#071 - Midseason Futures Update

Since we've reached the midway point (or roughly midway point) of the NFL Season, I thought it'd be useful to go through my NFL season-long futures bets and see where I stand. Calculate how much money I project to lose (or, you know, in a perfect world, win).

PLAYER BETS

-Tony Gonzalez Rec TDs +0.5 vs Antonio Gates Rec TDs: 12.00 to win 13.8

They were paying me juice for this, in addition to the half-score. Seemed like at the very least a 50-50 proposition.

Currently: Gonzalez 4, Gates 2
Odds: 60%; Value: 15.48

-Wes Welker Rec Yds +78.5 vs Calvin Johnson Rec Yds: 12.00 to win 13.2

Again, I was getting juice. I figured they were both going to put up lots of yards, but Stafford was due for a down year. Also, I can't help but admit I was swayed a bit by the Madden curse.

Currently: Welker 736, Johnson 638 (Welker has played 1 more game)
Odds: Conservatively, we'll call it 45%; Value: 11.34

-Greg Jennings Rec TDs +0.5 vs Dwayne Bowe Rec TDs: 12.00 to win 8.89

I paid a lot of juice for this, which looks bad now, considering all the injuries that have piled up for Jennings. He did score once this year in only about a game and a half. But Bowe has been seemingly the only guy to reach the end zone for KC, doing it in garbage time a bunch.

Currently: Jennings 1, Bowe 3
Odds: Per injuries, 10%; Value: 2.09

-Devin Hester Ret TDs vs Patrick Peterson Ret TDs: 12.00 to win 8.89

Hester returns punts and kicks, Peterson does not. And considering Peterson's importance on defense, and the addition of Brandon Marshall to the Bears, I figured Hester'd be all over the return game this year. Yet to find the seam, but all he needs is 1.

Currently: Hester 0, Peterson 0
Odds: 55%; Value: 11.49

-Victor Cruz Rec TDs vs Dez Bryant Rec TDs: 15.00 for 13.04

Cruz is a better receiver in a better offense. Seemed to be a no-brainer, especially consdering Bryant's attitude / off-the-field issues.

Currently: Cruz 7, Bryant 2
Odds: 75%; Value: 21.03

-Tom Brady Pass TDs +1.5 vs Matthew Stafford Pass TDs: 15.00 for 13.04

Getting points on Brady. No way Stafford duplicates last season.

Currently: Brady 16, Stafford 8 (Brady has played 1 more game)
Odds: 65%; Value: 18.23

-Eric Weddle's INTs vs Charles Woodson's INTs or Kyle Arrington's INTs: 10.00 for 16.00

Well, at this point, Weddle is the only guy actually playing for his team. I'd say that's a good sign.

Currently: Weddle 2, Woodson 1, Arrington 0
Odds: 35%, Value: 9.10

TOTAL FOR SECTION: 88.00 Out, Projected 88.75 In

OFFENSIVE ROOKIE OF THE YEAR

-Robert Griffin III: 10.00 for 60.00 (Odds: 40%; Value: 28.00)
-Trent Richardson: 6.00 for 60.00 (Odds: 25%; Value: 16.50)
-Andrew Luck: 24.00 for 30.00 (Odds: 30%; Value: 16.20)

I originally had bet RG3, but then I realized I could essentially lock in profit if any one of the three won (which seems like a foregone conclusion at this point), so I added the other two. I'm still hoping for Griffin, as that results in the biggest net gain, but the other two are acceptable as well.

TOTAL FOR SECTION: 40.00 Out, Projected 60.70 In

TEAM BETS

-San Diego Chargers AFC West Champs: 20.00 for 37.00

Screw the Chargers. I somehow get sucked into them every year. The collapse against New Orleans was one thing. The collapse against Denver was near inconceivable. But then to go on the road and lose at Cleveland just ended any and all relationship I have with that team. The amount of money I've lost on them in the last four weeks is atrocious. It looks like another 20 down the drain here.

Currently: 3-4, behind the Broncos 4-3
Odds: 20%; Value: 11.40

-New York Giants NFC East Champs: 20.00 for 40.00 (Odds: 55%; Value: 33.00)
-Philadelphia Eagles NFC East Champs: 43.00 for 67.25 (Odds: 10%; Value: 11.03)

Originally had the Giants, then wanted to hedge my bets a little with value on the Eagles after they beat New York. Hedged too much, I think. Wish I could sniff +100 on NYG anywhere, let alone +200.

-Seattle Seahawks NFC West Champs: 10.00 for 40.00

If they had managed to pull out that win at San Fran last week, this is a whole new ballgame. Then, they lost a late lead against Detroit, and now it's looking much less likely.

Currently: 4-4, behind the 49ers 6-2
Odds: 5%; Value: 2.50

-Pittsburgh Steelers AFC North Champs: 15.00 for 18.75

This one started to look really bad, but has since come back to life. The Ravens are reeling without Webb and Lewis. And the Steelers are finally putting it together, on the strength of their passing game. People automatically associate Pittsburgh with defense, but theirs is not very good right now. Same goes for Baltimore.

Currently: 4-3, behind the Ravens 5-2
Odds: 20%; Value: 6.75

-Atlanta Falcons NFC South Champs: 25.00 for 13.89

Made this after they started 2-0 or 3-0. Now, it's like stealing. Wish I had bet 250.

Currently: 7-0, ahead of the Bucs 3-4
Odds: 85%; Value: 33.06

-Denver Broncos Under 8.5 Wins: 15.00 for 20.25

Well, they were giving a lot of juice, and I wasn't convinced that this team was going to be ready to win 9 games. Fast forward 8 weeks, and I'm pretty convinced. The comeback win against San Diego has taken what could have been a really good season for me and turned it into pure mediocrity. Good call, me.

Currently: 4-3
Odds: 15%; Value: 5.29

-Jacksonville Jaguars Under 4.5 Wins: 20.00 for 37.00

I went down a couple notches here just to get the higher odds on this. I think they were at 5.5 when I made the bet. Didn't believe in them at all. So far, looking like my best one.

Currently: 1-6
Odds: 25%; Value: 14.25

-Arizona Cardinals Under 6.5 Wins: 20.00 for 17.39

When they were 4-0, this looked silly. Now they're 4-4, and I'm starting to regain hope. They just don't look very good. And while the defense is solid, they're not as good as they were to start the season, and not good enough to carry them again. They beat New England and dismantled Philly. Wow.

Currently: 4-4
Odds: 15%; Value: 5.61

TOTAL FOR SECTION: 188.00 Out, Projected 122.88 In

OTHER

-Will Rex Ryan still be coaching the Jets in Week 17: YES: 25.00 for 25.00

Bill Barnwell gave me the heads up to this. I figured it was a pretty good value. They'd have to collapse to get him fired midseason. They started to play better against Houston, Indy, and New England. But that game this week against Miami really changed my mind. Went from 65% to 40%.

Currently: 3-5 Record, last in AFC East
Odds: 40%; Value: 20.00

-AFC North will win the Super Bowl: 10.00 for 72.50

Going into the season, I figured they had one legit team (Baltimore) and one semi-legit team (Pittsburgh). Nowadays, it looks more like two semi-legit teams. Oh well, still not bad.

Odds: 10%; Value: 8.25

TOTAL FOR SECTION: 35.00 Out, Projected 28.25 In


TOTAL SO FAR:

Out: 351.00
Projected Return: 300.58
Projected Loss: -50.42

Umm... not good.


*UPDATE 11/05: Previously listed "NFC North" when I meant "AFC North". Thanks, JRK.

#066 - NFL Season Recap

It's hard to believe that the NFL season has already come and gone. Sure, the playoffs are here and I'm as excited as anyone for the playoffs, but the regular season in the NFL is the most salient regular season in all of pro sports. There are so many opportunities for fan interaction with the game, and you can't pitch a stone without hitting someone who follows the game. I'm a prime example of this, as I take part in numerous activities that are closely linked with the NFL season. Here's a recap of how they went this year.

1) Weekly Confidence Pool

12 people, $45 entry

I had a relatively poor start to my weekly confidence pool, which involves picking the winners of every game each week and ranking them with a point value 1-16. I ended up winning the pool on two separate weeks, earning $30 each time, but fell short of the overall season championship. I came in second, 21 points behind the winner, my dear friend and personal hero, James Moran. Still, +$15 on the season isn't bad, especially for a $45 entry. There are a possible 2282 points in the game (17 weeks, 136 pts per week, less 30 for byes) and I scored a final total of 1658 (72.7%). Honestly, I don't know what this means. But I'm recapping the results, and that is a result, so there it is.

