Pittsburgh Post-Gazette made a funny...

A writer at the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette speculated this week that the Patriots might have stolen the Steelers' snap counts, thus accounting for Mike Vrabel getting off the ball pretty much with the snap on just about every offensive play for the Steelers. Stealing the snap count? What, was he in the Steelers huddle when Ben Roethlisberger told the team, "on two?"

Please.

The man lines up on the line.

He was told by that organization that he would never be anything better than second string. This couldn't possibly provide any extra motivation for Vrabel. No. It couldn't be that.

I used to tell any of my defensive players that played on the line that they had certain keys to playing the line successfully, and none of it had to do with listening to the quarterback. The first thing that they had to do was look at how the lineman lined up as that would be a key to how the offensive lineman was going to block (pass/run), and the second thing was that they should always have an eye on the ball - the ball movement would be the key to quickly attacking the offense off the snap.

Stealing the counts?

Useless unless a player knows the quarterback's cadence.

This might be one of the larger stretches for an excuse as to why one's hometown team got spanked than I have seen in a long time.

I hate stupidity from reporters. It makes us all look stupid.

Double Standards

The Jets were absolved by any wrong doing by the commissioner's office this past week in regards to their taping at Gillette Stadium last year during the playoffs based on the claim by the Jets that they had permission to film from the mezzanine in the Patriots' home field. I'm puzzled by a number of questions this brings up.

If the Jets employee had permission, what is the proof that was provided to NFL offices? I think, based on the penalties meted out to the Patriots for Belichick's transgressions, the NFL owes that to the Patriot fan base.

If said employee had permission, was he wearing the proper vest and credentials that are issued to...well..credentialled personnel?

Even if the Jets were given permission, is the NFL then saying that team permission supersedes league rules? Consider the following reported by New York Newsday -

NFL rules state "no video recording devices of any kind are permitted to be in use in the coaches' booth, on the field, or in the locker room during the game." They also say all video for coaching .purposes must be shot from locations "enclosed on all sides with a roof overhead."

Last time I checked, the location the Jets noted that they were filming from was not "enclosed on all sides with a roof overhead." At least it wasn't unless the Jets set up in one of the stadium's snack stands on the mezzanine (assuming there's one with a view of the field).

Herein lies my problem with this - the Jets admitted filming. They publicly admitted filming from a location from which they are not allowed to film. The NFL essentially said, "that's okay because (you said) you got permission." To me, this is like a team going into a game, and then repeatedly committing personal fouls with the referees letting the team get away with it, because the team committing the fouls told the refs they had been given permission by the other team to commit said fouls.

The NFL either has to mete out discipline evenly for this, or the league needs to revisit the rule.

But this uneven application brings me to a baseball point.

As I have noted before, there are a number of baseball writers, including ESPN's Buster Olney, who say that they will continue to vote for the likes of Mark MacGwire, Barry Bonds, and Roger Clemens for entry into the Hall of Fame in Cooperstown. The excuse put forth by these writers is, "well, it's just the era they played in, and these were the best in that era."

These are the same people that want to keep Pete Rose as a pariah "in the best interests in baseball." The same people that keep Jim Rice out of the Hall because, in some eyes, his numbers aren't good enough - in spite of the fact that, without steroids, he has considerably better numbers than MacGwire in every offensive category except for homeruns. And, possibly most importantly, these are the same people who won't vote Jose Canseco in due to his steroid use.

The hypocrisy of the BBWA is palpable in the Hall of Fame voting.

There are even those writers, and many fans that like to point out that baseball in many of those years had no rule against steroid use. This is, I think, the most laughable justification. Possession and use of steroids without a prescription is a federal crime. The argument that baseball had no rule governing it is akin to employees of an Edward Jones Financial franchise flouting the federal laws enforced by the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), because Edward Jones corporate had no written policies dictating the same as the SEC.

In the case of the Edward Jones employee, that person would first lose his or her job, and then that person would go to jail for violation of federal law. Baseball players appeal to an arbitrator and keep their jobs in spite of violating federal statute. Nice double standard.

Tank McNamara was for Pats fans today...

Paradise Lost

Nobody got off lightly yesterday.

There were questions as to whether or not Mitchell would avoid implicating the Red Sox due to the fact he is part of the Sox ownership group.

The Red Sox team name came up 37 times in the Mitchell Report. That's once every 11 pages.

Current or ex-Red Sox on the list?

Manny Alexander
Jose Canseco
Roger Clemens
Paxton Crawford
Brendan Donnelly
Chris Donnels
Eric Gagne
Jeremy Giambi
Mike Lansing
Josias Manzanillo
Kent Mercker
Mike Stanton
Mo Vaughn
Steve Woodard

Mitchell, by his own admission, has put together an incomplete list. There are 14 players on this list that wore a Sox uniform (Yankees fans, stuff the "where are all the Red Sox names" accusation - they're right here).

Let's address Clemens one last time, because he is the only sure candidate for the Hall. There are many writers saying that they now won't vote for him, others saying that they will because he was a hall of famer before the 'roids started in 1998. Assuming that it was 1998, and not 1996, as I suspect, when he shared a field with Jose Canseco, then this is what his numbers look like pre-1998 -

203-118, 2882 strikeouts, 3.09 ERA, and a 2-3 postseason record.

There are those that argue that Curt Schilling will only get in based on his post-season performance because he doesn't have enough regular season wins. So, if Schilling's 216 wins isn't enough, how could Clemens be a Hall-of-Famer before the rumors of steroid use?

If you adjust for when I think he started, which was the 1996 season, then he only has 172 wins.

No. Clemens was not a Hall of Fame pitcher before the rumors of juicing. He was very good. But he was and is not "the best right-handed pitcher ever," which some baseball pundits have called him over the last couple of years. That distinction still belongs to Nolan Ryan.

Absolution

As I stated in my last post - the names listed there were rumored to be in the Mitchell report. Many of those did not appear in the report - such as Trot Nixon and Jason Varitek. This, however, should not be seen as absolving players that are not on the list.

To the contrary, Mitchell even alludes to the fact that it is not a complete list. It is merely a compilation of the names that came up in the course of his investigation.

There is no relief today in major league baseball.

