The Tuesday Ten

1) Nick Harper has to score a touchdown on the Jerome Bettis fumble recovery. Ben Roethlisberger made an amazing tackle, yes, but he was only able to make said tackle after Harper inexplicably cut back to the middle of the field during his run instead of turning to the outside where he would have had a clear path to a sure touchdown. The only guy Harper had to beat on the right was an offensive lineman, but he instead made the quick decision to cut left and ran right into Roethlisberger's outstretched arms. Mike Vanderjagt might have blown the field goal, but Harper's gaffe cost the Colts the go-ahead touchdown.

2) Like most of the free world, I can't stand Mike Vanderjagt. That he is referred to as "the most accurate kicker in NFL history" despite missing on the two most important field goals of his career (Sunday and in the 2004 season opener at New England) is sort of like calling Alex Rodriguez "the most feared hitter in baseball" when you can count his clutch hits on one hand. Hitting FGs in blowout wins over Houston is nice, but it's how you do in the clutch that defines a kicker. Just ask Adam Vinatieri.

3) Yesterday I called for the repossession of Shaun Alexander's MVP award. You might want to throw Lovie Smith's Coach of the Year in there too.
One guy on the field for the Carolina Panthers was capable of beating the Bears single-handedly, and Chicago let Steve Smith do just that. Wilbon had it right on PTI yesterday; the Bears were arrogant all week and seemed to assume they would beat Carolina just because they had done it before. To leave Charles Tillman in single-coverage on Smith for the bulk of the game was the worst coaching decision since the Bills started Rob Johnson over Doug Flutie in a playoff game six years ago. The Wolfman knows what I'm talking about, in both instances, sadly.

4) Earlier this year when ESPN, USA Today and various other national media outlets were doing stories on the success of black coaches, I criticized such pieces for their glaring hypocrisy. Each story focused on how guys like Marvin Lewis and Tony Dungy were coaching teams with the best records in the league and how they no longer needed to be considered black head coaches, but were instead just "head coaches". Race, it was argued, should no longer be part of the equation when evaluating coaches, quarterbacks or anything in sports.
But if race really "doesn't matter" anymore, why print the stories in the first place? Don't write "we've moved beyond race" in a story that totally proves we haven't. If that were really true, such an article would be unnecessary. You can't have it both ways, I contended. If race shouldn't be discussed when talking about the many merits of coaches like Lewis and Dungy, as is argued, then their success shouldn't be newsworthy simply because of their skin color.
Conversely, if you're going to write stories about how black coaches did well in the regular season, then it's only responsible journalism to do a follow-up story to discuss how black coaches went 0-3 in the playoffs this season, including two losses in which those coaches were absolutely out-classed by the guy on the other sideline (Smith by John Fox, Dungy by Bill Cowher).
Before you call Jesse Jackson on me, let me reiterate my point: The color of Marvin Lewis' skin has nothing to do with anything football-related. And Smith and Dungy's blackness had nothing to do with their losses this weekend. I'm just saying I wish the media would stop referring to them as "black coaches". But that won't happen, despite repeated pronouncements to the contrary. So if that's the case, then those coaches failure in the playoffs is just as much a story as their regular season success. I contend that neither are news-worthy, but editors nationwide apparently disagreed.

5) NFL referees are incompetent, spineless hacks. The overturning of the Troy Polamalu interception was the single-worst moment in the history of instant replay. Even 147-year old Dick Enberg could tell Polamalu picked the ball clean and fumbled on his way up; apparently the only person who didn't think so was the ref on the field. His baffling explanation for overturning the call ("his knee knocked it out while still on the ground") brought screams of "that's not even a rule" from me, just when I thought I had screamed myself out during the previous day's Redskins game. I can only imagine what fans in Pittsburgh were doing; I suppose I probably would have broken something via a thrown remote control if I rooted for the Steelers (I often move small objects that can be flung during crucial points in the game for fear of cracking my 55-inch screen with an errant throw.)
Joey Porter said he thought the call was part of a vast NFL conspiracy (years back I claimed the tuck rule, which kept the hated Al Davis out of an AFC Championship Game, was part of the same conspiracy) and while he'll likely be fined for that, what else are we supposed to believe? That the ref on the field actually thought it wasn't an interception? It took him about four minutes to make the call too, during which he was talking an awful lot into a headset. Will this be the NFL equivalent of Nixon's 18 1/2 minute gap?
There are a few ways to stem the tide of terrible officiating: 1) Suspend referees who make awful calls. 2) Designate an official in the booth to determine replay decisions. Going from watching the game live in real speed to looking at a slow-mo replay on a monitor under a hood has to be disorienting and is ridiculously, and unnecessarily, time-consuming. College football has a replay official and it takes about 1/5th of the time to review the plays. 3) Fire Mike Pereira, whose appearances on the NFL Network make him look like a spokesman for the North Korean government. When refs know the senior head of officiating will have their back no matter how bad their calls, they're more likely to make those bad calls.
One last thing about the refs; it's nice the NFL admitted the Polamalu call was incorrect, but I guarantee no such apology would have been given if the Colts had gone on to win. It's easy to admit a mistake when it didn't cost a team the game.

