guns" comprise of a different set of characters. We can for example include Nick Kyrgios, Thanasi Kokkinakis, Borna Coric, and now Elias Ymer among men's players, Cici Bellis, Belinda Bencic and Océane Dodin among women's players in this group. This Australian Open's message was clear to most youngsters belonging to this group: physically, they are not ready!

Let's take the extreme case Nick Kyrgios who reached his second major quarterfinal last week. He was tired during his match against Andy Murray and managed to play a close second set only thanks to the sheer energy that he generated from crowd support and the grandeur of the occasion. Note also that he just announced his withdrawal from the upcoming Marseille and Dubai ATP events because of a bone stress in lower back following his grueling run to the quarterfinals in the Australian Open.

Elias Ymer and Borna Coric lost their early-round matches not due to lack of skills, but mainly because they could only compete at a high level for three sets before they began to get flat-footed and physically waned. Bencic is in the middle of a down period following her quick burst on the scene in 2014, and the difference between Dodin and her second-round opponent Karolina Pliskova was how much fresher Pliskova was in the last few games of the final set. Of course, Dodin's three-set thriller against Alison Riske a day earlier did not help either.

Succeeding in majors takes getting used to mentally as well as physically. The pressure is higher, the crowds are bigger, and mentally, the players must remain in their intense competition mode for more days that that required in other tournaments. And for men, the matches last longer in Slams than in any other ATP Tour event due to the five-set format. It took Murray and Djokovic years, and several semifinal or final match failures, to finally get to the level of Nadal and Federer. Now Dimitrov, Raonic, and Nishikori are experiencing the repeated failures in those stages in majors against mostly the "big four" players. In short, Coric, Ymer, Kokkinakis, and Kyrgios better take note; they still have a long way to go.

Don't Play a Tournament the Week Before a Major*

This is not new, but rather a confirmation. As you noticed, it comes with an asterisk. If the player does not expect to reach the second week of a major, or if he or she is ranked in the lower part of the acceptance list, I can understand his or her choice to play an event the week immediately preceding a major, thus the asterisk. The player would hope to win matches in the main draw, benefiting from the lack of top players who are preparing for the following week, and collect valuable points, at the cost of under-performing when the major comes around.

This was the case for a number of players three weeks ago. Heather Watson lost in the first round of the Australian Open, suffering from menstruation-related pain, apparently a taboo topic in elite professional sports. While it is questionable how much the exhaustion from the full match schedule of the previous week may have contributed/added to the degree of pain that she felt, it is also not an exaggeration to wonder if she could have prepared better for her first round match in Melbourne had she not been preoccupied by the intense preparations of day-to-day competition in Hobart. In retrospect, Watson will cherish the points that she gained from winning a WTA event, so in her case, it was a trade-off and not necessarily a bad decision.

I do, however, have to question the decision of Petra Kvitova to play the WTA Sydney event during the week before the Australian Open. Yes, she won the tournament, but unlike Heather Watson, she did not need the points (she is No. 4 in the world), certainly not at the cost of risking a major tournament. She lost to Madison Keys in Melbourne. It is true that Keys had the tournament of her young career. Yet, the American did not play as well against Kvitova as she did in her matches against both Williams sisters in the quarterfinal and semifinal. Kvitova looked sluggish at times and lacked the first quick step to get into position to strike her powerful groundstrokes.

In the men, Adrian Mannarino who reached the final of the ATP Heineken Open in Auckland had to withdraw from his match against Feliciano Lopez in the second round of the Australian Open, feeling ill while he was two-sets-to-one up. In fact, none of the four finalists from the two ATP tournaments held the week before the Australian Open made it to the second week in Melbourne, with only Victor Troicki reaching the third round. On the one hand, the decision to play that week can suit a particular player depending on that player's ranking and immediate goals. On the other hand, history shows that it will most likely have a negative impact on the player's chance to do well at the major in question.

According to Brad Gilbert, when he became Andy Roddick 's coach in June 2003, one of the first things he told his new pupil was to forget about scheduling any tournaments prior to the majors. He was specifically referring to the St. Poelten tournament before Roland Garros that Roddick played and won, two months before they joined forces. In Gilbert's opinion, playing that tournament was the main reason why Roddick got upset in the first round of the French Open by Sargis Sargsian. Side note: Roddick did finish 2003 as the number one player in the world, the last American to do so.

