Barbaro: A Tribute In Rhyme

Barbaro, you brave young steed,
you'll never be replaced.
For no thoroughbred in history

hath made such gooey paste.

A Brief History of (Super Bowl) Lines

Imagine turning the business section of your newspaper and listed alongside the values of gold, pork bellies and other commodities were the going street rates for marijuana, crack and every other illegal drug on the market. It'd seem a bit weird, right? Why would a reputable outfit like a newspaper print information that could only be used for illicit purposes?
Yet open any sports page in the country (with the exception of the prententious, and worthless, New York Times sports section) and, there, listed in the agate type are lines for sporting events that are illegal to bet on in nearly every state in the country.
The Super Bowl is the second-biggest gambling event in the U.S. (behind the NCAA Tournament). This year, $100 million will be wagered legally, about 1/10th of the total of illegal bets that will be placed via the internet and office pools. And while exotic prop bets have become popular in recent years, the point spread is still the most popular way to bet on the Super Bowl.
Today, Chris' Sports Blog takes a look at Super Bowl point spreads throughout history, all while taking unnecessary cheap shots at the Patriots. Enjoy.

Best Lines
Super Bowl XXVIII: Oakland (+2.5) vs. Washington
The 1983 Washington Redskins were a juggernaut. They were defending Super Bowl champions, went 14-2 with the two losses coming by a combined two points on two Monday Nights two months apart (including the infamous 48-47 track meet with Green Bay that still holds the record for most points scored on MNF) and, most impressively, set the record for most points scored in an NFL season (a record that wouldn't be broken for 15 years). The 'Skins had All-Pros on both lines, a quarterback in the prime of his career and a Hall of Fame running back who had just set the NFL record for most touchdowns in a single season (a record which would stand for about a decade too). In short, before the Super Bowl, it would have been fair to assume the '83 Redskins were among the greatest teams of all-time.
Oakland, on the other hand, was a pretty good team. They finished 12-4 on the regular season and avenged two division losses to Seattle in the AFC Championship game (remember, Seattle was in the AFC back then). Oakland was good, but the Redskins were potentially great; which is why the fact that Washington was only favored by 2.5 is so damn fascinating.
Clearly, the low spread was caused by Oakland and Washington's regular season meeting, won by the Redskins 37-35 at RFK. Oakland came back from a 20-7 deficit in the 3rd quarter to score four quick touchdowns which put the Raiders up 35-20 with just 7:30 minutes remaining. A quick Thiesmann-to-Charlie Brown TD pass preceded a fumbled kickoff and a Mark Moseley field goal with 4:28 remaining to cut the lead to five. A failed Oakland drive followed, giving ther Redskins 110 seconds to get a touchdown starting from their own 31. Three straight passes to Brown got the 'Skins to the Raiders six with 43 left and, two plays later, Thiesmann hit Joe Washington streaking up the middle for the touchdown that sealed the win.
That close game was likely what dictated the 2.5 spread and it was a play in that game that led to the Raiders eventual blowout.
As NFL Films so expertly detailed on a Super Bowl Highlights VHS I watched over-and-over again in my earlier years, in the first Redskins/Raiders game Joe Gibbs called a play named "Rocket Screen" that went for 67 yards. The Raiders defensive coordinator had a hunch Gibbs might try to run it again, so he put Jack Squirek in certain packages to spy Joe Washington while other defenders dropped back into a sort of prevent.
Down 14-3 with the ball at his own 12 and only 12 seconds left in the half, the conservative Gibbs figured to down the ball and enter the locker room with an eleven-point deficit and the ball to start the second half. Instead, Gibbs called the rocket screen, Thiesmann never saw Squirek, who jumped the route, had the ball hit him in the numbers and walked, untouched, into the endzone for a 21-3 Raiders halftime lead.
In the case of Super Bowl XXVIII, the 2.5 spread wasn't a sign that the Redskins were superior, but that they were very vulnerable.

1995: San Francisco (-18.5) vs. San Diego
San Diego went 11-5 and had two wins in five weeks over the Pittsburgh Steelers, the team who earend homefield advantage throughout the playoffs. They played a brutal schedule and were not competitive in only one game, a 38-15 home rout by the team they would meet in Sure Bowl XXIX, the San Francisco 49ers.
It was likely for that game, and that game alone, that the oddsmakers bumped this spread up to 18.5, the highest in the history of the Super Bowl (yes, even higher than Super Bowl III, but thankfully we were spared the sight of Stan Humphries guaranteeing a victory whilst wearing a Speedo this time around). Based on records and stats, the Niners might have been two touchdown favorites.
As expected, the Niners jumped all over the Chargers early, so the only late-game drama was to see whether San Diego could get within 19 and come in under the spread, but a late on-sides kick failed and Bobby Ross was left to wonder what might have been if Stan Humphries was named Joe, from Broadway and wanted kisses from Suzy Kolber.

Worst Lines
1998: Green Bay (-11.5) vs. Denver
The defending Super Bowl champs had a fine follow-up season after Brett Favre's magical Super Bowl victory, a victory punctuated by that boyish celebration which showed how Favre is the game of football personified. Oh, how I love you Brett Favre. Me and The Wolfman.
Anyway, Green Bay ran through the NFC, finished 13-3 and had an easy time with the best teams they played, running a 7-1 record against teams over .500. But the Broncos were #1 in total points and total yards, and #7 in points allowed and #5 in yards allowed, the defensive stats beingvery similar to Green Bay's rankings.
It could be argued that the NFC contained the two best teams in football (GB and SF), but after those two, the talent dropoff was precipitous. The AFC, however, had few great teams but a lot of good ones, which helps explain Denver's unspectacular 12-4 record. A playoff rout of 11-5 Jacksonville set-up a game against the presumptive AFC favorites, Kansas City. The Chiefs won their last six games of the regular season, including a 44-9 drubbing of 11-1 San Francisco. Kansas City was the team to beat in the AFC and Denver did it, then desposed of Pittsburgh in the title game.
So why were Packers favored by so many points? Green Bay barely beats San Francisco and is instantly crowned king of the NFL, but Denver goes on the road to beat the team that blew out San Francisco and they're rewarded with an insulting line? What, was Rex Grossman their quarterback?
No, it was John Elway. And his reputation as a crybaby whiner who wouldn't go play for Baltimore was long forgotten, just as his three Super Bowl losses by a combined score of 118-40 were too. Elway finally had somebody to hand the ball to that wasn't named Sammy Winder and, with Terrell Davis, Denver posed a great challenge to the overhyped Packers. They did, thus giving us the worst line in modern Super Bowl history.

Super Bowl XXII: Denver (-3) vs. Washington
In retrospect, nobody knew what to expect from Super Bowl XXII. Both the Redskins and Broncos had escaped from their respective Championship games (a broken-up pass in the endzone by Darrell Green for the 'Skins and "the fumble" for Denver) and had numerous question marks at various positions. Coupled with the hype over Doug Williams becoming the first black man to start at quarterback in a Super Bowl (and with the fact that he and Jay Schroeder had been playing QB roulette all season) and anybody who claimed they knew what was going to happen was probably spending too much time hanging around Dexter Manley.
So this line isn't bad because it was poorly set, it's bad because it ended up being poorly set. After racing out to a 10-0 lead, Denver didn't score the rest of the game and watched Williams and the Redskins blow-up for 35 second quarter points, a Super Bowl record. Another garbage TD in the second half made the final 42-10, or 42-7 according to the spread. That 35 point margin is the most of any spread-score in Super Bowl history.

Lines That Were Too Good
2000: St. Louis (-7) vs. Tennessee
1997: Green Bay (-14) vs. New England
It's not too surprising that the only two "pushes" in Super Bowl history were in games where the spreads were multiple of seven - hell yes, using 3rd grade math for the first time since 1989! In 2000, of course, Kevin Dyson (left) was inches away from scoring a game-tying touchdown that would have sent the game into overtime (assuming Tony Romo wasn't holding for the Titans that day) and given bookies what they likely wanted; a result that paid, instead of returning bets for a push.
Three years earlier, the Packers were two-touchdown favorites against a New England team that was fortunate to play Jacksonville in the AFC Championship Game instead of the team everyone thought would be there, 13-3 Denver. (Terrell Davis had to wait to carry John Elway to his first ring in the next season.) They ended up winning 35-21.

Lines Indicating Oddsmakers Had No Clue What To Do
XL: Pittsburgh (-4) vs. Seattle
XXXVII: Oakland (-4) vs. Tampa Bay
XXXV: Baltimore (-3) vs. New York Giants
XIX: San Francisco (-3) vs. Miami
XVII: Washington (-3) vs. Miami
XVI: San Francisco (-1) vs. Cincinnati
XV: Oakland (-3) vs. Philadelphia
It's no surprise that, with the exception of Washington/Miami, all these Super Bowls were pretty unwatchable. It would seem to reason that low point spreads would equal a better game, but Super Bowl history says otherwise. Losing teams have never won against a spread less than six in the game's 41 year history. The closest one came to doing so was in Super Bowl XIII when the Cowboys were getting 3.5 and lost by 4.
Everyone looks back on that Baltimore/New York game and assumes that because Baltimore won so convincingly, they were the odds-on pregame favorite. The line, however, suggests otherwise. In retrospect it's easy to say Baltimore's offense could handle the Giants, but let's not forget that New York blew out Minnesota 41-0 in the NFC Championship, while the Ravens offense went five straight games without scoring an offensive touchdown during the regular season. Once Trent Dilfer was named quarterback they improved, but in those 2000 playoffs Baltimore hardly showed offensive firepower, scoring 21, 24 and 16 points in their three AFC victories.

Line Facts
* No AFL team was favored in the first four pre-merger Super Bowls that automatically pitted teams from the two leagues. Even after the Jets stunning win in Super Bowl III, the oddsmakers didn't learn their lesson, as they installed the NFL's Vikings as 13 point favorites over Hank Stram and the Kansas City Chiefs in Super Bowl IV. They got the final margin close (it was 16), but for the wrong team. KC blew out Bud Grant and the Vikes.
After the merge there was realignment and no longer a guarantee that teams from each league would meet. Indeed, in the first post-merger Super Bowl two NFL teams matched-up, with Dallas playing Baltimore. (It was only then that a Super Bowl point spread would come to a respectable level (Baltimore - 2.5). Jim O'Brien's game-winning field goal didn't alter the betting, but had he missed and the game gone to overtime, those who wagered on Dallas still could have won. It was the first time in Super Bowl history that an end-of-game play would affect the betting.)
The first time an AFL team was favored over an NFL team was in Super Bowl VII when the Washington Redskins were underdogs against the undefeated Miami Dolphins. It might surprise you that the Dolphins, now known for their semi-annoying champagne-swilling every season when the last undefeated team loses, thus keeping their record in tact, were only slight favorites against a very pedestrian Redskins team. So slight, in fact, that to this day, this spread still holds the record for the lowest in Super Bowl history. (It's actually tied for the lowest, but adding that nugget into the previous sentence sort of compromises the inherent drama.)
Yes, folks, the amazing, historic, unbeatable, never-duplicated, mighty 1972 Dolphins were favored by a Garo Yepremian extra point. One point. Just one. This might have had something to do with the fact that the Dolphins' opponents winning percentage was .367 on the year and they didn't win a playoff game by more than a touchdown. But I'm just saying. One point?!! Didn't you assume those guys were thought to be so good that Vegas was going to start breaking out abacuses to figure out the spread?

* In the Patriots' first three Super Bowl appearances, they were a combined 35.5 point underdog. In their last two, they've been a combined 14 point favorite, but have failed to cover each time. Yet somehow ESPN still thinks the 2004 team was one of the ten best in history.

* The now-standard "prop" bets, which can include betting on the first player to score a TD, which running back will have more yards, who will win the coin toss, etc. was created by Caeser's Palace in 1985 when they put odds on whether Bears defensive tackle William Perry would score an offensive touchdown. He did, of course, while Walter Payton did not. This year, there are over 250 available prop bets to choose from.

* Favorites are 22-16-2 in Super Bowls.

Friday Links

* Gilbert Arenas says he could score "84 or 85" points against Duke, in retribution for Coach K leaving him off Team USA's roster for last year's World Basketball Championships. Clearly, Gilbert doesn't watch too many Duke games because, if he did, he'd know that once he got to 45 the refs would immediately foul him out. Or he'd hit the game-winning shot and then have the refs arbitrarily add two more seconds to the game, plenty of time for Duke to steal one. All last night's Duke/Clemson game needed was Cold War overtones, '70s hairstyles and an Olympic banner overhead.
Also, Ivan Carter reports Gilbert was watching Bambi II on DVD when he got the call telling him he was voted an All-Star starter.

* According to FoxSports.com's Jay Glazer, the Cowboys have received permission to discuss their head coaching vacancy with 49ers offensive coordinator Norv Turner, news that makes me want to say, "that would be a very sensible hire, Jerry Jones," before running behind a bush and giggling maniacally.

* In Esquire, Chuck Klosterman looks into whether sports analysts were better at their original careers (playing professional sports) or their second-acts (talking about professional sports). Read the whole thing.
It's one of those ideas that you wish you had thought of yourself, and yet another reason why I consider Klosterman one of the best writers out there doing his thing. George Clooney.
Klosterman thinks Troy Aikman is a better analyst than he was a quarterback (high praise for his TV work, since Aikman is a Hall of Famer), rips on Sean Salisbury's NFL career so much that he thinks he is actually a better analyst, despite calling his TV work "an atrocity" and dishes this great line about Phil Simms: "He seems like a fictional announcer from a football movie I wouldn't pay to see," which is pretty much the perfect summary of Simms' broadcasting abilities.
Klosterman is one of those guys that a lot of people hate because he's successful, so he gets unfairly knocked around by people who are jealous of his talent and book deals. Someone once left a comment on my site suggesting that my dislike of Bill Simmons was for the very same reason, to which I responded, "some people hate Bill Simmons because they're not Bill Simmons. I just hate him because he's a d-bag."