Some will say this only opens up Pandora's Box, and that the sins that afflict baseball can never be put back in that box. They are wrong.

As much as it pains me to say it - Jose Canseco opened the box. George Mitchell just started digging into the box's dark and fetid corners. The crud he came up with has presented the fans and the Baseball Writer's Association of America with ways to rationalize away putting their favorite player into the Hall of Fame.

Bonds had Hall of Fame numbers before he started doing it.

Clemens had three Cy Young's before 1996.

Everybody else was doing it, so it remained a level playing field.

Me? As much as I have enjoyed watching many of these players, I think as a journalist and a fan, we need to take a stand. No one from this era gets in. Going forward, no one gets in who is unwilling to submit to regular blood and urine testing.

Remember, the Hall is a private organization and it's by-laws have nothing to do with MLB. And one of the most important dictates how voting is supposed to work states, "Voting shall be based upon the player's record, playing ability, integrity, sportsmanship, character, and contributions to the team(s) on which the player played." Integrity, sportsmanship, and character are three of the key terms here.

Don't tell me that these players didn't know that it was illegal. Why else did they inject in the shadows? Why else do they avoid owning up to it? They keep it secret because they know it was wrong, that it lacked character, integrity, or sportsmanship.

Let's not rationalize away this by just calling it the Steroid Era, and putting in the best players from this era. Yes, a lot of players juiced, but not all of them did. It might even have been most of them. But the assumption has to be made that this created an uneven playing field.

Keep Bonds out. Keep McGwire out. Keep Clemens out. Keep Palmiero out.

Sure, record their records for posterity's sake. Record their numbers because they are, for better or worse, part of history. But don't enshrine them.

They haven't lived up to the standard dictated by the Hall. And it would be an insult to those who did.

Shining a light in the shadows

There are going to be many who will question the validity of the Mitchell Report due to his Red Sox links. Others will question the validity of the witnesses testifying to former Senator Mitchell.

There are a host of questions that can be asked in regards to the report. Regardless of the questions that can be asked, at the very least, it begs a closer look at each of the players named and their career statistics.

Like with any medication or drug, the impact of these "treatments" that the players underwent will vary greatly. Some people named might be innocent, some are likely as guilty as sin. And before I get some steroid apologist who likes to bring up the "well it wasn't against the rules in baseball," argument, one of the key points, made by George Mitchell as he presented the report is, "for more than a decade there has been widespread illegal use of anabolic steroids and other performance enhancing substances by Major League Baseball players in violation of federal law..."

Mitchell does not absolve MLB in this. He does say that the report identified "some of the players," who indulged.

"Each of the thirty clubs have had" a player or players involved in this drug culture, said Mitchell.

Among the players rumored to be on the list that have spent some time with the Red Sox are Roger Clemens (whom I think started use before leaving the Red Sox), Dante Bichette, Wil Cordero, Johnny Damon, Carl Everett, Rich Garces, Eric Gagne, Nomar Garciaparra, Jeremy Giambi, Trot Nixon, Jose Offerman, Julian Tavarez, and Jason Varitek. So much for him slanting the report away from the Sox.

I've speculated as much in regards to Garciaparra, and have to admit I have questions as to how Jorge Posada who not only hit .061 points higher than his career average this past season, but has had his only season hitting over .287 (.336) at the age of 35, might not be on this list.

As for Clemens...

Clemens reportedly was taking winstrol in 1998, and approached his trainer at the beginning of 1998 with questions about a bottle of steroids already in his possession. Personally, I believe he was first introduced to the steroid subculture as early as 1996, when he shared a Red Sox clubhouse with Jose Canseco, and pitched over 200 innings for the first time since 1992.

As for some of the other proof - evidently, according to Mitchell, they have shipping records, other eyewitness accounts, phone records, and other evidence. This is going to come down hard on a number of players.

What it's really all about

Let's face it.

As I mentioned in a previous post, there are no innocent teams out there - and anyone who thinks their team is doing everything above board is incredibly naive. This weekend the Jets will face the Patriots for the fifth time since Mangini left New England to take over the team in The Swamp.

In light of a recent story revealing Mangini and the holier than thou Jets fans as a hypocritical finger pointers, I think the following picture is truly illustrative of this weekend, particularly in the eyes of those who are neither Pats nor Jets fans (with thanks to my wife)...

Speaking of finger pointers...

I think Mike Ditka has lost a lot of credibility in his fight to get the NFL to pay out more money in benefits to NFL veterans.

According to a report in USA Today, Ditka is in the process of dissolving the charity he established three years ago, Hall of Fame Assistance Trust. In spite of raising over $1.3 million in funds during that time, the charity distributed only $57,000.00 to ex-players in need.

The organization spent $715,000.00 on three charity golf events during that time, including $65,000.00 in appearance fees to get celebrities out to the tournaments. Somehow, in spite of being a charity, Ditka and his organization were unable to convince $65,000.00 worth of celebrities to write off their appearance fees.

For someone who has been as vocal a critic of the NFL in regards to this issue, that's one hell of a way to put one's money where their mouth is.

And this from a New York paper...

This

is

delicious...

http://www.newsday.com/sports/football/jets/ny-spjets1212,0,3978329.story

It has been confirmed that the Jets were taping in Gillette last season. The Jets claimed they were doing so with the permission of the league and the Patriots.

The league has no knowledge of the incident, or at least it has been reported that the league was unaware of it.

The Patriots removed the Jets employee from the stadium. Interesting definition of "permission" the Jets must have.

The line from Newsday - "Tuesday night the Jets admitted that they did videotape the game and their employee was confronted, but said they had permission from the Patriots to film from that location."

Once again, I ask, if they had permission to film from there, then why was the Jets employee removed?

I think this reaction from New York Newsday's response page sums it up best -

"So, the JETS catch the PATS videotaping and inform the league. The PATS catch the JETS and don't tell anyone, just remove the guy? If that's the case, it really makes Mangini seem low. Was it the game we won? Maybe that's the reason we won 10 last year and stink this year. After ratting on the PATS, the JETS stopped also.
"Great.
"It just gets better. "

-Frank, East Brunswick, NJ.
East Brunswick, NJ

Killing chances

I don't blame Bobby Petrino for wanting to get out of Dodge.