Posted by Mert Ertunga at 11:37 AM | Comments (1)

February 2, 2015

Super Bowl XLIX Rewind

Super Bowl XLIX
February 1, 2015
Glendale, Arizona
New England Patriots 28, Seattle Seahawks 24

That was a great game.

It's easy to confuse an exciting fourth quarter with a great game, but this one delivered throughout. The general excitement of a Super Bowl — the gravity of the situation — carried us through a scoreless first quarter, and the drama and tension built up to unbelievable finishes at the end of both the first and second halves.

Most people I talked to this week were rooting against New England, but if you just wanted to see a good game, this made up for last year's blowout. Let's break down some of what we saw.

Why the Patriots Won

The Patriots won with their passing game. Seattle's defense hadn't allowed 28 points since mid-October. Tom Brady completed a Super Bowl-record 37 passes and threw for 4 touchdowns. The Seahawks took away the deep pass and forced Brady to beat them underneath, stringing together first downs to drive the length of the field. The Patriots answered the challenge, with five drives of eight plays or more, including all four TD drives. Seattle's pass rush was ineffective: Brady was sacked only once, and hit seven times, in 58 dropbacks.

Rob Gronkowski had 68 yards and a touchdown, but he didn't break the game open. The Seahawks probably feel pretty good about the way they defended Gronk. They also contained New England's run game, frustrating LeGarrette Blount (40 yds, 2.9 avg), and didn't get burned by any offensive trickery. But they didn't get consistent pressure on Brady, and they couldn't cover Julian Edelman (9 rec, 109 yds, TD) or Shane Vereen (11 rec, 64 yds).

Two weeks ago, in my Super Bowl XLIX Preview, I explained how Seattle could win the game: "Limit New England's ground game and take away Rob Gronkowksi. The rest of the offense doesn't scare you. Offensively, Seattle wants to get [Marshawn] Lynch going. The priority with [Russell] Wilson is limiting turnovers. If he plays a clean game and Lynch rushes for 100 yards, the Seahawks will win." Wilson's clean game evaporated on the goal line, but other than that, Seattle accomplished its goals. The Seahawks shut down Blount and contained Gronkowski, and Lynch rushed for 102. Give the Patriots credit for winning without big plays, and for scoring four TDs on the backs of secondary weapons like Edelman and Vereen.

You wonder about the impact of injuries in Seattle's secondary. Richard Sherman, Kam Chancellor, and especially Earl Thomas all came in banged up, while Jeremy Lane left early with an injury, and defensive end Cliff Avril was out on the Patriots' last two touchdown drives. Sherman, Chancellor, and Thomas weren't noticeably limited, Lane isn't a key player, and Avril wasn't a major factor in this game, but this was a very close Super Bowl, and one more play could have been the difference. New England has been burned by injuries to players like Gronkowski in previous Super Bowls, and this time they were on the other side.

Passing at the Goal Line

It's 28-24 Patriots, with :26 remaining in the game. Seattle has 2nd-and-goal at the New England 1-yard line, with one timeout left. Momentum is with the Seahawks, and the announcers are wondering whether New England should simply let them score, so there's enough time left for Tom Brady to engineer a comeback. Russell Wilson drops back and throws a quick slant — which gets picked off by rookie safety Malcolm Butler, the first interception of his pro career. Following a couple of penalties, the Patriots run out the clock and win Super Bowl XLIX.

Everyone on NBC seemed to agree that it was a crazy, untenable play call, and I guess Twitter blew up with the same idea (perhaps prompted by Cris Collinsworth). I didn't have a problem with the call.

I've expressed my admiration for Marshawn Lynch a number of times (and I'm about to again; I'll announce my 2005-14 NFL All-Decade Team next week), so I probably would have run it. But it was second down. You can give it to Beast Mode on third and fourth if the pass doesn't get it, and Pete Carroll said afterwards that was the plan. If that pass is completed, it's brilliant strategy. Even if it's incomplete, no one criticizes the call. The problem was the pass itself, the great defensive play made by Browner, and perhaps a questionable effort by Ricardo Lockette.

The Patriots brought in a goal line defense, designed to stop Lynch. Passing against a stacked front like that isn't crazy. In fact, it's a good idea as long as you don't get a sack or a pick. This "worst call ever" controversy is nonsense.