* ESPN.com printed an appalling tale of injustice today, detailing the travails of a former high school football star in Georgia serving 10 years in prison for having consensual sex with a 15 year old girl while he was 18. Everyone involved in the case agrees Genarlow Wilson shouldn't be in jail for a decade, but nobody who can do anything about it seems eager to do so. In other news, Mike Nifong probably would have tried to get Wilson sentenced to life.

* A New York Times "Escapes" feature on the Triangle's basketball teams should have been a lot better than it was. Don't read it. I don't even know why I'm linking to it.

* Michael Wilbon thinks we could be witnessing something special in Steve Nash and the Phoenix Suns. And he doesn't have to compare their amazing run to the first 12 episodes of The White Shadow either.

* A few weeks back I started interrupting people's sentences with "George Clooney" and kept trying to get everyone over there and try to solve that thing and it made me hanker for a repeat viewing of Rick Sutcliffe's hilarious drunken appearance on a Padres telecast last May. After looking for it on the Internet for a few minutes, I determined that said video had been fully eradicated from the information superhighway and that this was, perhaps, the most amazing thing I had ever seen. How could a video just disappear? Does Rick Sutcliffe have connections?
Luckily, I'm always wrong and tonight I managed to find video documentation of this historic moment in baseball history. History, you fickle mistress whore, you've been defeated again in your attempts to hold down the brilliance of The Red Baron and for years onward schoolchildren will study Rick Sutcliffe's plan for thing-solving on foreign soil. Me? I'll be dropping off the clip tomorrow at the Smithsonian.

* And since we're on awesome guest appearances in baseball booths, here's the classic Dennis Leary/Lenny Clarke clip from NESN when Leary and Clarke found out about the heritage of Kevin Youkilis and turned it into a Mel Gibson roast. The best part about this clip (besides Jerry Remy practically keeling over from laughing so hard) is that Youkilis makes three huge plays in the half-inning, which gives Leary and Clarke even more fodder for their hysterical antics. Now if you'll excuse me I have to get outta here and call Jeffrey Katzenberg and ask him for a job.

Odds, Ends and Maria Sharapova

* Normally, I'd be shocked to see a list of Super Bowl teams that has the 2004 Patriots listed ahead of the 1991 Redskins, but with the media's love affair with Brady and Belichick still burning bright after they let the worst Colts team in four years handle them in the AFC Championship, nothing surprises me anymore.
Those '91 Skins would have throttled any of the Pats teams and a number of the teams ranked ahead of them on ESPN's inane list. The '86 Giants? They lost two games to non-playoff teams and had the 12th ranked defense in the NFL! But I guess we have to rank a New York team highly, because, after all, New York is the end-all, be-all of the entire sporting world. The '86 Giants. What a freakin' joke. Their inclusion at #8, along with the Pats at #9, make a mockery of these idiotic rankings, not that anything on Page 2 even has a chance of being remotely accurate. Dr. Z ranked the best teams of all-time a few years back and the '86 Giants didn't catch a whiff. (The '91 Skins were #5. I can't seem to find the link, mainly because the top hit on Google for "dr. z best teams all-time 1991 redskins" is some moron's site called "Chris's Sports Blog." Idiot doesn't even know how to use an apostrophe.
Maybe I'll rank the Super Bowl teams tomorrow, but I'll probably just complain more about the 2004 Patriots. They lost to a 4-12 Dolphins team in week 15 while fighting it out for homefield advantage, by the way. Oh, and they also won the Super Bowl because Donovan McNabb chokes like Mama Cass and vomits like Tara Reid after a regular ol' Tuesday. Sounds like one of the all-time best teams to me!
I just got finished talking about the rankings with CSB's resident UVA expert Spiro and now I'm even more furious than I was before. The '91 Redskins lost two games by five points, one in a meaningless week 16 game started by Jeff Rutledge after homefield was wrapped up (and they had a chance to win had lineman Mark Adickes not dropped a wide-open touchdown in the fourth quarter) and to Dallas in week 13 on the strength of a Cowboys end-of-half Hail Mary. They outscored opponents by 261 points, the second-best margin since the merger. Their opponents' winning percentage was .504, higher than every team above them except for the inexplicably-ranked '96 Packers. (Number six? Really?) Those 'Skins rolled through the playoffs and led the Bills 37-10 in the fourth quarter before Buffalo scored two meaningless touchdowns, one after an onside-kick. I won't bother ripping into the teams listed ahead of the Redskins (any moreso, that is), but it's a very fair statement to say that the 1991 Washington Redskins are much closer to being the best team of the Super Bowl era then they are to being the tenth best.

* Last night's State of the Union was one of the most thrilling television moments in history and it had nothing to do with Nancy Pelosi's blinking. For the first time ever, it was possible to accurately compare the HD quality of all four major networks. Since ABC, CBS, FOX and NBC all used the same pool camera for their network feed, viewers could flip between the channels to see which high-def looked the best.
It was, of course, a two-horse race between NBC and CBS, the only two of the "Big Four" to broadcast in 1080i. With my fellow HD-dork Falkow on the phone, we gave NBC the nod, with their crisp colors and rich blacks. The sound also seemed a bit better. CBS looked great as well, but the coloring and audio seemed a bit off, particularly on during the ovations.
Compared to NBC and CBS, ABC was a step down with their 720p broadcast. FOX, by far the worst of the four major networks in terms of HD quality - and all other quality for that matter - didn't even figure in the competition because they used an enhanced widescreen feed, instead of showing in true hi-def. It's miserable that FOX has the rights to most major sporting events because, of all the networks (cable included) they have the worst HD quality by far.

* Staying on the HD trek (which I try not to bring up often because you'll get meaningless posts like the few paragaraphs above), I'm disappointed ESPN isn't showing the Australian Open in high-def, because Maria Sharapova is so captivating in SD that I shudder to think about how little I'd get done during her matches if she was in HD.

* The ACC released its football schedule today, and Wake Forest has a fairly favorable slate. Considering this is the first time anybody has ever been excited about an upcoming football season in Winston-Salem, this doubtlessly means the team will struggle to a 3-9 record.
The Deacs get a break by not playing the presumptive ACC favorite Virginia Tech (who will, no doubt, begin 9-0 and then lose back-to-back games in November), Miami and Georgia Tech. Three home games follow the season-opener at Boston College, a stand which includes a visit by Nebraska.
The highlight of the schedule is a Thursday-night tilt with Florida State, during which the Seminoles will no doubt be trying to earn retribution for the pasting Wake handed them this season in Tallahassee. Oddly, the Deacs close their year at Vanderbilt on Thanksgiving weekend.
Wake also plays Army at home and then travels late in the season to Navy, a game at which I will hopefully be in attendance.

* Scott thinks we'll all be sick of the Super Bowl Shuffle by next Sunday, so he sends in this YouTube gem of the 1988 Florida State football team rapping. Keep a special eye out for Deion Sanders and the white guy with the bandana.

Chris Answers PTI's Questions

Is Bill Parcells done for good?
Parcells leaving the Cowboys has caused some analysts to say they were "shocked" by the news. And I agree. Just like I was shocked when Basic Instinct 2 was shut out of the Oscar nominations this morning. I'm guessing the same people who expressed their extreme surprise were the same who thought the Bears had no shot against the Saints because can any career move made by Bill Parcells really be considered shocking?
The Cowboys were his fourth team, which he went to after proclaiming in 1996 that he was done with football. Nobody believed this, of course, especially the writers who select members of the Pro Football Hall of Fame. Parcells was an easy choice for induction in the late '90s, but because everyone expected him to return, the committee planned on waiting until they figured Parcells was done for good. As for whether Parcells is coming back, let's just say I don't expect him to be making any speeches in Canton soon.
My guess is the beginning of the end of Parcells' tenure in Big D came when Jerry Jones foisted Terrell Owens upon him. Expect him to take the year off and then be associated with every big-name coaching job that comes up in the next two seasons. (Hello, New York?) Parcells becoming a GM has been suggested, but can you really see him shopping for the groceries without preparing the food? Pat Riley tried that and we all know what happened there.

How did the Colts win?
The Colts finished off the Pats on Sunday because Bill Belichick's heralded defense couldn't have stopped 11 grandmas during the second half. Peyton Manning played nicely, but it was hardly a sublime, Peyton-esque effort. It's not like we're all sitting back today reminscing about how Manning marched down the field a la Elway. The Colts just sort of gained momentum with their late field goal in the first half and continued it by scoring immediately in the second.
Reche Caldwell didn't help matters for New England, but neither did anyone else. During the fourth quarter me, Horo, Jaffe and Russ (but not Antzo, because he was sleeping. Through the whole game. On the floor.) were suggesting various scenarios for how the game would end. Vinatieri would make or miss a game-winning kick, Gostkowski would do the same, Peyton would throw a pick, Brady would lead a comeback, Robert Kraft's two-toned shirts would blind Tom Moore and lead to absurd playcalls, etc. And each of those seemed feasible as the fourth quarter unfolded, but when it came time for Brady to lead a game-winning drive with under two minutes, did anybody else feel, at the time, that Brady didn't have a chance in hell at doing so?
This isn't a knock on Brady, a quarterback who could retire today and be a Hall of Famer, but unless you're a Pats fan, it wasn't too surprising to see Brady throw that pick. I can't really figure out why that was, I just know that Brady didn't look all that calm on the sidelines near the end of the game and, for a guy who has won so much, he doesn't feel clutch like MJ or Bird or Montana or Elway. Let's just say I was about ten times more surprised 24 hours before when Gilbert Arenas missed a potentially game-winning three. And Gil's only been doing that sort of stuff for the past 12 weeks.

Is Peyton Manning's reputation secured?
What's the first thing anybody mentions when they bring up Dan Marino? That he doesn't have a ring. So, no. The only thing Peyton secured Sunday was that he isn't Bill Belichick's bitch. He still needs to win the Super Bowl before he retires, or his entire career will be marred by the gaping hole on his resume. Fair or not, this is the way it is.

Dominant performance by the Bears?
Wait, the Bears and Saints actually played? I just thought Chicago was going to roll over and play dead for New Orleans, since that what every football "expert" seemed to think was going to happen in the NFC Championship. I'm still flabbergasted that all eight analysts on ESPN predicted New Orleans to win a road game. I ranted about this all weekend and was vehemently rooting against the Saints for that reason, and that reason alone.
The Bears performance was deceivingly dominating, as the game was in doubt early in the fourth quarter, but Rex Grossman turned it on when he needed to and Chicago coasted to the NFC Title. Bears-haters like Gene Wojciechowski still insist Chicago could have lost the game in a number of ways, which is an interesting point because I don't seem to remember Grossman getting nailed on a corner blitz, fumbling, losing possession and then having the ball given arbitrarily given back to his team beacuse of some moronic, arcane and incorrect rule. Because if that had happened, you know everybody would be killing Chicago this week and calling them undeserving champions, but when it happens to a butthole-chinned pretty boy who throws last-minute interceptions, he's heralded as the second coming of Joe Montana.

How significant is the Dungy/Lovie matchup?
As I said Sunday, this is not a Jackie Robinson moment, or even a Doug Williams one. Instead, it is two good coaches, who happen to be black, coaching against one another in the Super Bowl. I think it's cool that they're good friends more than anything else, although we'll all surely be sick of that angle in 12 days too. The matchup is significant, but will do nothing to alter the perception of black coaches in league circles, because in 2007, nobody with a brain actually thinks black men can't adequately coach a football team.

Should the Colts be seven point favorites in the Super Bowl?
I spoke about the absurdity of this line on Sunday, but here's some more: In week 15, Indianapolis was favored by 3.5 points at home against Cincinnati, a team that finished .500. In week 8, the Colts were 2.5 road underdogs against Denver, another team that watched the playoffs from home. In week 16, Peyton and the boys were giving 9.5 to a Texans team that was 4-10. (Houston won that game, by the way.) So how can the Bears, a 13-3 team that crushed a Saints team that was thought by NFL experts to be the best in the NFC.

Is Mike Tomlin a good hire for the Steelers?
The Rooney's have a pretty damn good track record of selecting coaches, so I'm going to say yes, even though I had never heard of Mike Tomlin and accidentally Googled "Mike Timlin" when I was looking for background on him.

Charges will not be filed for Michael Vick?
Good for Michael Vick. Now the family attorney can focus all his attention on Marcus. But let's not be stupid about this. First of all, Vick had the bottle with the secret compartment, and that thing isn't meant for Chapstick. Second of all, since when do they have to take stuff to a lab to find out if its weed or not? Couldn't they just have flown Snoop in and saved themselves the trouble?
And I don't, for a second, believe that "nothing" happened here. Vick refused to give up the bottle (because he's an idiot) and they thought something was in there in the first place. Michael Vick is stupid. Michael Vick smokes weed. Michael Vick is also not a good NFL quarterback. Just because this incident doesn't prove the former two facts, doesn't mean they are any less true.

Mailtime
Reggie Bush's taunt and dance against the Bears was behavior we expect from T.O.. I thought this guy was supposed to be all class and a "student" of LaDainian Tomlinson.
Reggie screwed up, but he manned up afterwards and apologized. This seems to be out of line for him, since he had never done anything like that before. Let's give him the benefit of the doubt and hope he doesn't do it again.

Did you see Bill Belichick give Peyton Manning the brush-off after their game on Sunday? Kinda supports L.T.'s remarks about Belichick having no class, don't you think?
I can't stand Bill Belichick and think he's a classless schmuck. However, Peyton doesn't need Belichick's congratulations and I'm not going to blame Belichick for not wanting to speak a few perfunctory, meaningless words to the opponent who just ended the thing he has been working for over the past 12 months. What did you want Belichick to do, give Peyton a hug and say "you did it, friend!" That would have been fake, so why is it considered necessary. It's not like Belichick shoved him out of the way or anything.

