You can contact Tucker Warner by email at firstteemulligan@yahoo.com or on Twitter at http://twitter.com/twarner50
AFC East
1. New England Patriots
2. New York Jets
3. Miami Dolphins
4. Buffalo Bills
If the NFL was the World Cup, this would be the Group of Death. 3 good teams who will compete for a spot in the playoffs, and North Korea (Buffalo).
Let's start with the Patriots. Tom Brady might not be as good as he was before his knee injury, but he will be significantly better than last year, given that his injury takes two years to fully recover from. The additions of rookies Rob Gronkowski (an Arizona graduate, and the best NCAA player last year that you never heard about), and Aaron Hernandez (a favorite target of Tim Tebow while at Florida) help make the receiving corps for New England one of the best in the league. Of course, they'll get some help from a couple of guys named Moss and Welker. Their defense will continue to be solid as always, and the overall defensive production will not change much.
The Jets will probably be the most interesting team of the season. (Hard Knocks tends to do that to a team.) Some experts say the Jets will go to the Super Bowl this year. Others say they will miss the playoffs. It's easy to forget that the Jets were 9-7 last year. It's also easy to forget that the Jets had both the best defenses and offensive lines in the NFL last year. For them to make the Super Bowl, their offensive production will have to explode. For them to miss the playoffs, their defense will have to be all kinds of bad.
The Miami Dolphins are probably the least interesting team in the league. Fun to watch, sure, with their Wildcat offense, but not interesting. They'll probably go 8-8 this year. Their quarterbacks, Chad Henne, Chad Pennington, and Tyler Thigpen, have all been starters before, but none is that much better than the other. Their draft picks this year were solid infrastructure guys, but none of them were anything to get excited about. Could they potentially make the playoffs? Sure. Could they miss them by one or two games? Of course. What they can't do is make a deep playoff run or flop. They seem incapable of doing any better or worse than average this year.
As for the Bills, you should probably know what to expect for the upcoming season. Trent Edwards is one of the worst starting quarterbacks in the league, the rest of their offense doesn't have a whole lot of upside, and their defense has more holes than Swiss cheese. Let's move on to a more intriguing subject: Chan Gailey. Last year, Gailey was hired to be the interim head coach for Buffalo after they fired Dick Jauron mid-season. I don't know how else to put this, but Gailey should not be the head coach for a professional football team. 2010 will be the fifth full year that Gailey will coach a professional team. In 1991 and 1992 he coached the Birmingham Fire of the WLAF to a combines 12-7-1 record. He never won a playoff game. In 1998 and 1999, he coached the Dallas Cowboys at the tail end of their dynasty years to a combined 18-14 record. They still never won a playoff game. It's not even as if you could justify his hiring with a stellar resume in college football. As the head coach of the Georgia Tech Yellow Jackets, Gailey led his team to a combined 44-32 record over six seasons. However, they won more than seven games only once, and were 2-4 in bowl games. So to recap, that's a bad coach with a worse team. At least Buffalo still has the Sabres.
AFC North
1. Baltimore Ravens
2. Pittsburgh Steelers
3. Cincinnati Bengals
4. Cleveland Browns
Disclaimer: I do think the Steelers are a better team than the Ravens. I have the Steelers ranked second because Roethlisberger's suspension will cost them a couple games that they would have won had their starting quarterback not been a moron. By the way, I think it's safe to say that your team has a discipline problem when your quarterback has been arrested for the same crime twice in the span of just over a year.
Moving on. Baltimore's defense looks stellar, as always, but injuries to Ed Reed and Domonique Foxworth will set them back a bit. On the other side of the ball, the Ravens offense seems to be building around Joe Flacco. Their receiving corps is now probably the best in the league (Anquan Boldin! TJ Houshmandzadeh! Derrick Mason! Donte Stallworth!) and their running backs are no slouches themselves- Ray Rice is an emerging star and Willis McGahee is a more than competent backup. And they drafted really well.
As you can tell, I'm big on the Ravens this year. If the disclaimer told you anything, I'm just as big on the Steelers. Their star players are finally healthy and their defense will revert back to their dominating ways. The problems? Both the O-line and D-line are aging. The additions of Jonathan Scott and Maurkice Pouncey will take some of the pressure off the offensive line, but they are not solid enough as a unit.
The Cincinnati Bengals are destined for third place this year, barring a collapse by the Steelers. The most interesting thing about this team: The combined audiences for The T.O. Show and Ochocinco: The Ultimate Catch do not equal the audience for Hard Knocks, featuring the New York Jets, who also beat the Bengals in the playoffs last year.
The Cleveland Browns are a worst/best case scenario team. Worst case: They go 5-11. Best case: They go 3-13 and are able to draft whatever star quarterback they want in the 2011 draft. I'm as big a fan of Colt McCoy as anyone, but he's not going to get it done. Seneca Wallace and Jake Delhomme-less aren't the guys either. The defense is improving, slowly but positively. (Any improvement is a good sign for the Browns.) If they could land Jake Locker (Washington) or another QB of like ability in the 2011 draft, the Browns could be a playoff team in the future.
AFC South
1. Indianaplis Colts
2. Tennessee Titans
3. Houston Texans
4. Jacksonville Jaguars
The winner of the AFC South is never hard to predict. The Colts will win the division again. They lost very few important players, addded more infrastructure players, and are going to win the division again.
This might sound bold, but I believe it: The Titans have a chance at winning the Super Bowl. It looks sketchy at first, but think about it. Vince Young is entering his peak, they went 8-2 in the last ten games last season, and Jeff Fisher teams always win more games than expected. It's not a stretch to say that they could make a run towards the championship this year.
The Texans seem to always be a team that is picked to be a sleeper. I've bought in the past two years; this year I'm not buying in. Matt Schaub is great when healthy, but he might be overdue for an injury this year. The defense was strong last year, but apart from Mario Williams, Brian Cushing, and DeMeco Ryans, there isn't a lot of talent. The running backs and secondary will have to improve this year for Houston to make the playoffs.
And then there's the Jaguars. David Garrard is not good enough to lead a playoff-level passing attack, and the offensive isn't good enough to significantly help Maurice Jones-Drew. Oh yeah, and their blitz is awful- the Jags only made 14 sacks last year, worst in the NFL.
AFC West
1. San Diego Chargers
2. Denver Broncos
3. Oakland Raiders
4. Kansas City Chiefs
Yikes. The Need-To-Re-Chargers are the best team in this division, and it will be hard for them to win a playoff game. Problems: No proven running game, chemistry problems, a head-strong quarterback, and holdouts. And also, there is only one downfield target for Phillip Rivers for the first three games due to Vincent Jackson's suspension. The Chargers are this year's winner of the Process of Elimination Award for receiving a playoff berth simply because no one else in their division was going to.