Noteworthy

The Patriots did very little with the tricky formations we saw in the AFC playoffs, confusing eligible and ineligible receivers. I don't know if that was a function of the game plan, or if after all the DeflateGate foolishness, the team just wanted to prove a point. If it's the latter, that's an awfully big risk to take in the Super Bowl. It seems to me that every time a team — and in particular, that team's quarterback — has faced major controversy, media scrutiny, or distraction leading up to the Super Bowl, that team has emerged victorious. I'm thinking specifically of Len Dawson (who faced baseless gambling charges prior to Super Bowl IV), Doug Williams (the first black QB to start a Super Bowl), maybe Joe Namath (with his famous guarantee), and certainly Tom Brady (DeflateGate).

Let's talk about the end of the game. At the two-minute warning, Seattle was down 28-24, but had the ball in Patriots territory, with 1:55 on the clock and all three timeouts. Following an incomplete pass, the play clock ran down (the game clock was stopped) and Russell Wilson called timeout. Three plays later, another timeout, when the Seahawks didn't get downfield fast enough following Jermaine Kearse's ever-bouncing reception.

So when Wilson got intercepted at the goal line, the Seahawks had :20 and one timeout instead of three. With three timeouts you can get the ball back. The other issue, of course, was penalties. Seattle had some really harmful penalties in this game, perhaps none moreso than Michael Bennett jumping into the neutral zone with New England pinned on its own 1. A potential safety became an easy kneel-down to run out the clock. Bennett had a great Super Bowl, but he blew it on that play. Cris Collinsworth lamented, "Michael Bennett jumps offsides more than anybody else, 10 times this year. And in this critical, last-chance moment, he does again." Seattle's hopes were pretty slim at that point, but self-destructive clock management and penalties sealed the game.

First Half

The Seahawks ran three plays in the first quarter. Both teams punted to begin the game, then the Patriots started grinding out first downs, with a 13-play, 58-yard drive that took them to Seattle's 10-yard line, whereupon Tom Brady threw one of the dumber interceptions of his career. Collinsworth was astonished: "Hard to believe that Tom Brady just made that mistake. Under pressure, yes, but really just threw that one up." It was a terrible decision.

For Jeremy Lane, it was the first interception of his three-year career, but he was injured while returning the pick and had to leave the game. Lane was replaced by Tharold Simon, whom Brady picked on several times. The announcers even wondered if the interception helped New England, simply because it brought Simon into the game. That's a stretch. Jeremy Lane is not Richard Sherman, and there's no reason to believe Lane — who came into this game with zero career INT — would have shut down his side of the field. His pick turned a long drive into zero points. It was a big play for Seattle.

New England put together a pair of TD drives while Seattle's offense continued to struggle. Russell Wilson didn't complete a pass until 5:32 remained in the second quarter (the second-longest drought in Super Bowl history), and the Seahawks punted on their first three possessions. New England's secondary is the strongest unit on that defense, while Seattle's no-name receiving corps doesn't include a lot of game-breaking play-makers. With the main receiving threats shut down, Wilson eventually turned to rookie Chris Matthews, who had never started a game or caught a pass in the NFL. He caught 4 of 5 targets in the Super Bowl, for 109 yards and a touchdown. Matthews dominated Kyle Arrington so badly that in the second half, New England switched its coverage to put Brandon Browner on Matthews.

A 44-yard reception by Matthews set up Marshawn Lynch for Seattle's first TD, and after New England regained the lead with :36 remaining in the first half, three long plays and a face-mask penalty set up the Seahawks to even the score. This sequence helps explain why Seattle has been so successful under Pete Carroll. Taking over at your own 20 with :31 left, most coaches would kneel out the half. The Seahawks handed off, still a conservative call, but miles away from a kneel-down that would concede the halftime deficit. The successful drive gave Seattle 1st-and-10 at the Patriots' 11-yard line with :06 left. The NBC announcers urged a field goal, but in that situation, you've got to try for the end zone, and hope there's a tick or two left on the clock if you're incomplete. As it turned out, Wilson threw a touchdown pass to Matthews, and there were two seconds left on the clock. Great call by Carroll and his offensive coordinator, Darrell Bevell. Announcers are almost always too conservative.

Second Half

The Seahawks had to feel good coming out of the locker room. They had tied the score to end a poor first half, they established rhythm and momentum on offense, they were about to receive the second-half kickoff, and they've been a second-half team all year. Sure enough, they drove 72 yards and kicked a go-ahead field goal, 17-14. Three minutes later, Bobby Wagner intercepted Brady, and Seattle scored a touchdown on the ensuing possession. The 24-14 deficit is the largest Brady and Belichick have ever faced in a Super Bowl.

