Blame and team dynamics

It was a good win for the Colts on Sunday night. They did enough to win, and the Pats did just enough to lose.

There was plenty of blame to go around; Jabar Gaffney, Randy Moss, Dave Thomas, Bill Belichick.

Gaffney dropped a sure touchdown pass.

Moss ran a route half speed in the last offensive series when he had drawn one on one coverage, and then cut his route off early, as though he couldn't outrun the corner that was so far down on the Colts depth chart that the man was a player without a team earlier in the season.

Dave Thomas had possibly the biggest boneheaded play of all on a drive that might have ended up compensating for Belichick's earlier blunders, committing a personal foul after the play to turn a third and inches into a third and fifteen.

But some of the other things would never have played into it had Belichick not engaged in some brutally bad choices - the penalty challenge was poor because it really didn't take very long for me to establish with TiVo that not only there were only 11 players on the field, but the one that the Pats coaches mistook for the 12th guy running off the field was player 11. The coaches up in the box should have been able to determine that inside of ten to fifteen seconds.

Then with 11 minutes left Belichick second guessed himself on a fourth down sneak which worked, but the refs granted Bill the timeout and the play didn't count. Belichick eschewed four more chances at the end-zone for the tie. It somehow felt like the Ravens game last season with the Pats in the roll of the Ravens.

The difference in the game - the Colts didn't make the stupid choices - clock mismanagement, personal fouls, drops at key moments. That was all on the Patriots, and it was the difference in the game.

On the plus side, there are some bright spots to take from the game, some of which Peter King noted in his TMQB article where he talked to former Giants coach Jim Fassel -

• JIM FASSEL ON PATS-COLTS. Fassel did the 18-15 Indy win on Westwood One radio the other night, and he loved the game. "Great, great game,'' he said. "You think without [Tom] Brady the rivalry would really suffer, but you can't see a much better game than that one. New England has four 12-play-plus drives. Indianapolis has Manning playing for their season. Either team could have won.

"People thought the Patriots were dead with Matt Cassel playing, but I remember when Brady came in that first year [2001], and he was scrambling and dinkin' and dunkin.' Same philosophy now. Same gameplan. And in this game, I saw stuff out of Cassel I didn't see when I did the Patriots against San Diego a couple of weeks ago. He drops back, and on his fifth step, bang, he hits a receiver right between the numbers with authority. New England will be a tough team to beat in the playoffs.''

And onto team dynamics...

Humans are instinctively pack animals. I have believed this for a long time. We have this need to belong to a group, to something larger than ourselves. I've always felt this was at the root of why we root for sports teams, and we even identify with them using pronouns such as "we," and "my." There is almost always an "us against them" mentality for the fan bases, and it definitely exists within the teams themselves.

It's an instinct that both brings people together and one that pits them against each other.

I bring this up because there's something about fan and team dynamics that's applicable to politics. Historically, political races are run less on the actual issues than they have been run with the philosophy of tearing down the opponent. The us against them mentality is pervasive -

Republicans are fascist pinheads and religious nut jobs.

Democrats are commie pinko socialists bent on the destruction of the American Way.

Republicans are book-banning Nazis.

Democrats can't keep the nation safe.

For my money, it's all boneheaded, but as boneheaded as it was, we saw something new work this election. McCain used the Karl Rove playbook and got badly burned. Hillary Clinton did everything in the primaries that she could to tear down Barack Obama, and it ended up burning her.

Obama, while not total innocent of the "look what they're doing/ they have done" mentality in his advertising campaigns, his general message was that we needed to come together as a nation. He actually avoided some of the issues that could have reflected negatively on McCain which included -

For all of McCain's bluster about Ayers, McCain accepted donations and public endorsements from Leonore Annenberg and Arnie Weber - two individuals who also have ties to Ayers. Both individuals donated the maximum allowable amount to McCain's campaign, and both were involved in the approval of the grant Ayers' foundation received from the Annenberg Foundation. Does this make McCain a terrorist? Certainly not.

Palin, while mayor in Wasilla, asked the librarian how she would go about banning books from the shelves of the public library. She tried to fire the librarian when the same librarian gave Palin the answer that she couldn't.

Little was made of McCain's links to the Iran-Contra affair by the campaign.

Nothing was made about McCain's comments that we supported freedom fighters in Afghanistan back in the 1980's. Considering they were called the Taliban then, were trained by the Republican regime then in place, and had a member of that "freedom fighter" group by the name of Osama bin Laden - it was a comment that Obama could have jumped all over.

This is just the short list.

And please, don't mistake - I'm registered as an independent, have voted for Republicans, Democrats, Green Party, and any number of other candidates. My issue isn't with Republicans, per se. I have issues with party politics and the politics of partisanship and I cast my vote based on what I feel is the competence of the candidate.

What I think is interesting to note here is that while McCain tried scare tactics in regards to executive experience (he has virtually none as well), past associates (he has some pretty shady associates as well - I didn't even mention the Keating Five), incorrectly linking his opponent to a political philosophy that Obama doesn't actually espouse, Obama stayed on message - stressing in stump speeches the need to come together as a nation. I'm not naive enough to believe that this heralds a new day in campaign strategy. I just think the variables just came together for a guy who organized an impressive campaign.

And that's really the bottom line in sports and in politics - the people who win are the ones who run the best campaigns - and from early on McCain stumbled, Obama didn't - and like with the Pats-Colts game, the guy who made the fewest mistakes won.

Depth charges

There have been a lot of articles this week about how the Pats-Colts rivalry has lost some of its luster this year. I can't say I disagree with them. These two teams have combined to pretty much dominate their respective divisions since 2001. Last season the game between the two teams was a match-up between two unbeatens later in the season than it had ever happened before - and undefeated season was on the line at the halfway point for both teams.

Division rivals previous to the last realignment, the now conference rivalry never came close to approaching the fever-pitch that has grown over the last five seasons. Since 2001, the two teams have combined for 11 division titles, 12 playoff appearances, five Super Bowl appearances (four from the Patriots), and four Lombardi Trophies. The only other playoff contender in the AFC with more than two division titles is Pittsburgh with three. Coincidentally, they're the only other AFC team to have a Super Bowl appearance and to win the big game.

That was then.

Now, the luster is off as the Colts after seven games already trail the first place Titans by four games. They currently stand at 3-4, but could easily have been 1-6. They have alternately been horrible and great - often in the same game. The same can be said for the Pats - alternately horrible and great, often in the same game. But New England is 5-2 and tied for first in the division. The Colts are tied for last (granted, not a whole lot separates first from last in the AFC East this season, but it's worth noting that there are only four teams in the NFL with a better record).

I've heard a lot of talk about the age of the Patriots defense, but age has been a factor for the Colts as well - Marvin Harrison has been unable to get separation, the knee has made Peyton Manning play old and timid, age and injuries have begun to catch up to the Colts offensive line. To add insult to injury for the Colts, they are without the two corners that were projected as their starters when the season began.

For all their problems, however, an argument can be made that the Pats have had it just as bad, if not worse. The Pats started the season with the entire right side of their O-line on IR and only recently got Stephen Neal back. They are without their starting (pro-bowl) quarterback, running back, and (pro-bowl) safety. They subsequently lose their second and third string running backs, and end up with three rookies playing defensive back in dime situations in their last game.

In spite of all that, the Patriots have strung together a couple of wins to be tied with the Steelers and Bills for the second best record in the AFC. It's a testament to the coaching and the depth of a team that has been decimated by injuries that would have destroyed other teams.

Yes, there's a lot of football to be played, but if the Pats win the East again this season, then Belichick deserves serious consideration for his second coach of the year award, and Pioli exec of the year, for giving him the depth to weather major injuries (reportedly Norv Turner still blames the loss of Brad Johnson for the loss of his job as the head coach of the Redskins). I'm not saying I think he should get it, but he will deserve consideration. Probably right behind Jim Zorn and up there with Jeff Fischer.

Rooney

Named for Dan Rooney, owner of the Pittsburgh Steelers, the Rooney Rule came into being in 2003. The Rooney Rule came about in an effort to level the playing field for minority candidates for head coaching positions. In essence, the rule mandates that any team that has an opening for a head coaching position must interview at least one minority candidate.

While I'm not really thrilled by the rule in general, it doesn't really bother me either. It has definitely generated results. According to Wiki, "At the start of the 2006 season, the overall percentage of African American coaches had jumped to 22%, up from 6% prior to the Rooney Rule."

However, there's a fine line between effective and stupid. And this is stupid.

To sum up, the Rams submitted a contract extension for Jim Haslett to the league. The extension was contingent on Haslett reaching a certain number of wins and he would remain the team's head coach for "X" number of years.

The league rejected the contract, saying that the team was trying to circumvent the Rooney Rule.

Huh?

He's already the team's head coach. There is no opening, unless he fails to perform - which is true for any coach.

If they want to argue that he wouldn't be coach at the end of the season, then what I want to know is how this is any different than what the Cowboys or the Seahawks did in writing into the contracts of assistant coaches that they would succeed their current head coaches. I mean, it's not like they're requiring either of those teams to comply to the Rooney Rule in order to fill the spot once Wade Phillips and Mike Holmgren are done.

So, why is what the Rams are doing any different?

This is just one of those things from the NFL executive offices that just doesn't smell right.