The Broncos are um...well, um...average. They're an 8-8 team. I think Josh McDaniels could be the Coach of the Future, but he's gonna need a good team to make it to the playoffs. Even though McDaniels made Matt Cassell look good when he was quarterbacks coach for New England, the rest of the Broncos offense is not close to the Patriots offense. Good times are not yet here for the Broncos.
I think the Raiders will surprise a lot of people this year. Jason Campbell isn't one of the better quarterbacks in the league, but he's a lot better than JaMarcus Russell ever was. This will be the year Darren McFadden finally makes the leap to a top ten running back, and the defense, led by Nnamdi Asomugha, is better than commonly thought. Expect the Raiders to give the Chargers a scare in the standings in about Week 12.
Like I said in the Broncos section, Matt Cassell is not exactly who you want leading your football team. The Chiefs' youth will help them win a few games, fortunately. Their secondary also gained a huge boost with the additions of draftees Eric Berry (Tennessee) and Javier Arenas (Alabama).
NFC East
1. Dallas Cowboys
2. Washington Redskins
3. New York Giants
4. Philadelphia Eagles
This is the toughest division to predict every year, and 2010 is no exception. Any one of these teams could win the division. I'm picking the Cowboys because I like their depth at running back and their finish from last year. They have a fairly big problem with the offensive line, but they can still finish atop the NFC East. Don't expect a playoff run this year, though.
Living in the suburbs of Washington, D.C., I'm exposed to, um, "optimistic" pieces on the Redskins' chances for the upcoming season every year. This year, I'm buying in. Mike Shanahan can make any running back a 1500-yard rusher, and Donovan McNabb will complement a well-rounded offense. The O-line, the cause of most of the Redskins' problems over the past few years, has been revamped, the coaching system has completely changed, and there is a new style of football in Washington. They have everything set up perfectly for a comeback.
The Giants have struggled since their Super Bowl win three years ago. Things are looking up and down this year. Up: Brandon Jacobs is back, they drafted well in the middle rounds, the defense can only improve from last year, and they only missed a playoff spot by one game in 2009. Down: The O-line is old, they have no receiver that stands out, and Tom Coughlin will inevitably screw up again.
As for the Eagles, it's just tough to say at this point. Kevin Kolb looked pretty impressive while filling in for Donovan McNabb last season, but it's hard to say what he will do while being the starter for a whole season. If this column was one of those Predictor Challenge fantasy games, this pick would be lowest on my confidence rating.
NFC North
1. Green Bay Packers
2. Minnesota Vikings
3. Chicago Bears
4. Detroit Lions
Green Bay is winning the division this year. Aaron Rodgers is my pick to win the Offensive Player of the Year Award. Their defense is one of the best in the league, and their draft was under-the-radar good. The only problem is that two of their msot important players, Charles Woodson and Donald Driver, are aging- Woodson is 33 and Driver is 35. They will both start regressing this year.
The Vikings will not make the playoffs this year. Their success this year relies primarily on Brett Favre. For the Vikings to replicate the success of the previous year, here is what needs to happen: go undefeated at home again (because they didn't beat even an above average team away from Minnesota), and Brett Favre needs to have the same type of year as last season. The problem is that last year was the best statistical year of Favre's career and this year, his top two receivers have health and injury concerns. Not exactly a recipe for success.
The Bears have a multitude of questions this year. Will Brian Urlacher be able to regain the talent he had before the injury that kept him sidelined last year? Will Jay Cutler look like he resembles a playoff quarterback? Will they have any success in the red zone, on either side of the football, this year? The answers all point towards "No".
As for the Lions, at least it could be worse. Matt Stafford and Jahvid Best will lead the offense to at least competency. Ndamukong Suh will at least help out the defensive line. I wish I could say better for them, but it could be worse.
NFC South
1. New Orleans Saints
2. Atlanta Falcons
3. Carolina Panthers
4. Tampa Bay Buccaneers
The reigning Super Bowl champions will not be quite as good as last season, but they will certainly win the division again. Drew Brees is either the best or second-best quarterback in the league, and the offense will be just as dominant as last season. Once again, the problem is the inconsistency of the defense.
The Falcons are another rebound team. This year will look more like 2008 than 2009 for Atlanta. Matt Ryan will come back from his sophomore slump, and Michael Turner will make a lot of fantasy owners happy. The concerns center around the secondary and passing defense, but the addition of Dunta Robinson will help a little.
I think Carolina Panthers head coach John Fox is a lot better than he gets credit for. I also think Matt Moore is better than he gets credit for. At any rate, he's better than Jake Delhomme. The running back tandem of DeAngelo Williams and Jonathan Stewart is still great, but the defense will miss Julius Peppers.
As for the Buccaneers, I don't see how they're going to score. They're starting Josh Freeman at quarterback, his only target is a tight end, and Cadillac "Carnell" Williams only scored 4 rushing touchdowns last year. Oh yeah, and head coach Raheem Morris's seat is scalding. At least Tampa Bay has the Rays.
NFC West
1. San Francisco 49ers
4. Arizona Cardinals/Seattle Seahawks/St. Louis Rams (3-way tie for futility)
You know the old saying, "save the best for last"? Well, I apologize to people who live by that sentiment. The 49ers are the best team in this division, and they would be pretty good anyway, but they could win 12 games in this division. Alex Smith will finally show why he was the number 1 overall draft pick in 2005, and the defense will improve even more from last season.
As for the Cardinals, you know your season is bad when the quarterback projected to start at the beginning of training camp is behind Dan Orlovsky on the depth chart. (Speaking of which, that means a UConn alum is in front of a USC Heisman winner. Husky football is finally here!) At least Derek Anderson has Larry Fitzgerald to throw to. Sorry, that should read "aim at". Anderson will get picked off 20 times this year.
The Seahawks have an aging quarterback teamed up with a coach whose only success with a professional football team came in college football. You can't tell me that Pete Carroll won't be distracted by the NCAA sanctions at USC.
And then there's the Rams. Sam Bradford will be a good quarterback, but we don't know when. Steven Jackson is not as good as people think- his fantasy stats are inflated because of a total lack of passing success over the past few years. On the bright side, they have a better defense than the Lions.
AFC Playoff Teams: New England Patriots, San Diego Chargers, Indianapolis Colts, Baltimore Ravens, Tennessee Titans, New York Jets
NFC Playoff Teams: New Orleans Saints, Dallas Cowboys, San Francisco 49ers, Green Bay Packers, Washington Redskins, Atlanta Falcons
AFC Championship Game: Patriots over Ravens
NFC Championship Game: Packers over Saints
Super Bowl: Patriots over Packers
-Tucker Warner
Saturday, September 11, 2010
Saturday, July 24, 2010
Agents in the NCAA
You can contact Tucker Warner by email at firstteemulligan@yahoo.com or on Twitter at http://twitter.com/twarner50
When I first started writing, I established a few standards for myself. Don't use a full sentence quote more than twice in the same story; they aren't important enough. Don't be a member of the ethics police. Always remember that I'm writing from a fan's perspective; use public information only.