What a joke! A hand touches a helmet at the most critical moment in the game – not a slap or punch, but a graze – and it goes for a personal foul. The game is changing before our eyes and NOT for the better.
That was a terrible call, as was a non-call on some Colts pass interference in the endzone on the drive before. However, those 15 yards probably didn't mean much to Indy, since they were having their way with the Patriots defense and would have scored eventually and, more importantly, New England got away with a real roughing the passer penalty earlier on the same drive. Plus, for a team that won three Super Bowls solely because of a fumble in the snow was somehow ruled to be a forward pass, Pats fans have a lot of nerve for bitching about the refs. Shut up.
That being said, the roughing the passer calls this year have been insane. They need to stop babying the quarterbacks, and I think this includes bringing back the old intentional grounding rules that dictate a quarterback can't throw the ball away no matter where he is on the field.

Would Deion Branch have dropped those big passes Reche Caldwell dropped? Cheap shot question, but, you know?
Caldwell's drops were terrible, but I'm sorry that I missed Deion Branch's All-Pro season in Seattle, because, last I checked, Reche Caldwell had more receptions and yards this season than Deion Freakin' Branch.

The midwest is on a serious roll – first the White Sox and Astros, then the Cards and Tigers, and now the Bears and Colts. What's your take on the midwest owning the sports world of late?
That's all well and good, but who won the Stanley Cup this season??? Seriously, who, because I have no idea.

Chris Answers PTI's Questions is an occasional feature on this site

Rex Grossman Gets It Done, Thus Raising The Question, Can Rex Grossman Get It Done?

I thought after a convincing 39-14 win over a good Saints team in the NFC Championship, the Bears would finally get the respect they deserve from the press and oddsmakers. Looks like that might have to wait two weeks, as Vegas has installed the Bears as seven point underdogs in the Super Bowl.
While playing the "predict the line game" after the Colts thrilling victory tonight, everyone I watched the game with figured the Colts would be, at most, four point favorites. Three points was our guess though. I haven't been more than a half-point off for any of these playoff games and nailed the Championship game lines exactly last week, so being off by four means a number of things.
First, the oddsmakers intentionally put Super Bowl lines high to encourage betting. If the Colts played Chicago in the regular season on a neutral field, there's no way they'd be favored by a touchdown. Hell, even if the game was in Indy they'd probably only be favored by five or six.
Second, the Bears still get no respect. As a 13-3 team playing at home against a 10-6 squad, they only were getting 2.5 points, which is less than the standard three point bump home teams get.
The Wolfman, who sounded practically giddy when I made my congratulatory call earlier, says he heard last week that the AFC was getting an automatic seven regardless of who won the Championship games. I have no clue what to make of that. A quick Google search did me no good either. Either way, the line is too high and I'd be putting money on the Bears if I did that sort of thing.
Check back tomorrow for some thoughts on today's games. How great was the Indy/New England contest, by the way? When's the last time an NFL game lived up to the hype? As sporting events go, only the two Red Sox/Yankees ALCSs and the Texas/USC Rose Bowl were as good as advertised. The game was so great Antzo slept through the entire thing. On the floor. With his feet propped up on a cushionless chair.
This is the first Super Bowl in a while where I like both teams playing and genuinely wouldn't mind if either team won. I'll be pulling for the Bears, and will likely pick them, but I wouldn't mind seeing Tony Dungy and Peyton Manning win, as they seem like good guys. I'm going to get bored to death with the "black coaches" angle the media will endlessly hype this week, mainly because, while certainly an NFL first, this is not a seminal league event since no NFL franchise is going to look at Dungy and Lovie's success and say, "ahh, these black coaches are doing well, let's hire one too!" This isn't Doug Williams winning Super Bowl XXII, an event which helped get rid of the stigma that a black quarterback couldn't succeed in the NFL. There currently is no such stigma with black coaches. Nobody in league circles is saying "nope, can't hire Mike Tomlin or Ron Rivera because they're black." The recent hiring of Tomlin in Pittsburgh proves this. Everybody assumed Ken Whisenhunt or Russ Grimm was a shoo-in for that gig. Instead, the Rooneys went out of the family and hired a previously unknown, at least to me, coach from Minnesota. And it had nothing to do with his race.
For years people cited Art Shell's situation as proof that black coaches still weren't being treated right. Other coaches got second jobs, but Shell did not. This year's performance in Oakland should prove that the reason Art Shell was unemployed for over a decade is because he's an idiot, an affliction which has nothing to do with the color of his skin.
Dungy and Smith's achievement of becoming the first black head coaches in the Super Bowl should be noted, but should not be the focus of Super Bowl week. They are good head coaches of good football teams. And this is what matters.
And in case I forget about it, the Saints playcalling today was miserable. Throwing twice from their own endzone, leading to an eventual safety, was the beginning of the end for their season.

NFL Picks: Championship Game Edition

New Orleans Saints at Chicago Bears
Quick; without looking, what was the Saints record this season? They had to have at least 12 wins, right, or else why would nearly every NFL analyst be picking them to beat the Bears on the road this weekend. Why would the Saints offense be considered "nearly unstoppable" as Don Banks said on SI.com. Why would their defense be a "menace" as referred to by Len Pasquarelli.
The Saints are a fine team, and one very capable of winning the Super Bowl this year. But let's not forget that they were a very-pedestrian 10-6 team this season. I had no clue.
Among the teams that handled New Orleans; Carolina, Pittsburgh, Cincinnati and Washington. The team's only "good" wins came again Dallas, New York and Philadelphia, but each came at a time when those respective teams were reeling; Philly in the middle of the season and Dallas and New York near the end. The Dallas win, a 42-17 pasting, is, by far, the most impressive on the Saints' resume. But, like Twin Peaks, it hasn't aged well.
This isn't to say I'm picking the Bears to win, I'm just trying to point out that the Saints going on the road to play a bizarrely underappreciated Chicago team is hardly going to be the cakewalk some expect for New Orleans.
While Rex Grossman draws all the negative attention from the national media, I'd probably be more worried about the fact that the Bears once-stout run defense made a gimpy, half-hearted Shaun Alexander look like Jim Brown last week. The scary part, though, was that the Bears seemed a step slow and were missing tackles. It wasn't like Alexander was running through huge holes; he was making six yard gains out of nothing because the Bears couldn't close or wrap-up fast enough. If Shaun Alexander can do that, imagine what a healthy Deuce McCallister and the lightning-quick Reggie Bush will do? (There's a great picture in Sports Illustrated this week of Bush cutting, mid-run against the Eagles. Everyone on the field is running north-to-south, except Bush who has turned around and cut up towards the sidelines. It's one of those pictures that makes you appreciate still-photography.)
Grossman should be fine against the Saints secondary unless, as The Sports Pickle predicts, he regained enough confidence last week to start throwing into triple-coverage again.
The coaching match-ups seem to be a wash; I'm not all that impressed with Lovie Smith (and was even less so when he inexplicably called timeout with two seconds left in regulation last week, thus possibly giving Seattle a chance at a game-winning Hail Mary) and Sean Payton, for all the hype, made some fairly poor decisions of his own against Philly (namely, pitching the ball four yards back on a possession when they should have been running straight ahead, attempting to kill the clock).
Field goal kicking will be important but Robbie Gould and John Carney have similar stats, so its tough to give one an edge. Devin Hester might be an x-factor, which could excite or terrify Bears fans, as Hester either returns kicks for touchdowns or does something insanely stupid, and there rarely is middle ground.
They're calling for snow and 29 degree temps tomorrow in Chicago, which gives a decided advantage to the Bears. (I don't buy the talk that because Hester went to Miami and Cedric Benson went to Texas, etc. the Bears are at no more of an advantage than New Orleans. The Bears live in Chicago during the first part of the winter and are used to the cold. They practice outdoors in Lake Forest, while the Saints work out in a climate-controlled bubbled. So, just because some Bears don't have ice in their veins, doesn't mean they won't be acclimated to the cold better than the Saints. Anybody who says otherwise is just being contrary. Add in possible precipitation, and the Bears get a double-bonus from the weather. Anything that can make the field slick will help neutralize Reggie Bush.
It will be a close game, but maybe not as low-scoring as some expect. The Bears win it on the heels of a defensive touchdown and 2 TD day from Rex Grossman.
Pick: Chicago 27 - New Orleans 23

New England Patriots at Indianapolis Colts
Remember when Mike Vrabel mocked Terrell Owens in the endzone during Super Bowl XXXIX? Remember when Vrabel also scored a touchdown in Carolina and held the ball out to a child in the stands, then snatched it back at the last second? Or when the Pats made "choke" signs in the direction of the Chargers bench last Sunday? Of course you don't, because nobody in the media talks about these things and I'm not quite sure why.
The dancing at midfield was classless, no matter what you think of Shawne Merriman's original dance (I, for one, hate the dance and its creator). For starters, taunting after the game is over is a little like punching a boxer after he's been knocked out. Real classy, morons. More importantly, though, is that the Patriots should expect to win games like that. They have in the past, so why act like they're an upstart team who just earned their biggest win in years? When UNC beat Clemson last week, did they jump around on the Tigers logo? No, because they expected to win. Do the Yankees take victory laps around the Metrodome when they beat the Twins? No, because they've been there before. Marty Schottenheimer losing in the playoffs is one of life's inexorable fates. The Pats were merely playing the Globetrotters to Marty's Generals. So act like it, putzes. Man, do I hope they get pasted tomorrow.
And I think they will. If Philip Rivers and Marty Schottenheimer were merely competent, San Diego would be hosting tomorrow's game. Peyton Manning is a Hall of Famer and Tony Dungy is about a 5% upgrade from Marty. Plus, the game is in Indy, where the Colts are 9-0 this season. The mere thought of putting up with Bill Belichick, Tedy Bruschi and Robert Kraft's two-toned shirts for the next 14 days is enough to make me sick, so let's hope I'm right on this one.
Pick: Indianapolis 35 - New England 20

Oh, Dear Lord

My disdain for Bill Simmons is well-documented, but I still read his columns because he sometimes makes good observations, can be entertaining at times and provides easy fodder for ridicule and mockery.
Occasionally I chuckle at his stuff, but more often than not I'm left with the desire to wipe that self-satisfied smirk off his face with a 2x4 like I'm Jim Hacksaw Dugan. Today, though, I didn't even have to read Simmons' column to get that hankering, as the preview on ESPN.com's front page was enough to make me nauseous and angry in one fell swoop:

Why is the Sports Guy wearing the Manning Face? Because he had a sobering realization between San Diego and Indianapolis: His beloved Pats have become the NFL's version of the Yankees.

There's no way to follow that up, so I'm not going to even try.

Like Elton John, I'm Still Standing... Only Less Flamboyantly

I spilled beer all over my Macbook's keyboard earlier this week, hence the lack of posts. I've shipped it back to Apple and will hopefully have it back in a few days. (Although if Steve Jobs should ask you about it, the official story is that my shift key suddenly stopped working without provocation. Apple, you see, doesn't look too kindly upon spills of any nature. Hopefully they don't have one of those water sensors that cell phones have. In a not-at-all surprising coincidence, I'm currently using a non-functional Razr that I got wet last April. It replaces my other phone that I broke on New Year's while attempting to demonstrate how unbreakable it was. Man, I'm an idiot.)
Anyway, I'll be posting periodically this weekend with some thoughts on the idiocy of Michael Vick, my encounter with Gary Williams and picks for Sunday's games. Now, though, it's time to get my eat on.

Rex Grossman: Worthless... The Four QBs Who Lost This Weekend? Not So Much

Most football people expected two things to happen this weekend: Rex Grossman and Marty Schottenheimer would blow it for their teams. They were half-right. Schottenheimer continued his practice of gagging in big games, but Grossman, on the other hand, performed admirably in Chicago's 27-24 overtime win against Seattle.
So why is everyone ripping Grossman today while Marty is getting a relative pass? I apologize for the redundancy, but it's worth mentioning again: Grossman's team won and Marty's lost. What am I missing here?
Let's start with Marty. During an easily winnable game against an overrated Patriots team, the Chargers list of offenses included:
- Challenging a play that was so clear-cut that even people listening on the radio knew it was a mistake
- Two personal fouls which led to New England first downs
- Trying to pick up, and run with, a ball that was bouncing after a punt, leading to a fumble
- Fielding a kickoff about six inches from the sideline when the ball was clearly heading out of bounds
- Trying to return a 4th down interception instead of falling down and perserving possession which, again, led to a fumble
- And, perhaps most egregious, throwing the ball with a rookie QB nine more times than running it with an MVP back
Some might say that personal fouls and stupid plays aren't the fault of a coach. But those people are wrong. Make no mistake, Marty and the Chargers lost this game, not the other way around. (Look, we all know Tom Brady is a Hall of Fame quarterback. But let's stop with all the "Brady led his team back" nonsense. Remember, Brady threw three terrible interceptions, including one on fourth down that should have led to a Pats loss, had Troy Brown not stripped the ball afterwards. Brady was allowed to stage a comeback in spite of his poor play. Just because he's a fantastic quarterback doesn't mean we have to praise him when he doesn't deserve it. Imagine if Rex Grossman had made some of the throws Brady made yesterday. You think Phil Simms would have been making excuses for him? Maybe Brady's past record makes him immune from criticism, but it certainly doesn't mean his poor play should be lauded.)
It's hard to imagine Marty surviving the next few days in SD. With a transcendent running back and evolving QB, the Chargers shouldn't be losing to the worst Patriots team of the decade at home on a day where Tom Brady throws three picks.
On the bright side, it was nice to see the Patriots' true colors come out after the game. LDT was 100% right in ripping the team and attributing their classless post-game behavior to Bill Belichick. Do you think a Joe Gibbs or Bill Parcells-coached team would have acted that way? Belichick might be a great coach, but that doesn't mean he's not a scumbag. Shawn Merriman's dance is pretty much the dumbest thing this side of Michael Strahan's jumpshot, but act like you've been there before, New England. Alright, I'm done sounding like Peter King.
Here's an email sent by The Wolfman late last night:

I'm just pissed that all the articles are saying how many more interceptions Grossman could have had. The Chargers dropped one in the Pats first possession and the Ravens could have had a few more as well. Peyton has 5 already, Brady 4. Can you imagine if Rex threw 3 ints and the Bears won? He would be the worst (and luckiest) QB ever. Listen, if he has a shitty game next week (please for the love of God, don't), I'll be the first to admit it. So why is it so hard for the media to admit when he plays pretty well? Am I missing something here because if I am, please let me know. Oh, it just makes me so FURIOUS.