2) ESPN.com Fantasy Football

2 leagues, 10 teams each; one free, one $50 entry

I ended up with first overall pick in both of my leagues. Sure, I should have taken Rob Gronkowski or LeSean McCoy, but could you blame me for going with Adrian Peterson? Considering how the year went, it was not good news that both of my teams were built around Peterson and Philip Rivers. On draft day, I couldn't have been happier. Today, I'm a little disappointed. Still, I managed fairly solid seasons, making the playoffs in both leagues (though I honestly stopped paying attention to the free league, an unfortunate side effect of not having prize money to play for). In the pay league, I waded through debilitating injuries to Peterson, Fred Jackson, and Miles Austin (who played maybe two games as the Miles Austin I expected), while Beanie Wells was habitually questionable and Rivers simply stunk up the joint. I squeaked out a third-place finish, though, thanks to ridiculous performances by Matthew Stafford, Jordy Nelson, CJ Spiller, and Aaron Hernandez. This earned me my entry fee back, so the league was a wash.

3) ESPN.com Pigskin Pick'em (Against the Spread)

Free entry, no prizes

This is perhaps the best free, prizeless contest you can participate in, because it's simple to enter and gauges your performance against tens of thousands of other contestants. ESPN.com also always enters its spreads with half-point values to eliminated the possibility of pushes, which is nice and simplifies the results. However, this results in better-than-expected performance against the spread, as there is typically an extra half-point of value added in to the side you want. I bounced around the top 1% of entries for most of the year, and finished ranked #506 overall. I'd guess there are about 75,000 entries who picked all the games, with probably 75,000 more that gave up for portions of the season. The overall winner had 160 correct, for a record of 160-96 (62.5%), pretty remarkable for an entire season. To put that in perspective, this person would have won 19 cents for every dollar they bet, had they placed a bet on every game (assuming odds of -110). My final record was 146-110, 14 off the pace of the leader, good for a win percentage of 57.0%. If I had been able to bet on these spreads every game, I would have made 9 cents for every dollar I bet. If I had bet $20 per game on every game across the season, that would result in a $460 profit. Not bad, considering you need to start with at least $320 before Week 1 to do that. However, you normally can't

4) Hilton Supercontest (Against the Spread)

Free; just tracked picks

I didn't actually ENTER the Hilton Supercontest (contest explained here) because it costs $1500 and requires contestants to turn in their picks IN PERSON to the Las Vegas Hilton (or what was the Las Vegas Hilton) every Saturday, but I did follow along, using the pool provided spreads and making my own picks. You need to pick 5 games every week from the list provided by the casino, and the eventual winner took home over $300,000 this year. The winner, a group by the handle Sans Souci, went 58-22-5 (72.5%), for a sick 60.5 points (pushes are worth 1/2). Using the comparison from above, they would have won 36 cents for each dollar they bet over the course of the season. If they had taken the $1500 they needed for the entry and bet it on 5 games a week, $300 per game, they would have profited $9180 for the season. Instead, they entered the pool and walked home with $300,000. They are smart (and lucky) dudes. My picks were not as good. For the season, I finished 48-36-1 (57.1%) for 48.5 pool points, good enough for 56th place had I entered the pool. Only the top 20 places get paid. Again, this would have netted me 9 cents for every dollar bet. So if I had just used the $1500 entry fee and put it towards 5 games a week at $300 per game, I would have made $2295, instead of losing the entire fee by not finishing in the top 20. Food for thought. Considering I started off the year 5-10-0, I'll take that finish, as I went 43-26-1 the rest of the way (62.3%).

5) Cash Money

Lots of cash in; lots of cash out

It's kind of sad. I went back and looked at my performance in past years in the "put your money where your mouth is" department, and it was pretty awful. I know the cliche is 99% of sports bettors lose money (which is funny because you never meet anyone who has ever lost money) but I will fully admit I was one of those 99% for the last three years. As well as I could do in the contests, I just made bad decisions when it came to real money, and would often wager on things I had no real knowledge of, like college football and Italian soccer. I firmly believe you can't be successful by passively following something, which is how I deal with college football. I like it, I can talk it, but in the past, I felt like the money I was making with NFL bets I was throwing away on college. So I decided to scrap it. The NFL is my primary interest, and that's what I wanted to focus on. So this year, I went for that. And the results were much better.

5a) Preseason Bets (from here)

Losses: 144, Wins: 180.99, Net: +36.99

Losses
-Cincinnati Under 5.5 Wins; 50 for 40
Yikes. This was nowhere close. But, they had an offense full of rookies and a defense that let go of its top cornerback. How was I to know they'd do so well? Oh, maybe because their schedule was very easy.
-Detroit Under 7.5 Wins; 25 for 28.75
Well, I was taking a chance. I knew everyone was all over the Detroit bandwagon. But Stafford and Calvin Johnson played every game, which was the first time in basically ever. And they had those three crazy comebacks early in the year. Without those, where do they finish?
-Pittsburgh Under 10.5 Wins; 25 for 25
It was even odds, their defense is sliding over the hill, and I expected something of a Super Bowl losing hangover. None of it happened. Also, their finishing schedule was insanely easy. That hurt.
-St. Louis Over 7.5 Wins; 25 for 25
I thought either San Francisco or St. Louis was going to win the West this year. I bet on the wrong one.
-Jamaal Charles Rush Title; 4 for 40
10-to-1 odds on Charles didn't seem bad, since he was going to have a bigger role in the offense this year. Of course, that bigger role led to his season ending injury. Oh well.
-Philip Rivers MVP; 15 for 150
Damn him. I mean, given how Rodgers and Brees played, I'm not sure Rivers would have won MVP even if he played safety and returned kicks. But he played poorly most of the year, primarily early on and during a crushing loss at Detroit to end their playoff hopes. I think he might have been injured.

Wins
-Indianapolis Under 9.5 Wins; 50 for 52.50
What a charm. Had this wrapped up in Week 9. The only regret I have is not going stronger on it.
-Green Bay Over 11.5 Wins; 25 for 28.75
Given the better-than-even odds for this, I'm disappointed I didn't bet it more heavily.
-New England Over 11.5 Wins; 25 for 21.74
They had to lose to the Giants to momentarily put this bet in doubt. But an easy finishing schedule brought it home, no problem
-Philadelphia Under 10.5 Wins; 25 for 30
Insanely good odds on this. It was part emotional hedge, part smart play. I'm an Eagles fan. I know we don't do well with immense expectations, and I also know we don't do well with a quarterback writhing on the ground. Both played a factor this year.
-Maurice Jones Drew Rush Title; 4 for 48
12-to-1 odds on MJD. Seemed like a decent call. His only real competition was McCoy, but the factors supporting MJD are easy: he's durable, and he's about the only good thing on that offense.

5b) Weekly Bets

I went ahead and logged all of my weekly bets this year, something that I think will be good as I move forward next year. I started the year off quite rough, skipping Week 1 altogether and then only winning ONE bet during Week 2. From there, though, things went well. Between Week 6 and Week 17, I had 8 winning weeks and only 4 losing weeks, culminating with a monster 96% return during Week 17.

Overall, ATS picks were okay. I was 92-81-9 ATS which turned out to a -6.00 loss. However, starting with Week 6, when I switched sports books, I was 68-56-6 for +202.00. THAT'S what I need to keep going with heading into next year.

I only placed a few ML bets during the year, but they were the best of what I did. I was 4-1 for +124.85.

Totals were pretty pointless. I was 7-7, and lost -2.00.

Parlays were my worst enemy for the year. And I gave up on them after Week 10. I placed 13 parlays during the year, won 2, and lost -171.94 on them. Yikes.

Turns out that teasers were my favorite utility that I had--but instead of betting atrocious 3-team, 10-point teasers like I have in years past, I stuck primarily to 3-team, 6.5-point teasers this year. The payouts are much better, and if you pick selectively, you can turn quite a profit. I was 27-26 on all teasers, which is not the greatest percentage, but it turned a +563.00 profit. That's the advantage of betting something that has better-than-even odds. You can go .500 and still win. The 3-team, 10-pointers are -110, which means if you bet 4 and win 2, you're losing money. Maybe teasers are still a sucker's bet, but I'm focusing on doing them properly--which is to move numbers across as many key values as possible. Instead of teasing something from -14 to -7, look for more opportunities to turn +2.5 into +9.5. (Ending on a half-number with teasers are important. A push is a loss, so having +10 is no better than having +9.5. It's the same result.)

Some of the things I need to be careful with next year are forcing things where they don't belong. That is, if it's Sunday night and I want to run one more bet before the end of the week, I'll sometimes pick a 3-team tease for the Sunday and Monday night game and throw in a total on one of them. This is not a good strategy. Good strategy is to find value in the market, not to bet just for the sake of betting (even though it's fun to do and hard to stop). Another problem I ran into a couple times was having too much dependent upon one team. If you make three or four bets and include the Falcons in every one of them, well, you better hope the Falcons pull through. I was pretty good about this all year, but fell into the trap this past weekend during the playoffs, when I was heavy on the Saints/Lions Under. Look how that turned out.