And don't write about the business side of sports. We hate seeing it, we hate reading about it, and most importantly, we hate that it exists. Detractors will say that being a professional athlete is just like any other job. We have always known this, but we prefer to ignore it because we want every professional athlete to be like Derek Jeter or Michael Jordan- the guys who would play for free. Dreamy nostalgia aside, we don't like hearing about how sports is a business.
To end this disclaimer, I'd like to apologize for focusing this column on agents and money. I wish there was something more important to write about, but at the moment, there isn't. At least it's better than reading the 5000th article about how this is the Year of the Pitcher, right?
At the SEC media day on Wednesday, Alabama football coach Nick Saban likened agents who incite improper contact with collegiate football players to pimps. (His words, not mine. By the way, I think Saban's use of that word is the second-worst in history, behind only the probably-regrettably-named MTV reality show Pimp My Ride.) Saban went on to say "I don't think it's anything but greed that's creating it right now on behalf of the agents...I have no respect for people who do that to young people. None. How would you feel if they did it to your child?"
Back it up a sec, Nick. Your players practice four hours a day and participate in many other mandatory team activities, restricting most from taking other jobs. These players are on national television twelve times a year. Television networks, the college they attend, the NCAA, and the coaches themselves all make millions of dollars off these student-athletes, who are denied from receiving payment of any type under NCAA rule. How exactly are the agents who pay them the bad guys?
To put this in comparison, let's say that you are fresh out of college and take a job at a very large, very successful company. The job you take is menial and pays you next to nothing, but in four years you will be promoted to a position that is pretty prestigious and you will receive better wages. For three years you toil along and make very little over the cost of living. Then, someone from a rival company approaches you and offers you gifts if you agree to work for him in six months. You would recieve the same benefits and the same promotion at the rival company. Why would you say no?
It's not a perfect metaphor, but it seems to sum up the situation pretty well. There's no reason for the players to say no to these agents. The NCAA needs to stop pretending that these players are going rogue, when in fact they are just looking out for their own best interests. A large number of college football players come from families that are not well-off financially. They are offered gifts. What reasons do they have to say no?
The NCAA at least realizes that these players don't care if their former colleges are placed under probation or hit with fines and punishments. (It seems some of the coaches don't care either. When was the last time you heard Pete Carroll say anything about USC?) The NCAA has demanded Reggie Bush's Heisman Trophy back from USC.
Obviously, this is stupid. First off, it's not like Bush cheated. He won the trophy. Let him keep it.
Second, and more important, the NCAA is showing its blind stuborness and dumb policies in this one. They exploit their student-athletes much more than the agents they are combating against. I've already stated why I think college athletes should be compensated in some sort, which is forbidden by the NCAA. The NCAA will not allow this and now is attempting to paint the agents and the players as the bad guys.
"An Unnamed Memphis Basketball Player" never took the SAT and might not have been eligible to attend college. We all know who he is, but the NCAA has never released his name. Weslye Saunders, a tight end for South Carolina, goes to a party with some agents and his name is given to every media outlet. There's one reason for the double standard.
You guessed it.
Money.
The NCAA doesn't pay its players and doesn't want anyone else to either, darn it! There's greed behind its actions in every way.
-Tucker Warner
When I first started writing, I established a few standards for myself. Don't use a full sentence quote more than twice in the same story; they aren't important enough. Don't be a member of the ethics police. Always remember that I'm writing from a fan's perspective; use public information only.
And don't write about the business side of sports. We hate seeing it, we hate reading about it, and most importantly, we hate that it exists. Detractors will say that being a professional athlete is just like any other job. We have always known this, but we prefer to ignore it because we want every professional athlete to be like Derek Jeter or Michael Jordan- the guys who would play for free. Dreamy nostalgia aside, we don't like hearing about how sports is a business.
To end this disclaimer, I'd like to apologize for focusing this column on agents and money. I wish there was something more important to write about, but at the moment, there isn't. At least it's better than reading the 5000th article about how this is the Year of the Pitcher, right?
At the SEC media day on Wednesday, Alabama football coach Nick Saban likened agents who incite improper contact with collegiate football players to pimps. (His words, not mine. By the way, I think Saban's use of that word is the second-worst in history, behind only the probably-regrettably-named MTV reality show Pimp My Ride.) Saban went on to say "I don't think it's anything but greed that's creating it right now on behalf of the agents...I have no respect for people who do that to young people. None. How would you feel if they did it to your child?"
Back it up a sec, Nick. Your players practice four hours a day and participate in many other mandatory team activities, restricting most from taking other jobs. These players are on national television twelve times a year. Television networks, the college they attend, the NCAA, and the coaches themselves all make millions of dollars off these student-athletes, who are denied from receiving payment of any type under NCAA rule. How exactly are the agents who pay them the bad guys?
To put this in comparison, let's say that you are fresh out of college and take a job at a very large, very successful company. The job you take is menial and pays you next to nothing, but in four years you will be promoted to a position that is pretty prestigious and you will receive better wages. For three years you toil along and make very little over the cost of living. Then, someone from a rival company approaches you and offers you gifts if you agree to work for him in six months. You would recieve the same benefits and the same promotion at the rival company. Why would you say no?
It's not a perfect metaphor, but it seems to sum up the situation pretty well. There's no reason for the players to say no to these agents. The NCAA needs to stop pretending that these players are going rogue, when in fact they are just looking out for their own best interests. A large number of college football players come from families that are not well-off financially. They are offered gifts. What reasons do they have to say no?
The NCAA at least realizes that these players don't care if their former colleges are placed under probation or hit with fines and punishments. (It seems some of the coaches don't care either. When was the last time you heard Pete Carroll say anything about USC?) The NCAA has demanded Reggie Bush's Heisman Trophy back from USC.
Obviously, this is stupid. First off, it's not like Bush cheated. He won the trophy. Let him keep it.
Second, and more important, the NCAA is showing its blind stuborness and dumb policies in this one. They exploit their student-athletes much more than the agents they are combating against. I've already stated why I think college athletes should be compensated in some sort, which is forbidden by the NCAA. The NCAA will not allow this and now is attempting to paint the agents and the players as the bad guys.
"An Unnamed Memphis Basketball Player" never took the SAT and might not have been eligible to attend college. We all know who he is, but the NCAA has never released his name. Weslye Saunders, a tight end for South Carolina, goes to a party with some agents and his name is given to every media outlet. There's one reason for the double standard.
You guessed it.
Money.
The NCAA doesn't pay its players and doesn't want anyone else to either, darn it! There's greed behind its actions in every way.