I'll be honest; I have no clue why the media picks on Grossman so much. The AP story that Deadspin featured today was hilarious. For those that didn't read it, the game recap began:

Two swings of the foot by Robbie Gould were all the Chicago Bears needed to offset any shortcomings in Rex Grossman's arm.

What the hell does that mean? Let's compare numbers, shall we? Looking at the following and answer, who had the better game:

A 27-51, 280 yards, 2 TD, 3 INT
B 21-38, 282 yards, 1 TD, 1 INT
C 15-30, 170 yards, 0 TD, 2 INT

A is Brady, B is Grossman, C is Manning. And it's not even close; Grossman had better numbers than the two QBs who will one day have their busts in Canton. The whole "yeah, but Seattle started a guy in the secondary who was working as a loan officer last week" bit has been played to death too, so don't use that as an excuse. San Diego allowed 200 passing yards per game during the regular season, just three less than Seattle. So let's also not say Grossman was throwing against an inferior defense. I mean, did you see Quentin Jammer play? He probably wouldn't even start for the Redskins.
If you want to say, as mentioned before, that Brady and Manning's past gives them a pass, that's fine. (Even though Manning's playoff past should really cause his play to be put under more scrutiny.) But that still doesn't explain why everyone is dumping on Grossman. He played adequately, he made a great pass on 3rd and 10 that ended up going for 30 yards in overtime and, most importantly, his team won. I'm not sure what it will take for everyone to get off his case, but I imagine two more wins should do the trick.
Gene Wojciechowski seems to disagree, as evidenced by his baffling column on ESPN.com today. He begins with this bizarre riff on Ricky Manning:

So Bears cornerback Ricky Manning Jr. was standing in front of his locker after Chicago's 27-24 overtime win in the NFC Divisional playoff, and he was talking about how difficult the past 12 months have been for him. I'm a sucker for a heartwarming overcoming-adversity story, so I clicked on the digital recorder.

"I would say the last year has been a drastic change for me as far as signing with the Bears, then with the off-the-field issues [he pleaded no contest to a felony assault charge], getting married, having a kid, moving to Chicago, buying a Bentley ... it's crazy," he said.

It is, isn't it? I was just telling the ball and chain that very thing a few days ago when we were at the Ferrari dealership picking out ostrich leather seats for our new 599 GTB Fiorano.

Oh my gawd. You see, this is the problem with a lot of the Bears. Manning signs a five-year, $21 million free-agent deal and buys one of the most expensive cars on the planet -- and thinks he's had it rough.

Now, Ricky Manning is most definitely a jackass and has done some indefensible stuff in his life. But I'm not seeing in that quote where Manning said he's had it rough. He simply said "[it] has been a drastic change for me." Notice, no mention of "I've had it rough."
Wojciechowski writes dumb columns all the time, so I'm not going to waste my time on him. But read the story if you want a laugh.

At Least She Wasn't Flashing Janet Jackon's Nipple

Continuing in the grand tradition of FOX standards and decency, last night's Eagles/Saints game featured a fairly lengthy camera shot of a comely blonde with a very specific idea about what the Eagles should have done to them.

Amazingly, the decision to feature this woman on screen (not once, but twice) wasn't the worst decision of the day. Andy Reid made sure of that when he punted away his team's season on 4th and 15 late in the game, right after his team had easily converted a 4th and 10 that was negated by a false start penalty. The Eagles never touched the ball again. It could have been worse for Reid, I suppose... He could have thrown up all over the playbook.

Divisional Playoff Picks: Guest Edition

Since the Super Bowl and Championship games are usually yawners, Divisional Playoff Weekend has become the premiere two days on the NFL calendar. At this time last year, I was suffering from the shakes and had to drink myself to sleep in order to prepare for the Redskins first Divisional Playoff game in six years. Not surprisingly, this year seems a bit anticlimatic. (Although I'm still drinking myself to sleep, albeit for totally different reasons. Oh relax, Mom... It was a joke.)
Anyway, due to my semi-apathy about the games and my reluctance to write about anything not related to how the 'Skins need to take David Frost out for a drive to a nice farm where he can live out his days shanking bales of hay to fair-catching cows, I've enlisted some help from some family and friends, each of whom have a close tie to teams playing in each contest.
Some are fans - ranging from die-hard optimists to just-die pessimists - others have an intimate knowledge of the team because they happen to live in that city. Either way, their opinions are strong and their hatred of Eli Manning is stronger, so much so that I've put the kibosh on Eli-bashing. Why? Because I'm a damn gentle soul.
Onto the analysis!

Indianapolis Colts at Baltimore Ravens
By Phil
Phil grew up in Baltimore, roots for the Ravens and hates Cal Ripken Jr. And that is all you ever need know. He breaks down the Ravens/Colts match-up in four parts:
1) The Ogden-Freeney match-up.
I'm surprised this hasn't received more attention, because not only did Freeney destroy him last time they played, but it was a national TV game (Monday Night last season).
Ogden has slipped a little since his prime, but he still remains a competent blocker and good force on the O-line. But his two biggest problems are: speed rushers who are much smaller than he, and D-lineman with good spin moves.
Well? No one sees a problem with this? The last time they played, Ogden looked like a sleepy grizzly bear trying to swat at a pissed-off hornet. He doesn't get his body weight very low, he relies too much upon his hand-checking, he's dealing with a toe injury, and he generally just struggles against faster guys with speed moves. Looks like a bad match-up for the Ravens.
I was hoping that Billick might have used the week to practice with Ogden at LG (where he played his rookie year, and did well) and insert Tony Pashos (a smaller guy with good, quick feet) at OT. But I haven't seen any indication that he will. So, this goes in the book as a big plus for the Colts and a question mark for Ray-Ray's boys.
2) Samari Rolle
See, this is the kind of thing that you only get when you watch a team every week. The Ravens are said to have a great Defense (which they do) and a great secondary (which they pretty much do), so individual players are sort of glossed over. But Rolle has been pretty weak all year, and terrible in a few games. They've disguised it well with Ed Reed and the rookie safety Dawan Landry (a true revalation) playing well, but it's tough against a team with 2 good WRs. Look at the last game Baltimore lost - week 13 vs. Cincinnati, with both TJ and Chad Johnson having good games. Frankly, the Ravens are lucky they didn't lose that game by more (although I guess it doesn't matter).
If the Colts can get a little time to throw, they send Wayne and Harrison to opposite sides, McAllister stays with Harrison, and Samari Rolle is responsible for Wayne. They'll try to give him help from the Safety or even LB spot, but Peyton is mixing run and pass and using Play-action effectively, and more blitzing would mean more 1-on-1 coverage. So I chalk this up as another plus for the Colts.
3) Jamal Lewis
The smoking gun on Jamal is not that he's averaging about 3.5 yards a carry (or the fact that he recently upped his Verizon-to-Verizon minutes - Chris) or that he has only 2 100 yard games (and none of 110), but that he's doing that and I actually think he's IMPROVED since last year.
This is the kind of thing that makes me think I could coach a football team - not because the guy hasn't been playing well, but specifically because his problems seem so emminently correctable. It just seems like he needs someone to grab him by the facemask and yell at him until he starts doing it right. When he was running for 2,000 yards, he would take, at most, one sideways step as he took the hand-off, then turn his legs forward and just start running into the hole with hard, strong steps. If anyone got in the way and went high, he'd run right through them. If they went low, they might have a chance, but even then they'd need 3 guys to corral him. And once he got past the line, he was fast enough to outrun even safeties, as long as he's going on a straight line.
Starting last year, he does this weird thing where he takes these short, sideways steps, WAITS for the defense to close in, and the plunges forward for one yard. It's gotten a little better in the 2nd half of this year, but I'd still trade him for any other starting RB left in the playoffs. Even before they shut down LJ last week, I thought the Colts D would look like they'd made a big improvement if they played against J-mal.
And no, I don't think it has to do with his being in prison. I think it's just a combination of injuries that he "recovered" from but never 100% fully, and getting a little older, and losing the starting LG, Edwin Mulitalo, and basically just having a great season that you can't really expect him to duplicate every year. (But, admit it, it has a little to do with being in prison - Chris.)
4) The Idiot Ravens Fans
This is the gravamen of my prediction against the Ravens, and the reason I wrote you the e-mail in the first place. Before last week's game, my girlfriend and I were driving on 295 and listening to some Ravens talk on WBAL. The question the host had presented (I paraphrase, but I think mostly accurately):
"Should Ravens fans root for the Colts today? Even though it would be tough to root for the Colts, would it be worth it to see them win so that the Ravens could destroy them next week?"
And then listeners would call in and say "no, never root for the Colts, even for 1 game" or "yes, it would be worth it to root for them this week for the pleasure of watching the Ravens knock them out of the playoffs."
Not one mention of the fact that the Ravens could possibly lose the game. No one even CONSIDERED the fact that we might want to play the weakest possible team, rather than strongest.
Even if the hosts had said "Who would win, Ravens or Colts?" and every listerner had said "Ravens by 30" that would have been OK. But to just assume that your team has already won, to not even bring up the question, and then ask related questions involving how wonderful that win would/will be, is just stupid. Leaving aside the questions of match-ups, playing against a great QB, and the fact that the Colts killed us last time we played, it's just disrespectful to the game. I can think of too many times when a team or its fans have thought "I want to play against team X because of how sweet it would be to beat them" and then lost.
[I assume your readers know why the Ravens fans would hate the Colts, if not, I don't have time for an explanation]
So, if you add these factors up, plus the fact that I think this is the year Peyton finally gets it together (don't ask me why, just a hunch), I have to go with the Colts in this. And this is even-money - if you can get points, I'd say the Colts are about as safe a bet as you'd find this week.
My prediction: Colts 28, Ravens 13.
Chris' Pick: Colts 19 - Ravens 12

Philadelphia Eagles at New Orleans Saints
By Falkow and Obaza
Falkow and Obaza are the hottest songwriting team since Rodgers and Hammerstein. Their new musical "Chunky Soup Blues" debuts on Broadway next month. After a lengthy e-mail conversation, they narrowed down their thoughts about their beloved Eagles into ten easy snippets.
TOP TEN QUOTES FROM E-MAILS GOING INTO THE EAGLES/SAINTS GAME
10) Andy Reid has won this type of game before. He’ll have the guys ready to go. He’s one of those guys that gets so excited that he wishes he could be out there with the guys on the field. Heck, if fullback Thomas Tapeh can’t play we might finally get to see Andy wear some tights after all.
9) ”In order to win on Saturday the Eagles need to continue to run the ball effectively and put Jeff Garcia in positions where he can make safe throws against one on one coverage. Shawn Andrews and Jon Runyan are run blocking very well and Andy and Marty need to continue to exploit that. New Orleans allowed 4.9 yards per carry this year; Brian Westbrook and Corell Buckhalter need to run effectively to keep Drew Brees and the whiz kids off the field.”
8) “Defensively the Eagles are going to have to play perfectly. They have not been able to pressure any quarterback consistently since Kearse got hurt and Sheldon Brown's case of whiplash which prevents him from turning his head around has hurt them multiple times this year. Rod Hood is a solid replacement for Lito Sheppard, but is not as good in man to man coverage. Jim Johnson will have to limit his blitzes and hope the front four can get some pressure on Brees. Don't even get me started on stopping the run.”
7) “A quick pick or fumble recovery could hopefully take the life out of the crowd down there. They also have to play well defending the return game, the longer the field is the more chance the defense has to capitalize on a mistake.
6) “If they can go +2 in the turnover battle, I believe they will win the game.”
5) “This is the best thing I’ve ever seen and I don’t know why. If the Eagles pull it off, this should be the front page.” (right)
4) “When you’ve won 5 of the last 6 division titles and every other team in your division is such a failure that they’ve all had to switch coaches (some multiple times), the only thing you have left to root for is that your team actually wins a super bowl so you finally have something to come back with when your bastard divisional friends start ending arguments with ‘how many rings do you have?’ (Man, the guy who says that must be a huge dick. Oh... Wait. - Chris)
3) “Wah Wah . I’m sick of all these whiny Cajuns. They should have spent their FEMA checks on a defensive line instead of all those throwback jersies. Go loot some stores like Heineken man.”
2) Donovan McNabb CANNOT throw a season killing interception in this game!
1) Any team that can lose to the Redskins isn't unbeatable. (Except the Texans. - Chris)
OVERALL CONCLUSION: Even though they are underdogs in this game the Eagles cannot let themselves be intimidated by New Orleans. You only get so many shots in the postseason and you need to take advantage of each one. Since the Eagles have never been able to do that when they were supposed to win in the playoffs, maybe they can do it when they aren’t supposed to win. Jeff Garcia can already have any man he wants in Philadelphia, if he wins this game he might be able to choose from the entire tri-state area. Don’t think this team is lacking in motivation!
Chris' Pick: New Orleans 31 - Philadelphia 23 (This game reminds me of the Redskins/Seahawks game from last year. Philly can easily win, but I think the fact that tehy're banged up after winning six straight to make the playoffs will be the deciding factor.)