#064 - Singin' the Bronco Blues

Let's cut to the chase: I'm a fan of the Boise State football team. And like many of their fans nationally, I can pinpoint the moment I became one as the Fiesta Bowl game against Oklahoma in 2007. Already an undefeated team NOT playing for the national championship, Boise was a significant underdog against the perennial power Sooners, thus cementing the "people think we're frauds" stigma. They proceeded to work the Sooners, using their undersized players to execute their exciting offense to a T. Then, of course, the Sooners stormed back late and everyone turned to look at the clock on Cinderella. Only, they weren't done. And the last 2 minutes of regulation and the overtime session were the most exciting minutes of college football I had seen. 3 touchdowns in regulation (including what appeared to be a back breaking pick six for Oklahoma), and 2 more in the 2 overtime drives. The Broncos pulled out all the stops. Hook n Ladders, Statue of Liberty, marriage proposals... it was a thing of beauty.

Only it seems people have been constantly debating their legitimacy ever since.

Look, I'll be the first to tell you, they didn't deserve to be in the national championship game last season. Why? Because they lost. It's that simple. Oregon and Auburn were undefeated. It was an easy decision. Do I think Boise would have given those teams a run for their money on any field at any point? Yes. But, they lost. There's no debate anymore. Now, do I find it ridiculous that critics are pointing at their loss to Nevada as a reason why they are no longer deserving of being in the discussion? Yes. It's absolutely insane. Nevada was a hell of a team last year. 13-1 (with their only loss coming in Hawaii, consistently a difficult game for them) with wins over Cal, BYU, and Boston College. Sure, not the greatest teams. But high profile. Their offense was chock full of seniors jacked up to play in the biggest game of their lives, including stud quarterback Colin Kaepernick, who was drafted in the second round this year (you know, like well ahead of Alabama's QB or Ohio State's QB). Nevada played a great second half to come back from a big deficit and, unfortunately, all time Boise great Kyle Brotzman missed two gimme field goals in the waning minutes that sealed (but were not the sole causes for) the defeat.

They lost a game. It happens. Just not very often. In their last 41 games, Boise State has lost precisely 2 times. And dating back to 2006, the same year it eventually beat Oklahoma in the BCS, Boise is 62-5. That's an insane record. And critics will argue it's easy to do when your schedule is chock full of creampuffs (oh, is that so, Michigan?), but at the very least, Boise hasn't in that stretch lost to a team that wasn't damned good on its own. Let's take a look at the notable games, including listing all the power conference teams that weren't too scared to play them.

2011 (1-0 so far):

Game 1: Opened at Georgia (SEC). Whoops, I mean, VERSUS Georgia on a neutral field (that just happened to be in Atlanta, GA, you know, equidistant from Athens, GA and Idaho). Georgia was ranked #19. Boise was ranked #5. Boise worked them. Like, badly. They rebounded from a 80 yard touchdown run by a Georgia cornerback and took a 28-7 lead. It was over. They won 35-21. After the game, Kellen Moore said he was confused at why so many people were there to watch him play in 7-on-7 drills. It remains to be seen how good Georgia will be the rest of the year, but just remember how everyone was talking about how good Georgia QB Aaron Murray is going into this game.

2010 (12-1):

Game 1: Opened at Virginia Tech (ACC). Whoops, I mean, VERSUS Virginia Tech on a neutral field (that just happened to be in Washington, DC/Landover, MD, you know, equidistant from Virginia and Idaho). Va Tech was ranked #6. Boise was ranked #5. Boise won 33-30, including an icy cold touchdown drive by Moore in the last two minutes. The next week, Va Tech pooped the bed against James Madison and completely deflated Boise's sails. But what could they do? They scheduled a team that everyone thought was going to be awesome. It's not their fault VT had another game in only 5 days. VT stepped it up from there on, winning every remaining game and taking the ACC Championship and invitation to the BCS. So not only did they lose to Boise, but they lost to an FCS school and STILL made it to the BCS instead of the Broncos.

Game 3: Home vs Oregon State (PAC-10). They're common opponents, and unfortunately for Oregon State, Boise is the common victor. Like in this game, 37-24. Oregon State was largely unimpressive for the rest of the season, but they did beat Arizona and smoked USC.

Game 11: At Nevada (WAC). I covered this game above. Nevada was ranked #19 at the time, Boise #3. Nevada won, 34-31 in OT.

Bowl: In Las Vegas against Utah (MWC, now PAC-12). They smoked Utah, a team that was 10-2 at the time and opened the season with a victory over Pittsburgh. Utah was ranked #19. Utah was previously one of the teams that was always in the discussion for mid-major football, having gone undefeated in 2008 (including a win over Alabama in the Sugar Bowl). They've had a few losses each of the past two seasons though, so, this win gets less credit from onlookers. Note that Boise doesn't get matched up with a BCS conference opponent in this game, despite an 11-1 record and #10 ranking.

2009 (14-0):

Game 1: Opened at home vs Oregon (PAC-10). Oregon was ranked #14 in the country, Boise was #16. Despite being a traditionally offensive team, Boise showed defensive prowess in this game, winning 19-8 and holding LeGarrette Blount, at the time considered one of the better running backs in football, to -5 yards rushing. He was infamously suspended after the game for punching a Boise player, and then disappeared until halfway through last season, when he emerged as a threat on the Buccaneers' offense. The Ducks finished 10-3 including wins over USC, California, Purdue, Utah, and Oregon State. They scored over 30 points in all but 2 of their remaining games, never lower than 17.

Bowl: In Phoenix against TCU (MWC, soon Big East). TCU was ranked #3, Boise was ranked #6. Again, the BCS didn't match either team against BCS conference schools, instead pairing them up with each other. Boise got the better of TCU in a very defensive game, 17-10. TCU had an impressive season up to that point, with wins over Virginia, Utah, and BYU and an undefeated 12-0 record. But they clashed in a rematch of the previous year's bowl game, and Boise won. Boise finished the season undefeated at 14-0.

2008 (12-1):

Game 3: At Oregon (PAC-10). Oregon was ranked #12 at the time, but Boise jumped on them 37-13 before a bit of a comeback in the 4th by the Ducks. Final score: 37-32. Oregon went on to finish the year 10-3, only losing to USC and Cal otherwise, and defeated #13 Oklahoma State in the Holiday Bowl.

Bowl: In San Diego against TCU (MWC, soon Big East). TCU was ranked #11 at the time, Boise was #9. TCU was 10-2, having lost at #2 Oklahoma and at #10 Utah that year, with wins over Stanford and #8 BYU. TCU ended up getting the better of Boise in a defensive battle, 17-16. This was the second in a series of four straight bowl games for Boise against mid-major competition after their victory against Oklahoma.

---

Will they ever get a shot at the championship? Who knows. It would require the right amount of things to fall into place, first being that they finish the regular season undefeated. Unlike a Florida or Alabama, they will never have enough prestige wins to overcome a 1 in the loss column. If they don't win them all, they only have themselves to blame. But these are consistent efforts over multiple seasons. Not just a fluke one season run with a lot of seniors and then a return to mediocrity. The program is one of the best. Whether or not they punch their own ticket to the BCS Championship, I'm just tired of hearing that they don't deserve to be in the conversation.

#063 - 2011 NFL Season Futures

In anticipation of the 2011 NFL season--which for various reasons has become one of the MOST anticipated seasons I can remember, at least for me--I have naturally been browsing the posted Team Props for season-long bets. And, naturally, I wasted no time making some moves on them.

Here's what I've gone with, so far.

CIN BENGALS U 5.5 (-125) -- 50 units. It is not only my estimation, but many others' estimations, that the Bengals are poised to be the worst team in football this year. Their quarterback situation is a huge question mark, Cedric Benson is tumbling down the other side of the hill, they let Johnathan Joseph leave in free agency, and it's becoming a possibility that the players will simply quit on the franchise (based on the feelings of Ochocinco and Palmer). WITH those guys last year, they won 4 games, albeit against a pretty brutal schedule. But I just don't think they did anything to get better. I like Bruce Gradkowski (yeah, you can laugh at me if you want) but that doesn't mean I think he's a good fit for this team, especially not when you consider he's coming in without the benefit of minicamp and offseason workouts. And the other option, Andy Dalton, is a smooth operator who is a timing/precision guy. He's going to take a licking before he gets his feet under him. They have winNABLE games, but does that mean they're going to come through? In my mind, no. But there have been bigger surprises.

DET LIONS U 7.5 (+115) -- 25 units. It's mostly a contrarian play. Everyone is so high on the Lions right now. And yeah, they've got Megatron and they've got Suh and a pretty sick defensive line. But they were 2-10 last year before putting it together down the stretch (wins over Packers with concussed Rodgers and the Dolphins and Vikings mid-disintegration). What's the ceiling on this team? 10-6? Is that really possible? I think people in Detroit would consider this year a win if Stafford and Megatron stayed healthy and the team got to 8-8. But that's the worst they could do to still cover 7.5 wins. If they're going to pay me to take the under, I'll take it. And hope they finish 7-9.