Consider - if Haslett has a decent season with the Rams, and everyone knows that he's their man, what coach, in his right mind, is going to debase himself by interviewing for an opening he knows doesn't even exist?

This is just idiotic.

Midweek Ephemera

Congratulations to the Phillies.

The World Series was kind of a can't lose prospect for me this year. I was born in Philadelphia - the family moved to Boston when I was three - but most of my extended family remains in and around the City of Brotherly Love. I also taught there for five years before moving to Maryland. So, for the friends and family still there - enjoy the win.

As for the Rays - well, it was a good run. It would have been nice, in as much as it would have just been a wonderful metaphorical screw you to the Steinbrenner clan and their free-spending ways if the team with the second lowest payroll in all of baseball had walked away with the championship. And it just would have been made sweeter that the team that plays on Georgie's front porch did it.

Over on the hard-court it was nice to see the Celtics come up with a win on the same day they raised their seventeenth banner to the rafters in the Gahden. I think it was important for them to come out and get the win against fellow Eastern power Cleveland, but mostly, it was nice to see the green-and-white come out rise to the occasion on what was a very emotional night for some of the team. I would right about it more, but I think that Dave over at The Coffin Corner already has it covered.

Don Banks over at SI almost always has a tidbit or two that I hadn't yet put together. In his mid-season report, he noted something very interesting about the Brett Favre acquisition. For all the hoopla surrounding his acquisition, and the optimism about their improvement (at this point last season they were 1-6 as opposed to 4-3), they are, in essence, no better than they were this time last year - third place, trailing the Bills and the Patriots, and one game ahead of the bottom dwelling Dolphins. Sure, they're a lot closer to first than last season, but the Favre gambit has yet to translate into any sort of change in the standings.

With a Brady-less Patriots team, this really has got to be eating at Jets fans.

What's happened to the NFC South? Last season they sent three teams to the post-season, this season only the Titans are on pace to even have a winning season.

Speaking of paces, who do you like most for a winless season - the 0-8 Bengals, or the 0-7 Lions? Personally, I think that it's completely possible that both teams will succeed where so many bad teams have failed in delivering the first perfect season in the annals of sucking. But, hey, I'm just an optimist hoping to view perfection in back-to-back seasons.

Picking up the slack

Cassel is still a work in progress, however, signs are encouraging..

I'm not going to post the Brady-Cassel comparison this week - mostly because the Boston Globe has already done it. But it is interesting to note that other media outlets are finally getting that comparing Cassel to Brady '07 isn't the appropriate comp to make. They're finally figuring out that the appropriate comp is for the late-round pick, career back-up getting the start is to compare him to when Brady was the late-round pick, career back-up.

Its about freakin' time.

While I'm not going to repost the numbers here, having provided the link above, I am going to say that it's interesting to note that the numbers through seven games are remarkably similar, and with the exception of in the area of sacks, touchdowns, and interceptions, Cassel leads Brady version .01 in almost every other category - and neither leads the other by any sort of significant number in any category.

It's creepy.

Other thoughts and observations...

The Giants front office is gutless.

Plaxico Burress won't start the game against the Steelers as punishment for actions detrimental to the team - harassing officials last week, not showing up for treatments, and other petulant actions are at issue. Sure, he plays and collects all his salary. Wow. What a punishment.

Would the Giants have just benched Burress for the first couple of plays of the game had the team been playing the Lions? Or would they have suspended him again? I'm guessing the latter.

But against the mighty Steelers? No. It's all hands on deck for that, discipline be damned.

I notice they had no problem suspending him for a game against the lowly Seahawks.

Other boneheads...

Former Jets receiver Don Maynard said some dumb things this past weekend.

"You have 106 coaches in the NFC that's never played pro ball, you got 126 in the AFC that's never played pro ball," Maynard said. "You got 64 coaches that never played college football, so now you know why the knowledge of pro football has gone downhill. They don't even do what we did in offenses and defenses."

Never mind the fact that three of the last five Super Bowl winning coaches never signed a contract to play in the NFL (Bill Belichick, Jon Gruden, Tom Coughlin); never mind the fact that the man for whom the championship trophy is named, Vince Lombardi, never played a down of professional football; or that Maynard's own NFL coach with whom he won a ring - Weeb Ewbank, never played professional football (that's eight rings from five coaches who obviously have no idea what they're doing by Maynard's reckoning - more if you include Green Bay's pre-Super Bowl Championships). Never mind all of that.

Let's just talk about one of the biggest differences in the game - the playbook. When I was in high school in the mid 1980's, we ran a pro-style offense...from the late 1960's and 1970's, with a dash of the 80's thrown in. The closer we got to current day, even then, the more complicated the plays became. This guy probably couldn't decipher today's playbook- so, yeah, he's right, they're not playing the offenses and defensed they did then - they're playing much more complicated schemes.

On second thought, I think I am going to address the boneheaded thought that someone who never played pro football is less qualified. There have been 42 Super Bowls, of those 42 championships 26 rings/trophies went home with 15 (head) coaches that never played pro football. There are only 26 coaches that even have earned the right to wear Super Bowl rings, and 15, essentially 58 percent, haven't played a down in the NFL. They account for 62 percent of the wins in the big game.

More impressively, eight of those coaches that Maynard thinks lack the requisite background account for 19 rings. Thirty-five percent of the coaches on the list account for 45 percent of those wins. Some of the names of the unqualified (Maynard's complaint, not mine):

Vince Lombardi
Weeb Ewbank
Bill Walsh
Joe Gibbs
Bill Parcells
George Seifert
Jimmy Johnson
Mike Shanahan
Bill Belichick

Lombard, Ewbank, Walsh, and Gibbs are all in the Hall of Fame for their coaching acumen. All the others are, at worst, in the discussion.

So what have we learned?

That Don Maynard is a total ass-clown with the football IQ of a brain-dead platypus.

Sigh.

The defense is still a bit offensive

The Patriots have clawed their way back into a share of first place with their win over the Rams combined with the Bills loss to the 'Phins.

Once again, Matt Cassel was solid in his role as signal caller, and could have been even better if not for drops from Randy Moss (two touchdowns missed, and a deflection of his hand ended as an interception), and normally sure-handed Wes Welker (dropped a sure first-down, and fell in his route leading to interception two). Cassel led the offense to 23 points on 63 percent passing in spite of an erratic and often ineffective running game (although Kevin Faulk did average 4.1 yards a carry and was the Cassel's best weapon, accounting for a combined 107 yards and a highlight reel touchdown reception).

While I believe the offense could have been better - the team needs to do a better job of helping Cassel out - I don't have too many complaints about the offensive performance other than those noted above.

The defense, however, continues to bother me.

Overall, they did what they needed to do, coming up with the big third down stops pretty regularly. What wasn't good was the regularity with which the Rams hit big plays. Three St. Lois receivers had catches of at least 19 yards, two of them averaged more than 20 yards per catch and one, with six receptions averaged more than 27 yards.

These are not reassuring numbers.

They are a step backwards from last week when the Pats gave up virtually nothing deep.

Will they adjust sans Rodney Harrison? I hope so - but this really wasn't the sort of adjustment I was hoping to see, and I don't care what the record says, next week's Sunday night tilt against the Colts looms large. Even a wounded Peyton Manning is dangerous, and I would like to see that the secondary has made the necessary adjustments to win in Indy next week.

And on a separate note, for those of you who missed it, check out my last post on commercial viability. It's a gas.

Commercial viability

I love advertisements.

No, I don't just sit and watch ads - if I have something TiVo-ed, I will fast-forward through commercials. But I like breaking down the approach - what are the ad execs doing; is it entertaining; who are they targeting?

These are just some of the things I like to think about when I actually do watch the ads.

There are particular campaigns that I have enjoyed over the years. As little as I've like the product, the "Taste great, less filling" ads were fun. I have to admit to a certain visceral pleasure in watching Justin Timberlake getting whacked in the 'nads for a soda commercial. I thought the Visa commercials during the Olympics, the ones talking about the Olympic spirit - the one about the sprinter who finished the race leaning on his father, in particular - were excellent.

But some of my favorite sports related ads were from a campaign that's about five years old - Terry Tate, office linebacker.

The man is back...

Age?

I was concerned before the Monday night tilt against the Broncos - and rightfully so. The Patriots defense has struggled this season, and at times Denver has moved the ball at will against opponents. So you will pardon me if after watching Delta O'Neal get burned against the Chargers more often than the Mekong Delta during a napalm attack I lacked some confidence in the Pats ability to fend off a high-powered offense.

While I still have concerns about the offense (they looked great, but it was against one of the league's worst defenses), I have to give the defense props.

Yes, I'm a little worried moving forward about the lack of a healthy Rodney Harrison, but let's take a look at who made the plays on the "aging" Patriots defense.

The Patriots had two interceptions - one each from their pair of young safeties, Brandon Meriweather and James Sanders. Sanders was drafted in 2005 and Meriweather in 2007.

Three men on defense forced fumbles - undrafted defensive lineman Mike Wright (26 years old), Ty Warren (27) and the oldest - veteran corner Lewis Sanders (30).

The men who recovered those fumbles - rookie linebackers Jerrod Mayo, Gary Guyton, and back-up defensive lineman Le Kevin Smith - are all no older than 26.

