Greatest Ever Discussions

Before I get into the title subject, Mike & Mike are on TV playing up the importance of the fact that the Giants stepped off the plane all wearing black suits. The Patriots upset the Rams in 2001 by choosing to be introduced by a team, but whoah, a whole week before the SuperBowl the Giants are dressing all in the same color (to be accurate a number of them had dark gray on). Game over man, put my money down on the Giants. Fortunately Golic wasn't quite as caught up in it as sports romantic Greeny.

Clark Judge at CBSportsline.com has one of the better "Is Brady the Best QB of All Time?" columns today, because he gets some good varied input from GM's, former players, and old cranky sportswriters, to weigh in with their opinions. I like it because the hyperbole is kept at a minimum, except where Judge adds in his own quips. So it's definitely worth a read, but it keeps reminding me of the hyperbole in the past years regarding the evil disrespectful Tom Brady.

Here is what columnists were saying:

February 2002: "The day of The Catch in January 1982, the day the San Francisco 49ers made it to their first Super Bowl, the day Joe Montana threw to Dwight Clark, Tom Brady was a toddler in the stands. And now, 20 years later, when the New England Patriots win their first Super Bowl, Tom Brady has in effect become the new Joe Montana. He got what he wanted."
Nutshell: Brady reminds people of Montana, because he's cool. He's not a top QB yet though

February 2004: "OK, that's it. I can't take it anymore," writes Rick Morrissey of the Chicago Tribune. "Tom Brady is not John Elway or Joe Montana. He's somewhere in the Phil Simms stratum, a very nice place to be but a place where you have to crane your neck to see the mountaintop. . . ."
Nutshell: Backlash time as people drool over Brady winning his 2nd SB MVP, and start making over-the-top "Brady vs Montana" comparisons. Brady vs Manning now a toss-up with the rings getting Brady an edge for writers, but players give Manning the edge for stats.

February: 2005: Sporting News rates Peyton Manning the 15th best QB of all time. Brady comes in at 19th.
Nutshell: Sporting News Magazine, already declared dead years before, publishes this list that no one ever sees because no one subscribes to the Sporting News and in 2005 they were charging for this kind of exclusive content. Since they were charging, I have no idea who is in the top 10 outside of the obvious candidates. Brady had just won his 3rd Superbowl with his greatest statistical performance, and he started getting a little separation on the Brady vs Manning debate because he was up 3 rings to none. Of course plenty of people still sided with Peyton because he just put up the greatest QB season of all time with 49 TD's and the best passer rating ever. So the points remained the same, but the play of both elevated them even higher.

February 2007: Vinnie Iyer on Brady and his ranking at SN's Greatest #19: "If you look at Brady's regular seasons, they are pretty good, but his three rings are what have him at 19th, or 21 spots ahead of another pretty good regular-season quarterback, Donovan McNabb. For that matter, I think Brady should be in the top dozen."
Nutshell: Manning wins his first Superbowl, almost completely squashing the angle that Brady proponents held up in the debate. No mentions of Brady as an all-timer this year because he isn't in the Superbowl. Brady, according to Vinnie Iyer, is in the top 12. Most people at this point have Brady and Manning both firmly in the top 6 or 7. Some old people bring up Otto Graham and Sammy Baugh, which then causes Manning/Brady to fall two places. Several people start projecting Manning as the best ever, which had been happening in smaller doses for the past three years.

January 2008: Mike Martz: ""Tom Brady will be at the pinnacle of all those who ever played," said former head coach Mike Martz, now the offensive coordinator in San Francisco."
Jerry McGee of the San Diego-Tribune: "I like (Brady) better than Unitas because Unitas couldn't throw the ball like Brady. And I like him over Montana because I think Brady has a better arm and cerebrally is Montana's equal."
Nutshell: There is no article mentioning a Brady vs Manning debate. When the Colts lost to the Chargers in the Divisional Round, it cost us a week of chest-beating grunts from Bob Kravitz and others. But it wouldn't have mattered. There is only one debate left raging right now...Is Brady the best QB of all time? Mike Martz is given to hyperbole and has always been a Brady fan, but I was shocked to see how many people are putting him in the debate. No one can agree on who to compare him with of course (Montana, Unitas, Graham, Marino, and Favre seem to be the most popular candidates, in that order). NFL Live today brought it up several times today. People who last year would have taken Manning over Brady (Merrill Hoge, Mike Golic, and Ron Jaworski for starters) are now on the fence whether to put him over Montana or just alongside him.

Of course, the difference between last year and this year is that Brady has trumped Manning for the best ever season by a QB, led his team to an 18-0 record (19-0 if you're a time traveller like the Boston Globe's book publishing department), and is on the verge of winning his 4th Superbowl. The stats defenders of Manning have lost some mojo in the same way Brady rings defenders lost some mojo in that debate in 2007.

Here is what I think:

It's a stupid question with no answer for obvious reasons. First, comparing eras is fine if you all agree on the rules. No one does and they make up them up as they go along to support their preconceived notions. Second, the free agency factor has become way overblown. While a team could stay together for a number of years in the 70's to build a dynasty, it also meant that they didn't have the opportunity to upgrade like the Patriots do now.

The real question is, what does it mean to be the best QB of all time?

How much do you weigh...
1. Win totals
2. Postseason win totals
3. Superbowl appearances
4. Superbowl wins
5. MVP Awards
6. SB MVP Awards
7. HOF receiver to throw to
8. HOF running back for defenses to gameplan for
9. Passing Yards
10. Passer Rating
11. Number of TD Passes
12. Number of Interceptions
13. Quality of Opponents
14. Pocket Passer vs Gunslinging gambler
15. Did you revolutionize the game?
16. Did you call your own plays?

The list can go on and on, and every one of these 16 arguments has been used to cast a shining light on one columnists favorite over another.

This is why it's a futile argument....for now.

If Brady wins Sunday, continues to perform as the #1 or #2 best QB for the next 5 years, and wins 1 or 2 more SB's (passing everyone on the QB list in that category), then the point will become moot. It will be similar to what happened between 1991, where Bird and Magic were in the discussion for best players ever in the NBA, then 4 or 5 years later Jordan ended the argument.

I love the debate and think about it if you're a Boston sports fan this way. If you are over 35, you got to see:

Bobby Orr (#2 player ever in NHL)
Larry Bird (#3 or #4 ever in NBA)
Roger Clemens/Pedro Martinez (regardless of roids, both in the top 5 ever)
Tom Brady (Top 5 or 6 now consensus, with real potential for #1 in 5 years)

What other city can say that they saw the 4 main sports played at their highest level?

No one, and it's just one of the 100 reasons the rest of the country hates us.

Thoughts While Waiting the 6 Days 30 minutes 14 Seconds until Kickoff

It's the Monday of Superbowl Week so here comes the inane commentary...

• There is no shortage of current players that are sitting in for expert analysis of the Superbowl match up. 100% of them did absolutely no research of any kind before sitting down and it's shown so far. Donovan McNabb, D'Brickshaw Ferguson, Jay Feely are all featured on ESPN today to tell us things like "You have to get pressure on Brady", "Eli's at the top of his game coming in" and "The Giants are playing good right now so I think they'll get the upset." You have to have scored real low on the wonderlic test to be out-dueled by Skip Bayless, as McNabb was today.