He was put in a no win situation. He was initially expected to win with (statistically) among the worst quarterbacks in the league. He was told to build his offense around Michael Vick. Weeks after taking over the team, the Falcons traded back-up and potential starting quarterback Matt Schaub to the Texans. Then the dogfighting scandal hit, and Vick was done.

Sitting on a rudderless team with petulant stars like DeAngelo Hall, all Petrino could do, if lucky, was tread water. If this team failed to win a single game, enough went wrong around the team that Petrino could have been held blameless.

Even with the limited tools at his disposal, he still managed to eke three wins out of the Falcons.

Regardless of all of the above, Petrino has just succeded in killing any chances for college coaches to move to the pro-ranks anytime in the near future.

Recent history will play big in the heads of the NFL's general managers as they search for their next head coach, and the combined 18-27 NFL records of Petrino and Nick Saban (15-17) will serve as a big warning beacon. The bigger warning beacon, however, will be how the two coaches unceremoniously left after denying interest in college coaching openings.

An interesting aside - the denial games both Petrino and Saban played with their NFL jobs are not common to NFL coaching job changes. As a matter of fact, the only instances in the NFL that I can think of in which this happened are with these two coaching changes.

Right now this is happening all over college football, where a coach signs a contract to work for a school, and leaves before even a year passes in the contract year. Sometimes it's been within weeks.

Saban and Petrino brought it to the ranks of the NFL. And the GM's aren't going to forget that anytime soon.

Cheating and fan hypocrisy

With the Patriots due to play the 3-10 New York Jets on Sunday, a lot is going to resurface in regards to Camera-gate, Tape-gate, Spy-gate, or whatever you want to call it. In the wake of every game, some fan of some team puts their foot in their mouth and wants to yell about the Patriots as cheaters.

I have not denied that the Pats were caught doing something they weren't supposed to be doing, nor would I. The irony of it is that the problem was that they were filming from the sideline. If they had done it from the coaches' booth, it wouldn't have been considered cheating (a stupid loophole, but a loophole none the less).

I would, however, point out to the Eagles fans, Steelers fans, Rams fans, and other groups that complain that the Patriots championships deserve an asterisk that, while the league frowned on the practice, the sideline camera wasn't officially outlawed by the NFL until this season. The Pats kept doing it. They got caught in the first half of the first quarter of the first game of the season.

They were nailed with an unprecedented punishment.

So it goes.

For those fans who want to continue this holier than thou farce, I give you the following -

2006-2007 Pittsburgh Steelers - in the spring, one of the team's game-day sideline doctors was fingered by a federal investigation into illegal distribution of HGh by one of Florida's anti-aging clinics. Despite claims by the doctor that the hormone was used for elderly patients, the Steelers dismissed the doctor. Considering he purchased through illegal channels, his claims come off as somewhat disingenuous.

2007 New York Jets - Accused of emulating the snap count on defense in a game against the Baltimore Ravens, a personal foul that should have resulted in at least one, if not multiple personal fouls for unsportsmanlike conduct, had the officiating crew noticed.

1998-2007 Indianapolis Colts - Repeatedly accused by opponents, including the Steelers, Jaguars, and Patriots (among others), of piping in crowd noise. In spite of the fact that the NFL absolved the team of wrong-doing in the most recent incident, rumors abound that a stadium employee has acknowledged the team's cheating.

2007 Washington Redskins - Multiple Redskins fans have blogged this season that the Skins are piping crowd noise into FedEx field. The claims are being made by people who claim to be attending the games and sitting under the speakers.

2007 Green Bay Packers - Still currently under investigation by the NFL for reports of defensive players offering "bounties." League rules prohibit teams and players "from offering or accepting bonuses to a player for his or his team's performance against a particular team, a particular opposing player or players, or a particular group of an opposing team."

2007 Dallas Cowboys - In mid-November a trainer from Plano, TX plead guilty to possession of illegal steroids. The man provided federal investigators names of FORMER and CURRENT Cowboys whom he claims to have supplied with performance enhancing drugs.

2007 New York Giants - Have faced recent allegations that certain coaching decisions have been dictated by the Las Vegas point spread. Granted, this is speculation based on Big Blue's recent game against the Bears, however, if the Vegas point spread is indeed dictating coaching decisions and proof can be found to back this allegation, this could be a bigger scandal than the NBA ref incident.

Those are just the ones that hit the fan in the last twelve months - but are the fans of the following clubs ready to give up NFC Championships, AFC Championships, and even Super Bowl wins for the following?

1997 San Francisco 49ers - According to ESPN, "Carmen Policy made secret side deals with Young and three other players to clear out some cap room for the team. This, too, crossed the boundaries, and it came to the attention of the NFL Management Council, an ownership committee.
"After hearing Policy's protestations of innocence, Jerry Jones reportedly asked fellow committee members, 'How many of us believe what he said?'
"The 49ers eventually reached a settlement with the league, which docked the club two draft picks and assessed fines against Policy and general manager Dwight Clark."

1996-1998 Denver Broncos - Found to be in violation of multiple salary cap issues, were fined $950,000.00 and a third round draft pick in the third round of the 2005 draft by the less strict Paul Tagliabue. During that same time period, Broncos coach Mike Shanahan was caught filming (gasp! Not filming!) a Chargers practice...during the week...from a hill overlooking San Diego's practice facility.

1999 DenverBroncos/1998 Miami Dolphins - According to an article at ESPN..."In an interview published in the September 1999 issue of Muscular Development magazine, Conte said BALCO had 'provided testing and consultation for over 250 NFL players, including the entire Denver Broncos Super Bowl championship team, as well the entire Miami Dolphins team.'
"A Broncos spokesman told the Chronicle that the team was never a client of BALCO's and that any players who used the company did so on their own. Dolphins strength and conditioning coach John Gamble said that in 1998 Conte tested all of the Dolphins players for mineral deficiencies and that he subsequently sent supplements to counteract those deficiencies. Gamble said, though, that he did not believe Conte was paid for his services."