PIT STEELERS U 10.5 (EVEN) -- 25 units. We've been here before, I know. And after watching the Steelers dismantle the Eagles in the preseason, I'm not sure I feel very confident with this. But 11-5 is a damned good season. Can they do it? Yes. Can they do it against this schedule, which now that I'm really examining it, is remarkably easy? Yes. Am I feeling like a fool for betting this? Yeah, a little. Let's move on.

GB PACKERS O 11.5 (+115) -- 25 units. I think they're the best team in football. And yes, I know that's a ridiculous statement since they just won the Super Bowl. But even more than that. Their defense is sick. Their offense is sick. They never trailed by more than 7 points at ANY MOMENT last season. That's disgusting. They're getting Ryan Grant and Jermichael Finley back. I just honestly look down their schedule, and maybe outside of a road game at San Diego, I don't think there's a game there that I wouldn't feel comfortable picking them to win. They can play in a dome (hello, Atlanta) and they can play in the cold slop (hello, Lambeau and Soldier Field). I know it takes a great year to finish 12-4, but at better than even odds, I'll take it.

NE PATRIOTS O 11.5 (-115) -- 25 units. Very similar to the Packers above. The Patriots are going to score a lot of points. It's just science. Maybe they don't have the meanest, toughest team in the league, and maybe they don't have a stellar defense. But they went 14-2 last year with that same unstellar defense. They finish the year with Washington, Denver, Miami, and Buffalo. Can they be 8-4 or better going into that stretch? You're damned right.

STL RAMS O 7.5 (EVEN) -- 25 units. Based on the fact that I think the Rams are poised to be the best team in the NFC West. The best team in any division should be over .500, simple. The start of their season is brutal: Eagles, Ravens, Giants, Cowboys, Saints and Packers in the first 8 weeks. But then things flip completely, and they finish with a bunch of NFC West games, as well as the Bengals and Browns. I'm getting less confident about this as I write, but, I'd like to see this pull through.

PHI EAGLES U 10.5 (+120) -- 25 units. What? Yes, you read that correctly. Eagles under. It's a bit of a hedge bet against a disastrous season, also a bit of a reality check. Michael Vick played out of his mind last year. Can he play that well again? I'm not sure. Can he stay healthy for a full season? Who knows. Do I think Vince Young and Mike Kafka are awful? No, not at all, but I don't think they're the QBs to lead this team storming into the playoffs. We looked downright poor against the Steelers, starters v starters. In addition to 6 NFC East games, there's the Pats, Jets, and Falcons on the schedule, as well as your customary hiccup that has no explanation (2008 Bengals, 2009 Raiders, 2010 Vikings).

IND COLTS U 9.5 (+105) -- 50 units. The Colts have been kings for ages. Pencil them in at the top of the AFC South, it's pretty much set in stone. But now, their rock, he of the laser, rocket arm, is in dire straits and may not make the start of the season. Even with him, how good can this team be? They didn't beat anybody that good last year (Texans once, Giants, Chiefs?) and lost to everyone else legitimate (Eagles, Patriots, Chargers, Cowboys, Texans). To make it worse, they didn't go out and get that much better in the offseason. Not when you compare it with the moves the Texans made. The Colts don't really sign free agents. It's worked for them so far, but teams have been loading up (Eagles, Jets, etc.) by addressing key weaknesses. The Colts have been poor on run offense and run defense for a while, but haven't seemed to address it at all. Even with Manning, what is the ceiling for this team, 11-5? Without him, where do they drop to, 5-11? It's a percentage play, for me. It just seems like this team is teetering on the edge right now, and I wouldn't be THAT surprised to see them topple over.

#057 - The Vince Young Problem

I want to clarify a couple of things up front:

1) I'm not black. (Or Asian or Latin or Native American or biracial or Jewish or Muslim or any of the many, many cultural backgrounds that are prejudiced against much more than white Christian Americans.)

2) I believe there are PLENTY of people that still exist in this world and, yes, in this country, that have racist tendencies, or are just blatantly bigoted. It's a fact, and I wish it wasn't, but god only knows when that fact is going to change. I just hope the number decreases steadily through time.

3) I do not believe I know what it feels like to be prejudiced against because of my ethnicity. And I'm not claiming to.

I just got done reading an article on ESPN.com from Jemele Hill, who I think is a good writer, not that I agree with 100% of the things she says, but she usually comes up with pretty solid topics, albeit sometimes controversially. Here's a link to the article in question. (Likewise, here's a column by Jason Whitlock about LeBron playing the race card.)(And here is an article written by a blogger who seems to appropriately balance the argument in a thoughtful way.) Hill seems to sort of take this waffling stance on the treatment of black quarterbacks--that yes, the ones in question (Donovan McNabb, Jason Campbell, Vince Young) have at times underperformed, most notably Young, but that also their treatment has not been 100% on the up-and-up, going so far as to say that Jeff Fisher doesn't trust VY, and his mistrust has fed into a sour environment for the two.

On top of that, I read a comment in a chat with Bill Simmons yesterday from someone saying: "Funny how you'll blame Vince Young for the issues in Nashville but not acknowledge his career success and Jeff Fisher's lack of it..." What? Jeff Fisher's lack of career success? First of all, he's a head coach in the NFL, and he's the longest-tenured one at that. Something about that SCREAMS "career success" to me. Secondly, he's won 25 more games as a head coach than he's lost. Third, if you think Vince Young has succeeded in the NFL without help from his HEAD COACH, you're just insane. And as far as Fisher's mistrust of Young leading to the sour environment goes, that's a chicken-and-egg argument basically claiming that the chicken made the egg and it's a done deal. I'm a big sports fan. I read stuff from all over, it doesn't have to be my home team. And I read stuff from all sorts of sources--journalists, bloggers, stat people, beat reporters, former players. The bottom line on Vince Young seems to be that he's a pretty talented guy who just doesn't seem to have "gotten it" yet in the NFL. It could be that he was just so dominant in college that he never developed the proper work ethic. He could roll out there on the field and simply walk through teams (as he did on the BCS-winning touchdown run). To make it in the NFL, you need a little bit more than that. Donovan McNabb "got it" and I don't think you'll read anything from anyone claiming otherwise. He works his ass off, he studies up, he showed Michael Vick the difference between putting up stats and winning games (and look how Vick has taken that to heart). He's gotten it for sure--and maybe part of that is because he was criticized so early. Eagles fans wanted Ricky Williams (they were unaware of how insane he was) but Andy Reid went with McNabb because he thought it was an opportunity they couldn't pass up. McNabb came from Syracuse and knew he'd have to prove himself. Young came from Texas and a national championship and thought, "What the heck--I thought I already proved myself?" Some people are just wired differently.

The criticisms on the field that I've seen time and time again of Young don't seem that insane to me. He struggles with accuracy and making quick decisions (these were, for a long time, criticisms of Eli Manning), but he's a hell of a downfield passer and throws a pretty deep ball on top of all the playmaking ability with his legs. I don't know how to say it other than those comments seem pretty dead-on. Now, the flip side of it is, he's had a tough time dealing with team management issues. He doesn't seem to be able to handle getting benched, apparently he's missed a bunch of team meetings, and the bottom line is that you can't really have that from your quarterback--or any of the key players on the team. He disrespected Fisher to his face, perhaps as a result of his feeling that Fisher must have a grudge against him dating back to last season, when Fisher stuck with Kerry Collins through an 0-6 start. Here's a thought: YOU bench your starting quarterback after a 13-3 season. Go ahead, see how easy it is. Was six games too many? Should Fisher have pulled the plug sooner? (By the way, here's the six teams Collins lost to in that stretch: @ Pittsburgh, Houston, @ NY Jets, @ Jacksonville, Indianapolis, @ New England.) If Fisher has a mistrust of Young, perhaps it's because of Young. Not because of his skin color. To make the claim that Fisher doesn't trust a black quarterback is to EGREGIOUSLY overlook the fact that Fisher tabbed Steve McNair as his starting quarterback for the better part of TEN SEASONS, and McNair to this day is the best Titan in team history (Tennessee, not Houston). It seems irresponsible, or lazy, to suggest that the issues in the Titans' clubhouse are related to race. At least, if that were the case, it would mean that Fisher is weirdly selective about who he is racially biased against, choosing only those who seem to openly disrespect him.