Seattle Seahawks at Chicago Bears
By Steph and The Wolfman
My sister, Steph, begins our look into Sunday's first game:
Before I start, I have to inform everyone that I am a civil engineering major (translation: I did horribly in any class that involved writing). Since I joined the Army, I have lived in four different areas. While at West Point, we really didn’t interact with people outside of West Point, so I never had to deal with New York fans. Plus, we didn’t have TV, so I didn’t have to listen to New York reporters. Then, I moved to Germany, where they just cared about soccer, and Jim and I were forced to watch 1:00 games at 7:00 on a TV where the reception was so bad you couldn’t really see the ball. Then, we moved to Missouri where we were subjected to Rams and Chiefs games every weekend, but lived in the middle of nowhere, so didn’t really have to deal with any fans. Plus, everyone in the Army is from different places and ultimately root for different teams. Also, I find that a lot of soldiers could care less about sports.
So, when we moved to Washington, two years ago, I wasn’t really expecting anything different. Fortunately and unfortunately, we live in a neighborhood that is full of non-Army people who grew up in Washington. Their kids run around with Hasselbeck and Alexander jerseys. The next-door neighbors have a big Seahawks flag hanging outside. The cashiers at all the stores have Seahawks sweatshirts on. It is my first time being around other fans besides Redskins fans. People ask if I root for Seattle now that I live here. Why would I? I’m a Redskins fan. Plus, Alexander will always bother me for his whining about being taken out of the game a few years back and he was unable to get the rushing title. I think he said that Holmgren stabbed him in the back. Are these the words of someone who cares about his team?
But really, the thing that bothers me about Seahawks fans is they think they are better than other fans. Remember the whole 12th man thing last year? (You mean the thing that they stole from Texas A&M? - Chris) And they are always talking about how much louder their stadium is than other stadiums. Having been there during the Redskins-Seahawks playoff game last year, I can confirm that it is very loud. But, Qwest Field was designed to make it the loudest stadium. The roof is angled to direct as much crowd noise to the field as possible and the metal bleachers in the end zones were designed to reflect sound. How does this make you the loudest fans? It just means you have a smart owner. They never mention this fact in their local news reports. So, I’m really glad they don’t have a home game this weekend and hope they lose to the Bears so I don’t have to see everyone in their sweatshirts for another week.

Our preview continues with The Wolfman's take. And if you don't know The Wolfman then get the hell outta my car, old man.
Obviously you can cut and paste and do whatever is necessary to fit it in. This is 3rd draft of this and I was going to keep it to the last paragraph I had, but since I figured the column was originally supposed to be questions for me to answer, I could drone on endlessly. Also, since everyone just reads and hears the same story about Rex Grossman over and over I figured I'd give some people some other points about the Bears.
Since all they talk about on ESPN is about how Grossman needs to play well, I thought I'd give some tidbits from a person who watches the Bears:
1. Both starting corners will be back on the field for the 1st time in over a month. That let's Ricky Manning Jr. move back into his nickel duties and takes Devin Hester off the field. Hester is terrible on defense and this will make the team much better. With all the talk about Tommie Harris and Mike Brown being out for the year, few mentioned that either Charles Tillman or Nathan Vasher has not been on the field in the last 4 games. It was easy to see the difference on the field when Ricky Manning Jr. was beaten twice by Joey Galloway for long touchdowns. Though neither Vasher or Tillman are stars, they are both solid players (though Tillman is pretty stiff, anything that keeps Devin Hester out of the secondary is an improvement.
2. The Bears generate little pass rush. Though some of this can be contributed to the absence of Tommie Harris, the problems started long before the injury to Harris. Anyone who saw the Bears play the Patriots could see it. Their best pass rusher is a rookie, Mark Anderson. The Bears need to generate some pressure on Hasselbeck because if he gets hot and has all day to throw, it doesn't matter if the Bears have 4 all-pros in the secondary.
3. The O-line has been up-and-down protecting Grossman. They have struggled to pick up blitzes all year. Most of Grossman's bad games, not suprisingly, have come when the o-line hasn't been able to protect him, except the Packers game which was just awful. Grossman has very little pocket presence and it will be a long day if he doesn't get protection and is forced into making throws. It seems that the injuries to Grossman has effected his willingness to get out of the pocket, as he showed the ability to find space to make throws in the few games he had played in his career before this season and both injuries occurred when he was out of the pocket.
4. For the first time in his career, Cedric Benson is running hard. The Bears now have a legitimate 1-2 punch at running back, which was not really the case midway through the year when Benson was running tentatively and with his head down. If the Bears can get their running game going, it could be a long day for the Seahawks.
5. The Bears special teams is very good. The coverage teams as well as Maynard and Gould are both solid. Devin Hester is explosive, but is terrible at catching punts and overall being careful with the football. Every time he goes back there it's an adventure. If you've never seen Hester field punts in a game, watch on Sunday and see what I mean. Not only is the catch an adventure but he seems to have no feel when to fair catch or not. He needs to hold onto the ball first and then worry about breaking the big one, which he can do everytime he fields a punt or kickoff.
6. I would love to see the Bears come out in a 4-5 wide receiver set and throw on the depleted Seahawks secondary. Obviously the chances of this is almost zero and it's probably not the best idea, but I would like to see a little killer instinct in the team, even if "Bad Rex" shows up. I honestly don't think they have a set with 4 wide receivers. Any time they go to 4 wideouts, Desmond Clark is usually in the slot instead of a receiver. After last year's debacle, where the Bears were down 7-0 before I had even settled into watching the game, I would just like to see a little fire from the Bears and have them take it to Seattle.
Now that I've gotten a little analysis (and delusions of grandeur with 5 wide receiver sets) out of the way....
My stomach has been churning since Monday and I think I'm getting an ulcer thinking about this one. The Bears are the better team and should win. Of course, that doesn't mean they will. I've stayed away from a lot of coverage this week. Honestly, how many articles can a person read that says that Grossman has to play smart football. They might as well write 'Play Time is Fun' and have Rod and Todd 'go with it' because each offers the same value and insight. We've all heard it already, there's nothing else to say about it. Grossman does have to play well but sometimes letting your defense and special teams win a game, like everyone says they need to do, is not possible. It wasn't possible last year when Steve Smith ran all over Soldier Field. Grossman was what kept the Bears in the game even though he did not have a very good 1st half. If the Bears have to score 30 points to win this year, Brian Griese is not the one that's going to put those points up. Granted, the Seahawks don't have anyone as explosive as Steve Smith, but if Hasselbeck gets hot and the Bears can't generate any sort of pass rush the Seahawks can put a lot of points on the board. I suppose you have to pull Grossman if he throws 2 picks in the 1st half and I just pray to God it doesn't come to that. All the 'experts' think the Seahawks have a chance and they do, but they won't win this week, because if they do, I don't think I'll be able to pick up the pieces since I've been gearing up for the playoffs since Week 5. I could break the game down all day (and for some it probably seemed like I did above) and say what will happen, but the fact remains, nobody knows. So here's the prediction: Grossman has a good day, the secondary plays better with both starting corners back in the lineup and Hester doesn't fumble a punt or kickoff.....Bears 27 Seahawks 17. And the Bears better win, because if they don't, I don't think I ever fully recover.
Chris' Pick: Chicago 41 - Seattle 10 (Grossman shuts the critics up, until he throws 5 picks in the NFC Championship.)

New England Patriots at San Diego Chargers
By Jim and Sarah
My brother-in-law, Jim, is a Patriots fan. In spite of this, my sister married him anyway. His thoughts:
Pats-Chargers is going be a great game this weekend; possibly the best of the four match-ups. It will be fun to see Merriman stare down Brady, and how Brady reacts to the Charger rush. While Merriman may get one or two sacks, I believe the best of this match-up will go to the Pats. Brady will catch the Chargers blitz with quick release passes to his receivers, springing them for big yardage over the middle. By the way, this Pats receiving Corps has peaked at just the right time, and while they aren’t the most talented or imposing in the league, they are playing their best football of the year when it counts. Brady is now comfortable and confident in his receivers, and the way he’s using them is similar to their Super Bowl years past. As for the defensive side of the ball, with so much focus on “how the Chargers pass rush is gonna eat Brady’s lunch,” there’s a few guys on the Patriots defense that are pretty good themselves. The Pats trio of down linemen to include Richard Seymour, Ty Warren, and Vince Wilfork have all had fantastic years and will be keyed on stopping LT in his tracks. And the Pats have possibly the most underrated player in football, not to mention their key defensive cog, holding down the middle of the field in Teddy Bruschi. Oh, and don’t forget Asante Samuel, who has quietly had a pro-bowl type performance throughout the year (he tied for the league lead in interceptions, yet was snubbed). Like I said, it will be a great game. Brady vs. Merriman; LT vs the Pats defense.; Belichick vs. Schottenheimer. I think it will be a close game, yet in the end, the Patriots will march on to yet another AFC championship game. They will win on a last second field goal by their rookie kicker Stephen Gostkowski, sending Schottenheimer home with yet another playoff loss.

Sarah is The Wolfman's lady-friend, which sort of makes her Boof to The Wolfman's Scott. (Ahh, Teen Wolf references... Will you ever get old??) She lives in San Diego and, thusly, has become a semi-Chargers fan:
Although I'm obviously required to be a Bears fan, the San Diego Chargers are the closest thing I have to a hometown professional football team (unless you count the now-defunct Winston-Salem Wildcats, but they were NIFL, and really, who cares about that?). So I'm pretty excited that we're getting our moment of schadenfreude this season. April 24, 2004 was a great day in Chargers history, when thanks to a crybaby-who-shall-remain-nameless, we picked up a kicker who's proven to be solid and who's second in my heart only to my Robbie, the pick that would get us a great-even-when-possibly-no-longer-on-performance-enhancing-drugs linebacker, and a quarterback that gives my Dad (who, like me, supports anyone from a North Carolina ACC team) a reason to cheer for the Chargers. Add this to our powerhouse combo of Gates and LT, and here we are, ready for the Chargers to atone for their heartbreaking loss in OT to the Jets two years ago and get one step closer to that new stadium they're always whining about, in spite of Marty Schottenheimer (whom the Wolfman has assured me is the worst coach ever). I really hope they pull it off this weekend, if for no other reason than I'll get to annoy the Wolfman by running around the house singing the fight song ("San Diego – Super Chargers!") amidst his grunts about Rivers vs. Grossman.
Chris' Pick: San Diego 24 - New England 23 (Anybody who claims they know what's going to happen in this one is lying. If I had to guess, I'd say Danie's brilliance will overcome Rivers' struggles. But I wouldn't bet a penny on it, even if I had to.)

Quick Thursday Thoughts

Preparing something fun for tomorrow, so excuse the light posting today. Two things caught my eye during my daily web perusal and both deserve a mention here.
From Chris Suellentrop at Slate:

Also—and readers should know that I say this at great risk to my personal safety, as my wife and I recently moved to the Boston neighborhood of Jamaica Plain—the hubris of Patriots fans is distasteful. Boston seems to have reached the late stages of dynasty fandom, in which the fans are so confident of victory that they don't even get that excited about the games, because there's no tingling, nervous anticipation before kickoff. The talk-radio airwaves are full of mockery of the "San Diego Super Chargers" song and bluster about how the Genius will outwit the Boobenheimer. I've never seen a No. 4 seed so confident it would defeat a No. 1 seed. And San Diego is not a weak No. 1, but rather the team that is by general acclamation the best in the NFL this year. Marty's first Super Bowl, Manning's first Super Bowl, or McNair's shot at Super Bowl redemption—I prefer all of those story lines to a "Can Brady match Bradshaw and Montana with a fourth ring?" game.

This will be covered tomorrow, but I have to agree with Suellentrop (Slate's former editor) here. Let's not forget that the Pats dominated their Wild Card game one year ago and then wet the bed on the road against the Broncos in the Divisional Playoffs. I'm actually considering picking the Pats (again, this will be discussed tomorrow), but they are awfully arrogant for a team that had exactly two wins against 2007 playoff teams.
The best clip of the day belongs to Luke Winn, who wrote the following in his SI.com college basketball power rankings:

The Hokies' Zabian Dowdell jersey-popped in the direction of the Cameron Crazies, and Coach K saw fit to pull him aside and tell him (according to Dowdell), "You're too classy a guy to be carrying on like that." The YouTube of Dowdell is here, and at most it's mildly unsportsmanlike. K obviously didn't like it. What about the scene last year in the same game, though? If you've forgotten, here's the YouTube. Sean Dockery hit a half-court shot to win it, and the Crazies rushed their own floor when they were ranked No. 1 and Tech was unranked, mobbed everyone, monkey-piled on Dockery, and danced with the mascot. It was a crazy moment, and a justified celebration considering the shot. But it also set a standard -- meaning the Hokies could pretty much do what ever they wanted after getting revenge. Including a harmless jersey-pop.

Man, Coach K is an even bigger asshole than I gave him credit for. How dare he talk to Dowdell when his players routinely engage in floorslapping, fan-taunting, whining and every other classless thing you can do on the basketball court. Just because he's the best coach of all-time doesn't mean he's entitled to act like he's the moral authority of the NCAA. Screw you, Coach K (and keep in mind this is coming from someone who hates Virginia Tech almost as much as he hates Duke).
Oh, and Beckham coming to America? Totally going to make soccer the biggest sport in the country!

Hall of Fame Thoughts

Without a baseball team in D.C. growing up, I grew up as an Orioles fan. So, naturally, Cal Ripken Jr. was my boyhood baseball hero. His posters hung on my wall alongside Art Monk's and whenever I went to Memorial Stadium and, later, Camden Yards, my eyes were always focused on #8.
When Cal announced he would retire at the end of 2001, there was a mad scramble to get tickets to his final games. My cousins and I secured three for his last game at Fenway and my uncle, an Orioles season-ticket holder, snared the big catch: Four tickets to Cal's last game ever, on September 30, 2001 at Camden Yards.
It was about two hours into watching the events of 9/11 that it dawned on me that professional sports leagues would have to cancel their upcoming games and there was a chance that those tickets my uncle held would no longer be for Cal's final game. It was a trivial matter on such a disastrous day, but that I even though of it at the time shows how much being at that game meant to me.
Baseball would shut its doors for one week and eventually moved the cancelled games to the end of the season. Cal's last game would be played on October 6 against the Red Sox, a game that was originally supposed to be played September 16. As luck would have it, my uncle also had tickets to that one.
The only thing I remember about the game is that Ugueth Urbina pitched to Brady Anderson in the bottom of the 9th with two outs and Cal Ripken on deck. Sox catcher Joe Oliver went to the mound before Anderson's at-bat, presumably to tell Urbina to pitch around Anderson so the fans would have a chance to see Ripken once more. (The Sox and O's were long out of the pennant race.) Urbina uncorked five straight high fastballs, all of which were balls. Yet Anderson inexplicably swung at two, bringing the count full. One more ball and Ripken would receive one final ovation, and maybe have a magical moment like he did on the night he broke Lou Gherig's record. A strike and his career would end. Urbina gassed another high fastball way out of the zone; almost chin-high. Anderson swung and missed. I'll never forgive that steroid-taking son-of-a-bitch.
The crowd, which had been feverishly anticipating a Ripken at-bat, instantly turned silent. Slowly though, the cheers began to rise for Ripken and his Hall of Fame career. He rode alongside the stands in a Corvette after the game, reminiscent of the victory lap he took on that memorable night six years before. And even though it was officially announced today, everyone knew they were watching a Hall of Famer drive on by.