That's eleven teams (including the Pats) over the course of the last decade against which serious allegations were made, or were outright caught. Eight within the last year alone. And that was just based on a cursory search on a handful of teams.

I didn't include recent allegations by Shawn Merriman that Jeff Fischer "ordered a hit," this past weekend for three reasons - one; the blocks he's complaining about were clean and legal. Two; he's a whiner. Three; he was nailed for steroid use and hasn't exactly been the force he was since getting nailed.

I am by no means condoning what the Patriots coaching staff did earlier this season. To the contrary, I think it was mind-bogglingly stupid and unnecessary. They got caught, they got punished - and they should have been punished.

My point here is different.

My point is that the sanctimonious fans of other teams need to get off their high horse. I have no problem with those fans screaming about the Pats cheating, as long as those fans are acknowledging that their own team isn't a group of saints either...well, except of course for the Saints fans...but you get what I mean.

There is no such thing as an innocent team, there are only the ones that haven't been caught yet - and if you don't believe that with millions of dollars on the line in coaching contracts, player contract, endorsement deals, and various bonuses are going to prompt the most competitive people in our society to cheat, then you are truly among the most naive in society. Remember, part of the idea behind cheating is to not get caught.

For those who scream, "what does this teach the children," it teaches them that professional sports is a cold, hard business in which winning is the bottom line. If these people are using professional athletes as roll models for their children, well they're just morons.

Cheating in professional sports is a long standing tradition - from Ty Cobb sharpening his spikes and sliding with his feet high in order to cleat an opponent's shins, to Todd Bertuzzi's ordered hit on ice, to NASCAR pit crews making alterations to cars that violate NASCAR's rules, every sport, every team has a dark side to it's history that it doesn't want to see dredged into the light.

The White Sox have, arguably, the darkest story in all professional sports being the centerpiece of the 1919 Black Sox Scandal. Rumors abound that the 1970's Steelers, one of the most dominant teams in the NFL during the Super Bowl Era, were practically pioneers in the use of steroids (note, I did say rumors, although at least one Steelers lineman from the 1979 team came forward in 2000 to talk about his steroid use). Baseball Hall-of-Famer Gaylord Perry admitted to throwing the spitball. In 1963 the NFL suspended Packer Paul Hornung and Lion Alex Karras for gambling.

If you have a big problem with cheating, then give up on professional sports. If you want to believe that what each of these teams is doing creates an uneven playing field (which all of this is intended to do), then maybe it's time for you to walk away from the games. If you're looking for a villain because you need a bad guy - that's fine too, but admit, at least to yourself that's what you're doing. But don't pretend that there's a team out there that isn't doing everything it can in order to get an edge.

On another note -

The weighing in - 185, down 3.5 from my start weight last week.

Vick sentenced to 23 months

Michael Vick has been sentenced to almost two years in prison and three years of probation for his roll in the dog-fighting ring. Considering that the co-defendants received 18 and 21 months respectively, the court evidently found Vick to have greater culpability in regards to the crimes involved.

Not including any punitive measures by NFL offices, Vick will be unable to return to the NFL before October of 2009. I would guess there will be a suspension imposed that will not be allowed to serve concurrently with his jail time. As Vick is the first active player to be convicted and sentenced to jail time, my guess would be that the suspension will be indefinite, to be revisited at the beginning of each season, pending Vick's behavior while serving his probation.

I'm still not convinced we will ever see him under center in an NFL uniform again.

And considering he got nailed for using pot while awaiting sentencing, I'm not convinced he can remain clean for three years of probation.

The Jets are next

I usually don't guarantee victories. It's not my way. Not that I haven't done it before, but as a former player and coach (high school/semi-pro), I know that too much can go wrong on the field.

Next week the Patriots will win, and it won't even be close.

I just want to throw out these numbers - numbers I have mentioned before...

72 - It's the most points scored in a game by one team (Redskins over NY Giants, Nov 27, 1966. Final, 72-41).

64 - That was the most scored by a team (Philadelphia over Cincinnati, Nov. 6, 1934) in a shut-out victory.

5 - The number of touchdown passes that Brady needs to break Peyton Manning's record. I would not be surprised if he broke the record against the Jets.

7 - The most touchdowns thrown by a quarterback in a game, shared by Sid Luckman, Adrian Burk, George Blanda, YA Tittle, and Joe Kapp. The last time was in 1969 by Joe Kapp. This Sunday may very well be the first time since then.

4 - The number of touchdown receptions that Randy Moss needs to pass Jerry Rice for the most in a season.

Those are just some of the numbers that I think will become relevant this Sunday. At 4:00 Sunday afternoon, several of those records are going to fall - and it will be at the hands of the Jets. Make no mistake that this is going to happen, and Belichick will make sure that it happens against the Jets.

This isn't going to be a game. It's going to be a clinic - and Belichick is going to show Eric Mangini how little he knows.

Eat it, Anthony Smith

"People keep asking me if we're ready for the Patriots, they should be asking if they're ready for us...We got our swagger back on defense. We're playing great ball, and they're playing great on the offensive side too, so I think we've got a real good chance to win the game. We will win the game...Yeah, I can guarantee a win." - Steelers safety Anthony Smith, December 5, 2007

"Never heard of him." - Rodney Harrison, December 6, 2007.

"You know, I think Rodney put it the best, so I'll just leave it at that. But we've played against a lot better safeties than him, I'll tell you." - Bill Belichick, postgame press conference December 9, 2007. Final score, 34 - 13.

For those that believe that Smith's comments fell on deaf ears, consider the following -

The Patriots burned Smith deep three times, twice for touchdowns - one by Randy Moss and one by Jabar Gaffney. The third time was a pass to Gaffney deep in the middle. Smith tried to lay a knock-out hit on Gaffney, bounced off him, and Gaffney picked up another six yards after the hit.

The Patriots picked on Smith. Period.

Way to walk the walk there.

Pyrrhic defense -

The 1972 Dolphins do a lot of moaning about being the only team with an undefeated season. Make no mistake, it is, at best, Pyrrhic.

Sure, they spent an undefeated season in 1972 against one of the weakest schedules of any team in the Super Bowl Era. Their streak of regular season wins started with the opening day of 1972 and ended in the second game of 1973, giving them a streak of 15 regular season wins, and a total of 18 (including post season).