Including the combined two sacks from Adalius Thomas and Richard Seymour (not including the shot at the beginning of the game from Sey and Tedy Bruschi that seemed to throw Jay Cutler off his game), the average age of the game-changing players on the Pats D in the Monday night tilt - 26.1 years.

Not exactly the NFL equivalent of AARP membership, is it?

In other NFL news...

So, it's been reported that Brett Favre contacted the Lions before their game against Green Bay and spent an hour on the phone giving the Detroit coaches details regarding the nuances of the Packer offense. While technically not against NFL rules, it is incredibly slimy.

It's one thing for a team to bring in someone cut from an opponent to pick their brain. It's another thing for a player to go out of his way to contact the former team's upcoming opponent.

Favre has, of course, denied doing so. Lions coaches, on the other hand, have refrained from comment.

What really got me was the following passage from the article -

Packers wide receiver Ruvell Martin shared Woodson’s concern.

“If it’s true, then you’ve got to question motives,” Martin said. “I don’t know what to say.”

But Martin downplayed the actual damage leaked inside information could do to a team.

“In my opinion, there’s not too much you can gain,” Martin said. “You can give them our hand signals, (but) those are on tape already. If we find out you’ve got our hand signals, we try to find a way (around it).”

Okay -does anyone else out there see what I'm seeing? Anyone? Any of the outraged about the Pats Spygate scandal?

Remember, during that total lack of digging done by the pundits and sports reporters in which few beyond Michael Silver noted that taping is commonplace through the NFL? That time period during which the Jets it turned out had been caught, but no one whined about that? That time period during which Jimmy Johnson admitted to doing it while coaching the Dolphins and the Cowboys? When people ignored the fact that Mike Shanahan was caught doing the same in the 1990's?

So now, based on that comment, you have to believe that not only the Pats, Jets, Phins, Broncos, and Cowboys have engaged in this, but evidently it's a common enough practice in the NFC North that a Packer wide-out publicly asked what an opponent really could have garnered by talking to a former teammate because they had all the signals on tape.

Yeah, right, this wasn't a common practice.

Prats.

Staying on Favre for just a moment longer -

Jets fans should consider the following very telling statistic an indictment of Eric Mangini's ability to pick a talented offensive coordinator who can use the talent he's given.

Brett the Jet has averaged 9.9 yards per completion this season. Chad Pennington is currently averaging 11.8 yards per completion. Last year Pennington averaged 9.86 per completion in Brian Shottenheimer's offense.

Coincidence? Maybe, but unlikely.

Elegy and other things...

Well, it was a good run. They teased me into believing again. They came up just short.

So it goes.

Now, after a good season, the Sox turn their attention to off-season concerns.

Congratulations to Tampa, you earned it. Good luck in the next round.

Over on the Grid-iron...

Does anyone else think that somewhere Drew Bledsoe was watching the Dallas game yesterday with the following thought running through his head - "frickin' pansy. Yo, dough-boy, it's a frickin' pinky - I led the Patriots to two come from behind victories with a god-damned screw sticking out of my index finger. Jesus. They benched me for that wuss?"

The cracks are beginning to appear in Dallas - TO whining, Romo wussing, Pacman fighting, Jerry Jones trading the farm for a horse.

They now stand at 4-3 with only to pushovers, San Francisco and Seattle, left on their schedule. They are behind both New York and Washington in their division, and could, by the time they reach their bye easily be 4-5 and would likely need to go 6-1 over the remaining games just to get into the playoffs. With games against the Redskins, Steelers, Giants, Ravens, and Eagles, I think that's highly unlikely.

Speaking of the Giants, I admit, it looks like I was wrong about them, as I was about the Eagles. I thought the Eagles would be better and the Giants worse. The Giants have responded to the challenge of defending their title this year.

Right now Buffalo is the best team in the AFC East.

How weird is this after the first eight years of the decade - the Chargers, Colts, Jaguars and the Patriots who have combined for 17 of a total 32 possible playoff appearances over the last eight seasons (12 of those between the Patriots and Colts alone who are currently second and third in their divisions and a combined 6-5). The only current division leader/wild card contestant in the AFC that has regularly been at the top of their game along with the aforementioned teams is Pittsburgh at 5-1.

Welcome to Bizzaro-world, NFL style.

With any luck, the Pats go to 4-2 tonight, but I have to honestly say, I don't have any confidence that the Pats defense is going to be able to shut down Denver's high powered attack. This is a New England team that's still searching for its identity since the loss of its offensive leader.

It would be nice if tonight was the night the defense found their stride.

Do you believe?

I have to admit, I reached a point where I thought this team would come up short.

There have been several things this season that I missed.

I thought the Rays would eventually spit the bit. There's nothing wrong with it - it's not unusual for a young team to crack in August or September as the pressures of being in a pennant race for the first time get the better of players that have never been there. It happens.

I wasn't the only one who thought the Rays would wilt in the heat of the race.

To Joe Maddon's credit, every time the team began to show cracks, he said or did the right thing to keep them on track. Every time he settled them down, every time he kept them winning.

This post-season we reached the point where I was positive that the Red Sox were going to be bounced. They weren't hitting - well, not timely hitting. The pitching just wasn't there. Four three and two-thirds of a game they either couldn't hold a lead, or couldn't score a run when they needed to.

The Rays - well they just seemed to be the unstoppable machine.

Suddenly, the moment seems to be getting too big for the young team. They're standing on the precipice of history, and their defense and vaunted bullpen have begun to crumble under the extreme pressure. Errant throws, their relievers fooling no one. It all added up.

The Sox got what they needed out of Beckett. James Shields turned in a solid effort, but it just wasn't quite enough. The Sox got what they needed out of David Ortiz, Kevin Youkilis, and Jason Varitek, all of whom accounted for the team's RBI's.

It all added up.

It added up to an evened up series with a winner-take-all game to be played on Sunday night after the Sox were seven outs away from elimination, down seven runs, down three games to one. Sunday they march into the Trop evened up at three after the second biggest post-season comeback in baseball history, and then after taking it to the Rays in their dome - after taking it to the team with the best home record in baseball this year - well, just what might they be thinking in the Tampa locker room?

The champagne was chilled and ready to be popped at the end of game five.

Now the Rays have a front row seat to what the Yankees did in 2004 and the Indians in 2007.

Do you believe?

Damn

"Standing in the middle of nowhere
Wondering how to begin
Lost between tomorrow and yesterday
Between now and then
And now we're back where we started
Here we go round again
Day after day I get up and I say
I better do it again"

-Ray Davies

I said it earlier, and it's worth repeating - I do think that this is the Rays year. The Red Sox starting pitching has looked weak through this series. They just haven't risen to the occasion.

But last night - well, damn.

Like most, by the time we hit the seventh inning with the 7-0 Rays lead, I thought the Rays were going to close it out. Then it happened.

The rookie. The potential MVP. A breakfast cereal, Papi, JD and the Youk.

The offense suddenly came alive, as did Fenway which was more morgue than stadium for the better part of three games.

Contributions came from those who would have been cast-offs if the fans had their way- Drew and Crisp.

They've been here before, the Sox. Lost between tomorrow and yesterday.

And we should know by now to never say die (a long ways from 2003, isn't it?), but it's still a tough road ahead of them. I'm not going to rule them out of this post-season, but I'm also not going to get my hopes too high. They have a monumental task ahead of them in a hostile stadium - to do it again, and again.

Getting ahead of myself

So...

A couple of quick items - What happened in San Diego was just ugly, and the defense has me concerned. More than Castle. Right now Castle isn't significantly different from the 2001 Tom Brady (through six Brady-games they were 3-4 overall, 3-3 under Brady). Unfortunately, I'm not convinced that this defense is as good as the 2001 D. After six games the Pats were 3-3 in 2001.

Things began happening in 2001 that I don't see happening now. The offensive line began to gel back then. It doesn't look like it's even beginning to now, and it suffered key injuries that will slow it down even more. The defense, which sent a message in its game against the Colts that season (what Pats fan can forget the Bryan Cox hit), looks more like the pavement defense of 2002 (constantly getting steamrolled).

For this team to make noise, they need to get better. Particularly on defense. It's how they won in 2001, it's how they need to win now. The division is wide open and the Bills right now are best positioned to get to the second season.

Let's hope they rise to the occasion.

Over on the diamond....

The Red Sox are in a big hole.

No excuses.

The Rays have risen to every challenge the Sox have thrown at them. Every time the Sox crept within striking distance of the division lead, the Rays fended them off. The Sox put them in an early hole with their win in Tampa.

The Sox spit the bit, and I do think this is on Terry Francona, in game two with a two run lead when Josh Beckett had shown inning after inning that he couldn't protect a lead. I'm not calling for Francona's head. He's earned the pass on something like this - more often than not since he's been with the Sox, its worked out for him.

The bottom line is that the Rays are on the verge of their first World Series appearance in team history.

I'm not giving up hope - the Sox had their backs to the wall before (three game to none lead against the Yankees in 2004, down three games to one against the Indians last year...sound familiar) and managed to dig themselves out. Twice, okay. But three times, I have a hard time believing they can dig themselves out of this hole. I won't say it's one of their own making either, because that would diminish what Tampa has accomplished.

It would also diminish what Boston has accomplished.