I'm not going to sit here and say that there aren't people out there who probably don't trust Young as a quarterback because he's black. It's a shitty reality of this world. But what I am thinking is that those people are fans (or "fans") in some regard, onlookers, and not the men pulling the strings behind the curtain. Could it be writers? Perhaps. But from what I've seen, analysts' critiques of Vince have been pretty fair. He's found himself on his fair share of Greatest College Players Ever lists, and I think few people doubt that his Rose Bowl game against USC ranks as one of the all-time top performances in the sport. But his wild success in college masked a problem that seems to be coming out in the pros--he can't handle failure very well. And I mean even small failures, in game, not being able to stand boos, or being injured and missing games. Somehow, critics have turned Fisher's action of not sending Young back into the game into him "not trusting" Young. "If Brett Favre was hurt like that, would a coach stop him from going back in?" Probably not. But Brett Favre is a hall of fame quarterback who has played hurt many, many times and played successfully. Vince Young, in his short career, has occasionally had injuries that linger and recur. If Fisher sends him back out there and Vince is injured more severely on the next play, wouldn't that suggest that Fisher "doesn't care what happens to him"? It seems like he's damned if he does, damned if he doesn't. Apparently trying to protect your franchise quarterback from injury gets you nowhere these days.

I've been trying to think of ways to address the Jason Campbell problem this whole time, but I don't think I can come up with anything. Campbell has been a solid quarterback in the NFL. Solid, but unspectacular. The Redskins decided they didn't want him anymore, so they dealt him. Certainly it had everything to do with race, since they replaced him with--oh, that's right, a black quarterback. And the Raiders are probably biased against Campbell too, since they've never--oh, that's right, they tried every way they could to get JaMarcus Russell to succeed after drafting him #1 overall. The Raiders never bet the house on Campbell. They traded for him because it was an opportunity to acquire a solid NFL quarterback at a reasonable price, and they certainly didn't have their mind made up as to who would be starting for them. They don't have the luxury of a Peyton Manning or even a Sam Bradford--someone who they know they're going to stick with. But I've paid a decent amount of attention to this team for the last few years, and in my honest opinion, Bruce Gradkowski is the best quarterback they have, and have had for the last couple seasons. He's not awesome, but I think he's fiery and aggressive and makes plays. He's probably not that much better than Campbell, but right now this team has a poor pass offense, period, regardless of who is behind center.

And it's no secret that I love McNabb. I've written about it extensively, and I will openly admit it to anyone. He was my favorite player during his whole run as an Eagle, and honestly, I probably wouldn't BE an Eagles fan if it weren't for him. I don't understand Mike Shanahan's move at the end of the Lions game. Simply put. It didn't make sense, I was angry, I thought he took a winnable game and threw it in the garbage, and followed up by making a bunch of weird excuses that didn't make sense. But what does that have to do with him not liking him for his race? There's no way that Shanahan simply mistrusts Donovan as a black quarterback. Rick Reilly, who has recently written a lot of garbage, pointed out a lot of counter-arguments in a recent column.

Surely, McNabb was at the center of the Rush Limbaugh firestorm. But Rush is an idiot and spouts a lot of baloney and white people will tell you that. He likes being edgy. McNabb handled the ordeal with a lot of class. And, just like Young, McNabb definitely has his doubters out there, and some of them probably simply doubt him because of his race. But what position of power are those people in? Are they running the team? Are they writing the national columns? Are they on television in front of millions? I don't believe they are. ESPN saw to it that Limbaugh wasn't anymore. People out there are going to hate other people for whatever reason they want. You can't stop that from happening. Does that mean that there's a culture brewing in the NFL that signals mistrust of black quarterbacks? I don't think so. Wins bring dollars, and dollars make owners happy. Happy owners make happy coaches and happy players. That's the bottom line, literally, and I think you can see that from the Vick story that's been going on. As much as people hated him for what he did and as scummy a guy he was, he's winning games and lighting the field up, and the team has to stick with him--AND fans are loving it. McNabb brought a lot of wins to Philadelphia and a lot of people love him for it. But he also never brought that ONE particular win and a lot of people are upset about it. What are you going to do? Remember when Peyton Manning was the guy who could never win "the big one" before he finally did? It happens. Nobody doubted that Peyton was a good quarterback. He just was the guy you'd always bet against in the playoffs. The Eagles got rid of them because of a certain team philosophy that suggests not holding onto assets until they're worthless. It sucks. Did McNabb have more productivity in him? For sure. But so did Brian Dawkins when he was let go. So did Brian Westbrook. So did Sheldon Brown. The management of the team just has a philosophy to keep the wheels churning and bring in new talent. If it didn't work, they wouldn't do it. Now the Eagles are 7-3 and everyone's favorite to win the NFC. You can argue that it was rude of them to trade McNabb when they did, but you can't argue that they didn't have winning football games at the top of their priorities when they did. Fans may delude themselves into thinking that winning one season is all that matters. They'd trade in ten winning seasons for one Super Bowl and nine winless years. But that's just what I said--delusion. It's not good business, it's not good management, it's not good for team spirit. You try to win as many games for as long a time as you can. Andy Reid decided it was time to cut ties with Donovan, when he could still get decent value for him, and Reid did him a favor by trading him to a team with money that was still capable of competing.

As much as I love McNabb, the comments that he made that Hill attributes to him in her article seem a little misguided. For one, they were made in 2007, which is a weirdly long time ago when referencing players like Peyton Manning and Carson Palmer. In 2007, Carson Palmer was a very promising young quarterback with a couple excellent seasons under his belt and the Bengals seemed to be turning this around. If he wasn't criticized at that time, it was because the Bengals had been so purely awful for so long that to see them succeed was joyous for everyone involved. And I once again don't understand the short term memory that people have regarding Manning. He was trounced routinely for not being able to win the big one, despite being statistically a tremendous quarterback and winning a lot of games in the regular season. Then he finally won one, and after that point, has continued to lead winning seasons and play lights-out. If he is criticized rarely, it is because he is one of the best quarterbacks in NFL history. But that doesn't mean he was never criticized.

Finally, towards the end of the article, Hill points out that a lot of people suggested Vick move to another position other than quarterback when he returned from prison. Certainly this was because he was a black quarterback, and not because he missed TWO YEARS in prison. The fact that Vick even returned to football at all was a nod to his superior athletic talents. People suggested that he come back in a different role because he threw away his career by being a criminal, because few teams were knocking down his door to come back and be a starting quarterback (which he wanted), and because they thought he could be useful immediately by playing a wildcat or splitback. Suggesting that those comments were motivated by race would be to act blind to the facts: he missed a huge portion of time in prison, potentially irreversibly affecting his timing and rhythm; teams in the league had moved on and worked with new quarterbacks; he was an amazingly effective runner in Atlanta but not as effective passing; making him your starting quarterback would have been handing the keys to someone fresh off of a federal felony conviction who was teetering on the edge of Roger Goodell's death list. It was a very specific case, one that most analysts had absolutely no history dealing with. So they attacked it specifically. And if simply suggesting he moves positions is a strictly "black quaterback" thing, then I would present to you the following: Tim Tebow, Matt Jones, Julian Edelman, Scott Frost, Eric Crouch. Quarterbacks are suggested to change positions all the time, based on their skill sets. It's not restricted to black quarterbacks only.

I know that there is a lot of pressure on black quarterbacks to succeed. But there's a lot of pressure on everyone in the NFL to succeed--white, black, everything in between. And I acknowledge that, as they say, "haters gonna hate," but to take these issues that are popping up with some of the NFL's talent and suggest that they are racially motivated seems a little bit narrow-sighted to me. Anyone associated with the NFL knows that it's impossible to overstate the contributions made by black players--at all positions.

#056 - Day of the Dead: AFC Edition

So, in regards to the previous post, I just want to clarify that the classifications I listed aren't necessarily "Alive or Dead in the Playoff Race". Of course, especially in a playoff race like the NFC's (notably the NFC West), teams are still going to be technically alive even with poor records, like Minnesota at 2-5 or San Francisco at 2-6. What I mean from "Alive, Dead, or In Limbo" is the play of the teams. What do they give you on a week to week basis? Do they have any hope at turning their season around? Some teams I just feel are more of a threat any given week (the Rams) than others (the Seahawks).

So let's continue, this time with the AFC:

VIVO

New England Patriots -- Well, yeah, it's simple, they have the best record in football. Period. Amazingly, after years and years of teams taking undefeated streaks into late November, including two last year, this year we have NONE, and there's only even ONE team with a single loss, thanks to the Saints and Packers last week. This Patriots team is one of the biggest smoke and mirror jobs Belichick has ever pulled off. I mean where is their headlining talent? Brady, Welker, Mayo, ...? They have continued to be "Team Turnover"--as in player turnover, not keeping the old vets around any longer than they need to, shipping them off for draft picks before they bust out. And it's clearly working. If you take away a second half offensive meltdown in New York, they're undefeated, and against some stiff competition. How can they perform the remainder of the season? Well, I think they're a good regular season team (note: that's a backhanded compliment, they allow 55 more yards per game than they produce). So looking at their schedule, I'll give them 12-4. Prediction: 12-4, AFC East title.