6) How 'bout those Manning brothers?! Peyton couldn't win the big game in college (yet somehow Tee Martin took essentially the same team to a National title the year after he left) and now has proven it wasn't just the Pats that had his number in the pros. No player in recent memory will have more to prove in 2006 than Peyton Manning. With Edgerrin James and Reggie Wayne eligible for free agency, Peyton might have blown the best chance he'll have at a Super Bowl in a long time.

7) Not that it was all Peyton's fault, mind you. He wasn't the only one on the field who didn't show up. Everyone has been criticizing Manning for calling out his offensive line after the game, but what did everyone want him to do, act like they did a great job of protecting him? The man told the truth, he didn't throw his teammates under the bus. The Colts O-line sucked. They played like diddly-poo. Playoffs?! They weren't even ready for the pre-season. So why is Peyton getting ripped for this?
The press always wants players to "tell it like it is." Then when they do, journalists jump down their throats. On one hand, the press complains that every player has gone through so much media training that post-game press conference are essentially worthless. Nobody says anything controversial because they've been trained to give the most bland statements ever and, as a result, the mandatory interviews are good for nothing except generic quotes for game stories.
In the rare instance when a player actually says something that's remotely critical of anything, the press jumps on it and immediately lambasts that player for being a bad teammate/player/human being.
Peyton told the truth. Had he defended his offensive line and said the blame was on him, people would have called him disingenuous. Tiki Barber told the truth when he said the Giants were outcoached against the Panthers. A few year's back, Vijay Singh criticized Annika Sorenstam's involvement in a men's tournament. Singh, not the most likeable guy on the Tour, was turned into the sport's arch-villain. The media always rips on golfers for never taking a stand on anything. Vijay did and was practically run out of the country.
With that reaction, plus the recent outcry over Manning and Barber's non-controversial and factual statements, what motivation does any athlete have for speaking their mind? Michael Jordan knew that; years ago when Charlotte mayor Harvey Gantt was running for the North Carolina Senate seat against Jesse Helms, many reporters questioned why Jordan wasn't campaigning for the black candidate. He famously responded, "Republicans buy sneakers too."
Maybe Peyton Manning should have lied and said his offensive line did great and dished out a few cliches about how it was a team effort and crap like that. And Tiki could have kept his thoughts about bad coaching to himself. But if the media wants players to speak their mind, then jumps on them the minute they do, the whole exercise of post-game press conferences and interviews becomes meaningless. Tony Kornheiser left his lucrative show on ESPN Radio because he hated interviewing athletes for this very reason.

8) Imagine how much we'd be ripping on Jake Plummer today if it had been him, and not Tom Brady, who had thrown a horrendous interception that turned a probable 13-10 lead into a 17-6 deficit. Just because Brady has been fortunate enough to be the quarterback for Bill Belichick's defense he gets a free-pass for throwing a season-killing pick in his opponent's endzone? I didn't realize Super Bowl MVP awards were "Get Out of Jail Free" cards.
Brady's pick, and poor overall play, crushed the Pats, not the Asante Samuel call or the five turnovers.

9) Speaking of getting a free-pass, Champ Bailey essentially stopped running at the end of his 100-yard interception return. The momentary slow-up allowed Ben Watson to catch up to him and lay that vicious hit that might or might not have popped the ball into the endzone. Regardless of how great a play Watson made, it wouldn't have been possible if Champ wasn't showboating into the endzone. (No, he didn't slow up because he was tired.) Leon Lett will never live down doing the same thing in a Super Bowl rout, so why is nobody on Champ's case when that play could have totally changed the complexion of the game?

10) If Denver and Carolina should win their respective Championship games, and we are blessed with a Jake Plummer vs. Jake Delhomme Super Bowl quarterback match-up, is there any way the NFL can get both Jake and the Fatman to take part in the pre-game coin toss?