• By the way, Dana Jacobson of ESPN's First Take just did a big apology for her "F*** Notre Dame...F*** Jesus" drunken tirade at the Mike & Mike Roast (why such a roast ever exsisted is another story). I heard it and thought it was the "lynch Tiger" woman from the Golf Channel. Considering no one ever watched Cold Pizza and very few people watch ESPN First Take (mostly because of Skip Bayless), this could only have been good for Dana's career since it's the first time anyone is talking about her. Apparently she was suspended, but who would have noticed?
  

• As an aside, I have just now received express written permission from Al Sharpton, Scoop Jackson, and Jim Brown to be able to suggest that someone should lynch Skip Bayless.
  

• I'm enjoying the new "dirty" moniker that the Patriots are being given (notice I didn't saying "earning"). When linemen accuse other linemen of being dirty, former players laugh their asses off. Why? Because every lineman plays dirty. Every lineman throws punches on the bottom of a pile, steps on feet, and pokes people in the eye. It's always happened and always will. That's why people like Mark Schlereth and Mike Golic burst out laughing when they hear about Seymour or Matt Light playing dirty.

• On that note, Congratulations to Vince Wilfork, Evil Patriot of the Year. Vince clinched this award by receiving his fourth fine of the season this week, a dubious face masking infraction. Well done Vince. If this were the Masters, Rodney Harrison would be helping you into your green jacket as we speak. Early candidates for next year's award are Seymour, Light, and a sleeper pick in Logan Mankins.

• Mike Sando at ESPN.com devotes an entire story to Richard Seymour's alleged classlessity.

• The Evil Patriots Blog got a mention on Eric Wilbur's Boston.com blog this weekend. Nice to see all of this extra time on the 'puter isn't going to waste. Thanks Eric! I take back everything I ever said about you in the past or will say in the future.

• This "factoid that may only interest me" from Peter King's MMQP column today sums up the case for whether it's worth investing the 10 minutes: "I did not want the moment to pass without noting that the hiring of the new Falcons' coach, Michael Smith, was broken by Michael Smith of ESPN.com."

• My gut feeling this week is that the trademark "wrinkle" for a Patriots' superbowl gameplan will feature Troy Brown heavily. You heard it here first.
  

• You know how old men look in their caskets during a wake when they cake the makeup on them to make them look "fresh" but end up just making them look like Liberace? Well that's Bob Ryan every time he appears on PTI, Around the Horn, and especially the Sports Reporters. My god Bob, tone it down a bit, you look like a cross between Bela Lugosi and every guy from Amadeus. By the way, if you're under 30 substitute Clay Aiken for Liberace and Tom Cruise in Interview with a Vampire for Bela Lugosi.

• Now that I think about it, Dana Jacobson does have a small amount of milf-appeal. I'd put her just behind Rachel "Goth Princess" Nichols on the ESPN Hittability Rankings of which I just made up and only include those two so far. You have to assume that when Rachel Nichols goes out on the town, she hits the goth clubs dressed in lots of black suede, black silk, and black painted fingernails right?

• Don Shula will be jumping up and down in the stadium if the Giants win. Does he ever turn down a request for an interview? I think he's on a quest to out-jackass Mercury Morris.

• My favorite "real" prop-bet that I've heard so far is whether Tom Petty will spark up a joint during the half-time show. A $1 bet will get you $2500 if you win. Of course if it were simply "will Tom Petty be stoned during the half time show" you would probably have to bet $4500 to win $1.

• Speaking of Superbowl betting, how many people do you think are out there that have already made arrangements with their bookie to fork over their $600 tax rebate (that hasn't been approved yet) if the Patriots don't cover? Besides my friend Dale, I'm going to say 50-60 people so far.
  

Interesting Perspective on the Beli-psyche

Tom Monkovic blogs for the New York Times and started a project to incorporate contributions from readers with the simple question of "Who is Bill Belichick?". He got some really good responses from people, but really I'm just posting about this because of one contributor's answer that was just really well done and worth the read. Whether you think it's accurate or not is another question of course.

From Cliff Kuang:

The question “Is BB really a jerk or does he just play one” leads us down the wrong path. It slyly suggests a terrible assumption: That the public persona we see is unsympathetic and that therefore, it must be a ruse if anyone is to like him in private.

But of course, the character traits we see can be used to different ends, for different audiences. So he’s a taciturn, awkward jerk in public. The real question is: What could motivate that jerkiness, but then also inspire so much love in his players? (And his players do love him, above and beyond the simple gratitude that you might hold towards a thoroughbred that’s just won your Derby ticket.)

So here’s my take. BB’s adversarial persona shows us that he needs enemies to stay motivated. It is what motivates him when there is nothing left to prove. No big insight there.

But here’s the thing that people miss: People that foster a deep-seated “me vs. the world” mentality often are extremely gifted at bringing certain people in close to them – and in so doing, it brings other people inside the bubble. Think of all the people you know that make you say: “Yeah, he seems like a boner. But you don’t know him like I know him, and he’s amazing.”

So how does BB bring people close to him? He’s not a naturally warm person, that much is clear. But I’ve known very cold people who are also extremely fair and generous. And here’s the thing: They know that *in virtue* of that iciness, their kind acts are magnified into great significance. Those acts can become almost like a secret two people share.

If you listen closely to his comments about the team, you can see that he’s fiercely loyal to every last member of the team. It isn’t that hard to imagine that every comment he makes to every member of the team is well thought out, perhaps even crafted to that player’s personal needs, whether they’re up or down. If someone that everyone else hates or fears does that for you a couple times, you might become crazy-loyal too.

So why might he be so secretive about his kinder side?
If he shares an affection, he wants to know that affection won’t lead to people taking advantage of him or undermining him. Ergo, he only deploys it in situations where he feels comfortable and in control. That is, in situations where he commands the utmost loyalty.

Cliff later posted another thought:
A point I want to add to my previous comment: The framework I laid out gives us a rationale for why he cheated.

People that view themselves as being at odds with the world can easily rationalize bending rules, even breaking them. If you set your world view up so that you stand outside the circles where other people travel, then in some ways you don’t truly internalize their outside viewpoints. That is, you don’t really care if some of Them think you’re wrong.

And what’s more, BB is acting all this out from the confines of a distinct community: His team. So I think in his mind, there’s something complex at work. Basically, I think he views it as: I’ll do anything to help My Guys, because they’re so loyal to me.

What’s that do for him, and his ability to sleep at night? It turns the simple act of cheating into a communal attitude – and preserves BB himself from seeing his actions as merely craven. It might even turn a wormy action into something that — in his mind — is worth getting self-righteous about. BB not only isn’t sorry that he cheated, he thinks he did right by the only people that matter to him: His team.

Boston Sports Conspiracy!

This is a pretty funny video for the tin foil hat crowd on the cheating and underhandedness that runs rampant in Boston sports. He probably shouldn't have shown the Celtics when complaining about a lack of criticism when they spend huge amounts of money to get players since there is a salary cap and all. It would have been much better if he just did a shady McHale acting as a double-agent in getting the deal done.

Hyperbole Full Steam Ahead

Now that bootgate is over, the big hyperbole story of the moment is the status of Eli Manning as franchise quarterback and how everyone in the country was wrong for doubting him in the first place.

Here's a quote that pretty much sums up the goofiness of this argument:

"Everybody [else] is all surprised," New York Giants wide receiver Amani Toomer said about Manning's arrival as a Super Bowl quarterback. "I don't think anybody in this locker room is surprised how well he's playing. Everybody knew he could be that type of quarterback. Now, he's living up to everybody's expectation."