The Pats have now beaten the 'Phins regular season run twice in the Brady era with 18 and 16 game regular season winning streaks, giving the Patriots first and second in terms of longest winning streaks in league history. The 18 game streak was part of a 21-game-including-Super-Bowl-win winning streak.

The longest winning streak the 'Phins had subsequent to 1972 was the 10-game streak in 1973. The Dolphins never again came close to matching that record. If the Pats win their final three (against the 3-10 Jets, the 0-13 Dolphins, and the 9-4 Giants), the Patriots will set a new record for consecutive wins in a season with 19. If they go on to win the Super Bowl, then they will be two games shy of tying their own record of 21 consecutive including the post season.

Somebody needs to tell former Dolphins running back Mercury Morris that the Patriots have been in his neighborhood - twice. But, with three Super Bowl rings during the era, they live in a nicer one.

Vick-tim of his own stupidity -

Michael Vick will be sentenced today. The news leaking out of Virginia is that prosecutors don't believe that Vick has been very forthcoming in his so called cooperation with authorities. If that's the case, and the prosecution is expected to call two witnesses to rebut Vick's allocution today, Vick could end up serving the maximum possible sentence.

As part of any plea deal, the guilty party is expected to detail his/her part in a crime. If the judge determines that the party who has taken the plea has not been straight with the State, then the judge can reject the terms of the plea and impose any sentence that fits sentencing guidelines in relation to the crime.

Vick could easily get the full five years. If that happens, I will go on record now - Michael Vick has taken his last NFL snap.

Recent history and selective memory...

It's what the pundits have in backing their arguments.

Those arguing that the Steelers will end the Patriots perfect season this weekend, present the following thoughts - the Steelers are physical like the Ravens and Eagles, but better than either; the Pats are vulnerable against the run, and Steelers tailback Willie Parker is second in the league in rushing; the Pats offense has been in a slump the last two weeks while being pressured by these physical defenses; the Steelers defensive scheme is meant to cause confusion and will cause problems for the struggling Pats offense.

Let's look at each argument -

The Steelers are better than either the Ravens or Eagles. That's a fact. It is also a fact that they are physical with their linemen, but, as I mentioned in a previous post, not great with press coverage from their corners.

Yes, the Pats have struggled against the run this season - particularly as of late. However, as good as Parker has been, he put up 87 yards and a 3.1 per rush average against the defense deficient Bengals, 81/3.4 and two fumbles against Miami, and 52/2.5 against the Jets. Those teams are respectively 23rd, 32nd, and 29th against the run. That would be Parker's last three games - a total of 220 yards and an average of three yards per rush. Not exactly numbers that blow you away.

During the Patriots' offensive slump, they have averaged 29 points per game. The rest of the league is averaging 21.1 points per game. Wow. Twenty-nine points per game are gonna lose you a lot of games...really. On top of that, the last three games haven't exactly been sterling for the Steelers either. Yes they won two out of three, but, as previously noted, they played the Jets, Dolphins, and Bengals - losing to the Jets by two, and barely getting a three point win (at home, mind you) against Miami...horrible, horrible Miami.

As for the shock and awe of the Steelers zone-blitzing defensive attack...I seem to remember that the Patriots lit them up in the playoffs with lesser talent than they now have on offense. And correct me if I'm wrong, but the last time I checked, current defensive coordinator Dick LeBeau was running the defense that got lit up then.

Before Steelers fans get up in arms, I'm not guaranteeing a Patriots win, but I am pointing out that the arguments are weak as to why they will end the streak. It could very well happen - the Pats have looked vulnerable recently, but no more so than the Steelers.

House of cards...

Until the Patriots beat Dallas and Indy, the comment was, "who have they really beat so far?"

It was almost the mantra of New England's critics.

Now the Steelers are supposed to give the Patriots a run for their money. They have the number one defense in the league. Number one against the pass, number one against the run.

Like the Eagles and the Ravens, they play a physical brand of football - they want to push the opponents around at the line of scrimmage, and make receivers pay after the catch.

Unlike the Ravens and the Eagles, they play a zone blitzing scheme, because their corners are not great cover corners, but are good in space. If they play up on the line and try to get physical with the Pats receivers and whiff, then you're talking about a lot of targets running free for Tom Brady all day. But that's not really what I want to address.

What I want to address is, who have the Steelers forged their defensive ranking against?

They have wins against only two winning teams - the Browns and the Seahawks. The Seahawks only have a winning record because they play in the doormat division, the NFC West. The pass-happy Browns gave the Steelers everything they could handle - even with ineffective play from their quarterback.

Of the twelve games, only four opponents, the Browns, Cardinals, Seahawks, and Bengals have an offense in the top half of the league - fourth, ninth, twelfth, and seventh respectively. Of the ten total opponents, five are ranked 25th or worse in total offense. The average offensive ranking of the Steelers opponents through to this weekend's game? 18.8...in other words, the Steelers have pretty much made their reputation against losing teams with an average of the 19th ranked offenses in the league.

All three of the Steelers losses have come on the road - Cardinals (9th in offense), Broncos (19th), and Jets (24th). Their sole road win was against the Browns (now ranked fourth) in the season opener when the Browns had Charlie Frye at quarterback. They nearly dropped the rematch at Heinz Field.

The Patriots offense has already faced five of the defenses in the top half of the league, including the third ranked Colts D. New England has beaten those teams by an average of 19.2 points - including the three-point games against Indy and Philadelphia (12th overall). Overall, the average ranking of the 11 defenses faced by the Pats is 18.7, only marginally better than the 18.8 for offenses faced by Pittsburgh.

One of the big differences, however, is that of the teams Pittsburgh faced, only the Seahawks and Browns are close to locks for the playoffs. The Cardinals and Bills are fighting for wild card positioning. The Pats have cut their offensive teeth against the division leading Chargers, Colts, and Cowboys as well as wild card hopefuls Cleveland and Washington.

What does all of this mean?

Absolutely jack, if the teams don't come out and play the way they need to. However, if the rest of the season is any indication, the Steelers have had trouble coming out and playing the way they need to when on the road.