After the touchdown, the teams combined for four straight punts with only one first down, then New England drove for a TD that closed the gap to 24-21. The key play was a 21-yard reception by Edelman, on 3rd-and-14. He actually ran 33 yards on the play, but the last 12 were called back because his knee and elbow hit the ground. In hindsight, that seems like a really big play to me. It was big at the time, too, but after that run by Edelman, New England's offense really hit its stride; momentum shifted to the Patriots.

The Seahawks went three-and-out (with a little help from an uncalled tripping penalty on eventual hero Malcolm Butler), giving the Patriots possession with 6:52 remaining in Super Bowl XLIX. Seattle fans had to be worried at this point. Al Michaels commented, "A very fast three-and-out, exactly what New England was looking for." And by this time, Seattle's defense — missing Cliff Avril, who was injured during Wagner's interception return — couldn't stop Edelman or Vereen, and Gronkowski was starting to roll. The Patriots drove for an easy touchdown, 11 plays without ever facing a third down. With 2:02 left in the game, New England was ahead, 28-24.

With an empty backfield, Wilson hit Lynch for a 31-yard gain along the left sideline. As we reached the two-minute warning, no one was complaining about a boring game — but the action was just getting started. Following two incompletions, Wilson hit Lockette for 11 yards on 3rd-and-10, then one of the more unlikely plays in Super Bowl history. Wilson threw a deep pass to Jermaine Kearse in double coverage. Kearse and Butler both stumbled, the ball bounced into the air, Kearse fell to the ground and fumbled at the ball for a second or two, and it finally came down in his hands: first down Seattle, at the New England 5, with 1:06 remaining. I swear, whoever decided to use an oblong ball that bounces funny, rather than a round one, is responsible for the excitement of professional football.

So Seattle suddenly had a great chance to win. Lynch ran left, down to the 1-yard line. It was at this point that Al and Cris discussed whether the Patriots should deliberately allow a touchdown, just so they'd have some time to come back. Then came the play that everyone will remember from this game, Butler's interception (discussed above). But you don't allow a TD in that situation. When the Patriots let Ahmad Bradshaw score in Super Bowl XLVI, they led 17-15. The Giants could have kicked an easy field goal to win the game. Here, Seattle needed a touchdown. A field goal wouldn't even tie it. You've got to trust your defense in that situation. In this case, the defense came through, bigger than anyone expected.

Unfortunately, a thrilling Super Bowl ended with two kneel-downs and three penalties. The Patriots drew a meaningless celebration foul after the interception, then Michael Bennett had a game-clinching encroachment, and for some reason Bruce Irvin and Bennett started a fight after the first kneel-down. In a year when the NFL has been defined by the bad behavior of its players, you really need to have a straight fight in front of the biggest audience of the year? Right at the end of a great game, when the focus was on the sport itself? I hope the league will fine Bennett and Irvin, and I wouldn't mind seeing one or both suspended for the first game of 2015. Irvin was ejected.

Tom Brady, MVP

This could have gone in different directions. Edelman and Vereen had great games, and Darrelle Revis was pretty fantastic other than that one play where he got picked off by the umpire. But Brady's a sound choice. He completed 37 passes, for 328 yards and 4 TDs, with a 101.1 passer rating. Of course, he also threw 2 interceptions. Brady is the first Super Bowl MVP since Terry Bradshaw 35 years ago to win the award despite throwing multiple INTs. I probably would have voted for Edelman.

Brady joined his idol Joe Montana as the only three-time Super Bowl MVPs. Brady, Bradshaw, and Montana are the only four-time Super Bowl-winning quarterbacks. Brady is also the only Patriot to play in all four of the team's Super Bowl victories. In fact, Brady and Vince Wilfork are the only Patriots remaining from the team's last championship, in Super Bowl XXXIX. It was pretty awkward when Dan Patrick kept asking Rob Gronkowski how it felt to win the Super Bowl again. Gronk was in high school the last time the Patriots won a Super Bowl.

Bill Belichick and Tom Brady

In the wake of a thrilling Super Bowl victory, we'll hear a lot of discussion about whether Bill Belichick is the greatest coach of all-time, and Tom Brady the best quarterback ever. In fact, you'll probably hear more assertions than discussions.