* Tony Gwynn was also well-deserving of induction to the Hall. I'm glad he and Ripken, two of the classiest men ever to put on a major league uniform (and two of the rare modern players to start and finish their careers with the same team) will share the stage in Cooperstown and not have to cede the spotlight to a cheater like Mark McGwire.
With 23.5% of the vote, it's tough to see McGwire ever getting in. The real barometer will be to see how many more votes he gets next year. Some voters, desperate to make a point, might have held out Big Mac this time around but will throw their support his way next year.

* Eight voters didn't select Ripken on their ballot, which is a sign of how stupid the Hall of Fame voting is. Ripken isn't the best baseball player of all-time; far from it. But he is a surefire Hall of Famer (no matter what an idiot like Bill Simmons says) and should have been on every ballot.
One hack, though, had to submit a blank ballot so he could better write his self-serving ode to his own conscience. Others just didn't want Ripken to be the first unanimous player because that would somehow mean he's better than Babe Ruth.
I guess leaving Ripken and Gwynn off on that principle is better than casting a ballot for some of the talented, but not-even-close-to-the-Hall guys that received some votes this time around.
I mean, shouldn't the one guy who voted for Jay Buhner have his voting privileges taken away? Is it because Buhner got mentioned on Seinfeld once? And what about Ken Caminiti getting two votes? Or Dante Bichette getting three? (Dante Bichette? I'm sure more than three voters still thought Dante Bichette was active.) Hell, six morons actually voted for Jose Canseco! How is this possible???

It's Good To Be A Gator

Maybe everybody else was already thinking this, but it just dawned on me that Florida also won the NCAA Tournament, meaning they're about to own the two most important championships in college sports. I'm guessing this wasn't brought up more in the lead-up to the game because nobody really expected the Gators to win.
The few people on ESPN and SI.com who picked Florida probably did so only because their editors made them, you know, just for the sake of being contrary. Of the few people to pick UF to win this game, I'll only give credit to Lee Corso, who donned the Gator head before the game, and even that pick might deserve an asterisk because Corso seems to pick against Ohio State to piss off Kirk Herbstreit.
Urban Meyer must be the man, I suppose. Also, I really don't want to hear again how he did it with Ron Zook's players, because we all know Ron Zook wouldn't have won the Insight.Com Bowl with these guys. That's enough Thom Brennaman for me. I'm going to bed.

(Update: And what the hell is John Swofford doing presenting the National Championship trophy to Urban Meyer? I swear, if he's thinking of expanding the ACC again, I'm going to scream. And don't get me started on the fact that the dude from The Best Damn Sports Show Period is on the podium right now interviewing the coaches and players. If there's one sign that FOX should never, ever be broadcasting a major sporting event (and believe me, there are millions), John Kruk's co-host being involved in the most important moment of the broadcast is the biggest such sign.)

(Update #2: FOX's answer to "One Shining Moment' is Andrea Bocelli's 'Con Te Partiro', a lovely song, to be sure, but not exactly one that makes evokes memories of football games past. The end credits seem to be working out alright, but how am I supposed to know if the players always did their best or if they're a shooting star?
But that's not why I opened my computer back up. During the song, FOX listed the directors of all the BCS bowls and it seems that one Bill Webb directed the Orange Bowl. As I wrote last week, the director (who turned about to be this Bill Webb character) of the Wake/Louisville game was in love with cutting to shots of the crowd, even while the game was still being played:

The directing was almost as bad as the announcing. Reminiscent of their baseball coverage, FOX cut to reaction shots from the crowd at least two or three times between each play. Sometimes they’d do this during a measurement or penalty signaling. One time, viewers didn’t see a referee signal which team had recovered the ball after a fumble because the director had inexplicably decided to one of his 400 shots of the Louisville band. They also showed a disgusting amount of close-ups of fans and coaches, so much so that I half-expected to see Joe Torre pop-up on screen. Seriously, it was infuriating.

I'll give you one guess as to who is the #1 director for baseball on FOX. Hint: His name begins with "Bill" and ends with "Webb".)

Carrie Underwood Is So Gonna Get With Cleo Lemon

If Barack Obama was caught in the back of a Chuck E. Cheese blowing lines off a nude Rush Limbaugh while killing a whale during an NRA/Pro-Life Mixer, I don't think his reputation would go in the toilet as quickly as Tony Romo's did tonight.
If Romo could have gotten that ball placed on the ground, not only would my 23-21 Cowboys prediction have turned out exactly correct, but we'd be hearing comparisons all week about this year's Dallas team and last year's Steelers, because the Cowboys would have a very realistic chance to win the NFC. Instead, Romo butterfingers the hell out of it and the Seahawks live to see another day.
ESPN.com is making the natural comparisons we all thought of, saying Romo's play will go down with Leon Lett's fumble, Garo Yepremian's botched kick, Joe Piscarcik's fumble (a play my mom reminds me of every time I say "game over" prematurely) and Jackie Smith's endzone drop. So, the question begs, is this the worst gaffe in NFL history?
Before answering, it's important to define what we're asking. In terms of stupidity, nothing will ever touch Lett's fumble in the Super Bowl nor his snow recovery against the Dolphins. And Piscarcik's fumble was laughable, but more moronic than anything. Ditto for Yepremian's gallant attempt to salvage a botched kick that ended up turning into a Redskins touchdown in Super Bowl VII. Those plays were mental screw-ups. And only Piscarcik's ended up costing his team the game.
Romo's muff belongs in the category with Smith's drop and Trey Junkin's snap and Tom Brady's fumble; mistakes that weren't made by stupidity, but incompetence. Of the three (and I'm sure I'm forgetting some other big mistakes, so let me know if I have in the comments section. And, yes, I know Brady didn't techincally fumble in that snow game, but we all know he did, don't we Jimbo?), Junkin had the toughest job; snapping a ball under his butt to an exact spot seven feet away. He should have made it, but, as Chris Rock says, I understaaaaand. Smith's Super Bowl drop was bad, but at least he was moving in the end zone and was trying to catch a ball rifled at him. It was terrible and could have cost the Rams a Super Bowl, but it's fairly understandable. Guys drop balls all the time, Terrell Owens can speak to that.
Romo, on the other hand, I just can't comprehend it. I've never, ever seen a botched field goal like that. The snap was perfect, as was the catch. Those areas are always where potential trouble lies. But tonight, they were executed flawlessly. Of the three things Romo had to do as the holder (catch, place, spin), he performed the hardest one (the catch) with ease. No, Romo screwed up when he couldn't put the ball down on the ground for Martin Gramatica to kick. Have you ever seen that happen? Does anybody with any kicking experience read this site? Please enlighten us. I'm just speaking to what I see on TV and I can't ever remember muffing the transition from catch to placement.
Romo did make a gallant effort to score after the mistake (and from NBC's on-field camera angle, it looked like he might have a shot) and was gracious in defeat after the game, apologizing to his teammates and fans and putting the onus entirely on himself, so I'll give him some credit for that. But not too much, because that would totally take away from how happy I was watching dejected Cowboys trudge off the field.
And, thusly, our long national nightmare is over. It will be a long time before we ever hear faint praise being uttered with the name Tony Romo hanging in the air.
After the game, of course, the texts and calls were flowing from all the Cowboys haters and here are some of the better comments from the evening (50% are probably me, 49% come from others and 1% involve Nick Saban denying any interest in the Alabama job):
* "Romo's hands must have been to slick from messing around with Carrie Underwood."
* "Nice hold, God's son."
* "He looks upset. I'm sure T.O. can lead him some Vicodin to ease the pain."
* "When the Cowboys got the ball, I told this guy that the perfect thing would be for the Cowboys to drive down field and for Tony Romo to crap the bed and leave a huge stain. And Romo managed to so far exceed my expectations that even I'm surprised. Throwing the pick I expected him to throw in the endzone is, maybe, 1/1000th as terrible as muffing the placement. Oh man, he didn't just leave the stain; more stains are evolving from that one stain and eventually this will lead to a colony of stains that will have, as their leader, a FatHead of Tony Romo, the creator of life. Oh man, this is awesome."
* "Turn on ESPNews, Romo is crying in his press conference. It's almost like I should feel bad for him, but then I think about him f****** up that snap and I start laughing and forget that the sympathy ever even entered my mind."
* "Can we get some Vegas odds on whether Parcells will call Romo "she" in his presser?"
* "Jerry Jones would be frowning right now, but surgery #31 pretty much rendered any facial movement impossible."
* "I wonder if Donovan McNabb's mother feels bittersweet not that Romo looks like he's overtaking her son as the go-to quarterback who chokes under pressure. But it's not like Romo vomited on the ball, so Donovan is still firmly entrenched at #1. But Romo's coming, baby. Romo's coming."

Greg Paulus Gets - No... Too Easy

I Knew Herm and Tony Were Close, But...

NFL Picks: Wild Card Edition

Kansas City Chiefs at Indianapolis Colts
Ripping Peyton Manning and Tony Dungy's playoff failures is all the rage these days, much like minidresses and leggings. While those fashion items will certainly not age gracefully, it's tough to tell whether the Peyton-bashing will. Remember, it wasn't too long ago that Phil Mickelson was a lovable loser (although maybe he's back to that now after his U.S. Open collapse) and people were asking whether Michael Jordan could ever win a title. (It's easy to forget MJ didn't win the Finals - or even get to them - until his seventh season. If, back then, ESPN had been like it is today, this is all anybody would have talked about. Just wait until they start saying it about LeBron this summer.)
This is not to say Peyton is going to win six titles in the near future, it's just a reminder that criticism has a way of transforming into endless fawning once a trophy is hoisted. Just look at Bill Cowher; had Nick Harper returned Jerome Bettis' fumble for a TD or if Mike Vanderjagt was fit for a straitjacket, the only thing we'd be saying about Cowher today is that he could never quite get his team over the hump. (By the way, nice sweater, Bill. What, did you mug Bill Cosby on the way to press conference?)
Why am I mentioning this? I really have no idea, other than to lead-in to my picking Indy over Kansas City in a big way. I know, I've ripped the Colts all season and realize their run defense is historically bad. But let's face facts: The Chiefs D aren't exactly the '86 Bears. Peyton Manning will likely have a field day with their secondary and if he can get some early scores on the board, it might be tough for KC to commit to the run.
On the other hand, I'm starting to subscribe to the theory that the Colts defense is so bad, in part, because Peyton Manning and the offense score so quickly. I first took note of this idea in Michael Lewis' New York Times Magazine piece about Bill Parcells back in September. Looking at tape of Al Saunders' new Redskins offense, Parcells remarked how he felt the big-play capability (and, thusly, three-and-out possibilities) would work against Gregg Williams defense since it would put them on the field more. The smashmouth offense of Joe Gibbs, Parcells remarked, was better suited to keeping a defense fresh.
Surely, the Colts have bigger problems on the defensive end than fatigue, but it definitely isn't helping either.
LJ will likely have a big day, but Peyton's day should be bigger. I'm getting the feeling that this could be one of those games where the Colts come out on fire and everyone is wondering why they ever thought a team like the Chiefs could upset them in the dome. The Colts have played two Wild Card games during the Manning/Dungy area in the confines of the Hoosier Dome. The scores: 49-24 and 41-10.
Pick: Indianapolis 38 - 24

Dallas Cowboys at Seattle Seahawks
Here's a list of the nine teams Seattle has beaten this season: Detroit, Arizona, New York Giants, St. Louis (x2), Oakland, Green Bay, Denver and Tampa Bay. They were 1-3 vs. playoff teams and also lost to the Vikings, Cardinals and 49ers (in a fairly big game in which they were favored by 10). In short; Seattle ain't that good, folks.
Granted, I wrote very much the same thing last year about the Seahawks, and I still stand by that. Just because the team made the Super Bowl doesn't mean they were a great team. They simply took advantage of a weak schedule and an easy playoff slate.
The first thing I heard on TV when this matchup was set was that Matt Hasselbeck was going to have a field day against Roy Williams and the Cowboys secondary. As someone who has been hating on Roy Williams' game from day one, I clearly agreed that Dallas' secondary made them very vulnerable. But against Seattle?
Look, Matt Hasselbeck is a fine quarterback, but this year he's taken a gigantic step back from where he was last year. Injuries (to both him and Shaun Alexander) played a part, but so did the fact that defenses finally started concentrating on their pass defense instead of trying to stop Alexander.
Since his return from injury Hasselbeck has thrown 8 TD and 8 INT. He's lit up exactly one team; the Arizona Cardinals, who could probably still get lit up by Y.A. Tittle. The Cowboys defense is bad, but is Hasselbeck up to proving it?
The same could be asked of wunderkind-turned-probable-Surreal-Life-castmate Tony Romo. Man, what happened to him? Lindsay Lohan benders last longer than our national love affair with Mr. Romo did. He went from Brady to Bledsoe in the blink of an eye. Even Peter King is talking smack about him.
Combine Romo's play with an ineffective Julius Jones (please don't mention Marion Barber to me unless he gets more than 12 carries in a game) and Dallas could be in for a long night. Wait, why am I picking the Cowboys again?
Pick: Dallas 23 - 21