New York Jets -- Everybody's bandwagon favorite. Unfortunately, they laid a stinker against the Packers, and after the bye week--which makes me think Rex Ryan isn't going to turn into one of those Bill Belichick / Andy Reid "Unbeatable After the Bye" types. They have offensive problems, for sure. And if anyone ever slowed down Tomlinson, watch out. But the biggest surprise is the pass defense. They loaded up their guns with two more clips--Cromartie and first round pick Kyle Wilson--but have not improved against the pass at all, giving up 60 more yards in the air per game than last year and already allowing more touchdowns (10 to 8). They improved against the run, however, a filthy-low 2 touchdowns the whole season. It just makes you feel sort of sorry for the defense, that they could hold the Packers out of the end zone and yet still come away with a loss. Luckily, they have games against Detroit, Cleveland, Cincinnati and Buffalo still remaining. Prediction: 11-5, Wild Card.

Miami Dolphins -- Look, they've lost to the Patriots, Jets, and Steelers (on a bogus call that I'm still mad about). And now they have to play the Ravens this week. Tough schedule much? So having a 4-3 record is nothing to sneeze at. There are very very few teams who could play those opponents as well as road games in Green Bay (OT Win), Cincinnati (Win), and Minnesota (Win) and come out with the record they have. I like what they do. They play tough defense. Maybe they're not the shutdown team the Jets might be, but you don't get easy touchdowns against Miami, unless you're the Patriots and the entire special teams unit just falls apart. And they obviously play well on the road, an amazing 4-0 on the season. But things have to improve at home. And their stars (Brandon Marshall, Ronnie Brown, and Ricky Williams) have got to start playing better and earning their paychecks. The unheralded guys on the team can't keep holding them afloat. But if all you need is your big-name guys to step it up to go from dark horse to legitimate contender, I'd say you're doing something right. Prediction: 9-7.

Baltimore Ravens -- It upsets me that they lost that overtime game in New England, but the Ravens have already won two of the toughest road tests a team could face--at Pittsburgh and at the Jets. Now, their second half schedule doesn't get any easier for them, save matchups with the Panthers and Browns. But at the beginning of the season I liked them to be the best team in the league, and I still think they're very capable of that. They just need to run a lot of red zone offense with Flacco. I think he struggles. He's got a cannon arm and really likes to unfurl it, but his short-range touch leaves a bit to be desired (sounds like another #5 I'm familiar with). And I think it hurts them in the red zone. He's got a big target now in Anquan Boldin, who seems to be disappearing and reappearing throughout their games. He needs to show up on every play. Don't underestimate the importance of having Ed Reed back. This guy is a twice-in-a-lifetime type playmaker. Prediction: 11-5, in the hunt for the AFC North.

Pittsburgh Steelers -- I'm frustrated with the Steelers this year. I think they outperformed themselves with victories early in the season without Roethlisberger or Polamalu, and now they are left with a bunch of winnable games. But look at who they've beaten this year: Atlanta (in Pitt), Tampa Bay, Cleveland, Miami, Tennessee. Good, not great. They lost their two toughest tests, against Baltimore and New Orleans. I'd prefer to give them a few more games against top opponents before anointing them as many of the talking heads are wont to do. Prediction: 11-5, also in that same hunt.

Indianapolis Colts -- Look, this team has flaws. It's not alarming. It's the truth. They've been gashed by the run. They gave up tons of points to Houston and Jacksonville in losses. But let's be serious about something: there's no way in hell Peyton Manning doesn't win MVP this year. How about losing your budding receiver, Austin Collie? No big deal. What about Dallas Clark for the season? Eh, whatever. Bob Sanders? Melvin Bullitt? Joseph Addai? Donald Brown? How many huge injuries do the Colts have to endure before they're forced to play guys both ways? More than anybody else, this is a one-man team. It's kind of sad, but it's true. You take Peyton out of this lineup and they'd collapse faster than a Jenga tower. That's why he was named NFL Network's 8th best player OF ALL TIME. And that's also why they can take these beatings and keep on ticking, week in and week out. Prediction: 12-4, no road playoff games at 8-8 teams this year.

Tennesse Titans -- Talk about a team that's doing it with defense. Yeah, they're no Steelers or Jets, but here's a team that creates havoc when you play them. Turnovers, touchdowns, sacks, punt returns, the whole deal. They are making the most of their opportunities and are keeping the team ahead while the offense and Chris Johnson "struggle" (721 yards and 8 touchdowns is suddenly a bad season). I'm just worried that they've hit their high water mark. They're giving up more yards than they're producing, and have already created 19 turnovers. Plus they have four games against the Texans and Colts in the second half, as well as a matchup with the Ravens. And who knows what kind of impact Randy Moss will have on the team. I think he's best utilized as a decoy on this team, but you know he gets upset when he's used in that manner. Prediction: 9-7, unfortunate in this year's AFC.

Kansas City Chiefs -- What a turnaround by these guys. I really don't even like to admit it, considering I've been so down on them all year. I just didn't buy that they suddenly got it. But they have it, alright. Yeah, they haven't beaten a lot of good teams if you take away their opening week victory over the Chargers, but the good news for them is their schedule doesn't get that much tougher from here on out. No more games against the Colts, at least. I think they're primed for a bit of a fall-off, but you can't deny that they have a lot of young talent and are clearly the front runners in the AFC West right now. Prediction: 10-6, right in the thick of it.

Oakland Raiders -- Yeah I said it. Any time a team wins back to back games 92-17, you're going to get your props. And they're a hideous missed 32 yard field goal from Janikowski away from being 5-3 right now. And they have a 3-2 record in games when Darren McFadden has not been injured. I think their defense is better than people give them credit for, and if they can beat the Chiefs this weekend in what has become an enormous matchup for the two teams, watch out for them. Prediction: 7-9. Alright, so I'm not that in love with them. But I like what they're doing.

San Diego Chargers -- I begrudgingly put them here just because I think we've all seen this before from them. Struggle struggle struggle, then suddenly boom they explode and win a mediocre AFC West with a Week 17 blowout of Denver. This year though, they have a bit more competition. I think they'll come back from this because of their video games numbers on offense and defense--426 yards per game offensively, 260 yards per game allowed defensively. That's insane. Maybe if they stop getting punts blocked and stop laying the ball on the ground after receptions, they won't lose as many boneheaded games as they have. A road game at Indianapolis might be the only one standing in the way of a perfect rest of the season. Prediction: 9-7. Might be, I said.

PURGATORIO

Houston Texans -- They've been outscored this year by 27 points. They have the league's worst passing defense. They have to play the Chargers, Jets, Ravens, Eagles, and Titans (twice) before the season is out. Don't look now, but they could be headed for a real disappointment, especially after that huge opening week win against the Colts and a 4-2 start to the season. They need to do something defensively to prove that they have it together, and DeMeco Ryans's injury and Brian Cushing's sub-par post-steroids play are only making it worse. A round of applause for Arian Foster, he's been a wrecking ball this year. But the Texans should be learning by now that offense can't win you every game. Prediction: 8-8.

Cleveland Browns -- I hated this team more than any when the season started. Why? Because they were starting Jake Delhomme. I mean, seriously. Why would you do that? But you know what? They've played hard. And Seneca Wallace and Colt McCoy have done what Jake hasn't done for two years--given their team a chance to win. Nobody else in the league has played Kansas City, New Orleans, Pittsburgh, Baltimore, Atlanta, and Tampa Bay. All of those teams have 5 wins. That's insane. And they still have New England, the Jets, Baltimore, and Pittsburgh to go. Yeah, they're not going to win a lot of games. And yeah, their win over the Saints was a bit of a miracle. But I'm suddenly on the Browns bandwagon. Colt McCoy's my man. Prediction: 5-11. But things are looking up!

MUERTO

Buffalo Bills -- Sigh. I really wanted to give them a Purgatorio. I did. But I just can't. Not when they're 0-7 and hands down the worst team in the league. I love what ol' Seamus Fitzpatrick has done with this offense. This guy will take whatever shot you want to give him and pop right back up in your face. He's a little bull dog. And Roscoe Parrish and Steve Johnson have been revelations at receiver. They still have a few winnable games left on their schedule, so let's give three cheers for the Toronto Bills this weekend! Prediction: 2-14.

Cincinnati Bengals -- Whatever. They've been in every game they've played, and they have potential. But I used to like this team with Carson Palmer at the helm. Now they're just trotting out a retread team and focusing more on their reality shows. I think their window has passed. Prediction: 6-10.