And neither team deserves that.

Hey, Tampa, if you win, I'll be rooting for you, if for no other reason than the knife in the Steinbrenners' backs that it would be for the second lowest payroll to walk away with the title.

Sometimes you just have to see the beauty in all things.

As for coach of the year, it's hard not to consider Joe Maddon the hands-down winner. He took a team that went from worst and was a perennial joke in the American League East to the verge of the World Series. Even if the Sox somehow manage to pull it off and eliminate the Rays from the playoffs, Maddon deserves the award.

People will argue this, but Francona deserves consideration. Hank Steinbrenner whined about the injuries to the Yankees (somehow $210+ million doesn't buy enough depth to overcome injuries, wow, I guess it just doesn't go as far as it used to), but Francona kept the Sox in the race in spite of no effective number five starter, injuries to Daisuke Matsuzaka, and Beckett, not to mention losing JD Drew and David Ortiz for close to a third of the year due to injury, losing Mike Lowell for periods of time to an injury that he continued to try and play through, and dealing with a petulant Manny Ramirez.

He doesn't deserve to beat Maddon, but the only person that deserves additional consideration in the American League is Ron Gardenhire in Minnesota. The fact that the Twins were even in the mix at the end of the season is nothing short of a miracle given the talent that team cut loose in the off-season.

Stupid stuff to pass the time until the playoffs

Beginning of the end...

It would appear that Pacman Jones is beginning his final hurrah.

Sure, he might be able to dodge this bullet because no charges have been filed, but I won't be surprised if Roger Goodell throws the book at him given the fact that Goodell pretty much told him no more transgressions of any sort. Assaulting one of his security contingent employed by the Cowboys (an in turn the NFL) is not keeping out of trouble. To coin a Red-ism, "dumbass."

Best of the best...

Baseball and football are interesting beasts.

On paper, in all sports, the best team doesn't always win. It's why things like the 2001 Patriots happen. As the saying goes, "any given Sunday..." While it's unlikely, it's not unrealistic for a winless team to beat the best (or one of the best) team(s) in football. Baseball just doesn't work that way.

Sure, on any given day the worst team can beat the best team in baseball, but the scheduling, the post season system - they all favor the best team. Over a five or seven game series, the best team will invariably rise to the challenge, while the inferior team falters.

Yes, there might be a negligible difference between the teams on paper, but that's where the intangibles come in.

Just the way it is.

Nomenclature...

For roughly the last 60 years, major league franchises have either been on the move, or have searched for new identities - sometimes due to moves, sometimes without ever moving. There were a couple that were earlier than the last 60 years (the Redskins who once played in Boston come to mind), but it has happened with much higher frequency over the last six decades.

A brief list of once existing franchises (some still exist in some form, some are just gone) -

Frankford Yellow Jackets (football)
Brooklyn Dodgers (baseball)
Minneapolis Lakers (basketball)
New Orleans Jazz (basketball)
Houston Colt .45's (baseball)
Washington Bullets (basketball)
Chicago Cardinals (football)

Often the names have regional associations - the Browns were named for Paul Brown, the team's first coach. The New Orleans Jazz...well, that's obvious, and then you had the Brooklyn Trolley Dodgers.

Sometimes, like in the case of the Browns, the name really should stay with the place. I mean, really, what Lakes are even close to Los Angeles? Jazz in Salt Lake City? Yeah, right.

The Dodgers I can live with - I mean, they went from dodging trolleys to dodging bullets. Right?

But there really are just times that the teams need to change what they're doing when it comes to regional marketing. Imagine, for a moment, the Oklahoma City Marlins, or the Durham Twins or even the Pensacola Packers. Doesn't work, does it? There's a reason why the Minnesota North Stars became the Dallas Stars, and the Hartford Whalers became the Carolina Hurricanes.

Back

I am back from covering the World Beer Festival in Durham.

I highly recommend the event for any beer fans out there. They hold it at the home of the Durham Bulls - an absolutely beautiful ballpark. We stayed a ten minute walk away at the Morehead Manor Bed and Breakfast. If you ever have reason to be in Durham, I both recommend staying at the B&B and visiting the stadium for a game (season permitting).

Now onto the busy sports news of the last couple of days. I'm going to start with the Pats before I get to the Sox...

I was happy to see the Pats win. There were a number of things that I found encouraging that the team did on Sunday. However, there were times that the offensive line looked overwhelmed, and there were times that the Niners gashed the Patriots in the middle of the defensive line. Those things keep me concerned moving forward.

As does the fact that Cassel has only once thrown the ball away to avoid the sack.

Fairly or unfairly, Cassel will be compared to Tom Brady for the whole season. Unfairly, it will be to the Tom Brady of 2007, not 2001 when Brady, like Cassel, was still wet behind the ears and filling in for an accomplished veteran. I'm not going to make the mistake of comparing him to Brady.07.

No. What I'm going to do is look at what an untested, unproven late round draft-pick does from start to start against what another untested, late round draft pick did when he got his shot.

And the biggest difference between the two? After four appearances, including three starts (for both) Brady had been sacked eight times for 45 yards. Cassel has absorbed 15 sacks for 68 yards - a pace that will get him sacked 60 times during the season (Brady was sacked 41 times in 14 starts/15 games. Even projecting for Cassel's 16 games, Brady still would only have been sacked 47 times). He has to get better at just getting rid of the ball when there's nothing there.

Otherwise, this is how the two compare -

Cassel - 3-1 (2-1 as the starter), 70 of 104 for 707 yards (67.3 completion percentage), 3 TD's, 3 INT's.

Brady - 2-2 (2-1 as the starter and the team was 3-2 overall), 63 of 111 for 664 yards (56.8 completion percentage), 2 TD's, 0 INT's.

Brady's offense had turned the ball over eight times in the four games in which he appeared, to six times for the Cassel led teams.

The other interesting stat lies on the other side of the ball. The defenses in both seasons for the first four games in which they were dealing with the back-up signal caller on offense gave up exactly 79 points. The defense in 2001 forced six turnovers from the fateful Jets game in which Bledsoe injured himself, through to their 29-26 victory over the Chargers (putting the team at -2 in the turnover ratio). This year's defense has forced five (putting this year's team at -1).

As I've said before - I don't expect Cassel to develop into Tom Brady. But I think that Patriot Nation needs to back off. Despite his flaws, and I acknowledge he has 'em and they do worry me, I think we need to be patient with him.

Four of the team's next six opponents make up four of the five worst pass defenses in the league. Throw in a Colts team that seems to be clawing and scrounging for every win it gets, the hardest game between now and week 11 appears to be with the Bills.

If Cassel can guide the team to a 4-2 record during that stretch, not out of the question given the fact that the only team that looks truly dominant right now is playing in the Meadowlands (and I'm not talking about Gang Green), a 7-3 record at game ten puts the Pats in good position for a ten win season, and a likely playoff berth given that the only team in the AFC that looks en route to 12+win potential is Tennessee.

And onto the playoffs...

And so the Red Sox move on.

It seems like they're doing it differently each time.

In 2004 they had to come back from the brink. They did it with veterans - it was Curt Schilling and Derek Lowe and Pedro Martinez. It was David Ortiz, Dave Roberts, Manny Ramirez, Trot Nixon and Kevin Millar. The list goes on, but it was a largely veteran squad of mostly imports that liked to go by the name "the Idiots".

It was appropriate. They were loud, grungy, silly and had a lot of fun.

In 2007 the team absolutely dominated the Angels in the first round, scrapped around with the Indians in the second, winning that series 4-3. In the games the Sox won that round they averaged 10 runs per game while holding the Indians to an average of 2 runs per game. And then the Sox stomped on the hottest team in baseball, sweeping the World Series.

This year the Sox are getting it done with a lot of home-grown talent mixed with mid-season acquisitions. Jon Lester, Manny Delcarmen, Jed Lowrie, Kevin Youkilis, Jacoby Ellsbury, Jason Bay, Mark Kotsay.

This year there are no Colorado Rockies-type teams in the playoffs.

There were the Angels who won more games than any other team in baseball. Three more than the Rays and five more than the Red Sox. They still buy into their own hype, believing they were better than the Red Sox.

Yes, the Red Sox got lucky bounces, and didn't drop balls, and didn't miss the clutch hits - except in game three when they had multiple opportunities to put the game away. They did things that the top teams are expected to do - perform under pressure, make the plays when needed. John Lackey can believe that the Angels are the better team all he wants. It doesn't make it true.

The better team doesn't outright miss getting the glove on routine grounders at short. The centerfielder doesn't pull up and fail to call off the second baseman on a short pop-fly to shallow center, a move that costs the team three runs. The better team's closer doesn't spit the bit in real pressure situations. I could go on, but I won't.

I do want to touch on Jon Lester, though.

He got jobbed out of a win in game four, but that's okay, the team won. Lester has been absolutely dominant in the post season, throwing 22 and 2/3's scoreless innings over three starts. Only one lefty in the history of the sport has thrown more in October - Babe Ruth with 29. Now we're seeing the team head into a potential seven game series against the Rays with a rotation that should see both Josh Beckett and Jon Lester pitch twice if it goes to a seven game series.

While the Rays have been impressive this year, this is new territory for them, but it's old hat for the Olde Town Team. Just because it's old hat, however, doesn't mean it's a sure thing...which brings me to my last thought.