-Tucker Warner
Saturday, May 15, 2010
LeBron's Legacy
You can contact Tucker Warner by email at firstteemulligan@yahoo.com or on Twitter at http://twitter.com/twarner50
What can you say after watching the debacle that was the Cavaliers-Celtics series? Well, let me change that. What can you say about LeBron James?
Sure, you can say that Coach Mike Brown hurts the Cavs more than he helps them. Sure, you can say that Cleveland GM Danny Ferry does not and will never know how to build a championship team. Sure, you can say that the team itself is so flawed that not even Michael Jordan in his prime could have won a championship with them. (It's true. There's no good second banana on Cleveland.)
And yes, all these arguments have merit. Coach Mike Brown never seems to play the right five to match up well against an opponent. For example, Anderson Varejao used his speed, jumping ability, and versatility to exploit a huge weakness in Boston's frontcourt. He averaged 21.5 minutes per game in the Celtics series, a good 7 minutes/game less than his regular season average. Um, maybe not a good decision. Oh, Coach Mike Brown also thought it would be a good idea to match up a washed-up Shaq on a still-capable Kevin Garnett, while Antawn Jamison was stuck wasting his athleticism on the always-immobile Kendrick Perkins. Yeah, that one didn't work either.
Can you blame Coach Mike Brown entirely? No, you can't blame him entirely, but that's only because Danny Ferry has also done such a horrendous job as GM that you have to blame him also.
There's something that Ferry should realize: dynasties are created by the second and third best players. Look at the championship teams over the past three decades. Bird had McHale. Magic had Kareem. Jordan had Pippen. Isiah had Dumars. Olajuwon had Drexler. Shaq had Kobe, then Kobe had Gasol. Duncan had Parker and Ginobili. On the 2008 Celtics, Garnett had Pierce, or Pierce had Garnett, or Garnett had Allen, or Rondo had all three, or something like that.
LeBron has nobody. Who's the second-best player on the Cavs? Mo Williams? Um, that's not exactly a good thing. Some people might say "But Mo Williams is good! He was even an all-star in 2007!" And these people would be called dumb. Maybe he's above average, but he's definitely not one of the best five point guards in the league. Look at all the second bananas in the last paragraph. All of them, in their prime, were in the top three in their position during their prime. Heck, Manu Ginobili even got an MVP vote this year! That's the type of guy you need as a second banana when you have the best player in the league. Not a one-time All Star who isn't even the best point guard on his team. (For the record, if LeBron was a full-time point, he'd start over Mo. This is indisputable.)
So no, you can't blame LeBron for losing the series and never getting close to a championship. But at some point, you have to say that maybe LeBron won't be one of the ten best players of all time. Put it this way: there's a reason that guys like Reggie Miller or Julius Erving never won a championship. They were missing that thing that guys like MJ, Bird, Magic, and Duncan had. Miller was missing the talent to win games without much help. Erving was missing the killer instinct.
LeBron is missing selfishness.
Yes, I said it. Selfishness is a good quality to have when you're the best player on a contending team. I don't mean Kobe-in-2005-level selfishness. I mean just enough selfishness to realize that, if you're LeBron, keeping the ball for yourselfin a key situation is a much better option than dishing off to Mo Williams. LeBron is just too loyal.
Quick tangent: that's probably why I think LeBron will stay in Cleveland. The best move would be Chicago, for many reasons (mostly because of Derrick Rose and Joakim Noah), but LeBron probably doesn't care. This is the guy who keeps around his high school buddies as his entourage and plays in pretty much his hometown. Could he leave? Yes, and I could see him doing so. But I'd bet on him staying.
Back to my main point. Here's my list of the best ten NBA players ever: MJ, Russell, Magic, Bird, Kareem, Wilt, Duncan, Olajuwon, West, and Shaq. All of them have won more than two championships. Only one (Wilt) had something inherently wrong with him that prevented him from winning, but in his case, it was okay because during his era there weren't exactly that many 7-1 athletic centers who could stay with him through a whole game. LeBron is definitely the most athletic player in the game today, but he doesn't have the capability to dominate the way Wilt did.
And that's why, at the current rate, I don't see LeBron becoming one of the ten best players of all-time. Right now, his career is an enigma. Absolutely the best player of the past two years, he has never been close to winning a championship. Dwyane Wade didn't exactly have a ton of help when Miami won the title in 2006. Chauncey Billups didn't have too much help when Detroit won in 2004. And LeBron is much better than Billups, and probably better than Wade.
And while we're not ready to wrap up LeBron's career just yet, (he's only 25 and could completely change his legacy) his free agency will show LeBron's true intentions. If he signs with Chicago, that will prove that he is committed to winning, which would negate everything I have said in this article. If he re-signs with Cleveland, then it next-to-proves that LeBron wants to win a championship, but winning is not the most important thing to him, the way it was to Jordan or Russell.
And no matter what, that's where LeBron's legacy will be when he ends his career. Undoubtedly great, but no Jordan or Russell.
-Tucker Warner
What can you say after watching the debacle that was the Cavaliers-Celtics series? Well, let me change that. What can you say about LeBron James?
Sure, you can say that Coach Mike Brown hurts the Cavs more than he helps them. Sure, you can say that Cleveland GM Danny Ferry does not and will never know how to build a championship team. Sure, you can say that the team itself is so flawed that not even Michael Jordan in his prime could have won a championship with them. (It's true. There's no good second banana on Cleveland.)
And yes, all these arguments have merit. Coach Mike Brown never seems to play the right five to match up well against an opponent. For example, Anderson Varejao used his speed, jumping ability, and versatility to exploit a huge weakness in Boston's frontcourt. He averaged 21.5 minutes per game in the Celtics series, a good 7 minutes/game less than his regular season average. Um, maybe not a good decision. Oh, Coach Mike Brown also thought it would be a good idea to match up a washed-up Shaq on a still-capable Kevin Garnett, while Antawn Jamison was stuck wasting his athleticism on the always-immobile Kendrick Perkins. Yeah, that one didn't work either.
Can you blame Coach Mike Brown entirely? No, you can't blame him entirely, but that's only because Danny Ferry has also done such a horrendous job as GM that you have to blame him also.
There's something that Ferry should realize: dynasties are created by the second and third best players. Look at the championship teams over the past three decades. Bird had McHale. Magic had Kareem. Jordan had Pippen. Isiah had Dumars. Olajuwon had Drexler. Shaq had Kobe, then Kobe had Gasol. Duncan had Parker and Ginobili. On the 2008 Celtics, Garnett had Pierce, or Pierce had Garnett, or Garnett had Allen, or Rondo had all three, or something like that.