Merry Christmas from 300 Patriots Fans!

This links to a larger version that anyone can go to in order to get a screen shot to set as a background for your desk- and laptops.

'Tis the season!

The 360

The Sparta of America.

I'd like to be able to say that I came up with that...the Sparta of America.

It is a great description. But I have to give credit where credit is due. Thank you for that one Frank Deford.

As for the number?

53 players on the Pats
25 players on the Sox (not going with the 40 man roster)
15 players on the Celtics
22 players on the Revolution
24 players on the Bruins
25 players on the Cannons (Major League Lacrosse)
99 players on Boston College Football
97 players on Harvard University Football

Of the above, only the Cannons (5-7) have been unsuccessful during the most recent season. Others might have fallen short of expectations, but this is what each of the following has done in its most recent or current season -

Patriots - Season in progress, 12-0 with a chance at an undefeated season.
Red Sox - Won the World Series for the second time in four seasons, sweeping the National League Champion Colorado Rockies.
Celtics - Season in progress. With a newly minted "Big Three," the C's are 15-2 and on a blazing 72 win pace. Paul Pierce, rejoice.
Revolution - Four the fourth time in six seasons, the New England entry to Major League Soccer ended their season in frustration on the pitch in the league's championship game.
Bruins - After a down season, the Bruins are in sixth place in the East, a respectable 14-9, and only three games behind first place Ottawa in the win column. If they keep up their current pace, they will finish 50-32 and in the playoffs.
Cannons - See above.
BC Football - The Eagles finished up a solid season with a 10-3 record, including a loss in the ACC Championship game against Virginia Tech. While knocked out of contention for the national title, they still have a chance to bring home a bowl trophy and run the 2007 record to 11-3 if they can beat Michigan on December 28.
Harvard Football - The 8-2 Crimson went 7-0 in the Ivy League and handed 9-1 Yale their only loss of the season while bringing home the IL Title.

Of the teams that have pretty much wrapped their seasons - Sox, Cannons, Revolution, Eagles and Crimson - Boston area teams have appeared in league championship games four times (out of five), and brought home two titles. Of the remaining teams playing - the Patriots, Celtics, and Bruins, all are likely to at the very least make the playoffs in their respective sports.

The combined record of these teams for the 2007, 2007-08 seasons is 176-96,with 7 ties, which translates to a .631 winning percentage...even with the Cannons losing record thrown in.

Has any other city experienced this sort of success in the athletic arena? Ever?

Say it with me Boston sports fans...

WE

ARE

SPAHTA!

Shut up and play...and ruminations on the potential Santana trade

This has been a tiresome week for me.

I live in Whine Country in Maryland.

I watch the boards and read various articles about the NFL games for several days after the games end on Sunday and Monday. For weeks I have heard fans of other teams bitch and moan about the lack of class of the Patriots. This week I have heard, both locally, and nationally (mostly in interviews with Ravens) how the officials took the game from them (thankfully the national press has pretty much said what follows here...well, with the exception of my sentiments on Samari Rolle).

To that, I answer the following - since Belichick took over, you have never heard players blame each other for any of their losses (Peyton Manning, I'm looking at you), you have never heard the Patriots blame the officials (Ravens, I'm looking at you). The team has gone longer than any other team in the NFL without a player arrested (Bengals, Redskins, Cardinals, Bears, Dolphins, and...well the rest of the NFL, I'm looking at you). The team hasn't had any assistant coaches get into trouble on their own time (Detroit, and Arizona). As a matter of fact, other than Belichick being named in a divorce proceeding and the tragedy that took Marquise Hill, the Patriots are pretty much in the news for playing football.

As for the Ravens and their fan base, the idea that the refs took that game from them is patently ridiculous. While I have made many of the following points elsewhere myself, I would like to thank Peter King for the following summary of the end of Monday night's game -

• New England ball, fourth-and-1, Baltimore 30, 1:48 left, Baltimore up 24-20. At the last second before the snap, Baltimore defensive coordinator Rex Ryan calls timeout. The play went on, with Baltimore stuffing Tom Brady for a loss and, theoretically, that should have been New England's last gasp. One problem.
Only the head coach is supposed to be able to call time on the sidelines. But in
this case, the league has interpreted the rule on a last-millisecond timeout call that the side official cannot be responsible for seeing whether it's the head coach or another coach who calls time. So it's technically legal for Ryan to have called the timeout, and the league's point is the head coach is responsible for controlling his bench. In this case, Brian Billick has to be responsible for his sideline, and when Ryan calls time, the burden is on Billick to accept the call because it happened on the Baltimore sideline.
• New England ball, fourth-and-5, Baltimore 13, 55 seconds left, Baltimore up 24-20. Brady retreats to pass. From the right side of the line, tight end Ben Watson runs downfield into the end zone, with nickel back Jamaine Winborne riding him tightly downfield. Once Watson gets past the 8-yard line, it's illegal for Winborne to have anything but incidental contact with Watson, but he clearly has an arm on him well past the 8, and all the way into the end zone. Maybe the call should have been holding, maybe the call should have been illegal contact, but it was a legitimate call, not a ticky-tack one. Winborne impeded Watson's path.
The back judge, Billy Smith, called holding, a five-yard penalty and automatic
first down. I would have called illegal contact, but both penalties have the same impact, which is to give the Patriots a first-and-goal at the Baltimore 8. Great guts by Smith to make a call in that atmosphere.
• New England ball, first-and-goal, Baltimore 8, 50 seconds left. Brady throws to the left corner of the end zone for Jabar Gaffney, who catches the ball in front of his body with both hands while getting both feet down. During the time he gets both feet down, Gaffney moves the ball in front of him but never takes either gloved hand off
the ball and never juggles the ball. It is ruled a touchdown, and there is a booth review ordered by replay official Dale Hamer. The play is reviewed by ref Walt Anderson and confirmed. Let's remember what replay is: It's to be used to overturn a call only if there is indisputable visual evidence that the call is wrong. There's no way you can look at this play -- and I've seen it 10 times, in slow-motion -- and say there's clear evidence he didn't have control of the ball.
• Baltimore ball, second-and-10, Baltimore 45, eight seconds left. Kyle Boller throws a Hail Mary to the 3-yard line, and, in the middle of the scrum, Baltimore wideout Derrick Mason puts his hands on Patriot cornerback Asante Samuel's shoulders and pulls Samuel down. Mark Clayton makes the catch and is tackled at the three. There is no flag. Big mistake. There certainly should have been offensive pass interference ... but even if that was the call, it would not have changed the outcome. Because the clock expired, and the game can end on an offensive penalty, the game would have been over without the Ravens having another chance to score.