New York Jets at New England Patriots
Of all the dumb statistics out there, the NFL's passer rating is, by far, the dumbest. To wit; Tom Brady currently has the 7th highest QB rating in NFL history. One spot ahead of him; his opponent in Sunday's game, Chad Pennington. Amazingly, that's one of the least ridiculous things about that list.
Of the top 21 all-time passers, 16 are currently active. This list includes Jeff Garcia, Brian Griese, Jake Delhomme and Brad Johnson. Neil Lomax is ahead of Sonny Jurgensen. Danny White higher than Troy Aikman. Jeff George is #39, well ahead of such luminaries as Fran Tarkenton, Dan Fouts, John Elway, Phil Simms and Johnny Unitas. Joey Harrington, the lowest active player who qualifies for the all-time list, is 12 spots ahead of Joe Namath.
Terry Bradshaw and Kordell Stewart are separated by .22 points.
These baffling placements are due to two factors: 1) Football is always changing and the current emphasis on short, accurate passes makes current QBs look better than their earlier , free-throwing, gunslinging counterparts. 2) QB rating is the stupidest idea since NBC put up a blank screen for 30 seconds before Super Bowl XXIII so people could go to the bathroom.
This has nothing to do with the Jets/Pats game, I just thought I'd mention it.
Since I really know little about both these teams, a few other non-game-related thoughts:
* Eric Mangini is my choice for Coach of the Year. Now, this could be because I picked the Jets to go 1-15, of course. However, I think Mangini's job of getting New York to the playoffs with much of the same personnel that went 4-12 last year is nothing short of miraculous. Nothing against Sean Payton, but he had some brand new toys to work with and had the added benefit of not playing games in a half-full Alamo Dome. If you'll recall, some people thought the Saints wouldn't be that bad before Katrina hit and they were starting Aaron Brooks.
The additions of Drew Brees and Reggie Bush gave the Saints offense a new identity. And the emotion of playing in a racous, sold-out Superdome helped give the team a real homefield advantage for the first time ever. (I don't buy the whole "Payton had to get the Saints to overcome so much" angle either. The New Orleans Saints only suffered discomfort and a losing record last year. Those players that lost their homes in Katrina could easily afford new ones. This is not to deny that it was a trying time for the Saints, but compared to others who were affected by Katrina, they had it among the easiest.
Instead, it was the people of New Orleans, namely the poor people of the city, that had to (and still have to) overcome so much.
I like Drew Brees, Joe Horn and Deuce McCallister a lot, but when they were shipped to San Antonio, they weren't living in a stadium, sleeping on cots and getting their meals served by the Red Cross. Let's keep some perspective on this whole "Saints suffering" thing before we annoit Payton a miracle worker. Maybe that was a bit harsh, because I do think Payton did a great job in New Orleans, it's just that Mangini did more with less.)
That being said, I still would have voted Drew Brees as my NFL MVP. An MVP award deserves to go to the most valuable. And as Peter King says, plug Michael Turner into the Chargers offense and they probably still win the AFC West. Replace Drew Brees with Daunte Culpepper, Jamie Martin or whoever, and they're a 4-12 team.
Danie should have been the unanimous selection for Offensive Player of the Year, but I think his value was less than that of both Brees and Tom Brady.
As for my pick, I think this one is going to be a snoozer and, no matter who wins, their playoffs will end next weekend.
Pick: New England 20 - 6

New York Giants at Philadelphia Eagles
So is this the game the NFL considers the marquee match-up because it gets the coveted 4:15 Sunday slot, or is Dallas/Seattle more attractive due to its primetime Saturday night billing? Did Fox and CBS get to choose which games they got to broadcast? (NBC is doing both Saturday tilts.) Does anybody care but me?
I know this angle has been played to death this week, but it really is amazing that a team with a journeyman QB who could have been had by any of the other 31 NFL teams this offseason is currently favored by 7 points over everyone's golden-boy-in-training Eli Manning. And by amazing, I mean totally sweet.
I'm looking forward to next year when somebody inevitably defends Eli by saying he's led the Giants to the playoffs twice the past two years. Because that's going to be awesome.
Anyway, the Giants are done. Just because Sean Taylor can't tackle doesn't mean they're back in any way, shape or form. They have two wins in eight games. They won't make it three in nine.
Pick: Philadelphia 35 - 19

What, He Couldn't Get Jay-Z?

When my cousin Peter turned 25, we drank for seven hours at various D.C. watering holes and eventually ended up getting turned away at a 24-hour Denny's in College Park. On Antzo's 25th, he made everyone take a disgusting shot at midnight and then proceeded to hit on every Greek girl in a three-zip code vicinity. This past August, when I turned 25, my parents took me out to a nice dinner and then I met up with a small group of friends and got hammered off Crowne and car bombs and ended up paying a bouncer to keep out uninvited guests.
Gilbert Arenas turns 25 tomorrow and will have a similar get-together, except his friends will include Busta Rhymes, The Game, T.I., Lil' Wayne and a bevy of hoochies that would make a rap video blush. Oh, and he's also sent out "Arenas Express" cards as invitations (what, Evite wasn't cool enough?). And Puffy's hosting. And the dress-code is "super duper fly." (At mine, I only required duper fly; hence the difference between me and a millionaire.) And Caron Butler says it'll be the second-best D.C. social event of the year behind, of course, Howard Homecoming. And the party has it's own website.
As Bullets play-by-play man Dave Johnson told Dan Steinberg, "my last party didn't even have a site." (It was Steinberg's awesome DC Sports Bog that alerted me to this monumental event.)
There's a chance Gil might be the coolest cat around these parts these days; from his vocab-lesson-jumpshots to his argyle sweaters (watch the video, it's great) to his hyperbaric sleeping bag to his perfect 32-foot game-winners (see below), Arenas has turned from underrated eccentric to MVP-like eccentric in a matter of months. Seriously, watch the shot. How bad-ass does he look, turning away after shooting and not even watching the ball go in. There have only been two people who ever could pull that off; Michael Jordan and Will Smith in that episode of Fresh Prince where he racked up about 70 points on an eight-foot hoop, which makes Carlton get all jealous.
Anyway, watch the shot.

Happy Birthday, Gilbert. Here's hoping T.I. doesn't shoot you.

Chuck Klosterman Is Right; Bill Simmons Is An Idiot

Over the past few weeks I've slowly turned against the idea of a college football playoff, accepting the fact that while the bowl system might never be perfect (and the NCAA's excuses against it will always be lame), a playoff would pretty much kill the meaning of regular season college football. Chuck Klosterman agrees. It's a good column, read the whole thing.
My opinion on the playoff started to shift when I heard somebody on ESPN Radio casually mention that a playoff would be logistically impossible to pull off because bowls can't expect a school's fans to travel three times to various sites around the country for games and, thusly, every playoff game but the Championship would have to be an on-site affair, which would kill the current bowl system as we know it. The NCAA and their financial sponsors (read; bowl sponsors), it was said, would never let this happen.
At first I dismissed this argument, but the more I thought about it, the more it made sense. Let's say Ohio State was in a playoff and had a quarterfinal game at the MPC Computers Bowl in Boise, a semifinal at the Chick Fil-A Bowl in Atlanta and then a final in Glendale. How many Buckeye fans could be expected to show up for more than one of those games? A handful, perhaps? And it's not like the OSU fans could plan on only attending the Championship in advance because they'd only find out if their team was playing in it two weeks ahead of time. Without the fan-base from participating schools, bowl attendance would plummet and many bowls would see their books dip into the red.
This, coupled with Klosterman's argument that a playoff would render much of the regular season meaningless, is enough to put me in the anti-playoff camp. (Klosterman's clincher: If there was a playoff, that super-hyped, must-watch Ohio State/Michigan event back in November would have meant almost nothing.)
As for Klosterman's Page 2 counterpart... Bill Simmons is busy whining about the Hall of Fame and how Mark McGwire is getting a bum rap from hypocritical sports columnists. Ahh, the irony. Cry me a river, you high-voiced clown.
Simmons begins his column by casting doubt on whether or not Mark McGwire actually took steroids. He whines:

Some writers won't vote for McGwire because he probably used steroids -- keep in mind there's never been proof that he did, other than a visible bottle of andro and those 135 pounds of muscle he added from 1990 to 2002 -- which would be fine if they weren't so pious about it. Not content with simply dismissing McGwire's candidacy and moving on, they need to climb on their high horses and rip the guy to shreds. Of course, many of them would appear on any radio or TV show for 50 bucks and a free sandwich. We're supposed to believe they would refuse the chance to take a drug that would enable them to do their job twice as well and make 10 times as much money? Yeah, right.

Sportswriters can't hit a curveball either, but that doesn't mean they shouldn't criticize a player with a similar problem. That's a sportswriter's job, to critique athletes. I agree, McGwire, Sosa and Bonds got a free pass from the media during their heyday, but what does that have to do with anything now? (I'm proud to say I never bought McGwire's story, I used to complain to my Uncle Stephan about him all the time back in '98 - I'll plead the fifth on whether I did the same for Sosa though.) A news columnist can't say he now disagrees with the Iraq war because he supported it three years ago? People aren't allowed to change their minds? I thought this was America, people?
But Simmons' hypocrirony (didn't he think all Theo's moves were gospel at the time?) pales in comparison to the suggestion that McGwire should be given the benefit of the doubt on steroids. First of all, there is plenty of proof McGwire juiced; namely his reluctance to say anything about 'roids to Congress, oh, the fact that he definitely took them. Secondly, are you high? Do you really think McGwire didn't cheat? Look at his career numbers. In his prime (ages 24-27) McGwire had OPSs of .830, .806, .859 and .713. Those aren't Hall of Fame numbers, they're Dave Kingman numbers. McGwire didn't become a Hall of Fame player until 1996, when he was 32 and started poppin off OPS numbers like 1.222, 1.121 and 1.229; numbers that put him in the company of Ruth and Gherig. Magical, wasn't it??
At least Barry Bonds would have made the Hall without the steroids. McGwire just would be have been another failed Rookie of the Year winner.
There are far too many idiotic statements in Simmons' piece to get to, but a few highlights, if you will:

[Sportswriters] rush to tell you that they can't vote for McGwire because their conscience won't allow it.

Which sportswriters are doing this? Everybody columnist I read who isn't voting for Big Mac says its because he cheated and disgraced the game; not because their conscience won't allow it. Simmons presents the case of one moron who actually will vote her conscience. But there are 519 other voters out there, you'd think we'd get some more examples of this horrid conscience-voting but we don't, mainly because Simmons is simply making all this up.

Word is, JFK cheated on his wife. Should we change the name of the airport and remove all his memorabilia from the Smithsonian?

Yes, Bill, but there's no proof JFK cheated on his wife, so it can't be true... Right?

McGwire boasts some undeniable credentials: When a painful strike canceled the 1994 World Series and nearly killed the sport, two events got people caring again: Cal Ripken's breaking Lou Gehrig's consecutive-games record in 1995, and McGwire's and Sosa's battling for Maris' record three years later.

Last week Simmons said Cal Ripken wasn't deserving of the Hall of Fame, but today he's saying that McGwire saving the game (just as Ripken did) is a reason he should be in. Hmmm... Interesting. And by interesting, I mean moronic and hypocritical.

If he took steroids, he did break the rules. All that does is give him something in common with Hall of Famers like admitted ball doctorer Gaylord Perry and Ty Cobb, a virulent racist who deliberately tried to hurt other players and was accused of fixing at least one game. Are we really going to play the morality card for Big Mac when Cobb is in the Hall? Who's okay with this?

You'll get no defense of Gaylord Perry from me; but Ty Cobb being an asshole and a racist doesn't mean he cheated. As for the game-fixing; Cobb was investigated for such an action but was eventually cleared by Commissioner Kenesaw Mountain Landis. Nice cover-up of the facts, tool.
At the end of his witless rant, Simmons puts forth some ridiculous theories and ideas, mainly, it seems, for the sake of being contrary. He knows McGwire is a dirty cheat, he just can't bring himself to write the same column everyone else is writing nationwide. Bill Simmons; conforming to non-conformity. And being a whiny, know-it-all punk.
George Clooney!

Hell Of A Season... And Announcing Crew

Never have I enjoyed watching my team lose more than I did last night during Wake Forest’s 24-13 defeat in the Orange Bowl. Even though the announcers were openly rooting for Louisville, the refs blew a key fumble call that altered the outcome of the game and Louisville scored two late touchdowns to make the hard-fought battle seem like a mismatch, the mere sight of seeing Wake Forest in such a big football game was well worth it. I can’t ever remember being less upset about a loss in my life. Sure, there was frustration during the game, but the moment Riley Skinner threw the interception that sealed the game for Louisville that all went away and all Wake fans began appreciating what a magical season it was.
Alright, now that the Full House music has stopped, it’s time for me to air some grievances with FOX. First of all, let me make clear that I’ve always hated watching sports on FOX. The poor HD quality (they, like ESPN, broadcast in 720p), terrible directing, silly graphics, inane pre-game shows, questionable talent (Jeannie Zalesko?) and mediocre commentating makes FOX seem amateurish compared with CBS and NBC. The ads for The War At Home don’t help either. But this year’s BCS coverage makes all other FOX sports seem like Wide World of Sports in its heyday.
FOX broadcast zero college football games this season prior to the Cotton Bowl. (They did air dozens of games on their regional networks.) Because of this, they have no knowledgeable or credible talent when it comes to college football. There are no Brent Musbergers or Dick Vermeils or Kirk Herbstreits working for FOX because everyone who knows a lick about college football is working for a network that broadcasts it for more than a seven-day stretch in January.
Last night, FOX had Jimmy Johnson and Dave Wannsteadt on their pregame show discussing Wake Forest and Louisville. Johnson, who of course works for FOX’s NFL unit, has probably not watched a single Wake Forest play all season and probably has viewed a handful of college games. Wannsteadt has probably seen even less, considering his Pitt Panthers weren’t invited to a bowl for the third straight year.
In the booth were Terry Donahue, fresh off wrecking the San Francisco 49ers franchise and Pat Haden, who spends his autumns fawning over Notre Dame on NBC. Yesterday, both served as unofficial boosters for Louisville football.
I’m not saying this because I was rooting for Wake, I’m saying this because I have the ability to hear and reason: Haden and Donahue were all over the Cardinal’s jock last night in a way that made Lou Holtz look impartial. I’ve never heard anything like it.
To listen to Haden and Donahue (mainly Donahue, though), Louisville was the greatest football team ever and Wake Forest was lucky to be on the same field with them. Louisville's offense would be able to score at will against Wake's lowly defense, according to them. When the Cardinals struggled offensively for the game's first 50 minutes, all the announcing duo could do was make excuses; never once praising Wake's defense.
The adulation began early and never ceased, even as the Deacs were outplaying Louisville through three quarters. Some highlights:

- With 6:00 left in the first quarter Donahue said, “Wake Forest should feel very fortunate to have the ball on their own 42 and still be tied with Louisville.” This was, to repeat, nine minutes into the game.