Yes, I want to see the Sox win it all again - but I won't be crushed if the Rays do (I think that the eventual winner of the World Series will come out of the American League). Why, one might ask, wouldn't I be upset at the Rays winning?

Well, I won't lie - I would be disappointed if the Sox didn't make it, but there's a certain poetic MLB flipping of the metaphorical finger to the Steinbrenners should the team with the second lowest payroll in the league walk away with the championship. There's just something beautiful about that. Maybe no more than seeing the Sox win their third in five seasons, but it's still pretty damn good.

Grinding it out

It wasn't Jon Lester's prettiest win of the season. The lefty was not at his sharpest. He repeatedly fell behind hitters, running too many counts full. He had thrown over 50 pitches through his first three innings.

But he did what aces are supposed to do when they're struggling with their command. He found a way.

He pitched seven innings without giving up an earned run. He gave his team a chance when their post-season horse was sitting on the bench, recovering from a muscle strain. This could be the beginning of the end for the Angels.

The team has now dropped 10 straight post-season tilts with the Sawx, and last night, when the Boston nine were padding their lead, when Masterson, who didn't look sharp, got out of the inning, the Angels were shown sitting on the bench, mouths open and shaking their heads in disbelief.

This wasn't supposed to happen to them. They were healthy, the Sox were not, they had home-field, the Sox did not. They were supposed to wake up this morning up 1-0 in the series. They did not.

Because Lester is beginning to become the ace I argued he could be.

Because Lester is becoming the pitcher the Twins thought he would, the pitcher that would replace Santana in the Twins rotation.

Because the Red Sox are simply better in clutch games.

Putting the "fun" in dysfunction...

"Just win, baby."

Welcome to Raider football.

Define "win."

That press conference that the Crypt Keeper held the other day was a farce. I'm at the point where I pity Raiders fans (and let's face a basic truth about Al Davis, if there were even an iota of truth in his tampering accusation, he would have filed charges with the league over a year ago).

The NFL's answer to Howard Hughes has not only challenged the Ford family for most inept handling of a franchise, but might have past them - at least you can make the argument that the retaining of Millen was an attempt to give the franchise some consistency and give them an opportunity to build something.

Davis gave his coach a quarterback he didn't want, staff he didn't want, and other players he didn't want -the man is trying to make square pegs fit into non-existent holes, and then is blaming the pegs for the failure to fit.

Two quick things...

I don't like to get political at my blog, but I have to see if any of my readers can enlighten me - from what I have gathered, most of the people who support McCain and the Republican Party in the coming election claim to do so on the following two points; that McCain is a better selection for Commander-in-Chief because he was a captain in the Navy, and because Republicans are better in regards to national security issues. Where did these myths start?

McCain was a captain whose career had stalled - the Pentagon didn't feel he was fit to rise higher than captain (he was a pilot - which meant he spent time in a cockpit, but not leading troops into combat - who logged a total of about 20 combat hours and lost five planes) and is now asking the American people to give him a promotion that his bosses didn't believe he qualified for.

As for the second item - where did this myth begin? The Republicans are better with national security issues?

World War I and II, the last two major wars that we came out of in which our leadership is considered to have not made major blunders and handled poorly - Woodrow Wilson, FDR, and Harry S. Truman - all Democrats. Korea and Vietnam, the reigning president at the end of both wars? Eisenhower and Nixon/Ford - Korea wasn't so bad, but Vietnam was an absolute mess.

Now we have a party hell bent on not having the same resolution as Vietnam, in spite of the fact that it's come out that there was no intelligence that supported an invasion, that, by every analysis, stateside security has been weakened by this war, and our troops are being depleted in a place they should never have been in the first place. These are the security experts?

Just because someone is insane, doesn't make them a psychiatrist.

Sorry for the rant.

As for the other item - I'm off for the weekend. I will have my laptop with me, but I don't know if I will be able to blog. It is a working weekend, so I will also have to work to make time to watch game two. I will be in Durham, NC covering the World Beer Festival.

Tough life, huh?

The Wolf at the Door, and other thoughts

The Red Sox are on the verge - the veritable edge. Even though they were the third team to clinch a playoff spot and an invitation to the Dance, they are the last team in. They are on the precipice, looking down at the abyss with the mighty Angels standing behind him, ready to push them into oblivion.

At least, that's what a lot of the pundits would have you believe - that the Red Sox needed to win the division and hope that the wild card Rays would knock off the Angels. They'll point to the Angel's 8-1 record against Boston this year, or the fact that the Angels batted .053 higher in those nine games, or even that they outscored the Sox 61-33.

Yes, these are all trends that could indicate doom for the Sox - a brief appearance in the first round. It could easily be argued that it's very likely, based on those numbers, that the Sox are toast. Hell, Jon Lester's career ERA against the Angels is over seven and Daisuke Matsuzaka's is over 10 - not exactly reassuring.

The team could easily be down 0-2 by the time they return to Fenway.

At least that's the trend indicated by numbers. The numbers don't trend well for the Sox. That is a fact.

Of course, that doesn't include the Angels 0-6 record against the Red Sox in post-season play this decade, having been swept twice.

It's also a fact that until 2004 no team in the history of baseball had ever come back from a 3-0 deficit in a seven game series. Until this year, no first baseman had come close to Steve Gavey's errorless streak of 194 games.

To cross sports - the numbers didn't favor the Celtics winning the way they played in the post-season up until the finals. No team in the history of the NFL has ever completed a 16-0 regular season...except for the Patriots last season. No team has ever won 20 regular season games in a row...until the Pats did it. Until this year, no one has ever returned home from the Olympics with as many as seven gold medals. Until 2004, no cyclist had more than five total Tour de France victories. Based on trends, all of the above accomplishments were unlikely.

I'm not saying I think the Red Sox are going to win. I'm hoping they do - but they have their work cut out for them. They will have to fight and scrape to stave off the wolf at the door.

The bottom line is that this is a team that's going to have to adopt the persona of the right side of their in-field. They will have to be the Dirt Dogs, the scrappers, and brawlers. They have to come back to Fenway with at least a split.

The bottom line is that this is an opportunity for one of these two teams to buck a trend and get a monkey off its back - the Angels post-season woes against the Red Sox, or the Sox breaking the monkey of a season in which they barely were able to steal a win from the Angels.

Other things...

Terrell Owens is whining that he didn't get the ball enough in the Cowboys' home loss to the Redskins on Sunday. He's whining after a game in which Tony Romo had 47 attempts, 17 of them went to Owens.

The volatile receiver caught seven passes for 71 yards and a touchdown. He also dropped three, including a late touchdown that would have put the Cowboys ahead, and short-armed at least two others.

Maybe before he whines about the offensive coordinator not calling his number enough, he ought to make the plays on the catchable balls thrown his way.

Can't say this is a surprise, though. It was only a matter of time. Really, the only surprise here, to me, is that he kept it together this long.

I would also like to take a moment to wish good luck to now former Jacksonville offensive lineman Richard Collier who had to have a leg amputated after being shot during the preseason. Collier's life has changed radically in a brief period of time, going from being a monster of a human that pushed people around, to being paralyzed from the waist down. While a most unfortunate turn of events, Collier joins the likes of Sean Taylor and Darrent Williams as apparent targets of attackers.

Granted, Collier supposedly wasn't exactly in one of Jacksonville's high-end neighborhoods when shot, but one has to wonder if some of these players aren't putting themselves into harm's way. These are horrible things that no one deserves, but one still has to wonder.

And now for something completely different....

A brief departure from sports for the moment...

Some of you occasionally visit my other blogs like Grains N Grapes (I have a regular gig writing for the Mid Atlantic Brewing News), and GibberingIdiots (entertainment - I minored in film in college). Today I started a new blog - http://www.rabbitskulldesign.com/

Rabbit Skull is the name that I utilized while selling flash to tattoo artists in Philadelphia.

This is an on-line portfolio for me that I posted, in part, because I recently did some character sketches for the internet zombie movie currently being chronicled on-line in conjunction with the BBC here.

Over the next couple of weeks/months I will slowly but surely upload a variety of examples of my work from my portfolio. Here's a taste, though, with a couple of unpublished editorial cartoons I did back in 2004 (honestly, the wife has been on me to post these for quite some time...I just figured they were no longer timely). Please pay special attention to the bat in the second one (all art is copyright, Kevin M. Smith) -

More later. Enjoy, and feel free, as always, to comment - and yes, I know I have Bonds batting from the wrong side of the plate.

Brown out at the Razor

Troy Brown has officially announced his retirement.

It was hard not to see it coming. He lost last season to injury, and didn't want to play anywhere else.

A pick in a round of the draft that no longer even exists, Troy Brown was as clutch as anyone to ever play for the Patriots - including Tom Brady. He was everything the Patriots needed - receiver, returner, defensive back. He even took pre-season snaps at quarterback. He was the consummate team player. He will never make the Hall of Fame with his numbers, but no one in this era has done what he has done. Not like him.

Often when the team needed a play at a critical juncture, Troy Brown was the man.

During a late season game back in December of 1996 when the Pats trailed the Giants in the Meadowlands, Brown, lying on his back, snared a Bledsoe bullet out of the air for a 13 yard gain on 3rd and 13 to help keep the game winning drive moving.