Let's also address Samari Rolle's complaint about the 53-year old former player, and official who called him "boy at least five times." The large black man whom Rolle accused, by his own admission, of having "never strapped on a helmet," in relation to what Rolle felt were bogus calls.

The more that comes out about Rolles complaint, the more it sounds like he incited the ref. Rolle claims that he was told by 110, "boy, shut up and play." Part of his complaint is that Rolle himself is 31 years old and a father of three, and "you don't call a grown man 'boy.'" To which I say, maybe he should act like a grown man and accept responsibility for his actions, and not blame the refs for his teammates screw-ups.

This will result in a talking to the officials by Goodell, but it should also result in a smackdown on the Ravens who seem to think that the officials are trying to help the Patriots by edict from the league offices.

One of the most ridiculous accusations is that the league wants to help Bill Belichick, who has pretty much become the NFL version of Darth Vader in everyone's eyes, win. It was obvious in the way the game against the Colts was officiated, and the way the officials helped AJ Feeley toss three picks, and of course the way the officials ignored an obvious penalty on the Baltimore Hail Mary in the closing seconds. If Clayton gets into the end zone, that's a potentially game changing play on which the refs blew the call. Do Ravens fans think the NFL told the refs to blow that call too?

Bottom line, they need to get their heads out of their asses and really look at how that game was called. Yes, it was poorly officiated, but it was poorly officiated on both sides. And if the second most penalized team in the AFC really thinks that the refs were quick to throw the flags on them, then maybe it has a lot less to do with the Patriots record than the fact that year in and year out they play disciplined football, and, as such, are one of the least penalized teams in the league. That might have followed the Ravens into the game more than any conspiracy by the NFL to keep the Patriots without a loss.

If they don't want the flags thrown, maybe they should try playing with discipline - hell, Ed Reed was five yards off-sides on an extra-point attempt. How often do you see that?

As for Santana, and I'm not talking the guitar legend...

I'm pretty much on record at a number of other blogs as not in favor of this trade. Johan Santana is a superb power pitcher whom I would love to see on the Red Sox for the right price. The deals as structured combined with the rumored contract demands are not the right price. Maybe if Santana were 27, it would be, but he's 29, has already pitched over 1300 big league innings, has faded down the stretch and has been mediocre, at best, in the post season.

This doesn't even take into account Santana's Fenway park numbers - 1-3 (15.2 innings) in three starts and one relief appearance with a 6.89 ERA, 12 K and a 1.85 WHIP. The only win came in the relief appearance and his last Fenway start was 5 innings with a 7.20 ERA. Part of what has hurt Santana in Fenway is the fact that he's a flyball pitcher. Those flyballs that are outs in the Metrodome are going to be doubles off the wall in Fenway.

I can't help but feel that given the fact that Jon Lester is 23, was solid in a year that he came off cancer, and put up better numbers in his first year than Santana in his first, I can't help feeling that giving the Twins Lester and three to four prospects that will likely be playing in the majors within the next two seasons, that the Red Sox are grossly overpaying ala the Vikings for Herschel Walker for a bauble they don't really need. What surprises me here is that the Twins haven't jumped on this offer, given that the Sox are currently not bidding against anyone else.

Why do I compare this to the Walker trade? I think, like Walker in Minnesota, that Santana will have limited success in Fenway, and that his propensity to give up flyballs will negate any upgrade he would otherwise represent over Lester who is likely to average 14 to 16 wins per season over the next couple of seasons (health permitting).

Power pitchers who begin to develop elbow problems like Santana has been exhibiting begin to show significant drop off in numbers between the ages of 33 and 35. Given Santana's demands, I can't help feeling that in four years that the Sox would be paying $20 to 25 million per year and dealing with the same situation that the Mets did this year with Pedro Martinez - paying gobs of money for a guy who couldn't get off the bench until late August due to injury.

And none of this takes into account the domino effect of paying Santana obscene gobs of money in spite of the fact that he's nowhere near the post-season pitcher that Beckett...or for that matter, Lester is.

Given the way last year's JD Drew signing went down, it feels like Theo has become enamored of another shiny bauble that the team doesn't need, and is bidding against himself in an effort to get it.

I understand not being able to do Lester straight up for Santana, even Lester and one player, but Lester and three seems too much for a team that doesn't actually need Santana. Don't even get me started on Buchholz or Ellsbury, neither of which I think should be included in any deal for the Twins ace.

Scraping the bottom

Sometimes in professional sports, scraping bottom isn't about finishing last. Sometimes its about the fact that the franchise is run into the ground for so long that employees feel like they go to work in a cave somewhere far below the level of the rest of the respective league - bad drafting, bad coaching, bad free agent signings, bad executive decisions (budget, contracts, etc.).

Some teams are so bad in a given season that they become a benchmark against which other teams are measured - the 1962 New York Mets won only 40 games; in the team's first season the Buccaneers lost all 14 regular season games, becoming the first NFL team to do so in the Super Bowl era; the 1972-73 Philadelphia 76ers won nine while losing 73.

Sometimes, as I said, it's less about the single season then it is about sustained periods of putrescence. Some teams just historically have issues - the Cubs, Browns, and Clippers have been the sad sacks of their respective leagues for years.

But who are the teams scraping bottom now?

Let's start with the worst of the worst -

The New York Knicks - The Isiah Years. Not including the partial season of 2003 - 2004 that Isiah Thomas has presided over this team as team president/GM and/or coach, and not including this season's sterling start, Isiah Thomas has managed to pad his resume with the following facts -

• The team has an aggregate record of 89 -157. Currently the team is on pace for roughly a 25 win season.
• Thomas himself has been embroiled in a sexual harassment scandal, found guilty by a jury of his peers.
• He has put together a team of individuals with the highest payroll in the league, but has never been able to get the team to .500.
• He has publicly feuded with his team's biggest star, Stephon Marbury, who claims he has the goods on Thomas and also admitted to sleeping with a team intern.
• Owner James Dolan has publicly supported Thomas, going as far as to say that he believed that Thomas was doing a good job and had the team headed in the right direction.