LeBron has nobody. Who's the second-best player on the Cavs? Mo Williams? Um, that's not exactly a good thing. Some people might say "But Mo Williams is good! He was even an all-star in 2007!" And these people would be called dumb. Maybe he's above average, but he's definitely not one of the best five point guards in the league. Look at all the second bananas in the last paragraph. All of them, in their prime, were in the top three in their position during their prime. Heck, Manu Ginobili even got an MVP vote this year! That's the type of guy you need as a second banana when you have the best player in the league. Not a one-time All Star who isn't even the best point guard on his team. (For the record, if LeBron was a full-time point, he'd start over Mo. This is indisputable.)
So no, you can't blame LeBron for losing the series and never getting close to a championship. But at some point, you have to say that maybe LeBron won't be one of the ten best players of all time. Put it this way: there's a reason that guys like Reggie Miller or Julius Erving never won a championship. They were missing that thing that guys like MJ, Bird, Magic, and Duncan had. Miller was missing the talent to win games without much help. Erving was missing the killer instinct.
LeBron is missing selfishness.
Yes, I said it. Selfishness is a good quality to have when you're the best player on a contending team. I don't mean Kobe-in-2005-level selfishness. I mean just enough selfishness to realize that, if you're LeBron, keeping the ball for yourselfin a key situation is a much better option than dishing off to Mo Williams. LeBron is just too loyal.
Quick tangent: that's probably why I think LeBron will stay in Cleveland. The best move would be Chicago, for many reasons (mostly because of Derrick Rose and Joakim Noah), but LeBron probably doesn't care. This is the guy who keeps around his high school buddies as his entourage and plays in pretty much his hometown. Could he leave? Yes, and I could see him doing so. But I'd bet on him staying.
Back to my main point. Here's my list of the best ten NBA players ever: MJ, Russell, Magic, Bird, Kareem, Wilt, Duncan, Olajuwon, West, and Shaq. All of them have won more than two championships. Only one (Wilt) had something inherently wrong with him that prevented him from winning, but in his case, it was okay because during his era there weren't exactly that many 7-1 athletic centers who could stay with him through a whole game. LeBron is definitely the most athletic player in the game today, but he doesn't have the capability to dominate the way Wilt did.
And that's why, at the current rate, I don't see LeBron becoming one of the ten best players of all-time. Right now, his career is an enigma. Absolutely the best player of the past two years, he has never been close to winning a championship. Dwyane Wade didn't exactly have a ton of help when Miami won the title in 2006. Chauncey Billups didn't have too much help when Detroit won in 2004. And LeBron is much better than Billups, and probably better than Wade.
And while we're not ready to wrap up LeBron's career just yet, (he's only 25 and could completely change his legacy) his free agency will show LeBron's true intentions. If he signs with Chicago, that will prove that he is committed to winning, which would negate everything I have said in this article. If he re-signs with Cleveland, then it next-to-proves that LeBron wants to win a championship, but winning is not the most important thing to him, the way it was to Jordan or Russell.
And no matter what, that's where LeBron's legacy will be when he ends his career. Undoubtedly great, but no Jordan or Russell.
-Tucker Warner
Friday, April 30, 2010
NHL Playoffs Round 1 Review/Downfall of the Capitals
You can contact Tucker Warner by email at firstteemulligan@yahoo.com or on Twitter at http://twitter.com/twarner50
Round One of the 2010 NHL playoffs have concluded, leaving us with a few surprises. Although I can currently offer little solace for fans of the upset Sabres and Devils (other than they'll be back next year), there is much more to be said for the future of the Washington Capitals.
Yeah, I know they were by far the winningest team in the league this year, and that they lost to the team seeded last in the NHL, becoming the first 1-seed ever to lose a series to an 8-seed after having a 3-1 lead. (Message to Caps fans: wait until you read the rest of the article before sending me angry emails. It gets better.)
Losing this series to the Montreal Canadiens could be the best thing ever to happen to the Washington Capitals franchise.
I know it sounds ludicrous, and crazy, and ridiculous. Just hear me out for a little while.
It's important to remember that this just wasn't the Caps' year. They were not going to win the Stanley Cup. This became evident in Game 5, when the Capitals were playing in Washington with virtually every advantage in their hands and couldn't close out the series. This team was just too flawed.
Sure, they had the most points of any team during the regular season and looked unbeatable for some stretches. But you can never, NEVER, win a championship with a defense as bad as the one the Capitals had. It just doesn't happen. That was the biggest reason that the Capitals couldn't win this year, although there was also their inability to create good shots, inconsistent goaltending, a penchant for taking dumb penalties, and not enough chemistry due to players switching between lines every game.
See? This wasn't the Caps' year. But like I said earlier, it gets better.
Or rather, it COULD get better. Washington's general manager George McPhee tends to make deals that don't make a whole lot of sense, to put it nicely. During the previous offseason, McPhee operated under the basic principle that "our defense is fine." You guessed it, McPhee made very little moves on the defensive end. Never mind the fact that their defense was actually very bad and Chris Pronger was still in the free agent market. It's just that whenever you can sign two washed-up journeymen forwards, you've gotta do it. Anyone want to know the day Washington made their first move to acquire a defenseman? March 3. Funny...that date was also the trading deadline. That was the day the Caps traded for Joe Corvo, a solid defensive player. The glaring mistake in this trade was that they traded AWAY one of their top defensive players, Brian Pothier. But hey, whenever you can trade away your best defensive player to get an inferior player in every sense of the game, you've gotta do it.
Obviously, McPhee isn't the best general manager for a team that wants to win a championship. For a team that needs to become good, sure. But not for a legitimate contender. The good news, however, is this would become a wake-up call. That's where losing now comes into the picture. You don't get wake-up calls by losing in the conference finals. You get wake-up calls by losing historically in the first round. So maybe this will be the year that McPhee wakes up and realizes "Holy crap. We suck at defense." Maybe.
Moving on now, here's 4 Up and 4 Down for this round, with team power rankings at the end.
4 Up
Sidney Crosby
Did he do anything that wasn't expected? Well, not really. But he did lead the first round in scoring by a large margin and is the best player on what seems to be the best team. Also, he became the definite answer to the question: "Who's the best player in the NHL?" I'm sorry, Ovechkin fans, but your argument doesn't have any strength anymore. Yeah, maybe Ovechkin's flashier and can do more with his skill set, but how can you call him the best player in the NHL when he's only made the second round of the playoffs once? Meanwhile, Crosby is the best player on the best team, a guy who can lead the league in goals, and is one of the only player who affects games just by being on the ice. The way he can see passing angles that none of us can even conceive of is a skill that belongs to only an elite few of the NHL- Crosby, Nicklas Backstrom, Joe Thornton, and Joni Pitkanen. In addition to the off-puck skills, well, did you SEE what he did to Jason Spezza in Game 5? He kept the puck for nearly 15 seconds just circling and waiting for someone to get open. Once he passed it, his team immediately scored a goal. It's just incredible. And if you think that's impressive, imagine what this paragraph would look like if I liked Crosby.