Jacksonville Jaguars -- What makes me interested in this 4-4 team? That they've been outscored by 61 points this year? That they're 28th in passing defense and 22nd in rushing defense? That if you take away the Indy win, they've beaten teams that are 2-6, 0-7, and 1-6? I'm not buying what the Jaguars are selling. (And it seems nobody is, ZING! That's an empty stadium joke!) Prediction: 7-9. Or something.

Denver Broncos -- The fans want Tebow. Give them Tebow. They're getting outrushed by 87 yards per game. It can't hurt. Also, I'm running out of steam. Prediction: 5-11.

#055 - Day of the Dead: NFC Edition

Week 8 is over, which means we can officially start to eliminate some teams from contention--even if some of them are not mathematically eliminated. Coincidentally, November 2nd is Dia de los Muertos in Mexico, and also Election Day in the good old US and A. What does election day have to do with it? Well, just like in American politics, the race for the NFC West is between a bunch of good-for-nothings that just like to take your money without giving any real effort to earn it. And also, just like in American politics, SOMEBODY has to win. Gulp.

Let's break the NFC and AFC races into three categories: Vivo (Alive), Muerto (Dead), y Purgatorio (Somewhere in between--just like that hip new Matt Damon movie! Which looks totally weird and stuff!)

NFC

VIVO

The New York Football Giants -- everyone was proclaiming them to be the beast of the least after their second half dismantling of the Cowboys, which almost turned into an epic collapse against the Cowboys, which turned into a not-so-impressive victory over the Cowboys thanks to David Garrard and the Jags this weekend. But before we crown them champs, let's look at this: so far this year they've beaten the Cowboys (1-6), the Lions (2-5), the Texans (4-2), the Bears (in the Jay Cutler Walking Zombie game), and the Panthers (1-6). In between they got hammered by the Colts and the Titans. Luckily for them, they only play one game against the AFC the rest of the year (home vs. Jacksonville), but they do have to play four games against the Redskins and Eagles, which are always tough, and road dates in Seattle and Green Bay. They could go 5-4 the rest of the way to finish 10-6 and an almost stone cold lock on a playoff spot, but then again, we've seen them fall off the cliff before (5-0 to start last year, finished 8-8; 11-1 to start 2008, finished 12-4 and lost first playoff game). Prediction: 9-7, still good enough to secure a playoff spot.

Philadelphia Eagles -- Currently 4-3, they have a LOT of tough football games to play the rest of the year, including 2 with the Giants and next week's game against Indy. The good news is, if Michael Vick is on his game, they could beat anyone. The bad news is, sometimes Michael Vick has games where he couldn't hit the broad side of Terry Bradshaw's bald dome. We're young and pretty talented, and the thing that helps that combination is confidence. And right now, coming off of a brutal fourth quarter meltdown against the Titans, I'm worried about confidence. Nate Allen was playing like a star until Kenny Britt burned him deep, and now I'm concerned he's going to overcompensate against a Colts team that destroys defenses on underneath routes. Prediction: With Minnesota and Dallas looking like tumbleweed right now, it's not a stretch to finish the year 5-4 to go 9-7 and hopefully snag an NFC Wild Card.

Green Bay Packers -- At the beginning of the year, I thought they were the class of the NFC. Now, after taking some time to get their legs under them, they have big wins over Minnesota and the Jets in back to back weeks despite lackluster offensive performances. They have a swarming, aggressive defense, and that's a good basement to fall back on when Rodgers is off. Week 12 they play at Atlanta in what could go a long way to determining the NFC top seed, and then two weeks later they play at New England in another brutal matchup. But the rest of their games aren't so daunting. Prediction: 11-5, first round bye.

Atlanta Falcons -- At home, they are dominant. On the road, you have to question their poise. A lot of that falls down on Matt Ryan, and it's one of those things that hopefully he grows out of (you know, like Peyton Manning's "he can't win big games" tag). But if you start to peel away some of their key players, you are left with a team that has some gaping holes. Beyond Roddy White and Tony Gonzalez, what do they have in the passing game? Beyond John Abraham and Curtis Lofton, how strong is their defense? You can attack them at their weaknesses and try to limit their strengths. But their schedule the rest of the way is pretty favorable. Prediction: 12-4, first round bye.

New Orleans Saints -- The defending champs are alive and kicking after a big win against Pittsburgh. They just have seemed out of sync all year and perhaps injuries to the offense and defensive secondary are to blame, but it could just be that they caught the league by storm last year and this year teams studied them up. You expose all of your secrets in a long playoff run and if teams were careful enough to watch they could have picked up on a lot of tendencies. That doesn't mean the Saints are an open book. They remain a tough team to beat, even with their slow start, and if they ever start clicking like they did last year, watch out. Like Atlanta, they have a pretty favorable schedule the rest of the way, if you take out back to back road games against the Falcons and Ravens weeks 15 and 16. Prediction: 10-6, wild card.

Tampa Bay Buccaneers -- You have to give them credit for the way they've played so far. They got steamrolled by the Steelers and the Saints, but have taken care of business in all their other games, including a wild comeback against St. Louis last week. Josh Freeman gives them a chance to win, and that's about as good as it gets with a second-year quarterback. Unfortunately for them, it looks like their team has a lot of young, unproven, low-ceiling talent that has to get by on playing hard and making the most of their opportunities. You might say, "Why is that bad?" It's only bad because instead of saying that they're primed to dominate in the coming seasons, I feel like it's more likely that they're primed to return to mediocrity, a bunch of 7 and 8 win seasons in the future. This year, though, they're a bit of a darling, especially in the NFC. Will it last? Unlikely. Tough games against Atlanta (twice), Baltimore, Washington, Detroit, San Fran, and New Orleans. Prediction: 7-9.

St. Louis -- They're tough. End of story. I'm not a Sam Bradford fan, I didn't get the hype surrounding him, I didn't see what separated him from Colt McCoy and all the other quarterbacks out there. But he's getting the job done. Steven Jackson remains the league's best underutilized running back. Teams crowd the box to stop him and Bradford has been making them pay, at least so far. But the offense is not the story with St. Louis. They're about average. Their defense this year has completely revamped--if you take out their blowout Detroit loss, they have not given up more than 17 points all season. Last year they allowed 25 points or more TEN TIMES. Kudos to Steve Spagnuolo. They have two games remaining against San Francisco, including next week, which will be season-defining games for both teams. Prediction: 8-8, your 2010 NFC West champs.

Detroit -- What? How could I put Detroit at 2-5 in the "Alive" category? Well, it's not always about record, people. This team plays HARD. They're a tough out. Just ask anyone. Ask St. Louis how it felt. Ask Philadelphia how scared out of their minds they were when Detroit got the ball back down 3. Ask Green Bay why they couldn't put them away. Ask Washington how it felt to blow their lead this week. Ask Chicago how it felt to escape with that heaven-sent victory. They have two advantages that no team can stop: Megatron and Suh. Calvin Johnson gives them the league's single scariest receiving threat. He can go get it in double-, triple-, quadruple-coverage. And Jahvid Best has been pretty explosive out of the backfield, at least posing a threat of the run game (despite limited results in recent weeks). And Suh is the real deal. I'm sure Gerald McCoy is fantastic, but looking back, I think you have to question the draft gurus who ranked McCoy ahead of him. 6.5 sacks on the year and a fumble recovery for a touchdown this past week. Those are Joey Porter numbers, but Suh is an interior lineman. Detroit has a tough, tough schedule the rest of the way (Green Bay, New England, the Jets, Miami), but that doesn't mean that any of those teams WANTS to play them. Prediction: 5-11. But it's not always about records.

PURGATORIO

Seattle Seahawks -- Yeah, they're leading their division. And yes, they are ahead of the Rams, who I just put in the "Vivo" category. But what's going on with this team? They lost on the road at the Rams 20-3 and on the road at Oakland 33-3. Seriously. And no, it's not 2002. These Rams and these Raiders were a combined 6-26 last year! While being outscored by 443 points! Seattle is a tough team at home, but is that going to really cut it? If you're just a cadaver on the road, you have to win EVERY home game to make it count. Can they win every home game? I don't think so, but they do have a chance to turn it around. Prediction: 7-9. Carroll is back for next year.

Chicago Bears -- Remember when they were lighting the world on fire? Well, even then I had serious doubts about the team. I just don't see how they are any different now from last year. Mike Martz is regarded in some austere manner in the NFL, but when was he last successful? Turmoil in San Fran. Turmoil in Detroit. He was the king of kings when he had Kurt Warner at the helm, but I think Kurt Warner proved in Arizona that it probably had a lot more to do with KURT WARNER than Mike Martz. Jay Cutler is super talented. I think. But you know how some guys just have to "get it"? He's not "getting it" right now. Instead, he's getting hit. Offensive line troubles are one of the worst omens a team can experience. Two of their wins came from Calvin Johnson's bizarre decision to smash the football into the turf and Green Bay's atrocious fumble in the fourth quarter. They're obviously reeling right now and I'm not positive they ever had it together to begin with. Now's their chance to prove me wrong. Prediction: 7-9.