In the 2001 playoffs Brown came up big against Pittsburgh, contributing to two special teams touchdowns - one on a blocked field goal attempt, the other on a punt return.

In 2004 with the team's defensive backfield decimated by injury, Brown became the team's nickel corner, tied for second on the team with three interceptions while still catching 17 balls for 184 yards. While neither of those numbers are particularly impressive, Brown was pressed into service as a defender again in 2006, virtually shutting down Donald Driver in a late season match-up.

Driver, at the time, was on pace for 1233.2 receiving yards and six touchdowns. Driver finished the season with 1295 yards and 8 touchdowns - in spite of being held to only two receptions for 42 yards (only one of those came while being covered by Brown). Brown effectively shut Driver down.

Speaking as someone who coached kids, Brown was my consummate example - he did everything asked and whatever was needed. He is the Patriots all-time leader in receptions, he was a game-changing kick and punt returner, he was a more than serviceable defensive back, and was listed as the team's fourth quarterback on the depth charts. I suspect he would have played nose tackle had his coach asked him to.

He has always been the sort of player that every team needs to win - the monkey wrench, the guy who grinds it out and gets it done. He's not the most talented guy you'll find. But in his prime, he's one of the first, if not the first guy I would have picked for my team.

Good luck Troy, I already miss watching you on Sundays. You deserve any accolades that come your way.

Panic in Patriot Nation

There are a lot of Patriots fans out there that don't seem to pay close attention to what's going on around the league, or that even know their history. I know that, for the most part, if you're reading this, I'm preaching to the choir, but I still have to get this off my chest.

After the beat down the Pats suffered at the hands of the Dolphins this weekend, a lot of the fans on the message boards, particularly at the Boston Globe and Yahoo, are calling for the Pats to sign Duante Culpepper. Yeah, the same Culpepper that was having trouble playing his way out of a paper bag when he had the Baltimore power running game behind him. The same Culpepper that is failing to generate interest from Kansas City, Detroit, and Cleveland - all winless teams suffering from poor quarterback play as much as from anything else.

Consider since 2001, as a starter, Culpepper has a record of 30 wins and 44 losses, has started 16 games only twice during that time, has averaged 11.1 interceptions per season (but 17 per 16 games), 15.5 touchdowns per season, and has been sacked 3.2 times per start (to put some of that into perspective - Tom Brady has been sacked an average of 1.8 times per start, or an average of 22.4 fewer times over every 16 game season; and 12.5 INT's per 16 games).

Sure, people aren't clamoring for him to replace a struggling Brady - they're clamoring for him to replace what they perceive as a struggling Cassel. Before you go calling for the head of the Pats back-up, think about this -

Culpepper is not the answer - if you think he is, if he was such an answer, why aren't any other team's looking at him? he's done.

As for Cassel -

a) That game wasn't his fault. he didn't give up 38 points. The defense seldom stopped a team that couldn't win more than one game last year. With the Dolphins far out in front, they were able to load up against the running game and basically dare the Patriots to win on the arms of Cassel.

b) A look at Brady's second game? a 30-10 loss to the dolphins in which he passed for a total of 86 yards, no TD's, no INT's and was sacked 4 times for 17 yards of losses. Cassel passed for 131 yards and a TD (1 int), and was sacked 4 times for 19 yards. additionally, the Brady led pats in that 2001 game lost three fumbles. The Patriots lost only one turnover this past Sunday.

Back in '01, after the team got shellacked, Pats fans just saw another losing season ahead of them with a back-up slogging his way through the season in place of his more accomplished predecessor.

No - Cassel is no Tom Brady, but Brady didn't light it up his first two games as a starter either -

Brady's line through his first two NFL starts...

25 for 47 (53.2 percent completion rate), 254 yards, 5 sacks for 26 yards, no TD's, no INT's.

Cassel -

35 for 54 (64.8 percent completions), 296 yards, 7 sacks for 28 yards, 1 TD, 1 INT.

If anything, Cassel has had a slightly better first two games than Brady. Be patient.

This and that...

Make no mistake, I want the Red Sox to repeat as World Series champs. However, given Hank Steinbrenner's whining about how divisional play and the wild card give other teams an unfair competitive advantage (yes, the same Steinbrenner whose payroll is roughly $70.4 million higher than the next highest team and $90 million more than the Dodgers that he singled out) I would be perfectly happy seeing the Rays, who carry a payroll roughly a quarter that of the Yanks, walk home with this year's championship.

I would be happy to see the Brewers win, even at the expense of the Sox (not thrilled, mind you), but it would be a nice FU to the way the Steinbrenner family has done business.

Anyone else waiting for the Ford Family to say April Fools, no we really still have Matt Millen as our GM. The fact the man set a new standard for futility as a GM is impressive - particularly in an era that has seen the likes of Carl Peterson of the Chiefs, Jay Zygmunt of the Rams, Bill Bavasi of the Mariners, and, of course, Isiah Thomas of the Knicks. The fact he finagled a contract extension during that stretch is nothing less than puzzling. It never fails to amaze me that Lions fans didn't march on the stadium with torches and pitchforks.

Speaking of puzzling - how did Omar Minaya manage a contract extension in the middle of a second consecutive collapse?

Finally, with all the hits cycling has taken in the last two years, all the suspensions of many of the sport's top talents, am I the only one out there thinking that Lance Armstrong, in spite of his age, should be considered the favorite to win next year's Tour de France? I also suspect, considering he's riding gratis, that this is, more or less, a BIG FU to the French.

500

This is post 500. I have been at this for 500 entries.

This one follows a Red Sox and a Patriots loss. C'est la vie.

Let's take a look at some key things from this year...

The Patriots lost a heart breaker in the Super Bowl. Right now everybody is calling it the worst loss in Super Bowl history. While I'm not thrilled the team lost, it's not like they got blown out. They were edged out by a team that came in with a good game plan.

In time, that 2007 season will be remembered in the same way that the Bills four consecutive trips to the Super Bowl are now remembered. Once called the biggest losers in the NFL for going 0-4 in consecutive Super Bowls, the Bills are now talked about as having achieved something no other team did. They're talked about in terms of achievement, not failure. I firmly believe the same will happen for the Patriots, it will just take some time.

Watching the Pats this past weekend, the team has its work cut out for them going into the bye. There were those who talked about how the Bill Belichick probably would like to be getting right back into it next weekend, but I think the bye comes at a good time. This gives the Pats a chance to retool a defense that got virtually no pressure on Chad Pennington in the game against the 'Phins, a chance to retool a defense that had gaping holes in their zone in the secondary, and were brutally bad at tackling.

There will be no extra days off in Foxboro during this bye, and for good reason.

Diamond Dogs...

"Chamberlain had become the most dominant starting pitcher in baseball and Wang has been a 19-game winner every year," Steinbrenner said. "You lose those two guys, it's rough. If the Red Sox lost (Josh) Beckett and (Jon) Lester, the whole national media would be crying about it. We lose two guys better than Beckett and Lester and you don't hear anything." - NY Daily News, August 12, 2008

I won't even get into Hank's delusions regarding the quality of his pitching staff, but I will note that as The Hoodie would say, you play with who's out there, they've got to step up.

With a $200+ million payroll, you damn well better have the depth to deal with injuries, and for all the injuries the Yankees have had, the Red Sox have been just as banged up.

No starts from Curt Schilling.

Missed starts by Beckett, and Daisuke Matsuzaka and an ineffective Clay Buchholz.

David Ortiz missed almost 30 percent of the season and has played with a nagging wrist injury.

Mike Lowell has missed more than 25 percent of the season and played with a nagging hip injury.

JD Drew will have missed close to 30 percent of the season with a bad back.

Manny Ramirez, pretty much half the season due to...well, being an asshole and getting traded.

Julio Lugo missed significant time - about 25 percent of the season, due to injury.

Kevin Youkilis has missed games due to injury as well.

Jason Varitek has flirted with the Mendoza line all season.

That's six of the Sox starting nine and three of the starting five in the rotation missing games due to injury. What do you suppose Hank's reason is for why the Sox stayed near the division lead while the Yankees struggled? Or why the Rays continued to win despite losses of key players for significant stretches?

I know what I saw - the difference was that the Sox, and even the Rays, had youngsters that contributed and their GM's made moves that helped. Paul Byrd instead of Sydney Ponson. Jason Bay instead of Ivan Rodriguez.

The Yankees have six players ranked in the top 25 in payroll, including Alex Rodriguez, Jason Giambi, and Derek Jeter - the top three on the list. When the Sox traded away Manny, they traded away the only top 25 payroll drain on their payroll. That Brian Cashman...helluva GM.

Hank went on to insist that the Yankees will contend next season, but that's not going to happen unless they go out and get some starters and some relievers - because trying to put Joba Chamberlain, a pitcher whose injury issues caused him to drop in the amateur draft, in the starting rotation is still the height of foolishness. Meanwhile, the Sox are well positioned with the first four spots of the rotation set, and guys like Justin Masterson and Manny Delcarmen coming along.

Yes, the Yankees are better in the minors than they have been, but the Red Sox have built up serious depth there as well - the Sox' youngsters have shown the ability to come up big in the majors when called on. The Yanks....well, we saw how well Phil Hughes did helping the team.