Jaroslav Halak
Despite a lackluster at best performance in the first three games of the Canadiens' series with the Capitals, Halak recovered to lead the Habs to the second round with three straight unbelievable performances. His Game 6- the game where he had 53 saves- was one of the best postseason games by a goaltender in the history of the NHL. Enough said.
Joe Pavelski
The guy most responsible for the Sharks finally making it out of the first round was not Joe Thornton, Patrick Marleau, or Dany Heatley. It was Joe Pavelski, who led San Jose in goals with 5. Those 5 goals included game winners in Game 4 (overtime) and Game 6, and the game-tying goal in Game 2 which happened only 30 seconds before overtime. In the first game of the second-round series with the Detroit Red Wings, Pavelski scored 2 goals en route to a 4-3 victory. Pavelski also racked up a nice, complementary 4 assists. In conclusion, it's safe to say Pavelski is a necessity to the Sharks.
Brian Boucher
The Philadelphia Flyers goaltender, a 33-year-old journeyman whose last regular starting job was before the lockout, led all playoff teams in both Goals Against Average and Save Percentage in the first round. In the four wins against the Devils, Boucher gave up 1, 2, 1, and 0 goals. In the lone loss, he gave up 4 goals- the Flyers scored 3. Even when the Flyers lost, they were still in a position to win due to the impeccable play of Boucher.
4 Down
Alexander Semin
And you thought this would be Alexander Ovechkin! Nope, Ovechkin played well in the first round. Backstrom's play was acceptable, Theodore's and Varlamov's goaltending woes were not their fault, and the mediocre play of the defense was to be expected. Semin had only 2 assists and zero goals in the seven-game series, with an even plus/minus. Is this the type of play you want from what is supposed to be your second- or third-best player? Of course not. Is Semin just not a good player? I don't know. What I do know is that whoever claimed Alexander Semin was an elite player was mistaken.
Joe Thornton and Patrick Marleau
Obviously, Thornton and Marleau must not have gotten the memo that the playoffs already started. Thornton finished with 0 goals and 4 assists, with a -4 plus/minus, while Marleau picked up 1 goal and 2 assists, with a -2 plus/minus. I suppose this wouldn't be bad if they were third-line guys, but this isn't what you would want from two of your best players.
Martin Brodeur
I wouldn't say that Brodeur's case for the best goalie of all-time is toast, but the past two seasons have been a gigantic step away from securing his spot. After losing in the first round in heartbreaking style to the Hurricanes last year, Brodeur was supposed to come into this year's playoffs with a giant chip on his shoulder. Obviously, he didn't, losing 4 out of 5 games. On the playoff ranking of GAA, Brodeur is fifteenth. Fifteenth! There are only sixteen starting goalies! Incredible.
Drew Doughty and Jack Johnson
The Kings' top defensive line, starring two of the best young defensemen in the league, ranked tied for 232nd in plus/minus, good for third from last. When your best defensive line plays like THAT, you cannot win more than 3 games. It's impossible. The Kings lost their series.
Power Rankings for Second Round
1. Pittsburgh Penguins
2. Chicago Blackhawks
3. Detroit Red Wings
4. San Jose Sharks
5. Philadelphia Flyers
6. Vancouver Canucks
7. Boston Bruins
8. Montreal Canadiens
-Tucker Warner
Round One of the 2010 NHL playoffs have concluded, leaving us with a few surprises. Although I can currently offer little solace for fans of the upset Sabres and Devils (other than they'll be back next year), there is much more to be said for the future of the Washington Capitals.
Yeah, I know they were by far the winningest team in the league this year, and that they lost to the team seeded last in the NHL, becoming the first 1-seed ever to lose a series to an 8-seed after having a 3-1 lead. (Message to Caps fans: wait until you read the rest of the article before sending me angry emails. It gets better.)
Losing this series to the Montreal Canadiens could be the best thing ever to happen to the Washington Capitals franchise.
I know it sounds ludicrous, and crazy, and ridiculous. Just hear me out for a little while.
It's important to remember that this just wasn't the Caps' year. They were not going to win the Stanley Cup. This became evident in Game 5, when the Capitals were playing in Washington with virtually every advantage in their hands and couldn't close out the series. This team was just too flawed.
Sure, they had the most points of any team during the regular season and looked unbeatable for some stretches. But you can never, NEVER, win a championship with a defense as bad as the one the Capitals had. It just doesn't happen. That was the biggest reason that the Capitals couldn't win this year, although there was also their inability to create good shots, inconsistent goaltending, a penchant for taking dumb penalties, and not enough chemistry due to players switching between lines every game.
See? This wasn't the Caps' year. But like I said earlier, it gets better.
Or rather, it COULD get better. Washington's general manager George McPhee tends to make deals that don't make a whole lot of sense, to put it nicely. During the previous offseason, McPhee operated under the basic principle that "our defense is fine." You guessed it, McPhee made very little moves on the defensive end. Never mind the fact that their defense was actually very bad and Chris Pronger was still in the free agent market. It's just that whenever you can sign two washed-up journeymen forwards, you've gotta do it. Anyone want to know the day Washington made their first move to acquire a defenseman? March 3. Funny...that date was also the trading deadline. That was the day the Caps traded for Joe Corvo, a solid defensive player. The glaring mistake in this trade was that they traded AWAY one of their top defensive players, Brian Pothier. But hey, whenever you can trade away your best defensive player to get an inferior player in every sense of the game, you've gotta do it.
Obviously, McPhee isn't the best general manager for a team that wants to win a championship. For a team that needs to become good, sure. But not for a legitimate contender. The good news, however, is this would become a wake-up call. That's where losing now comes into the picture. You don't get wake-up calls by losing in the conference finals. You get wake-up calls by losing historically in the first round. So maybe this will be the year that McPhee wakes up and realizes "Holy crap. We suck at defense." Maybe.
Moving on now, here's 4 Up and 4 Down for this round, with team power rankings at the end.
4 Up
Sidney Crosby
Did he do anything that wasn't expected? Well, not really. But he did lead the first round in scoring by a large margin and is the best player on what seems to be the best team. Also, he became the definite answer to the question: "Who's the best player in the NHL?" I'm sorry, Ovechkin fans, but your argument doesn't have any strength anymore. Yeah, maybe Ovechkin's flashier and can do more with his skill set, but how can you call him the best player in the NHL when he's only made the second round of the playoffs once? Meanwhile, Crosby is the best player on the best team, a guy who can lead the league in goals, and is one of the only player who affects games just by being on the ice. The way he can see passing angles that none of us can even conceive of is a skill that belongs to only an elite few of the NHL- Crosby, Nicklas Backstrom, Joe Thornton, and Joni Pitkanen. In addition to the off-puck skills, well, did you SEE what he did to Jason Spezza in Game 5? He kept the puck for nearly 15 seconds just circling and waiting for someone to get open. Once he passed it, his team immediately scored a goal. It's just incredible. And if you think that's impressive, imagine what this paragraph would look like if I liked Crosby.