I don't believe either one has a strong case. Three years ago, when I ranked the best coaches in NFL history, Belichick rated fourth. I'd place him second or third now — it's tough to evaluate so soon following a big win, before you've had time to put the accomplishment in perspective. Here's the main competition:

George Halas: 318-148-31 (.671), 6 championships
Paul Brown: 213-104-9 (.667), 7 championships
Belichick: 211-109 (.659), 4 championships

Brown was also the foremost innovator of the Modern Era. He invented modern pass-blocking techniques and the quarterback pocket. He was the first coach to give film grades or call plays from the sideline. He pioneered year-round coaching staffs and tutored five eventual Hall of Fame head coaches, including Chuck Noll and Don Shula. Brown has the largest, most important coaching tree in NFL history. He's the father of modern football. Bill Belichick is a brilliant coach, the best I've ever seen. But he's not the best ever, not ahead of Paul Brown.

Tom Brady has been one of the best QBs in the league for over a decade. He's passed for 50,000 yards, nearly 400 TDs, and he's never thrown 15 or more INTs in any season. He holds several postseason records, he's started in six Super Bowls, quarterbacked four Super Bowl winners, and won three Super Bowl MVPs. He's an obvious Hall of Famer, one of the greatest QBs of all-time.

It's hard to compare Brady to some of the other top quarterbacks, because he hasn't spent much of his career with elite receivers. He had a few years with Randy Moss and Wes Welker, a few with Gronkowski. Other than that, some fine players, but no one you'd call elite. How do you compare him against someone who threw to Jerry Rice, or Raymond Berry, or Marvin Harrison and Reggie Wayne?

But if Malcolm Butler doesn't intercept that pass, and Lynch runs in for a TD on the next play, should that really affect our perception of Brady? Why should his legacy be dictated by a play made when he was on the sideline? If the Seahawks score there, Brady becomes only the third QB to lose three Super Bowls (Fran Tarkenton and Jim Kelly). I know some people will hammer me for this, like I can't tell the difference between one Super Bowl and four, but it's obvious to me that Tom Brady isn't as great as Peyton Manning. Everything Brady does well, Manning has done better: more accurate, better play-fakes, better avoiding sacks, better reading and responding to defenses. Brady's better at QB sneaks. Manning turns every receiver he plays with into a superstar. Emmanuel Sanders was nothing special in Pittsburgh, and Ben Roethlisberger is not exactly chopped liver. With Peyton, Sanders caught 101 passes for 1,404 yards and 9 TDs. Last year, Brady was lost without Wes Welker and a healthy Gronk.

Brady's an all-time great. And he's still playing well, so there's reason to believe he'll move up the all-time lists, but for now I think he's still behind a handful of other passers, guys like Manning, Otto Graham, Johnny Unitas, probably Dan Marino and Joe Montana. Maybe a couple of others, too, depending on what you look for. I get that people are excited after the Super Bowl, but I don't believe any thorough analysis would show Brady as already the top QB in history. Let's check back on this topic in two or three years.

I don't really have anywhere else to put this, but Belichick tied Chuck Noll as the only four-time Super Bowl-winning head coaches. I'm not trying to down Brady or Belichick. I have tremendous respect for both of them.

Entertainment and Commercials

I was in a bad mood at the beginning of the game, so I'll go ahead and admit this: I hate when "America the Beautiful" gets performed at sports events. I've never liked that song, it's never inspired patriotic feelings in me, and it's overkill to do two anthems for one game. There, I said it. Whew.

I love the Star-Spangled Banner. It does everything for me that the other song doesn't. But I didn't like it in Arizona on Sunday. First of all, the crowd showed no respect. Fine, you don't like Bill Belichick. But how do you boo during the national anthem? Let's save the cheers (or boos, if necessary) for the end. Beyond the less-than-classy crowd reaction, Idina Menzel didn't respect the song. A crisp Star-Spangled Banner runs about 1:20. She drew that thing out. I clocked her at 2:05. A long anthem isn't always a disaster, but at no point did Menzel sound good. A good performance is about the song, not the performer. Menzel clearly wanted it to be about her, but she ain't Whitney Houston.

It was a disappointing opening, but I enjoyed the halftime show. I'm not a Katy Perry fan, and I didn't care about the music one way or the other, but it was visually pleasing, an aesthetically effective show. I wish they would quit using so many different performers, though. It's insulting to the headliner, whether it's Bruno Mars or Perry or whoever, to invite so many guests, like the star can't carry the load on her own. If you hire someone to do the show, have the confidence to let them do their thing.