The Curse of the Big Sey

So...the Patriots' loss was ugly. A special sort of ugly. And, from an on-field perspective, the loss can be laid squarely at the feet of New England's vaunted defense that was a complete no-show for the game.

If the defense continues to play like that, look for a repeat of 2002, not 2001.

Off the field...well, let's talk superstition...

Some background first, I suppose. I have been involved in sports long enough to give in to superstition. When in high school I ran track for seven seasons. Seven seasons of wearing the same sweats to meets, seven seasons of wearing the same green bandanna around my left ankle until it was little more than a frayed green piece of cloth.

Fast forward - I have a handful of Pats jerseys. Two Bledsoes, a Coates, a Brady, and last Christmas my wife got me a Richard Seymour. Through almost every game of last season I wore the Brady.

I have worn the Seymour three times.

The Super Bowl.

The recent Chiefs game.

And this past Sunday's game.

Some of you out there might have noticed a pattern. Every time I have worn the Big Sey jersey, bad things have happened for the Pats. At this point, the jersey is looking at one of three fates - retirement as game-day attire, to be worn only during the week; treatment by the best voodoo experts and witch doctors money can buy; ritual burning.

If that loss wasn't weird enough, just look around the league at what happened yesterday - doormats took contenders to the limit, up was down, east was west, dogs mated with cats - it was anarchy. Currently the kings of the AFC are all upstarts - Denver, Buffalo, Tennessee, and Baltimore, displacing annual powerhouses San Diego, New England, Indianapolis and Pitsburgh respectively.

Over on the diamond the Sox keep inching closer, but they don't seem able to close the deal. With less than ten games left, they can still take the division, but that's going to take a little more consistency than what the team has been showing.

And now for something completely different...

Regardless of the pimp slapping the Pats took, the weekend was not a total loss from a sports stand-point. As many of you out there know, I play Australian football for the Baltimore/Washington Eagles. I started back in 1999 with the Philadelphia Hawks (at the time it was the Philly Crows).

I am wrapping up my tenth season as a human pinball, and we closed out against the Hawks, for whom I played five seasons.

We wrapped up the final by a score of 121 - 22. It allowed us to close out our second straight Eastern Australian Football League undefeated season and championship. It also allows the team to go to Nationals in Colorado Springs likely as the number one seed in Division I.

As I won't be making the trip myself, I'd like to wish my team luck on their Rocky Mountain sojourn.

Changing expectations

Realistically, it doesn't behoove anyone to make snap decisions based on the first two weeks, but some pretty significant stuff has happened in the NFL's first two weeks - things with season-long implications. Some of the things even predate week one...

Shawn Merriman - let's face a couple of basic facts here...Merriman changes the complexion of the Chargers defense, and so far that defense hasn't been very good. Merriman avoided doctor recommendations to get his knee operated on at the end of last season, choosing instead to rest the knee. Then, once again ignoring the doctors who told him not to play on the screwed up ligaments, chose to play in the first game of the season. With a sub-par Merriman in game one and with his understudy in game two, the Chargers have given up 65 points through the first two games - the most in the AFC. Fourteen more than Miami, 25 more than Kansas City. The only teams that have given up more? The Lions (82), Rams (79), and Seahawks (67). Neither the Lions nor the Rams were expected to compete by anybody, and people are having serious doubts around now about Seattle.

Sure, general manager AJ Smith said all the right things about Merriman's understudy, intimating that they expected no drop off in play, but if that player were really as good as Merriman, wouldn't he be starting opposite Merriman, not playing behind him? If the Chargers cannot get it together on defense, they will be watching the playoffs from their living rooms, not from the sidelines. Period.

Vince Young - Young is as much an emotional and mental description as it is his name. I give the Titans a better chance with Kerry Collins guiding the attack than Vince Young. I don't really believe that Young beat him out in camp so much as the team was committed to going with their first round draft pick. I've said this before about Young and I will say it again - he's a talented athlete, but a mediocre quarterback. He's not committed to the game and that's the last sort of person you want leading your team in a sport where people are expected to sacrifice their bodies. To paraphrase Bull Durham, he has a million dollar arm, but a ten cent head.

My guess is that Young is the second coming of Todd Marinovich, although Akili Smith might be a better comparison. Akili Smith vaulted into the first round of the draft when he had a great senior season in college. Before that, he was on no one's radar. What people forget about Young is that he wasn't even in the discussion in regards to the top of the draft until Texas qualified for the Bowl game, and wasn't mentioned as a top five pick until their Bowl win.

I suspect that when his contract ends, he either goes away completely, or bounces around the league as a back-up for a couple of seasons before fading away.

Jeff Saturday - I'm condensing this one. Saturday, the Colt's long-time center, is one of...well, most of the Colts starting line which is injured. The Colts have struggled mightily on offense through the first couple of weekends without their vaunted line. Fortunately for the Colts, no one is looking like they're ready to just take control of the division.

Osi Umenyiora - So far the pre-season loss of Umenyiora for the season hasn't affected the Giants on defense, but his loss has a definitive impact on the team's depth along the defensive line, one of the team's definitive strengths and a reason why they won last year's Super Bowl. It might never come back to bite them as long as the team remains reasonably healthy along the defensive line. Not unrealistic. And right now this team has the best defense in the NFC East. Given that and their running game, they will compete for the playoffs.

Yes, I predicted that the Eagles and Cowboys to finish ahead of New York, but I also said I wouldn't be surprised if the Giants ended up at the top of the heap at the end of the season. With Umenyiora in the line-up the team can afford injuries to the likes of Justin Tuck. Without Osi, the Giants have to hope that the back-ups are up to snuff - otherwise that changes the landscape in the East. (My prediction assumes that an injury will happen).

Tom Brady - This injury has changed two things...the Pats offensive philosophy (2001 revival on our hands here), and the Patriots as Super Bowl favorites. Yes, this makes life harder for the Pats, but all the favorites in the AFC are struggling early while the Pats work their way through a cupcake schedule that is likely to see them go into their bye at 3-0, and meet up with the Colts with anything from a 5-2 to a 7-0 record. Not unrealistic given the fact that the prolific Denver offense has not yet been challenged by a quality defense and that neither the Chargers nor the Broncos has been able to stop anyone.

Can Matt Cassel take the team all the way? That's the great unknown in regards to the Patriots.

Seattle's receiving corps - Put simply, Seattle has lost their top receivers. Their offense has been the third worst in the NFC. Coupled with the team's defensive problems, Seattle could well be screwed.

That Deion Branch trade/signing is looking pretty weak now, isn't it?

While the jury is still out on Brandon Meriweather, the player the Pats got, in essence for trading Branch to Seattle, Branch himself has not posted the numbers of the top receiver he believed himself to be. Currently, Branch is missing games due to a knee injury, the same Branch that the Seahawks desperately need right now. The same Branch who has started 16 games only once in his career.

Am I the only one who saw this coming?

The Jets' difference makers...

They were the guys the Jets brought in to make a difference against the Patriots. And they did...

Brett Favre threw an interception that killed a Jets drive.

Calvin Pace was nailed for a 15-yard roughing the passer penalty that helped the Pats extend a scoring drive that put the game out of reach.

First round pick Vernon Gholston was the twelfth man on the field during a fourth quarter Patriots drive.

Kicker Jay Feely knocked a chip-shot field goal attempt wide right at the beginning of the game.

Alan Faneca and Damien Woody were part of the revamped offensive line that were able to get all of zero net yards down on the goal line when the Jets were trying to punch the ball in.

Those were just the ones brought in this season.

If you go back to Laverneus Coles who returned last season after a few seasons in DC, how many drops did he have?

Yup.

Those are the Jets difference makers.

The difference between winning and losing.

You figure out for yourself what difference they all made.

So begins LAB

Life After Brady...at least for this season.

Mike Greenburg said something this morning that's probably spot on - if Brady started against the Jets the Pats would very likely have put an absolute beat down on Gang Green. That said, I was very happy with Matt Cassel's performance in yesterday's game. He was solid - hell, he was even Brady-esque to an extent.

For those that don't know, or don't get it, Cassel's numbers yesterday were almost identical to Brady's first NFL start. Brady's line against the Colts in his first NFL start - 13-23-168 with no touchdowns or interceptions and two rushing yards. Cassel - 16-23-165 with no touchdowns or interceptions and seven rushing yards.

The Pats won both games.

Cassel has at least two more games to get his feet wet against competition like the Dolphins and 49ers before facing San Diego. Although, if San Diego doesn't get their act together, the first tough defense that Cassel will face is Indy's in the eighth game of the season. And, quite frankly, if Indy's offense doesn't get it together, their defense might be a little worn out by game eight.

San Diego, by the way, has given up an average of 32.5 points per game through the first two games. Miami, the Pats next opponent, has had a better defense than the Chargers, giving up 25.5 per game, then San Fran at 26.5.

Sure, the Pats play Denver who has been prolific, scoring 80 points in two games, but that's been against the aforementioned Chargers and a Raiders team that's expected to be pretty bad.

The hardest games for Cassel going forward are likely to be Denver (if the team gets into a shoot out, it could be problematic), the Colts, Bills (twice), Steelers, and Cardinals. Ten and six is certainly possible, and I don't think 12-4 is unrealistic. The Pats could, realistically, enter the playoffs as the number one seed (although they could just as easily be the number four).