Here is what Amani is saying, broken down:

1. Everybody [else] is all surprised - No one expected him to play this well.
2. Everybody (in the locker room) knew he could be that type of quarterback - He's never been that type of quarterback before but we had a good hunch that he could eventually play at that level.
3. Now he's living up to everybody's expectations - well those in the locker room anyway who, as Toomer says, never saw him play that well but knew he could. But for everybody else in the country that "is all surprised", we also knew he could play that well, but until now had never seen evidence of it.

He was the overall #1 pick in the NFL draft, so we detractors always had an expectation that he could play this well. Maybe it's more because he has the Manning name, than because of his play in college. Either way, Amani Toomer seems to agree with all of us detractors that Eli didn't play anywhere near this level prior to Week 17 against the Patriots.

Every playoffs has an enormous amount of over-the-top hyperbole and here are the examples that are already out there and what we can expect to see over the next two weeks:

1. Eli is a greater playoff quarterback than Peyton - not exactly a large body of work to compare with, but that won't stop people from writing it.

2. Eli is hotter than Brady heading into the Superbowl - this is already getting enough play and some backlash has started to regain perspective but lets take a look at the only "perception is reality" argument that comes from Sunday's games.

Manning 21/40 254 yards 0 TD 0 INT
Brady 22/33 209 yards 2 TD 3 INT

Now, the obvious thing that stands out is that Brady had 3 INT to Manning's 0 which is a clear indication that Manning was better on Sunday. But how much better? Eli completed barely 50% of his passes and threw 0 TD's. Brady completed 66% of his passes and had two touchdowns that were critical. I'll still say that Brady's 3 INT negates the advantages in TD's and completion %, but you'd think Brady was utterly awful and Manning was phenomenal by what the media hacks are writing. What you see in Manning right now, is the 2001 Tom Brady...neither spectacular nor awful, but very efficient and mistake-free. But Tom Brady plays at a level now where his Sunday performance is viewed as horrible and reason for concern in comparison. So I think we have to go back a week to find out where the separation is for Eli being the hotter QB:

Manning 12/18 163 yards 2TD 0INT
Brady 26/28 262 yards 3TD 0INT

I don't know about you but I don't see where Eli is hotter this week either. He is continuing a streak of mistake-free football (of course throwing the ball 18 times doesn't create a lot of opportunities for mistakes).

All-in-all, I'd say they both played very well in the Divisional Round (Brady better), and mediocre in the Championship round (Manning better). And then ask yourself, "which QB do you want heading into this Superbowl" taking into consideration how they've both played in these playoffs? I'm thinking the majority of the country would take Brady. Just a hunch...of course I was a detractor of Eli's.

3. The Patriots NO MATTER WHAT HAPPENS are not the best team ever - this is already making the rounds because it's the typical backlash to the season-long hyperbole argument that, yes, the Patriots are the best team ever. What I love about this debate is the fact that prior to the Patriots entering the argument, no one ever mentioned another team in the conversation outside of the 85 Bears. They were the consensus #1. But now, people who are writing the backlash argument point out the 72 Dolphins, 89 49ers, late 70's Steelers (they cant even pick a season), among those that are probably better than the Patriots and deserve to be #1. It's a ridiculous argument, I don't really care if the Patriots ever end up being the consensus #1, but I would be very happy that 19-0, 4 rings in 7 years, with no other team even appearing in the Superbowl twice during that time, would be indisputable.

4. The Giants know what it takes to beat the Patriots - The Eagles, Colts, and Ravens all said the same thing and really thought they'd be able to do it if only they had a second chance. Well the Giants do now, and they really believe they can do it. And there is no reason to doubt their confidence. However, this statement, so overused this season and now in the playoffs, is like saying "we know what it takes to bring peace to the middle east." Yes, everyone know what it takes, but no one is capable of actually doing it and seeing it all the way through. I know what it takes to beat the Patriots myself, but I'm not allowed to take a 2x4 to Brady's knee. So, although I know how to beat the Patriots myself, I'm not going to do it.

5. Brett Favre is the greatest QB ever - This one has been on the back-burner all season as he piles up more career records, which are great. But, as he showed yet again on Sunday, Brett Favre is also one of the most mind-numbingly-dumb decision makers in the history of the NFL. Everyone loves the Ultimate Warrior, so the criticism is never harsh, no matter if he costs his team their season...why? Because he had fun out there and had the best regular season of his career. Well...do you want Eli in the playoffs or Favre? Me? I want Eli. He may not end up throwing a 50 yard TD, but he also won't throw a 50 yard INT or several of them. The best arm in the history of the game, threw the lamest duck of a pass in OT. He's not the greatest QB in the history of the game, but he's probably around #5. Basically he's Cal Ripken. Great guy, Hall of famer, fun to root for, and durable.

6. The Patriots aren't nearly as good now as they were in October - this is my favorite one. While the Patriots offense is not putting up the points and stats they were in October, their running game has improved dramatically because the weather dictated it. The shutting down of Moss has prevented the quick long strike, but it has resulted in the Patriots dominating time of possession by using the short-to-medium passes to complement the rushing attack, and the defense has improved from being 31st in the league in the red zone in October, to completely shutting down their opponents in the playoffs. They're not giving up the rushing yards they were, and while they still give up the medium passing plays, all of this points to them returning to exactly the style and effectiveness of play that they used to win in 2001, 2003, and 2004. By the way, the Patriots passing juggernaut slowed down as it got windy and cold. They haven't played a game above 40 degrees in that time, but they're going to the warmest, driest, least windy area in the country for the Superbowl. So what game plan will the Giants prepare for? The control-the-clock dink and dunk combined with rushing, or the stretch the field bombs away that only works in a warm, dry climate?

Some other storylines you can expect to see in the next week that aren't getting play yet:
1. Brady is friggin awesome after a bad performance.
2. Belichick has two weeks to gameplan and that's too tough to overcome.
3. Coughlin is a hell of a coach who will be able to offset Belichick's gameplans
4. Kevin Faulk is the MVP of the Patriots
5. The Patriots still deserve an *
6. The Patriots shouldn't be celebrated at all.
7. The 72 Dolphins need to put a Code Red on Mercury Morris to shut him up.

NY Radio Station Offering Bridget Moynahan Masks

Q104.3 in NY is offering downloadable Bridget Moynahan masks for fans to wear at the Superbowl to distract Tom Brady. No doubt this is what will do in the Patriots. This is why we quote the famous proverb from Spaceballs: "Evil will always triumph, because good is dumb."

Stay Classy Indianapolis!

The Stupid Flanders Retirement Watch is over! Welcome back Tony! We look forward to seeing more strategic errors in the playoffs next year that will be glossed over because of your glorious piety and quiet strength. Of course this sets back his candidacy for what will surely be a first ballot canonization when he becomes eligible.

AFC Champions!!

It was not a pretty game by any means. The passing offense was almost completely shut down. But the defense was everything you remember about the 2001-2004 editions: give up the yards but stop them cold in the red zone. No touchdowns in the entire game. Unbelievable. Here are some thoughts on the game:

• I think Philip Rivers gained a lot of respect from fans around the league this week that was missing the last several when he was an obnoxious trash-talker. But he played really well considering what he was up against and playing in pain.
• On the flip side....LT. Wow. If he has surgery next week I'll take this back, but how do you not play in this game?
• Rodney Harrison and Junior Seau came up huge in this game. Even again 3rd down linebacker Tedy Bruschi had a pass defensed against Gates.
• Tom Brady was terrible but in the 4th quarter was solid. Just like every game they've been close in over the past two months, the Patriots turned it on and made adjustments in the 4th quarter to separate themselves from their opponents.
• The reverse to Moss, I thought, really jump started the offense. Before that play, San Diego was stuffing the run and getting consistent pressure on Brady. After that play, the holes opened up more and the offensive line gave Brady more time.