Also, we have got to reel in the length on these things. A normal halftime runs 12:00. I timed 31:50 between the last play of the first half and the second half kickoff. That's a huge disruption for players, and it needs to be curtailed. Perry's performance didn't even begin until 10 minutes into halftime.

The commercials were pretty bland this year, but evidently many advertisers had the same ideas as one another. The big two were inspiring people with prosthetic legs (a car company and a software company), and sappy dad ads (two car companies, and a company that makes hygienic products and toiletries). A fast food company was in on that idea, too, except with mom love. None of the commercials were executed well (except maybe the first car/leg ad), and I find it really insulting when advertisers try to manipulate people with stuff like that. It's also not apparent how how most of the products being advertised related to the commercials themselves.

Just when I'd given up on the commercials, we got the Budweiser Pac-Man ad. I want to do that. Clearly the best ad of the Super Bowl. But I think the Best Buds stuff, which I liked two years ago, and appreciated last year, has run its course. Let's not do any more of those.

Season Honors

The NFL and the Associated Press announced this year's major award winners on Saturday night. Aaron Rodgers ran away with the MVP race, drawing 31 of the 50 votes, far ahead of J.J. Watt's second-place 13. DeMarco Murray (26 votes) topped Rodgers (15 votes) for Offensive Player of the Year, because the voters believe that they must select a quarterback or running back, and that no one should win both awards.

Watt won Defensive Player of the Year, of course, and became the only player ever selected unanimously. Odell Beckham and Aaron Donald won Offensive and Defensive Rookie of the Year, and the Panthers' Thomas Davis was named Walter Payton Man of the Year. Cardinals coaches Bruce Arians and Todd Bowles took home Coach of the Year and the inaugural Assistant Coach of the Year Award, respectively.

Those choices largely mirror my own, and the only major disagreement (on Murray) was predictable.

Hall of Fame

The Pro Football Hall of Fame announced the Class of 2015 on Saturday: Jerome Bettis, Tim Brown, Charles Haley, Bill Polian, Junior Seau, Will Shields, Mick Tingelhoff, and Ron Wolf. It's good to see the maximum eight nominees elected, but this is not a strong Hall of Fame class.

There are some inductions to celebrate. Tingelhoff, the Senior nominee, was a five-time All-Pro who started in four Super Bowls, and his selection was long overdue. The PFHOF also changed policy this year, separating "contributors" from players and coaches, so the two don't compete against each other in the selection process. The result was two worthy personnel men, Polian and Wolf, getting recognition for their parts in building multiple dynasties. Both the selection committees and the voters who approved them did fine work on these nominations.

In the general election, we got Bettis, Brown, Haley, Seau, and Shields. Seau was a no-brainer. He's one of the greatest linebackers of all time. Shields, a 12-time Pro Bowler, was also a sound selection. This was his fourth year of eligibility, and I'm surprised he wasn't inducted earlier. Tim Brown was a fine choice, as well, though it's strange to see him chosen over fellow wide receiver Marvin Harrison, who was turned away for the second time. I guess some of the voters are dismissing Harrison as a product of Peyton Manning's brilliance, but Harrison was an exceptional route-runner, and the best I've ever seen at keeping his toes in bounds for that critical catch on the sideline or in the corner of the end zone. He and Peyton helped each other.

Bettis and Haley do not belong in Canton. I've written many times before to explain why Bettis falls below the Hall's standards. He only had three impact seasons, and he was never the best RB in the NFL. He didn't run-block, couldn't catch, and wasn't a great short-yardage runner. I don't want to spend more space bashing him, because some readers are probably starting to believe I have something against Bettis personally. I don't; he seems like a nice guy. But his election diminishes the Hall of Fame and lowers its standards.

Bettis is not the worst running back in the Hall. Haley probably is the worst defensive end in the Hall. Haley was a good player, but he got elected because he's the only man to play for five Super Bowl-winning teams, and that's largely a coincidence — Haley was in the right places at the right times. Haley was a pass-rush specialist, but he had fewer sacks (100.5) than contemporaries like Jim Jeffcoat (102.5), Trace Armstrong (106.0), Greg Townsend (109.5), Sean Jones (113.0), and Clyde Simmons (121.5), who are nowhere near the Hall of Fame. Fellow HOF Finalist Kevin Greene had 10 seasons with double-digit sacks, twice as many as Haley (5), who was also a difficult man to get along with, an annoyance for some of his former teammates and coaches.

It's frustrating to see worthy candidates like Harrison, Greene, and Terrell Davis left out while good-but-not-great players like Bettis and Haley are ushered in. Hopefully their selections will at least clear the way for stronger candidates at the same position.