- After Wake stopped Louisville on a 3rd-and-short, Donahue said “I’m surprised at how well Wake Forest is playing the run. Louisville is much bigger on the interior.” Minutes earlier, play-by-play man Matt Vasgersian had mentioned how Wake’s run defense was stout, but their secondary was questionable. Donahue also failed to mention that Wake’s run defense was better statistically than Louisville all season.

- In a bizarre jab at National Coach of the Year Jim Grobe, Haden asked incredulously, “how can a coach go 24-32 and even survive for a fifth season?” Hmm, maybe because it’s Wake Forest, you Brady Quinn-loving jackass, and 24-32 at Wake is more impressive than 36-20 in many places.

- Haden, after Wake Forest punted, trailing 10-3: “The Deacons need a big stop here, they can’t let this game get out of hand.” IT WAS 10-3 FOR CRAP’S SAKE!

- Wake gets 24 yards on an end-around. Donahue says if a Louisville player hadn’t gotten his hand on the ball carrier, he’d have scored a TD. Replay greatly disproves Donahue’s theory, showing two defenders coming in at an angle that forced the Wake player out of bounds. Even when Wake did something good, Donahue found a way to praise Louisville.

- Three times during the game, Donahue said a variation of, “I think Louisville should be a top five team,” thus ignoring the fairly obvious fact that LOUISVILLE ALREADY IS A TOP FIVE TEAM ACCORDING TO BOTH THE AP AND USA TODAY POLLS.

- Wake runs an end-around reverse that nets a first down. Donahue sneers, “you go down in the garbage can for that play.” He fails to mention that Louisville’s only touchdown up until that point CAME ON A SIMILAR GADGET PLAY. Garbage can. Man, that one made me mad.

- There were countless times were Haden or Donahue said something like “Bobby Petrino’s guys need to fire it up” or “Louisville has to capitalize on this field position.” Jim Grobe’s guys never received such encouragement.

Vasgersian, whom I like mainly due to his presence in the booth during Rick Sutcliffe’s drunken rant this past May, wasn’t bad but made a number of mistakes including naming Georgia as the team Wake beat in the ACC Championship and not getting the correct down and distance at least four times. George Clooney.
The directing was almost as bad as the announcing. Reminiscent of their baseball coverage, FOX cut to reaction shots from the crowd at least two or three times between each play. Sometimes they’d do this during a measurement or penalty signaling. One time, viewers didn’t see a referee signal which team had recovered the ball after a fumble because the director had inexplicably decided to one of his 400 shots of the Louisville band. Seriously, it was infuriating.
With the announcers babbling about how Anthony Allen needs a bust in Canton, it was difficult at times to keep track of what was going on. They also showed a disgusting amount of close-ups of fans and coaches, so much so that I half-expected to see Joe Torre pop-up on screen.
Still, the announcing was worse. According to Donahue, Wake Forest never had a chance in the game and would be lucky to keep the game even close. When Louisville finally went ahead after an untimely fumble by Wake Forest, Donahue acted as if the result was preordained.
It’ll be fascinating to see how FOX treats tonight’s underdog, Notre Dame. Surely, they won’t give the Irish a chance against LSU since the Tigers are favored by nearly as much as Louisville was (9.5 vs. Louisville giving 10 to Wake). Surely they’ll ignore Brady Quinn while praising JaMarcus Russell, even though the two might put up similar numbers. Surely FOX will mention LSU’s speed a few dozen times and say Notre Dame hasn’t seen anything like it all year. Surely Notre Dame will get dumped on too. Right? Right? Who knows though; with Terry Bradshaw and Howie Long calling the game, they probably won’t even know a receiver need only get one foot in bounds on a catch.
College football on FOX. Gotta love it.

The 2007 Orange Bowl
Louisville vs. Wake Forest
Holy Freakin' Crap

Remember when Marisa Tomei won that Oscar for My Cousin Vinny and nobody could really believe it, so they made up urban legends about Jack Palance reading the wrong name and the Academy covering it up to prevent embarrassment? And now you have to dig in your memory vault for confirmation on the off-chance somebody mentions that Marisa Tomei has an Oscar, like on Entourage when Drama mentioned he had worked with an Oscar winner during his three-episode arc on A Different World? (Tomei, not Kadeem Hardison - although his work in The Sixth Man was criminally ignored.) Remember that?
Than maybe you also remember that Lyle Lovett married Julia Roberts. Or that George Mason made the Final Four in 2006. Or that Britney Spears is the mother of two children. Or that a former WWF wrestler was governor of Minnesota. Or that my buddy Scott once jumped off a two-story balcony with an umbrella to prove that what Mary Poppins did was possible. Or that Michael Irvin continues to have gainful employment with the biggest sports network in the world. Or that Sly Stallone just released Rocky VI, and it isn't that bad. Or that Marion Barry was re-elected to D.C.'s mayoral office after he was sent to jail for possession of crack.
All these occurences were highly improbable; some even borderline impossible. Yet none of these things can compare to Wake Forest winning the ACC and playing in tonight's Orange Bowl. None. No matter what happens tonight, nothing will change this fact.
The Orange Bowl is only the seventh bowl game in Wake Forest history. Before this season, they spent a grand total of seven weeks in the AP Top 25 Poll - ever. Their all-time conference winning percentage is .280. Prior to this August, Wake Forest wasn't just a doormat, they were that nasty, cruddy buildup under the doormat.
It figured to be more of the same in 2006 once starting QB Ben Mauk and highly-regarded RB Micah Andrews went down with season-ending injuries early in the year. An opening game win in Syracuse was followed by a near-loss against a Duke team that would finish the year 0-12. Had it not been for a blocked chip shot field goal in the waning seconds, Wake's season would likely have been over by week 2. Jim Grobe is a great coach, but losing to Duke would have been the ultimate blow to a team that was seemingly being held together with duct tape.
Instead, the Deacs used their near-loss against the Dukies to rattle off three-straight wins, including a beatdown of Ole Miss in Oxford. The Rebels have been down for a while, but that never mattered in the past. Wake Forest football teams simply did not win road games against SEC schools.
Wake jumped into the AP Rankings for the first time in three seasons after the Ole Miss win and were getting some national attention for their 5-0 record. Still, the wins had come against a weak schedule and nobody expected the Deacs to give #15 Clemson much of a game when the Tigers came rolling into Winston-Salem. But, for the game's first 45 minutes, it was Clemson that was playing the role of the weakling. It wasn't until a blocked FG returned for a touchdown that Clemson had any life. Had All-American kicker Sam Swank hit that field goal, the Deacs would have been up 20-3 in the 4th quarter. Instead, though, Wake's lead was a narrow 17-10 and everyone in the stadium and watching on ESPN knew the game was, for all intents and purposes, over. The Tigers rolled to 24 fourth quarter points and Wake had let a golden opportunity slip through their fingers.
At that time, everybody in Winston-Salem was hoping the Deacs could get the win they needed to become bowl eligible. With a contest against UNC on the horizon, everybody figured Wake would be bowling for the first time since 2003. The more optimistic fans were hoping Wake Forest could sneak out a win against NC State (who still had yet to collapse), Boston College, Florida State, Virginia Tech and Maryland so the Deacs might be able to play a bowl close to North Carolina. Winning the ACC wasn't even on the radar.
With Clemson, Maryland and Boston College all ahead of Wake in the Atlantic Division, even the most optimistic fan couldn't have dreamt the Deacs would contend for the division title. And it wasn't until a primetime win over Boston College (which was preceded by nailbiting wins over the two remaining North Carolina schools; State and Chapel Hill) that anybody even considered that the Deacs could play in the ACC Championship.
With the win over BC giving Wake the tiebreaker over the Eagles, it was figured out that if the Deacs could win two of their last three games (at FSU, vs Virginia Tech and at Maryland) they would win the Atlantic Division. The VT game was figured the least winnable, barely ahead of the upcoming tilt with FSU. Though the 'Noles were struggling for the first time since entering the ACC 14 years before, Wake had never won in Tallahassee and rarely was competitive against Bobby Bowden teams. The media, who was on the Wake bandwagon but still refused to take them seriously, all picked Florida State to win. All the Deacs did was hand Bowden his first home shutout ever, as Wake pummeled the Seminoles 30-0.
That win gave Wake control over their own ACC destiny. A win at Maryland on Thanksgiving weekend would give the Deacs the Atlantic Division, no matter what happened in other games. Thusly, it was no surprise that Jim Grobe's unit came out flat in a meaningless game against Virginia Tech. (That the lateral quickness of the Hokie linebackers helped stifle Wake's sweeps, reverses and end-arounds, also surely played a part.) The only thing left was to see if Maryland would have a chance to win the Atlantic when the Deacs visited College Park. Thanks to Miami's Thanksgiving night win over Boston College, that happened and the Deacs and Terps met on November 25 for the ACC Atlantic Division title and the requisite berth in the ACC Championship the following weekend.
Maryland struck first, but Wake's running game proved to be too much for the Terps defense. A gutsy 4th-and-goal touchdown plunge by fullback Richard Belton sealed Wake's 38-24 victory. They rushed for 296 yards against Maryland and picked off their QB Sam Hollenbach three times.
In Jackonsville, Wake rode the defense of Jon Abbate, Alphonso Smith and Josh Gattis to a hardfought 9-6 win over Georgia Tech. All-American receiver Calvin Johnson had a quiet 177 yards, but the ineffectiveness of Reggie Ball doomed the Jackets. Sam Swank's third field goal gave Wake their first lead with 2:55 left in the game. GT went three-and-out on their next possession and punted, hoping to force Wake into a similar fate. On a 3rd-and-2 with 1:13 left, Willie Idlette ran for 18 yards off an end-around, sealing the game, and the ACC Championship for Wake Forest. It was only the second in their history and first since 1970.

Tonight's game in Miami is the biggest event in Wake Forest sports history. Winning the ACC Basketball Tournament is always huge, but not since the 1962 Final Four have the Deacs ever been on a national stage like they'll be tonight. And the irony of it all is, it doesn't really matter if Wake Forest wins or loses.
It's not a cop-out to say that the Deacs victory was in merely getting to the Orange Bowl. All the odds were stacked against them. They were picked last in their division, had three offensive starters suffer season-ending injuries and play at a school where football wasn't as big as basketball signing day. Throw in that Wake Forest is the third-smallest school of any playing Division I-A football and that's a lot of obstacles to overcome.
There will be no shame in losing tonight to Louisville, if that should happen. Wake sold-out their allotment of 17,500 tickets well before Christmas, a fact that should be considered even more impressive considering there are only 55,000 living Wake Forest alumni.
Sadly, this alumni won't be in Dolphins Stadium tonight; a dislike for flying and an even greater dislike for driving 36-hours roundtrip means I'll be on my couch tonight, drinking Sierra Nevada, wearing my lucky shirt and rooting on the Deacs from Bethesda, MD.
Even if I had made the journey, a loss wouldn't have diminished any of my excitement or pride in my school's football team. Wake Forest is playing in the Orange Bowl, while Miami, Florida State, Clemson, N.C. State, Boston College and Virginia Tech have already finished their seasons. Jim Grobe is the man of the hour in college football (at least he will be until kickoff - or if Nick Saban should take that Alabama job). And Wake Forest is the darling of college football. It's been a sweet ride in 2006. I wish it didn't have to end.

It will end tonight, however, no matter the result. It will either be a sweet win to always savor or a loss that still won't diminish what this team has accomplished. And just as I have all year long, a loss is what I'm predicting. Calvin Johnson had 177 yards against Wake's defense with a D+ quarterback (and that grade might be too kind). Brian Brohm is an A quarterback and he will be more productive against Wake's unheralded (and underrated defense).
As Boise State showed last night (and as Wake has been proving all year), no result is impossible in college football. For as good as Louisville's offense is, it's important to remember that their defense can best be described as generous. The Deacs struggle against teams with linebacking speed (VT, GT), and all indications are that Louisville lacks this. If Wake can run the ball effectively and keep the Cardinal defense on the field, they could be dangerous.
The Deacs aren't likely to make a huge comeback (a la Texas Tech), so their best shot is to try and hang around and make something happen in the 4th quarter. (Jim Grobe has already said as much.) In order to beat a team that was an offsides penalty away from playing in the National Championship, that might be a tall task.
Even so, Wake Forest's football team has already won.

Yet Another Wonderfully Played Football Game In Phoenix

When your local NFL team is among the worst franchises in sports, it's nice to know that at least the college kids can put on a show for you. Last night's Fiesta Bowl, played at Glendale Stadium in Phoenix, made the 2006 Rose Bowl look like a Raiders/Lions game. Three touchdowns in the final 91 seconds of regulation; a stunning Boise State game-tying touchdown on the most flawlessly executed hook-and-ladder of all-time and a miraculous two-point conversion in overtime via the Statue of Liberty play were what made the Boise State/Oklahoma game the best BCS game ever. And I'm not one given to instant history. That Rose Bowl was great, as was the Fiesta Bowl where Ohio State stunned Miami; but for sheer entertainment, last night's game was tops. (By the way, those 22 points in the last 91 seconds were more points than the Arizona Cardinals - the stadium's normal tenant - scored in five of their home games.)

I'm preparing for tonight's Orange Bowl featuring a certain black-and-gold clad team from Winston-Salem, and I hope to have a post up before the game. Until then, enjoy the highlights of the Fiesta Bowl.