As bad as the pass offense was, I think there is a big difference we can talk about for the Superbowl. Warm weather, hardly any wind, 70 degrees, no rain. You can bank on all of those things happening. What does this do? It opens up the Patriots and it takes all of the variables that hinder a pass-oriented offense out of the equation.

They're going to face the Giants again. They played them just four weeks ago. They already know just about everything they need to know about them, including how they were able to play the Patriots so well. And now there is two weeks to formulate a gameplan to fix those problems, plan for the pass rush, and figure out how to get Moss open in space.

The Patriots open as 13.5 point favorites. That probably won't change much. But unlike the past few weeks, where I thought we'd see close games, I think this Superbowl will be a masterpiece that will look nothing like the Week 17 game.

It's going to be a fun two weeks. It's too bad the Ultimate Warrior, the world record holder for career interceptions, couldn't keep up his end of the bargain for the greatest battle of good vs evil. I think the Patriots bandwagon will be getting some new members because who the hell wants to root for the New York Giants?

Mike Freeman at CBSportsline.com gets the nod for writing the first (this week) "The Patriots Look Vulnerable" column. Get used to these kinds of columns and plenty of "they may go 19-0 bu the Patriots have shown that they are vulnerable and therefore not the best team of all time."

Enjoy, we'll have lots of coverage over the next two weeks.

The Anti-Christ Press Conference

Here is a short experiment imagining what the angry Patriots haters of the nation must picture when they hear a Bill Belichick press conference.

Championship Weekend Picks

San Diego @ New England (-13.5) - I'd love to know what the psyche of a typical Chargers player is coming into this game. On one hand you just beat the consensus 2nd best team in the league, but your superstars are so banged up it has to be making you demoralized even a little. It's going to be cold, which means nothing really, but it will be windy (20-25mph winds). I'm a little concerned about the wind as it will allow the mediocre chargers' safeties to move up and interrupt medium "wes welker" routes. But I do expect some more creative play-calling this week to counteract the pass rush, so it should be fun to watch. I expect at least two interceptions from the Patriots defense this week. In the end the Chargers just won't have enough to keep pace on offense (this is almost a cliche now) and the Patriots will win 31-17.

New York @ Green Bay (-6.5) - I said it last week, but I really mean it this week: this is where Eli's road ends. I like the Packers defense a lot more than I did the Cowboys and I think the Ultimate Warrior can escape the rush and pull the typical Favreresque "whoops" plays to pull out a close one. If the Giants somehow pull this off I'll be more worried about them in the superbowl than I will be about the Packers, because it'll mean they're playing out of their heads as opposed to better team beating a weaker team. I'm rooting for the Packers of course to set up the most polarizing superbowl ever. 24-21 Packers.

This is going to be a lot of fun this weekend. Here's hoping this blog is still relevant on Monday!

The 710 ESPN Radio Hatriots Song

I really liked this one. It's the rare "I hate the Patriots" video/song that is actually enjoyable to listen to. It probably would have stuck in my head all day if I didn't already hate all rap music made after 1995 (except Talib Kweli and Mos Def..but that's it).

Who Should the Haters Root For This Weekend?

I think we've reached a difficult point in the season for Patriots haters who, at first glance, would simply root against the Patriots this coming weekend. On the one hand, they want to see the season end with a loss in the worst way, but if it did this weekend, that would mean the new "most obnoxious team in the NFL" would make the Superbowl. But the hatred of the Patriots far out-distances the hatred for the Chargers (maybe except for in Denver where Philip Rivers in public enemy #1).

But, what if, as a jealous Hater, you were to root for the Patriots this weekend and hope the Packers beat the Giants? It would set up the ultimate Good vs Evil battle in the Superbowl. It's safe to say that the networks, 99% of the media, and most fans want to see Packers vs Patriots. Gregg Easterbrook and others are already pondering the poetic showdown.

The story lines for this match up could legitimately fill the 2-week gap between the Championship games and the Superbowl for the first time ever. But even better, you could root for the Ultimate Warrior to take down the Evil Empire and ride off into the sunset with his great blue bull Babe (if there was ever a personification of Paul Bunyan in sports, it would be him right?).

On the other hand...the Patriots are friggin awesome and more likely than not would triumph over the Packers, leaving the legions of haters left feeling sick to their stomachs through the entire off season.

So if you hate the Patriots, do you root for San Diego to take them down now and hope Favre takes out the obnoxious Chargers in the Superbowl? I'm not sure. While you'd feel good about the fact that Favre's Packers have a much better shot of beating the Chargers than the Patriots, you'd forget one thing. The Chargers would have won their last 9 games and would have beaten the Colts and Patriots while banged up. If it ends up being Chargers - Packers, I'd put all my money on the Chargers after what they would have done to get there.

So if it were me, I'd root for the Patriots to win this weekend and set up the showdown and hope for Favre to win. The consolation prize, if the Patriots win it all, is that you'd never have to hear from the '72 Dolphins ever again. No Mercury Morris interviews would be a good thing.

And then one last "oh no" thought. If you roll your eyes a hundred times during every Packers Monday Night Football game because of the gushing over Favre -

"Now take a look at this right here. Only someone like Brett Favre, could escape that pass rush and heave it 45 yards down the field while falling down. Now unfortunately it was intercepted, but boy, you can just tell he's having fun out there, can't you? He's just incredible. No one in the history of the NFL is better at throwing the deep ball while falling down than him. And he's 38, but playing like he's 23!"

- then picture that magnified by 100, and instead of being confined to a 3 hour broadcast and 15 minutes on SportsCenter, imagine it going non-stop for two weeks with nowhere to hide from it. Pretty scary thought right?

So what other alternative is there for the Patriots hater who also hates hearing the old men with man crushes on Brett Favre wax idiotic every time he drops back to pass?

Giants vs. Jaguars. No thanks.

Thoughts from the Saturday Night Victory Over the Jaguars

• CBS' pre-game show had the greatest moment of unintentional comedy this season when J.B. asks Bill Cowher about Tony Romo's off-week trip to Mexico with Jessica Simpson. Cowher: "Well, guys got a chance to get off their feet, relax..." Dan Marino almost completely lost it and a minute later Cowher nearly did as well.

• David Garrard is a very good quarterback. He makes great decisions, is extremely accurate, and his ability to escape the pocket was on display all night while still being able to make a good throw. If I were ranking QB's right now I might stick him at #4 behind Brady, Manning, and Favre, just ahead of Tony Romo. He's going to be really good if they get him some receivers.

• It was a scoring play on the first drive of the first half. First half timeouts are almost always meaningless. Why not throw the flag? I've heard local guys say they thought it was a good idea not to throw the flag because it was so close but if you stop the replay when the shin is on the ground, he clearly still has the ball.

• The defense was obviously set up to stop the run and they did an effective job of it. Of course the Jaguars had a great gameplan to throw the ball and ate up Randall Gay and Asante Samuel. Randall Gay showed why he's not a starter, but I can't blame Samuel on a couple of those routes he was beaten on because he had a big zone to manage and was almost never working on the guy who was being thrown the ball. Some bad tackling in the first half, but much better tackling in the second half. Still hate the forearm shiver as the method of tackling.