Kenny Easley was an honorary captain for the Super Bowl coin toss. I would really like to see the Seniors Committee nominate him a few years down the line. Easley was an Ed Reed-type player, a hard-hitting strong safety who went after passes like a ball-hawking free safety. He made five Pro Bowls in just seven seasons, and he was Defensive Player of the Year in 1984, when he intercepted 10 passes, returning two of them for touchdowns. New HOF inductee Ron Wolf, who was Easley's division rival with the Raiders, called Easley "the best safety I've ever seen."

Posted by Brad Oremland at 3:35 PM | Comments (0)

Selig's Legacy, For Better and For Worse

Bud Selig really is retired, at last. And baseball's new commissioner, Rob Manfred, isn't an incumbent or former owner. Selig, you may remember, owned the Milwaukee Brewers when he helped engineer the putsch that sent Fay Vincent out of the commissioner's office. He then became baseball's longest serving commissioner since Kenesaw Mountain Landis. And his legacy is at least as mixed as Landis's was.

Part of the problem is that, say what you will of the man one way or the other, Selig really is a baseball fan when all is said and done. And like many baseball fans who aren't even close to owning a franchise, never mind running the game overall, Selig hasn't always married his fandom to the absolute best for the game.

Essentially, it comes down to the way I phrased it addressing a different issue a short while back: Under Selig's watch, the common good of the game wasn't always the same thing as making money for it. Which isn't to say that Selig was always as concerned about making money for the players as for the owners, of course.

Think about all those yummy new ballparks that came online during Selig's administration. Damn near all of them were paid for with "public monies." (Read: your tax dollars.) Not only did they not "deliver the local economic booms they promised," says Sports Illustrated‘s Jay Jaffe, "but [they] also often pushed average fans farther away from the action, thanks to the addition of corporate-targeted luxury boxes and premium seats — all while raising ticket prices, of course. What's more, the costs of the increasing television revenues brought into the game were inevitably passed along to customers whose cable and satellite bills have skyrocketed, and yet odious, antiquated blackout rules prevent fans in some markets from watching as many as six teams in their general vicinity."

Lots of fans thought it was just a delight when baseball's owners engaged in collusion twice in the 1980s. Selig was one of those owners. Except that he has never spoken publicly about his precise role in it. Murray Chass, the former New York Times columnist now writing independently, notes that Selig has never admitted that, yes, the owners colluded to suppress salaries in violation of specific agreements with the Players' Association: "Or if he didn't want to make it so personal, ‘Yes, we violated the free-agency rules'."

Two independent arbitrators said the owners were guilty. The owners — including Selig — agreed to pay the players in question a total $280 million to settle the issue. When Chass asked Selig last week to talk about collusion, Selig merely referred him to Peter Ueberroth, the commissioner at the time collusion began.

Vincent wasn't a perfect commissioner. He did try strong-arming the Yankees into submission when they stood by reliever Steve Howe despite an eighth or ninth drug-related issue. But Vincent also told the owners, essentially, as a reader wrote the New York Daily News, "You stole $280 million from the players, and the players are unified to a man around that issue, because you got caught and many of you are still involved."

And in due course Walter Haas, Jr., the late Oakland Athletics owner, admitted to Vincent, "I'm embarrassed about it. I was involved in it. You should never feel bad about saying it happened, and on your watch it wouldn't have happened." Selig has yet to speak. "Concerned that if Vincent remained in the commissioner's office, he would get in the way of the owners' plan to go to war with the union," Chass noted, referencing the 1994 players' strike, "Selig and his closest cohort, Jerry Reinsdorf of the Chicago White Sox, led a move to oust Vincent. It was just another brilliantly bad move that is imbedded in the part of his legacy that Selig would prefer that no one talk about."

Perhaps realizing at last that all the strong-arm and warmongering with the players' union was going to get was the possible destruction of the game — and possibly embarrassed as hell because the strike was barely settled when Reinsdorf, the cheapskate, backed a truck to Albert Belle's place refusing to leave until Belle signed a deal paying him a few million a year more than 1994′s highest annual salary ("Whatever happened to nine and ten?" Whitey Herzog would ask incredulously in You're Missin' a Great Game) — Selig gradually backed away from downright militancy.