A few other thoughts -

Both Denver and the Colts benefited from some blown calls right down by the goal line. There will be a lot of ranting about that from San Diego fans and from Vikings fans.

If the refs get the call right on the goal line on that third down play, it's likely that the Colts settle for a field goal given Manning's knee and the time left to play in the game. That's at least a seven point swing, as the Colts don't line-up for the field goal in the final seconds.

San Diego, of course, also then has the ball and closes the game out with 30 seconds to go.

The flip side of both of these - better coaching, better execution and neither the Vikings nor the Chargers are in a position to get screwed by a bad call. The San Diego defense has been brutally bad through the first two weeks, as has the Vikings offense.

Bad calls happen every week in the NFL, sometimes those calls threaten to change the course of a game. Good teams either take advantage of those things (the Colts), or overcome them.

As I used to tell the kids when I still coached, the refs don't see everything, and if we're the subject of bad calls, then so is the other team - get over it and go out and play the game.

Later this week, I'm going to talk about some of the potential season changing things that have happened in the first two games of the season.

The Sky is Falling! The Sky is Falling!

That's the news about the Pats from just about everyone except for ESPN's Michael Smith.

I won't deny that Tom Brady's injury is a big loss for the Patriots. It's huge. But it doesn't mean the season is over for the rest of the team - it just means the end of the season for Tom Brady.

Things have gotten considerably harder for the Patriots - that's a given. However, there's still a good core of players on this team around Matt Cassel. Yes, Brady made the team around him better, winning Super Bowls with the likes of Troy Brown and David Patten as his top two receivers. Right now Cassel has receivers around him and runners behind him that will make him better. The team is going to need that to win.

Even with Brady out, there is reason to believe.

In 2001 a little known late round draft pick who had previously been drafted to play baseball came into an early season game when the star quarterback went down with a potentially season ending injury. The back-up was something of a surprise of a draft pick given that he was behind a much more highly regarded quarterback at his Alma-mater (Brian Griese) and as a starter he shared playing time with his back-up (Drew Henson). This was seen by many scouts as an indictment of his ability.

Every Pats fan knows the story, and they would all be lying if they didn't to a man say that they thought the season was over when the star went down.

Are the Pats going to catch lightning in a bottle twice? I have my doubts, but I won't rule it out.

Brady and his development were aided by a bruising running attack that was nowhere as deep as the current running game is for the Patriots. They won't go 15-1 as I previously predicted, and they might even have issues getting one of the byes, but they will still make the post-season and they should still win the division.

For the time being Cassel is the quarterback, but expect the Pats to look at a few veterans for insurance. The name's Chris Simms and Tim Rattay have already come up.

Rattay is intriguing because he was considered by the Patriots in lieu of Tom Brady. Brady got the nod, supposedly, because he was taller, but Rattay received serious consideration from the Pats brain-trust.

Simms has put up average statistics on what has been a very average (and sometimes below average team). In 15 starts he's 7-8 with 3087 yards passing, a 59.1 completion percentage, and 12 TD's v. 18 INT's. He could do a lot better with the talent of the Patriots surrounding him if he can pick up the system.

I wouldn't be surprised if rumors start about Vinny Testaverde, Doug Flutie, Daunte Culpepper, and Kelly Holcomb. You might even hear Byron Leftwich's name pop up.

I think that Culpepper, Flutie, and Leftwich are all unlikely candidates. Flutie, with how long he's been removed from the game is unlikely to come out of retirement. Leftwich, I have a hunch, is probably not thought of that highly by Pats coaches and scouts - there are too many holes in his game. Sure, Culpepper has a pre-existing relationship with Randy Moss, but he just hasn't been good recently and rumors are that he has developed a reputation for not exactly being the hardest worker in the classroom in recent seasons, and that will kill you on a Belichick coached team.

That leaves Vinny Testaverde who has played for Belichick before and should know the playbook, and Kelly Holcomb who played on the Browns and in the AFC East against the Belichick Pats. If the Pats aren't comfortable with what they see from Simms and Rattay, don't be surprised to see some of these other names come up.

F#@&! F#@&! F#@&!

http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/news

So...it looks like the gap between the haves and the have nots may have gotten a bit closer in the AFC East today. Anyone else wondering if Bill Belichick has Vinny Testaverde on speed dial? I would ask in regards to Drew Bledsoe, but I think there's still some bad blood there, and I don't believe Drew wants to come back.

Coming from Mike Silver, I have to believe that the report is accurate, but that doesn't mean I can't hope that it's wrong.

The season has gotten a lot harder for the Pats.

And now for the AFC East

The AFC East is going to be one of the most watched divisions this season, if for no other reason than the following -

• People will want to see when the Patriots finally lose a game
• See how Brett Favre fares in New York
• See how Da Tuna's changes work in Miami
• To see if Buffalo can close the gap on a playoff birth

There's a lot going on in a division that faces an easier schedule than it had last season, and the following is how I see the chips falling...

4. Jets - It was the biggest move of any team in the off-season, and it could result in big dividends for the Jets, but I don't think it will. I don't see Brett Favre being the solution on a team that had so many glaring holes last year. If anything, I believe, given the short amount of time he had to practice with the team going into the season, he will be a wash (in regards to Chad Pennington). Before anyone gets defensive about it, I present the following -

1. Favre is learning a new system for the first time in 16 seasons, that will cause early problems for a team that faces New England, San Diego, and an improved Arizona squad in the first four games. This is a team that could easily enter their bye at 1-3 or even 0-4.
   
2. He has had one good season in the last three - last year's when the young talent drafted by Green Bay finally began to gel. The Jets do not have the playmakers on defense, the wide outs (though theirs aren't bad), the runners, nor the offense line that the Packers have. Favre has not made his teammates better the last couple of seasons, he was made better last season by young talent placed around him. Now that talent is around Aaron Rodgers.
3. The Jets brought in Damien Woody and Alan Faneca to protect a quarterback that will be 39 in October - two thirty-plus year-old linemen. Sure, Faneca was a pro-bowler while surrounded by other pretty good linemen in Pittsburgh, but now he has to compensate for a roughly average D'Brickshaw Ferguson, and an okay Nick Mangold on either side of him. And Woody, well, this is a guy who spent his career handling tackles from the guard position, lost his starting job in Detroit of all places, and has been brought in to play tackle. Forgive me if I'm skeptical about that line having great results.
4. With that line, teams aren't going to give Favre time early to connect long. Teams will pressure Favre until the Jet line shows it can handle the pressure. Don't count on the long ball early.

All that said, the Jets will win around six games this year just out of the mercy of the scheduling gods that gave them teams like Kansas City and Oakland - and even the Raiders aren't a given for the Jets this season.

3. Dolphins - This still isn't a good team. As a matter of fact, it's still pretty bad. However, while it's universally acknowledged that the Favre deal was the biggest deal during the off-season, I believe that the Chad Pennington signing is the most important. It makes the Dolphins significantly better than they were last year, it might even make them better than the Jets, and here's why - unlike Favre, Pennington has had to adapt to new coaches and new systems, and it's likely, given Bill Parcells' predilection for hiring guys he's worked with before (he drafted Pennington), it's likely that Pennington will be playing in the same system in which excelled when he was first with the Jets. Overall the team lacks the requisite personnel to be successful, and the 'Phins would be better off with Parcells on the sideline rather than in the executive offices, but he will make the team better in the long run, just don't expect a contender right away. Expect them to be around that same six win plateau as the Jets, maybe even seven and nine if they can steal a game here and there.

2. Bills - I think Donte Whitner's mouth is writing checks his team can't cash. This team isn't bad, but it's got work to do to get to the next level. They aren't ready to compete with the likes of the Pats, Indy, the Steelers, and the Jags, San Diego, and maybe not even the Browns. I give the team an outside shot at the playoffs, but should they eke their way in, it will be one of those final regular season Sundays when they're doing calculus to figure out tie-breakers with teams like the Titans, or the Broncos as they try to figure out the tie-breaker (Dick Jauron to Whitner sometime in December: I think we get in if the Broncos win, but only on a drop kick from 32-yards out or longer by Jay Cutler, unless the Ravens score a safety and it happens to be a new moon).

1. Patriots - A lot of people are putting the Pats at 12-4. I'm going to go out on a limb and put the Pats at 15-1, losing only to the Colts during the regular season. Yes, there were issues during the pre-season on defense, but this is largely the same defense the Pats had last season that was ranked fourth overall, they ran virtually no stunts during the pre-season, and they've added some speed and youth on that side of the ball. In games that the defense struggles, this is still an offense that will be able to score at will against almost every team in the NFL, and it's a better team, from a talent perspective, than the Chargers, probably the second best team the Pats will face this season. It's been 19 games since the last time the Pats lost in the regular season. If my guess is correct, the Patriots will make it to 26 consecutive regular season wins before dropping another game.

On a related note, my wife is creepy. Years ago my wife started doing this thing where she would just say if the Pats would win or lose. If I remember, it started with the 1996 season. She got every game right that season. Overall, through the years she's probably batting about .900, maybe .950. She said, without hesitation nor reservation, that the Patriots would win the Super Bowl this year. She could be wrong, but I wouldn't bet against her.