Jaroslav Halak
Despite a lackluster at best performance in the first three games of the Canadiens' series with the Capitals, Halak recovered to lead the Habs to the second round with three straight unbelievable performances. His Game 6- the game where he had 53 saves- was one of the best postseason games by a goaltender in the history of the NHL. Enough said.
Joe Pavelski
The guy most responsible for the Sharks finally making it out of the first round was not Joe Thornton, Patrick Marleau, or Dany Heatley. It was Joe Pavelski, who led San Jose in goals with 5. Those 5 goals included game winners in Game 4 (overtime) and Game 6, and the game-tying goal in Game 2 which happened only 30 seconds before overtime. In the first game of the second-round series with the Detroit Red Wings, Pavelski scored 2 goals en route to a 4-3 victory. Pavelski also racked up a nice, complementary 4 assists. In conclusion, it's safe to say Pavelski is a necessity to the Sharks.
Brian Boucher
The Philadelphia Flyers goaltender, a 33-year-old journeyman whose last regular starting job was before the lockout, led all playoff teams in both Goals Against Average and Save Percentage in the first round. In the four wins against the Devils, Boucher gave up 1, 2, 1, and 0 goals. In the lone loss, he gave up 4 goals- the Flyers scored 3. Even when the Flyers lost, they were still in a position to win due to the impeccable play of Boucher.
4 Down
Alexander Semin
And you thought this would be Alexander Ovechkin! Nope, Ovechkin played well in the first round. Backstrom's play was acceptable, Theodore's and Varlamov's goaltending woes were not their fault, and the mediocre play of the defense was to be expected. Semin had only 2 assists and zero goals in the seven-game series, with an even plus/minus. Is this the type of play you want from what is supposed to be your second- or third-best player? Of course not. Is Semin just not a good player? I don't know. What I do know is that whoever claimed Alexander Semin was an elite player was mistaken.
Joe Thornton and Patrick Marleau
Obviously, Thornton and Marleau must not have gotten the memo that the playoffs already started. Thornton finished with 0 goals and 4 assists, with a -4 plus/minus, while Marleau picked up 1 goal and 2 assists, with a -2 plus/minus. I suppose this wouldn't be bad if they were third-line guys, but this isn't what you would want from two of your best players.
Martin Brodeur
I wouldn't say that Brodeur's case for the best goalie of all-time is toast, but the past two seasons have been a gigantic step away from securing his spot. After losing in the first round in heartbreaking style to the Hurricanes last year, Brodeur was supposed to come into this year's playoffs with a giant chip on his shoulder. Obviously, he didn't, losing 4 out of 5 games. On the playoff ranking of GAA, Brodeur is fifteenth. Fifteenth! There are only sixteen starting goalies! Incredible.
Drew Doughty and Jack Johnson
The Kings' top defensive line, starring two of the best young defensemen in the league, ranked tied for 232nd in plus/minus, good for third from last. When your best defensive line plays like THAT, you cannot win more than 3 games. It's impossible. The Kings lost their series.
Power Rankings for Second Round
1. Pittsburgh Penguins
2. Chicago Blackhawks
3. Detroit Red Wings
4. San Jose Sharks
5. Philadelphia Flyers
6. Vancouver Canucks
7. Boston Bruins
8. Montreal Canadiens
-Tucker Warner
Thursday, April 22, 2010
Saturday, March 20, 2010
Friday, March 19, 2010
Friday, March 5, 2010
March Madness (3/5/2010)
As I write this, I am watching one of my new favorite basketball teams, Morehead State Eagles, beat up on Tennessee Tech. I like them because of the great tandem of Kenneth Faried and Maze Stallworth, their great hustle and team play, and- more to the point- I have money riding on them.
That's what this college basketball season has led to. Me, and I'm sure many others (right?), are staying up, on a Friday night, to watch two teams starring players we will never see again, play a do-or-die game in their conference semifinal. The crowd is crazy, the players are running like their life is on the line...and the game isn't even close. So, to recap, the fans are crazy, the players are crazy, and I thought I just saw Kenneth Faried sprout a third arm. So now I'm crazy too. But it does explain his rebounding abilities.
I don't even know where Morehead State is.
But isn't this the real point of March Madness? Does it really matter that most of the games aren't that close or exciting?
For me, the greatness of March Madness starts in the first few weeks of March. Already we've had one great chills moment. Love him or hate him, Greivis Vazquez is the best player in Maryland Terrapins history not named Len Bias. In his final game at home, against the best team in the ACC, Vazquez sealed the win. In the upcoming ACC Tournament, Vazquez will likely become the Terrapins' all-time leading scorer. He could have chosen to break that record at his stadium, with his fans. He decided to win instead. It's too bad that type of thing doesn't happen in the NBA anymore. Kind of ironic that Vazquez will likely be a journeyman for his professional career, isn't it?
And that's just the start of the best three-week stretch in American sports. Next is the conference tournaments. These, more than the NCAA Tournament itself, are where the magic resides. Think about all the great games, or moments, that have happened in the conference tournamens over the past 5 years. Don't forget all the small conferences- you can't leave out Duquesne's energizing run to the Atlantic 10 or North Dakota State winning the Summit Championship in their first year of Division 1 eligibility. And those only happened last year.
But here's what I'm getting at: think of the great conference tournament games of the 1980s. Heck, even think of the great ones of the 1990s. Now think of the great NCAA Tournament games in both those decades. Don't you think of way more from the NCAA Tournament? Disregarding the Final Four, between the NCAA Tournament and conference tournaments, the product is just as good, mostly as dramatic, and usually evenly matched. But in the conference tournaments, the teams have natural rivalries and chips on their shoulders from previous games with their conference foes.
Now, I'm not going to argue that conference tournaments are better than the NCAA Tournament. It's not. But aren't they relatively equal? Shouldn't we remember some legendary games from the conference tournament?
In the 1981 Big East Final, Syracuse beat Villanova in three overtimes. The winning shot came from a Leo Rautins tip-in with three seconds left. Doesn't this sound like one of the greatest games of all time? Why is this not remembered?
And as a UConn fan and a Big East afecionado, I'm scared that the to-describe-it-as-epic-doesn't-do-it-enough-justice Six Overtime Classic in last year's Big East Tournament will suffer from the same fate. Eventually, critics will pick it apart. They will say things such as "The game wasn't very exciting at the end" or "Neither team played great". Maybe I can't disagree with those statements. All I know is that my favorite team played against their most heated rival through six overtimes on a Thursday night in Madison Square Garden. And I was there.
To say that I'm "worried" that this game falls through the annals of basketball history is an understatement. Easily the best game of the past ten years, the game will mean nothing in 2030, for no other reason than it did not occur in the NCAA Tournament.