• Evil Disrespectful Tom Brady was phenomenal. And I'd like to say that I predicted we'd see the "dink and dunk" offense for this game two weeks ago! My picks are awful, so I'm going to take full credit for this instead.

• Jags' rookie cornerback Reggie Nelson on Brady's night: "anyone can go 26-28 in a dropdown game." Thanks for that sage wisdom Reggie. Welcome to the NFL and the future bulletin board of the Patriots.

• It was great to see Laurence Maroney driving through people. I think that was the most reassuring part of watching his great night running the ball. I think that performance on offense gives next week's opponent even more to think about in picking their poison on which weapon they try to take away.

Of course I'll be rooting for the Chargers today to beat the Colts. The Colts have exactly what it takes to stay with the Patriots for all 60 minutes. A couple of things that make me feel better about possibly facing the Colts is that in their first meeting this year they had Dwight Freeney. Now they won't with him on the IR. The other is that the Patriots had 15 penalties in that game that were very costly and a few times kept alive drives that should have stopped. I'm willing to bet that won't happen again.

Division Round Picks

And here we go...

Seattle @ Green Bay (-8.5) : Seattle is the most difficult team to figure out. I think last week's game was the first time I saw them all season. But I have seen plenty of the Packers. We all know what the Ultimate Warrior can do and Ryan Grant has been a big plus running the ball. The Seattle defense isn't too shabby but I don't think they can keep up with the Packers offense. Then the real problem is that I think the Packers defense is way too stingy to give up many points to Hasslebeck and that offense. So I'm looking for a blowout here, say 35-17.

Jacksonville @ New England (-11.5): The only difficulty in making this pick was whether it was going to be a blowout or a close game. I think the Jaguars are a good team, but I really believe they have to be able to have a good passing day to win. Why? Because I don't think the Jaguar defense is as good as advertised, especially with the injuries they have. So I don't see them stopping the Patriots, no matter how many long drives they can get with Jones-Drew and Taylor. That means the 2nd half will be all about catching up and that will require Garrard to throw a lot more than he's used to. I just don't see that working out. He's been accurate with the fewest INT's this year, but he also doesn't throw it a lot. So that said, I expect the Patriots to score early and often and for this game to be a blowout. 38-21.

San Diego @ Indy (-7.5): I'm kind of surprised at how the general consensus on this game is that the Chargers have no chance. They are 10-2 in their last 12 games, already beat the Colts once this year, and LT has been dominant the last quarter of the season. I think the line is correct and I think the Colts will ultimately win, but I would not be shocked at an upset here. I think the Colts have the best homefield advantage in the stadium with the crowd noise and the pumped in crowd noise. I don't think it would be difficult for that to rattle Rivers, but I also think that LT will get a lot of short passes in this game and use his speed and strength to get big gains. In the end though, Peyton will lead them down the field at the end and win the game. 28-24.

New York @ Dallas (-7.5): The ride ends here for New York. I don't even think it will be close. Eli had two back-to-back great performances but I don't think he keeps up this weekend and will instead toss some awful picks. I think T.O. pulls a T.O. and comes out and gets 100+ yards on 2+ TD's and Romo gets the last laugh about people who complained he was in Mexico (what is that, about 2 hours away?) during the off week. 35-16.

Should be a fun weekend in the NFL. Enjoy the games.

Stats Inc & ESPN.com's Jeremy Green Picks the Jaguars

Can you feel that rumbling? That's because it's Thursday which is the day of the week where all over-the-top hyperbole about who would win the game this weekend completely reverses on itself and media people start picking the underdog. Up first is Jeremy Green who writes for Stats Inc and ESPN.com. My first thought after reading the column was that it couldn't have been written by someone at a very credible sounding place like Stats Inc. But let's take a look at some of Jeremy's arguments:

"The Patriots have dominated teams with their talent and because they're intimidating. But Del Rio isn't easily intimidated and neither are the Jags."

Is Pete Prisco ghost-writing his columns? You're playing the intimidated factor here? This isn't Tiger Woods and his steroids-inspired fist pump on 18th green. This is football. The Ravens, Eagles, and Giants didn't look very intimidated to me. The Patriots actually bring out the best in their opponents because they know they have to be completely focused and execute when they play them. That's a better (though opposite and more accurate) argument to make here Jeremy.

"You know what I love about the Jags? They don't get blown out."

Three of their five losses were 29-7, 41-24, and 42-28. They kind of look like blowouts to me. I'm going to say the Patriots might have an edge here with 3 less blowout losses than the Jaguars. So I guess I love that more about the Patriots than I do about the Jaguars.

"Secondly, I don't really care what the Patriots' defense is ranked -- it is overrated. Yes, they were fourth overall, 10th against the run and fourth in scoring defense. Those are great stats, but they are misleading. The Patriots' run defense was not very good against Dallas, which averaged 6.2 yards per carry. Or Indianapolis, as Joseph Addai ran for 112 yards. Or Baltimore (Willis McGahee had 138 yards) or the New York Giants, who averaged over four yards a carry."

ok, so what's your point? Let's take a look at some highlights of the 2004 Superbowl Champion Patriots who gave up 3.9 yards per carry over the regular season.

• Week 1 vs Indy - gave up 202 yards rushing
• Week 4 vs Buffalo - gave up 123 yards rushing
• Week 8 vs Pittsburgh - gave up 221 yards rushing
• Week 14 vs Cincinatti - gave up 150 yards rushing

Not only did they win all of those games, but they went on to beat Indy in the AFC Championship, Pittsburgh in the divisional round, and Buffalo again in week 10. They didn't turn out too bad. The Jags are #1 in the NFL in rushing of course. The Patriots played 6 of the remaining 9 teams that are ranked in the top 10 in rushing yards. 6-0 against teams ranked in the top 10 isn't too bad since rushing the ball constantly is supposed to be the silver bullet to stop the Patriots.

"After going 16-0, I will call them the best regular-season team of all time, but six of those wins came against the Bills, Dolphins and Jets, who were a combined 12-36. Still, despite that, the Patriots have eight Pro Bowlers while the Jaguars had zero. OK, Fred Taylor got in this week due to an injury to Willie Parker, but that's not exactly a rousing show of respect."

What? You know this is crazy. Why not make the easiest and most poetic argument instead. The 2001 Patriots were underdogs with a great defense, solid (not great) running game, and a QB that didn't make the spectacular throw, but managed the game very well with no mistakes. Then they went in and beat the #3 offense in the history of the game when no one gave them a chance. Doesn't that sound like Jacksonsville? The no respect thing? That sounds like the Patriots. One team feels is motivated by a lack of voted-in pro bowlers while the other team is motivated by an opponent's player who called the Patriots cheaters. Which team do you think will be better at playing the disrespect card this week? Anthony Smith's guarantee was mostly taken out of context, but they destroyed him.

"I know Jacksonville coach Jack Del Rio will be reminding his players all week that they had no Pro Bowl players voted in by their peers, opposing coaches or fans. He will be telling his team the Patriots' coaches, players and fans don't respect them since those are the people who make up the voting process. The Jaguars will be motivated."

No one feels more disrespected in this league than Rodney Harrison. "No one thought we could beat the Panthers!" But even Rodney wouldn't take that bait. This is one of the biggest reaches to play the disrespect card I've ever seen. And the Patriots are masters of exploiting anything no matter how insignificant in context (remember Brady blowing up at Schottenheimer over comments I'm still trying to decipher as insulting). But this is just silly.

"Teams that don't commit penalties don't get blown out."