Washington Redskins -- It breaks my heart to see all this controversy with Donovan McNabb. I mean what was Shanahan thinking pulling him with 2 minutes left down one score? It just doesn't make sense. They were 4-3 with a chance at 5-3, instead they have left themselves on the outside looking in. If you look at their games this year, they've played (almost) every game tough. Lost to Indy by 3, Houston by 3 (in that gut wrenching overtime game), Detroit thanks to a ridiculous series of plays, beat Philly in a close one, beat Green Bay in OT, beat Chicago thanks to Mr. DeAngelo Hall's 4 INTs. You can pretty much pencil them in for close, grind it out, field goal-laden games. Is that going to get the job done? Probably not. Their schedule from here on out doesn't get any easier. Prediction: 8-8. Better luck next year.

San Francisco -- Yeah, I'm stubbornly holding onto this. While it looks more and more like the Rams will wrest the NFC West championship, I still think San Francisco has a shot. They have executed worse than just about every team in the league this year, but are really only 2 1/2 games back right now to two teams who are playing above their heads. Mike Singletary is a good guy, and I hesitate to offend my few readers, but I just don't think he's right to be a head coach. And Alex Smith needs to get as far away from San Francisco as he can. I think sometimes it just works out for a quarterback. Look at Brady in New England. He just sort of fell into a position with a good team around him and he performed and gained the confidence of his coach. It worked out for him, and he's earned everything he's got. I'm not saying Alex Smith is Brady, but don't you think there's a reason this guy was at the top of everyone's draft board? He's played well at times, but has had more coaches than Elizabeth Taylor has had husbands, and in turn, he's got about as much confidence as any guy whose girlfriend used to date Shiancoe. I hate to say it, but maybe Troy Smith is the answer, at least for now. Who knows? They're going to lose at Green Bay and at San Diego, but their other games look like this: Arizona twice, Tampa Bay, St. Louis twice, and home versus Seattle. Who says they can't win those games? Prediction: 7-9. Good effort, boys.

MUERTO

Dallas Cowboys -- Don't tell me there's a way to recover from 1-6. There just isn't. Not the way they're playing. They had ONE opportunity salvage their season in a wide-open NFC race, at HOME against Jacksonville, a team with a pass defense about as good as yours or mine. As is typical of a team full of veterans, instead of bleeding their hearts out, they dropped a whole bunch of passes that led to interceptions and botched a bunch of other chances to come back--even when the Jags were almost BEGGING them to. Kitna's done a hell of a job for a guy who had to step in cold turkey. He's not clicking right now and I'm not sure he ever will, but Cowboy fans should consider that before they call for his head. I guess that's why Andy Reid says having two quarterbacks is a beautiful thing. Prediction: 5-11.

Arizona Cardinals -- Don't try to sell me on Derek Anderson or Max Hall. Hey, everyone is rooting for Max Hall. Come on, he's a nobody who came stumbling down some mountaintop into a starting quarterback role. But this offense is just miserable right now (more credence to the "yeah, it was Kurt Warner" theory). Could you imagine Terrell Owens in Fitzgerald's shoes? (Roll tape of 2009 Buffalo Bills.) A lot of talent on this team, and I really hope they don't blow it up. Donovan McNabb could very well be available after the season, and as I've said for months and months, I think this is the place he should have gone the whole time. Prediction: 6-10.

Minnesota Vikings -- Brett Favre. Brett Favre. Brett Favre, Brett Favre? Oh, Brett Favre. The Vikings have like 49 terrific players on their roster, and yet, this is where we're at? Why? For a few reasons. One, because Brad Childress has as much conviction as Brad Childress. Two, because Brett Favre turns every team he goes to into his own personal soap opera set, ignoring coaching advice, ignoring playcalling, ignoring preseason, ignoring the other team's cornerbacks, ignoring his own glaring health issues. Just hang it up right now, Brett. You're one of the legends, and I think fans across America would like to keep it that way. Honestly, take a time machine to 4 years ago, and tell sports fans, "Hey, in 2010, everyone is going to hate Tiger Woods, LeBron James, and Brett Favre." Some fans could buy it on the "they got too good it was no fun to cheer for them" angle. But to be where we are now? I just can't believe it. Mostly about Tiger, but Favre has just been on a constant legacy landslide for three years now, and it ain't getting any better. Prediction: 8-8. Yeah, not bad, but that's their best potential outcome.

Carolina Panthers -- I don't think I really even need to elucidate the reasons here. Prediction: 3-13. Instead, I leave you with a video of the best Panthers performance of the season. Cheers.

#033 - Worst Bowl Season Ever?

No question mark. Let's make that one official. I'm not a guru on college bowl season--the fact that there are 34 of them and teams like Minnesota and Marshall and Southern Miss play in them makes it tough to follow. Almost none of them matter to anyone but the schools' athletic directors and coaches on the hot seat, but they get aired on TV, there's tons of hype, and everything eventually leads to a highly-questionable and rarely-entertaining finale: the BCS Championship.

The problems with the BCS itself are numerous and I don't even feel like spouting them off. Every college football fan with BCS beef carries around the same notecard of talking points and reasons why it's total baloney. But this year the BCS took "stinkfest" to a new low.

Just take a look, for a moment, at the results:

1. Rose Bowl - Year in and year out, there is something unimpressive about Ohio State. They win lots of games, they are always highly ranked, but they give off vibes about being unable to beat the elite teams. I never want to see Ohio State in anything. They pooped the bed against Florida. They pooped the bed against LSU. They played the ho-humest of all ho-hums against Texas last year (broken-hearted Texas), and then lost to baby genius Matt Barkley and USC this year. On the flip side, Oregon was the hot pick, with the hot offense, the hot headed running back, and the team that is bound for glory and scoring records next season. I think they came into it as the more enjoyable team, but this game was a yawner. Oregon never gained any traction and lost pretty handily. I think most people, by this time next year, will be asking, "Wait, who played in the Rose Bowl last year?"

2. Sugar Bowl - Florida's talent level: 98. Cincinnati's talent level: 72. Sad, sad rout.

3. Fiesta Bowl - Outside of the fact that this game was low-scoring (despite feature such high-octane offenses), this was the only game that could really keep my interest, probably because I was most intrigued by the teams. But my main gripe is the set-up. I think the BCS blew some chances here, to make things more interesting. Florida is the team that people wanted to play (if they couldn't play in the championship game). Florida is the top of the totem pole. Give either Boise or TCU the shot to play them. I know, in a way, since they were both undefeated it would have been tough to pick, so playing them against each other is a fair solution... but it would only have an effect if it was a playoff system. I believe the BCS didn't want another upset. And some argue "they got better competition this way". Maybe. Maybe not. I'm not saying play these two teams against Iowa or Georgia Tech. But one of them should have gotten the chance at Florida. Probably TCU, as the best non-automatic qualifier. Then Boise would play Iowa (which was the other non-automatic qualifier). And Georgia Tech should have played Cincinnati, since they both won their conferences. All that aside, this game really didn't live up to it's hype. And I think underneath all the manufactured hoopla (generally there's a lot of hoopla involved) BOTH teams probably felt a little sad about the missed opportunity to knock out a big dog.

4. Orange Bowl - Georgia Tech. Iowa. This game couldn't have any less charisma if Bill Belichick did the color commentary. Who even won? (Iowa, I'm pretty sure.)

5. BCS Championship Game - Arguably. Colt McCoy went down like four seconds into regulation. And Alabama won, surprise surprise, forcing five turnovers against a freshman quarterback who got some serious licks in against UTEP and Louisiana-Monroe this season. Maybe you can say that a national championship contender should have a deeper roster, sure, but let's be real, Texas's offense struggled this year, and Colt McCoy to Jordan Shipley was the only thing that produced any real points all season, outside of Hunter Lawrence. The Longhorns were winning with McCoy. And Gilbert may end up being good and he showed some flashes in cutting the deficit to 24-21, but he was born in 1991. Think about that for a second. 1991? I was already smoking a pack a day by then. That makes him a contemporary of Miley Cyrus, and he's supposed to be ready to deliver in a pinch on college football's biggest stage? Sigh. I know injuries happen and they can ruin a national championship at any point, but if I was an Alabama fan, I wouldn't even be satisfied with this result. "Yay, we just beat a freshman quarterback after the Heisman finalist played a handful of snaps." It's deflating all around. I know a playoff wouldn't fix Texas's problem, sure. They lost, if it was a playoff they would still have lost. But at least a plus one gives us the opportunity to see what might be a completely scintillating (or completely stink-bombing) matchup between the two teams left standing--Boise and Bama. (And hopefully Kellen Moore wouldn't stub his toe on the first drive.)

I, for one, would love to see two teams with complete rosters playing full-throttle when the crystal's on the line.