Sure, there are other teams that have finished below the Knicks in the standings (last year's Celtics for one), but none have had the combination of futility on the court, in front office, and in the court rooms as the Knicks have had.

The Knicks were, at one point, one the NBA's most storied franchises. Now they're the punchline.

A close second? The Matt Millen Detroit Lions - Like the Dolan owned Knicks, the ownership of the Lions is in serious denial about their general manager, Matt Millen. Millen has drafted poorly, made poor hirings of coaches, and has played the free-agent market like a neophyte stock broker on Wall Street. Like the Knicks, there have been teams that finished behind them, but no other team has been as consistently bad.

To wit, under Millen,

• Detroit had an assistant coach arrested for indecent exposure. Said coach faced no significant consequences from the team.
• The team has set a record for futility with six straight seasons of double digit losses, and are sitting at 6-6 this season after a four game losing streak (no general manager in NFL history has presided over any team with as many 10+ losses per season). With games remaining against Dallas, San Diego, Kansas City, and Green Bay, a seventh straight season isn't out of the question.
• Has gone through at least three head coaches.
• Repeatedly drafted wide receivers with a top ten pick when the team had glaring needs at other places like offensive and defensive line.

Number three is, of course, the Miami Dolphins - Since 1998, this might be a team with some of the worst personnel decisions in the NFL. Consider that starters tend to hit their stride in their third or fourth year - particularly the later round picks.

And the result of their drafting futility?

• In the six drafts from 1998 to 2003, Miami had 59 choices. It exercised 46 of those picks and used 13 other choices in trades to acquire veteran players. Only Ricky Williams, acquired in a draft day deal as one of those 13 other choices, is on the current Dolphins roster (with thanks to Peter King for these numbers).
• They weathered the Nick Saban experiment.
• And while the jury is out, picking a glorified and injured kick returner with their first rounder just goes against conventional wisdom from a personnel standpoint.

Amazing for a team that once was a perennial power in the AFC East.

Pittsburgh Pirates, Tampa Bay Devil Rays, and the Baltimore Orioles - Sure, I'm grouping these three together because these three teams prove that it doesn't matter how big or small a team's budget is when ownership has no idea what it's doing. Continuing a recent history of futility, the Pirates and Devil Rays have become nothing more than glorified triple A teams cultivating talent for the rest of the league. The Orioles and George Steinbrenner wannabe, Peter Angelos has shown that a team can go out and spend money and still suck.

Were it not for the fact that the Marlins have established a pattern of binging and purging in order to win championships, they would make this list as well.

The Good, The Bad, and the Ugly

The Patriots won last night.

As a New England fan, that's pretty much the good of it.

I suppose you can throw in the following facts as well - when the chips were down, the Pats came up big while the Ravens made the mistakes that lose you games. Even when the Pats made mistakes, they turned them to an advantage - like a late penalty before the snap that negated a fourth down play that would have given the Ravens the ball back with less than a minute-and-a-half to play. Instead, it was fourth and six, and Tom Brady scrambled for a first down.

Oh...and the forced fumble by Kevin Faulk after Brady was intercepted just before the half was probably worth at least a three point swing in the final score of 27-24.

As for the bad and the ugly...well, there was a whole lot of that in this game.

This was, for Brady and the wideouts, a bad game. Brady completed less than 50 percent of his passes, including a couple of poor throws (the interception at the end of the first half and the ricochet off a Raven helmet in the red zone late in the game come to mind). The receivers dropped a number of balls that hit them on the hands - Randy Moss had at least two and tight end Ben Watson one. Of those, at least two of them would have accounted for touchdowns and an 11 point swing (Watson's unforced error in the back of the end zone turned into a field goal attempt).

Asante Samuel was bad. He was picked on, and he made few plays. The biggest play he made was for the Ravens when he misplayed a 15-yard sideline pass into a 50+ yard reception in the first half.

The refereeing was bad as well, although I would say not as bad as the Colts game. The refs left calls on the field against both teams. I will even grant that the Pats touchdown to Jabar Gaffney was borderline, but I also don't believe there was enough to merit overturning the call on the field. Of course none of this matters since Raven Bart Scott was undergoing a meltdown which would have given the Pats the ball with four fresh downs on the Raven two yard line.

As for the Ravens public claim that the officials were trying to give the game to the Patriots, they might want to re-watch the film of the bomb at the end when the official kept the flag in his pocket in spite of the fact that Derrick Mason did not play the ball. Replays clearly show that Mason threw a block on Asante Samuel, the closest defensive back to receiver Mark Clayton who came down with the ball. Not only did Mason hit Samuel, he then wrapped the corner from behind, aiding Mason in making the reception that almost won the game for the Ravens.

Yeah, refs conspiring to get the Patriots an undefeated season are going to ignore that every time, I'm sure.

As for the ugly...

The Patriots run defense was ugly through most of the game, as Willis McGahee carved up the Pats (at least until the game was on the line late in the fourth quarter). The Pats secondary was also carved up for the second week running by a career second string quarterback.

That the Ravens can't come to terms with the fact that their own mistakes killed them is ugly.

What could possibly have been the ugliest is what the Ravens allege about one of the refs calling Sumari Rolle "boy," throughout the game...were the ref white. Head linesman Phil McKinley, a black man and former player in the late sixties and early seventies (ie: the man grew up during segregation and the Civil Rights Movement). Given the background of the "name caller" I would say that Rolle and his teammates are looking for any reason to try and discredit a mediocre officiating staff just because they don't want to accept responsibility for melting down in their loss.

On a different note - the time of year has come again for the annual weight loss contest. Husband and wife teams: me and my wife, my wife's sister and her husband. Whichever pair drops a combined 40 pounds first, or whichever pair has the greatest combined weight loss by May 1 wins. I weighed 188.5 yesterday. Let the games begin.