Well in 2007 the Patriots and Jaguars both averaged 4.8 penalties per game. Of course Jeremy could have been a little more specific since neither the Patriots nor Jets went a single game without at least one penalty.

"Teams that take care of the ball don't get blown out."

Another statistic worthy of Stats Inc. Since his argument is just relative, we'll just note the fact that the Patriots led the league with a +16 turnover ratio and the Jaguars had a +9 ratio. So once again, very little chance of a blowout. I'm not sure that either of the last two arguments necessarily make the case for a Jaguars win, unless you mean moral victories compared with those of the Eagles, Ravens, and Giants.

"And in a twist, what the Jaguars do best on offense is also their best defense against the amazing Patriots offense."

Right, but why wouldn't the inverse of that statement be at least equally possible? The Patriots passing offense (historically great) can put up the points necessary for the Jaguars to abandon their running game to use the pass to catch up right? I think I saw that happen to a couple of teams this year.

"There really is not a defensive scheme yet devised to stop the Patriots' offense. It is the most explosive attack we have seen in a long time, but know this: New England won't be able to run on Jacksonville."

Why would they want to? How does that even become an issue? Even when they were blowing people out and averaging 5+ cards per carry, they still passed to kill the clock. And I have it on pretty good authority that you won't see them trying to overcome a Jaguars lead by running the ball.

"Tom Brady, Randy Moss, Wes Welker and Co. can't beat you if they are not on the field."

I wholeheartedly agree here Jeremy. I don't see any way the Patriots offense can score while not on the field. And if the Patriots can't take the field at some point during Saturday night's game I think there is a real possibility they will lose.

"And undoubtedly, Del Rio will have a great game plan because he is one of the best coaches in the NFL."

Um..hello?



And in conclusion...

"A fan never thinks his team can lose, but no team is invincible. In the playoffs, it's one-and-done and anything can happen. Even Jacksonville beating New England."

I'll take the fan supporting that case of his 16-0 team over the Stats Inc guy that says he's not a fan of either team, but is rooting for bad weather to help slow the Patriots passing game to help support his vague laws of football blowout probability.

Greatest Individual Seasons In Like 4-Eva

ESPN.com has a Page 2 section up (so you know it's on the second tier of credibility) that lists the overall 25 greatest individual seasons across a fairly arbitrary list of sports, then breaks down the top 10 from each sport. Instead of getting a coronary by being up in arms about the rankings and snubs, I'll just offer some comments. I definitely encourage you to check it out and come back and submit your own comments.

Here is the link: http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2/story?page=080109/seasons

• First off, I wouldn't blame anyone that started hating Tom Brady today simply because he inspired this entire fiasco.

• Second, if you look at the reasons in each of the sports, they all use statistics heavily, how much they revolutionized the game, and actual context of the era they played in with the rules, fitness training advantages, etc. Of course none of them weighs this criteria with any kind of consistency and only cites the non-statistics to make their point. So right away you can see why this is a Page 2 special section.

• Football: Marino is ahead of Manning who is ahead of Brady. The ONLY reason Chadiha gives for putting him over those two is that the rules were different, and whoah, imagine what he could do today! It's not that the rules argument is invalid that gets me, but that it's the ONLY reason he gives.

• Manning's 2004 season is ahead of Brady's 2007 season because Manning threw 4 TD's in 4 straight games and he sat in most of the 4th quarters and most of the last game. So you know that he would have put up even more awe-inspiring numbers if he played 60 minutes each week (thanks Stupid Flanders). If you compare the numbers, Brady beats Manning on basically every meaningful stat except passer rating. How could that be, you ask, if Brady had more TD's, Passing Yards, Yards per attempt, and fewer interceptions? It's because Brady threw about 80 more passes. Since he threw 80 more passes, that makes Manning more efficient. Yes it's exactly as dumb as it sounds and why fewer and fewer people cite QB rating as an argument winner anymore.

• One more thing on the Manning - Brady seasons. Chadiha cites Brady as the best big-game QB of his generation before this year and cemented it with this season. He also gives him props for the 16-0 but for this particular discussion it apparently doesn't matter. If you're sitting in the 4th quarter of most of your games and almost the entire final game, how much pressure are you under? Brady spent half the season coasting, then the expectations of 16-0 and the number of 4th quarter comebacks should have made a bigger difference.

• Ok this is really the last point on that topic. Manning had his leading running back rush 334 times for 1548 yards that season which is fantastic. Brady had his leading rusher carry 185 times for 835 yards. Not quite as much pressure on you when you have the #2 rushing attack in the NFL. Of course, maybe if you're a Colts fan, you'll have some insight into other unseen factors in 2004 that put Manning ahead of Brady. But if you're Chadiha you didn't write them down.

• Since all positions are apparently created equal in this list, shouldn't Devin Hester's 2007 season be on there? What other player dominated at his position in a single season more than Hester did this year with 4 TD on punt returns and 2 TD on kick returns?
  

• Switching to baseball, Rob Neyer immediately changes the direction of criteria and discounts the kind of rules you saw in the NFL argument, to put Bonds in #1 and #3. I don't know how you put Bonds' 2001 season ahead of Babe's 1921 season in which he dominated his peers like no one ever has. There is ZERO accounting for the era that each played in and how their performance compared with the rest of the league....which brings me to....

• #8 Pedro Martinez 1999. Wait...Neyer's first sentence in his Pedro argument is: "In a year in which American League pitchers combined for a 4.86 ERA, Martinez posted a 2.07 ERA that was nearly a run-and-a-half lower than the No. 2 man on the list." But, how could that be when he just completely dismissed this angle in putting Bonds ahead of Babe? What's the deal Rob? Is it this bizarre "ill pick the winner then find stats to support it" angle that helped you stick a fork in Jim Rice? On a side note, 1999 is still the greatest Red Sox season of my life time. 2004 and 2007 don't come even remotely close (because both regular season's were kind of boring). 1999 had everyone changing their plans to watch every Pedro start, in the same way my parents never went out in the early 70's (pre-bratty children) when Bobby Orr was playing. It also had his 1-hitter 17k performance in Yankee stadium, which is still the best pitching performance I have ever seen on TV, and of course the Cleveland series, which was just incredible and a solid #2 behind the 2004 ALCS.

• By the way, Pedro at #8 was only one of two pitchers in the top 10 (Lefty Grove at #10). It's nice to see this list is consistent with how MVP voting in baseball goes.

• Phil Esposito at #9 in hockey? That was unexpected and probably unwarranted. But my only personal memories of Esposito are at his number retirement (where Bourque gave him his jersey and took 77 instead) so I'm probably wrong here.

• Hey, there's Bobby Orr at #2. And wow, how about that glowing argument - for revolutionizing the position and being the first ever defenseman to win a scoring title amid a season that has never been matched.

• And yet here is Gretzky the net loiterer at #1. I don't actually have any problem with Gretzky at #1 in itself. But ESPN.com's David Amber says that there is no wrong answer in choosing which is his best season. So why is his next best season at #5 and not #2? Is Gretzky here because he's the greatest ever or because that season was better than anyone elses? or is it because as Amber puts it, "...it was Gretzky's ability with grace and style to bring the game of hockey to the masses that stands out from the 1981-82 season"? Yup, no one dominated the Lady Bing in the 80's quite like Gretzky. Don't get me wrong, I know Gretzky dominated his peers that year by setting the points record and completing dominating the scoring title. I guess I've been away too long from Hockey to know that grace and style matter more.
  