The best parts of Selig as commissioner: He did engineer revenue sharing at long enough last, enabling fans to understand that baseball, being a franchise operation, wasn't quite the same thing as thirty independently operating manufacturers whether they produced the same goods. He did respond affirmatively enough when people like the late Michael Weiner, first as a negotiator and then the (too-short-lived) leader of the players' union, shepherded an era in which compromise and larger visions no longer had to fight with a disreputable past. They have other battles to fight, larger visions especially do, but no longer does baseball seem entirely like a war waiting to happen.

In case you were wondering, the average baseball game attendance during the middle so-called Golden Age of Baseball — 1955, to be precise — was 13,466. The average game attendance last season was 30,437. Last year's worst attended team, the Tampa Bay Rays (average attendance: 17,857), still drew better than the 1955 World Series champions. (The Brooklyn Dodgers — average attendance: 13,423.) Thank you, George F. Will, for isolating those figures.

Selig also finally got on board with the much-needed and long-overdue instant replay system. Yes, the system has a few kinks to work out still. But, yes, it's far better than what was present before. And you notice that this past postseason the umpires' mistakes seemed fewer and farther between. The human element wasn't eliminated, after all. The world didn't grind to a halt. Hell didn't freeze over. And the sun still arose the morning after the World Series finished.

Unfortunately, the World Series amplifies a couple of the worst sides of Selig's legacy. His insane championship of three-division leagues and wild cards yielded up a 2014 World Series in which the nation's ninth-best major league team beat its seventh-best. Essentially, Selig compromised the value of the regular season on behalf of the postseason. The fannies in the seats may be greater on average than in the so-called Golden Age, but isn't it just a little perverse to be sitting on the edge of your seats down the stretch biting your nails to see who's going to finish ... in second place?

Even Selig's postseason emphases have come with problems other than the silly idea of pegging World Series home field advantage to the All-Star Game result. Television viewing is still in the basement. It never seems to have crossed Selig's mind, to any extent known publicly, that a seven-game League Championship Series dilutes the impact of the World Series, that in the past decade or so there have been times when the LCS was actually more exciting than the World Series (to name one, who the hell remembers the Florida Marlins' 2003 Series conquest more vividly than they remember that year's hammer-and-tongs, Boone-and-Bartman LCSes?), and that the saturation factor just might have a play in it?

Selig may have helped shepherd a stringent and by and large effective baseball counterattack to actual or alleged performance-enhancing substances, too, but it was on his watch that their presence went from trickling in to exploding in the first place. It was Selig's and the owners' blind eyes as much as the players' that finally invited Congress — which probably had no business doing it and seemed interested less in solving a problem than bashing players and other baseball people — to pressure baseball into a program with some heft. And even as the program continued to improve and tighten up, not only did a few such problems continue but Selig proved very willing to get in the dirt and violate certain agreements in matters such as the Biogenesis scandal.

Selig is far from the worst commissioner baseball has ever had. Landis may have cleaned up baseball's gambling problems for the most part, but he did turn the other way as that generation of baseball people did their best to keep the game from admitting black players who proved in due course to enhance it munificently. Ford Frick was so hands-off (except when trying odiously to preserve Babe Ruth's legacy, as Roger Maris could tell you) that it sometimes seemed baseball might as well be anarchy. (He also presided over the Golden Era of 15,000+ average game attendance and competitive balance inclined almost entirely toward New York.)

Bowie Kuhn, who genuinely loved the game, forced the Atlanta Braves not to jerry-rig Hank Aaron's breaking of Babe Ruth's career home run record for the home folks, in the interest of honest competition. But he also presided over fifteen work stoppages, tried actively and clumsily to censor Jim Bouton's Ball Four, tried to thwart the overdue end of the reserve era that kept players as chattel, and was exposed during the 1981 strike as having built little real consensual power. Ueberroth might have fought baseball's cocaine epidemic in the 1980s but he was also what Vincent would call "the quarterback of collusion."

And A. Bartlett Giamatti, who probably loved the game more deeply than any commissioner, might have done yeoman's work in investigating Pete Rose's gambling, but he was also coming out as a baseball labour hawk before his untimely death. We'll never know whether that would have exacerbated or eased the tensions and chicaneries that led to the 1994 strike.

Mae West once said, once famously, "When I'm good, I'm very, very good, but when I'm bad, I'm better." Say fairly of Selig, then, that when he was good, he was very, very good. But say as well, and just as fairly, that when he was bad, he could be and often enough was very, very bad.

Posted by Jeff Kallman at 1:30 PM | Comments (0)