• TANGENT ALERT: The Hockey section just made me depressed that the Bruins are going into their 19th year of unwatchability so here is a clip of the Hanson brothers debut in Slapshot that always make me feel better after a 1-0 shutout loss to a team steeped in hockey tradition like the Carolina Hurricanes (they were the Hartford Whalers the last time I really followed hockey).

• By the way, this clip contains adult language and may not be suitable for all corporate locations..especially if you work for me and you're spending company time reading this...for shame:
  

• My biggest grievance is with the NBA. Of course when the byline lists ESPN.com as the writer, you wonder if the person who compiled it preferred to remain nameless because of how they mailed it in completely. This list goes almost exclusively based on statistics and also the very popular and accurate "player efficiency rating." (see MJ at #3). Shaq's 1999 season at #9 is beyond ridiculous.

• I'm not even bothered by the complete exclusion of Celtics' players on this list because of the obvious lack of thought that went into it. If it were more well thought out and took into consideration several factors beyond pts/assts/rb/efficiency rating then you'd see Larry Bird's 1986 season might make it. But the supporting cast and selective memory of the nameless contributor to this section probably keeps him off it. Which is fine, 16 championships is a good look at the bright side.

• And then there's College Basketball and you can smile now because Bird is included. But where is he included? Since his name is Bird he's listed second to Lew Alcindor in a bullet-list rather than a ranking. Here's to you Page 2 Editor, you really know how to put a top notch section together that will reflect well on the sports leader!

• A couple of other notes on the College Basketball list. Apparently, they deviate from the others as well to make arguments about how well they did in the tournament. Of course the lists are for Greatest Individual Seasons, not Greatest Individual Regular Seasons, which of course now just pisses me off more about Marino at #1. Since Brady's season is still ongoing, I wonder if that means winning a Superbowl would propel him to #2 or possibly even #1? That's just silly, but maybe #2 though!

• Golf. yeesh. Annika Sorenstam at #5. It's the freakin LPGA for chrissakes. She doesn't even make the cut when she plays PGA events. How is she ahead of anyone here? Why not do a separate LPGA list? Or why not just combine the NCAA Basketball list with the NBA list? Of course now something else is really bothering me....

• What about Josh Gibson?!?! Why not include the greatest season in the history of the Negro Baseball League? Gibson hit .467 with 53 home runs in 1933 against all levels of competition (unless Wikipedia is lying to me). If you're going to include Annika Sorenstam in Golf, why would you completely disregard the Negro League for baseball? Of course Gibson's numbers are somewhat suspect because "all levels of competition" includes the Negro League and the independent league. But it was a 137 game regular season in which he dominated more than anyone other than Babe Ruth's 1921 season. The point isn't whether the stats are completely accurate or not (they're the accepted stats which is important), but that he, and anyone else I might forget from the Negro League, were not even considered. How do I know that? Because he hit .467 with 53 homeruns. I'm thinking that trumps at least Mr. Freeze Ted Williams' 1941 season with a .406 average and some eye-popping walk totals.
  

• Since I completely loathe college football, I'm not going to bother to comment.

• Ok I lied. I had to see if and where Flutie ranked. #8. Why? "He helped put Boston College on the map as a national university. Applications for admission soared after he rose to fame at BC." I'm not even kidding. That's what it really says. I'm super stoked for the Dean of Admissions, but come on. Of course the Hail Mary was great, but the actual game in which it happened was just phenomenal. Well admissions soared which is the true mark of a champion.

• I'm seriously proud of myself for recognizing 6 of the 10 NASCAR drivers listed.

• If you're a woman that was offended at my earlier Annika Sorenstam complaint you'll be very happy with the lesbian...err...woman-dominated Tennis list. Why Steffi Graff at #1 you might ask? Well it was an Olympic year and she won a gold, which means that in order for the other 9 tennis players to have a chance at #1, they needed the stars to align so that their best year fell in an Olympic year, so that they could compete and win a gold. Of course the Olympics presents tennis competition that is much higher than a WTA tournament. Before beating Gabriela Sabbatini in the finals, Steffi disposed of mixed-doubles ace Zina Garrison and Manuela Maleeva, Bulgaria's greatest Tennis player ever!
  

• Considering all of the various inconsistencies and playing loose with who qualifies for inclusion, I want to submit my 1985 Babe Ruth Baseball season where I turned a winless Almeida & Carlson Insurance team around for a trip to the Championship. I batted over .500 that year, would have had 15 home runs if there was a fence and I wasn't David Ortiz-slow, and struck fear into the hearts of opposing pitchers so much that when facing the most dominant pitcher in the league, I still became the first player in the history of the Plymouth Babe Ruth League to be intentionally walked. I also hit a triple off my friend Jeff Brown after he threw at my head. Suck it Jeff. I figured I should come in just ahead of Pedro at #8.
  

• All things considered, it was an entertaining Page 2 section that made up for the lackluster TMQB, and the complete lack of Sportsguy columns (that book better be good). I just hope I didn't steal Scoop Jackson's thunder by being the first to complain about the lack of Negro League baseball player inclusions. Stay strong Scoop...I know it's been a tough week for you since Clemens didn't get any benefits of the doubt from anyone, in turn killing your chance at writing a Roger Clemens racial injustice column. There's still time to write about David Garrard being underrated because of stereotypes and not being given a fair shake column before he sets for his off-season vacation home on Sunday.

Brady picks up the AP NFL Offensive Player of the Year

Tom Brady kept the awards rolling today picking up the Offensive Player of the Year. Don't you just hate when awards go to these ingrates that don't quite act like they just won the Publisher's Clearing House Sweepstakes? Eschewing individual goals for team goals just makes Tom Brady boring and furthers the notion that he's just not as warm and cuddly as Peyton Manning and LaDainaian Tomlinson (who fresh off his award for "All Around Great Guy of the Year Award" is in line for the "Just Shut Up You Jackass Award" for turning into a jerk this year).

Congrats Tom. Now let's go for the individual award trifecta with a Superbowl MVP.

I'm guessing Frank Cooney voted for Wes Welker here because Welker has less physical gifts to work with and the preseason expectations for him were so much lower than what he produced.

Tom Brady Wins MVP

Congratulations to the evil, disrespectful Tom Brady on winning the MVP Award today. He got 49 out of 50 votes, with the Ultimate Warrior getting the other one (I can't imagine what state that vote came from).

The Season of Evil continues...

Here are a couple of comments I enjoyed from the ESPN.com

"The cheats are getting all of the awards."
-Hardy121

"are you kidding me wow 50 td passes nfl record. but he is still not the best qb in the nfl. not when peyton manning is playing. even known that manning trails brady in super bowls 3 to1 but their numbers are not even close this was bradys greatest year ever with alot more what peyton had. last time i checked peyton has over 41000 yards and 306 td passes. while brady has only 26000 yards and 197tds. he is lucky to be in that team.so i still think that manning is the best qb and brady # 2. p.s im a huge jets and cowboys fan"
-sebrol

I particularly enjoyed the last one where he decides not to include the fact that Brady didn't start playing in the NFL until 3 years later.

Playoff Picks

First let me rant. Jerry Rice went on his (no doubt extremely popular) Sirius satellite radio show and laid into Randy Moss. Why? Rice invited Moss onto his show to discuss the record he broke that previously belonged to Rice. Moss declined the interview. How did Jerry Rice respond? He went on the show and called the comments Moss made after the game "a slap in the face, but that's typical of Randy Moss."

Moss' comments after the game: "I don't think me breaking Jerry Rice's record is special," Moss said. "I think shutting you guys up is what made it special, all the negativity, all my critics."

Now why would Randy Moss say it's not special? How about maybe the perspective that Rice gave a few weeks earlier on Mike & Mike about the possibility of Moss breaking his record?

[I'm paraphrasing but only a little] "Moss has had a good year but I did it in 12 games. Randy Moss is going to play 16 games and the NFL is going to just take it upon themselves to give him my record?" I was watching this on ESPN2 live at the time and he was shaking his head in clear disgust.

So. Rice is basically saying that he wouldn't even recognize the record being Randy Moss' because he did it in 12 games (even though it's Most Completions in a Season), but then Randy Moss is supposed to gush and be completely honored to be mentioned in the same sentence as Rice and bow to his greater achievement?

Jerry Rice, '72 Dolphins, Dan Marino, you guys are such bitter miserable people (Marino was clearly disgusted during Peyton's pursuit of his TD record). Why are these people so insecure? We're talking about the greatest receiver ever, one of the greatest teams ever, and one of the top 5 greatest QB's ever. Why do you have to be such jackasses?

You wonder why Randy Moss doesn't feel breaking the record is special? Well, it's a dubious honor when the previous record holder whines that you even qualify for it.

End of rant.

On to the picks:

Wild Card Weekend

Washington @ Seattle: Washington is the feel good story, and they're playing better than Seattle right now. First upset of the week.

Jacksonville @ Pittsburgh: Willie Parker is out for the season and the defense of the Steelers is closer to a silk sheer curtain than an Iron Curtain, but I'm still picking them because I think Jacksonville is one of those teams that folds early in the playoffs and the experience of the Steelers and the poise of Big Ben will trump the big running game and accuracy of Garrard.

New York @ Tampa: Good night New York. You're not going to do anything against that defense and you used your "out of your head" performance last week.

Tennessee @ San Diego: San Diego. Titans have no shot in hell. I'm guessing San Diego is already game planning for the Colts.


Divisional Playoff Weekend

Washington @ Dallas: And the feel good story ends here. Cowboys at home, T.O. plays and makes a contribution and they roll over the emotionally and physically exhausted Redskins

San Diego @ Indy: Harrison may play but he's not going to stretch the field and he's going to get beaten up. As long as it's the LT show they have a shot, but I think Indy gets up early and the LT show becomes the Rivers disaster in the 4th quarter and the Colts win.

Tampa @ Favre: It's the defense that will win this for Green Bay.

Pittsburgh @ New England: UPDATE: I originally screwed up and put Jacksonville here, but since they lost to Pittsburgh in my picks above, that makes this impossible. All of the hesitation and marginal worry I had about facing the Jaguars doesn't exist when facing the Steelers. They just simply can't stay with the Patriots. Polamalu missed the regular season game, but he gets lost in Tom Brady's eyes too easily and jumps the wrong route. This is a lopsided victory for the Patriots.


Championship Weekend

Indy @ NE: Not actually a close game. Dwight Freeney's absence is going to kill the pass rush that was so important in week 9. Also, there won't be 14 penalties on the Patriots either. I think this will be more reminiscent of the 2003 AFC Championship than the 2006 AFC Championship.

Green Bay @ Dallas: I actually like Green Bay here. I think they've been very consistent and unless T.O. is 100% or close, I think Green Bay finally beats them. I'm expecting a Tony Romo mental error game here (not a fumbled field goal attempt, but interceptions galore).

Superbowl

Green Bay vs New England: REVENGE!!!! No kick off returns for TD and this is in Arizona. Dry, fast field. 48-21 Patriots.

Evil triumphs over the Ultimate Warrior, the reign of terror and classlessity continues into the offseason with bitter anger slowly subsiding among the rest of the nation.....until draft hype begins when everyone remembers that they Patriots will be picking 7th.....anger rises again....subsides until late July when the CAN THEY GO PERFECT AGAIN? hype starts up.

Happy 2008 everyone. Enjoy the games this weekend.

EVIL TRIUMPHS AGAIN!!!!!

The Anti-Christ has won the AP Coach of the Year Award for his ruthless demolition of opponents during the regular season!

It's great to see the writers are so wishy-washy and have their own complete sets of rules for the award that they couldn't all gang up on the notion that spygate contributed to the success of his season. Denying the fact that Bill Belichick is the BEST COACH IN THE NFL is something none of them can do, but the writers are vindictive, overly sensitive, self-entitled jerks (in many, not all cases) and I would be shocked if someone didn't vote for McCarthy or someone else strictly because he gives better quotes or doesn't look smug.

From the AP Story:

Spygate didn't stop 29 of the 50 voters on a nationwide panel of media
members who cover the NFL from voting for Belichick. In a season highlighted
by many strong coaching performances, Belichick beat out Green Bay's Mike
McCarthy, who received 15 votes for leading the Packers to a 13-3 record and the
NFC North title.

TMQB Answers the Call for Vitriol!

"New England is solid across the defensive front, if consistently dirty. (How the Patriots' defensive linemen get away with dirty tactics is another of the officiating mysteries surrounding this team; Vince Wilfork stuck his fingers into Brandon Jacobs' eye Saturday night and the zebras, standing there, not only did not toss Wilfork but didn't even flag him.) Plus, the Patriots are adept at varying defensive tactics. Often, they play a conservative coverage-oriented look in the first three quarters, then, having lulled offensive coordinators to sleep, blitz in the fourth."

Thank you Gregg Easterbrook for bringing back the hate. The TMQB Column for today was typically uneven in the sense that some of it was well researched and some of it (namely the first several paragraphs) looked like they were designed to reinforce a preconceived angle at all costs.

For example, pointing out that the passing leader has never won a Superbowl kind of misses the point. You could point to TD passes, which are a better indicator than passing yards, and see that Peyton Manning, Brett Favre, Steve Young, Joe Montana, Roger Staubach, Terry Bradshaw, Kurt Warner, and of course Tom Brady all won Superbowls in a year they led the league in touchdown passes. Pretty good group of players isn't it?

But then he brings up a good conspiracy theory point later in the column:

"Rules note: it was Giants 28, Patriots 16 when linebacker Gerris Wilkinson was called for pass interference against Randy Moss in the end zone, placing New England on the Jersey/A 1; the touchdown made it 28-23 and was key to the Flying Elvii comeback. I didn't see any pass interference on this play, did you? Wilkinson ran in front of Moss and held his hands up, facing away from the ball, but didn't hit Moss. Where was the pass interference? NFL Network announcers Bryant Gumbel and Cris Collinsworth declared that the penalty was for faceguarding. But the rule against faceguarding was abolished in 2005! When Collinsworth played, what Wilkinson did was illegal; now, it's perfectly legal. Once again, the Patriots benefit from a mysterious major officiating call in their favor. And NFLN guys, if you're going to represent the league, know the rulebook, OK?"

Easterbrook makes a good point here that I never heard before. Probably helped Plaxico's whining after the game about the bad officiating, but of course he was perfectly fine with the constant no-calls whenever he went to purposefully take out Rodney Harrison's knees the whole game.

TMQB takes the time-tested "Patriots can't run the ball" angle to say why the odds are against them winning the Superbowl. The fact of the matter is, they don't need too and only use it to supplement short yardage and goal-line situations. In another two to three weeks everyone will also remember that the good coaches don't open up the playbook when they're dominating teams, even to get records. Remember the dink and dunk offense? That is your running game and it's easily the equivalent of a good running attack because of the Moss double-coverage deep threat, Wes Welker's quickness, and Stallworth's ability to create yards after the catch.