More than anything, I support upholding the history and great moments of my favorite sport. That's why I want to meet Greivis Vazquez someday and hug him. That's why I sometimes smile just thinking about the Six Overtime Classic. And that's why I stay up on a Friday night watching Morehead State play Tennessee Tech. I'm not just waiting for another one of "Those Games" to happen. I'm fervently hunting for the next installment of college basketball's greatest games. They're buried deep in the passion. I know they are.
And that, I think, is the main reason I don't want these conference tournaments to be forgotten. Somewhere, there are the teams who cared about winning more than anything else. And that can't disappear. We can't let it.
Meanwhile, the Big South Final will be played tomorrow between Coastal Carolina and Winthrop. I'll be watching it.
As always, email us with comments, insults, and questions (whether on or off topic) at firstteemulligan@yahoo.com
That's what this college basketball season has led to. Me, and I'm sure many others (right?), are staying up, on a Friday night, to watch two teams starring players we will never see again, play a do-or-die game in their conference semifinal. The crowd is crazy, the players are running like their life is on the line...and the game isn't even close. So, to recap, the fans are crazy, the players are crazy, and I thought I just saw Kenneth Faried sprout a third arm. So now I'm crazy too. But it does explain his rebounding abilities.
I don't even know where Morehead State is.
But isn't this the real point of March Madness? Does it really matter that most of the games aren't that close or exciting?
For me, the greatness of March Madness starts in the first few weeks of March. Already we've had one great chills moment. Love him or hate him, Greivis Vazquez is the best player in Maryland Terrapins history not named Len Bias. In his final game at home, against the best team in the ACC, Vazquez sealed the win. In the upcoming ACC Tournament, Vazquez will likely become the Terrapins' all-time leading scorer. He could have chosen to break that record at his stadium, with his fans. He decided to win instead. It's too bad that type of thing doesn't happen in the NBA anymore. Kind of ironic that Vazquez will likely be a journeyman for his professional career, isn't it?
And that's just the start of the best three-week stretch in American sports. Next is the conference tournaments. These, more than the NCAA Tournament itself, are where the magic resides. Think about all the great games, or moments, that have happened in the conference tournamens over the past 5 years. Don't forget all the small conferences- you can't leave out Duquesne's energizing run to the Atlantic 10 or North Dakota State winning the Summit Championship in their first year of Division 1 eligibility. And those only happened last year.
But here's what I'm getting at: think of the great conference tournament games of the 1980s. Heck, even think of the great ones of the 1990s. Now think of the great NCAA Tournament games in both those decades. Don't you think of way more from the NCAA Tournament? Disregarding the Final Four, between the NCAA Tournament and conference tournaments, the product is just as good, mostly as dramatic, and usually evenly matched. But in the conference tournaments, the teams have natural rivalries and chips on their shoulders from previous games with their conference foes.
Now, I'm not going to argue that conference tournaments are better than the NCAA Tournament. It's not. But aren't they relatively equal? Shouldn't we remember some legendary games from the conference tournament?
In the 1981 Big East Final, Syracuse beat Villanova in three overtimes. The winning shot came from a Leo Rautins tip-in with three seconds left. Doesn't this sound like one of the greatest games of all time? Why is this not remembered?
And as a UConn fan and a Big East afecionado, I'm scared that the to-describe-it-as-epic-doesn't-do-it-enough-justice Six Overtime Classic in last year's Big East Tournament will suffer from the same fate. Eventually, critics will pick it apart. They will say things such as "The game wasn't very exciting at the end" or "Neither team played great". Maybe I can't disagree with those statements. All I know is that my favorite team played against their most heated rival through six overtimes on a Thursday night in Madison Square Garden. And I was there.
To say that I'm "worried" that this game falls through the annals of basketball history is an understatement. Easily the best game of the past ten years, the game will mean nothing in 2030, for no other reason than it did not occur in the NCAA Tournament.
More than anything, I support upholding the history and great moments of my favorite sport. That's why I want to meet Greivis Vazquez someday and hug him. That's why I sometimes smile just thinking about the Six Overtime Classic. And that's why I stay up on a Friday night watching Morehead State play Tennessee Tech. I'm not just waiting for another one of "Those Games" to happen. I'm fervently hunting for the next installment of college basketball's greatest games. They're buried deep in the passion. I know they are.
And that, I think, is the main reason I don't want these conference tournaments to be forgotten. Somewhere, there are the teams who cared about winning more than anything else. And that can't disappear. We can't let it.
Meanwhile, the Big South Final will be played tomorrow between Coastal Carolina and Winthrop. I'll be watching it.
As always, email us with comments, insults, and questions (whether on or off topic) at firstteemulligan@yahoo.com
Saturday, January 16, 2010
Steroids and baseball, does it ever end?
Mark McGwire. Adjectives that used to come to mind were “role model,” “legend,” or even perhaps “future Hall of Famer.” Now all I can think of are “juicer” or “cheater.”
There are many arguments when it comes to the fate of McGwire, but I will state my opinion first and clear; I do not care if steroids were legal at the time of his career, performance-enhancing drugs are just that, performance enhancing. If you didn’t set those records with your own strength and no help, you cheated. No exceptions.
The Steroid Era only needed one guy to start it. When one man uses it, others follow, because it’s the only way you can keep up with that level of play. So like I say about other things in life, it was “understandable yet inexcusable.” Sure it may be hard to hit a 100 mile per hour fastball, but wouldn’t you say that you have even more talent if you didn’t have aide? How fair is it to the players that didn’t use juice yet had remarkable seasons of their own and were overshadowed? Sports have rules to be fair, not to be broken.
The other day when McGwire released his statement about having used steroids, it was no surprise to me. It’s a shame to have America’s Past-time go down the tubes because of a drug. But I feel as though that this drug should be treated just like any others, with a huge fine and some jail time. But what’s Roger doing now? Probably sitting on some beach. And with no doubts in my mind McGwire will be joining him shortly.
And is it ironic that McGwire wants the new hitting coach position? Well his idea of apologizing and “starting with a clean slate” is a whole bunch of BS to me. I was reading in Sports Illustrated when I came across a quote from a reader regarding Tiger and his scandal. The quote read, “This is a very forgiving country. If Tiger is truly sorry for what he has done […] the cheers will be there for him again.” But is that true? Are we that forgiving to just let players go with these mistakes? Will we just forget about McGwire and his steroids in a few months, just as though it seems we did with Alex Rodriguez or Roger Clemens? How about big ole Barry? I think we choose to forget, and that’s not the right solution. We shouldn’t keep pushing the issue off to the side. We have the test results for crying out loud! It’s called the Mitchell Report! Steroids were a loophole, and loopholes aren’t allowed anywhere else. So why should it be different in baseball?
--Meg
NFL Playoffs Round 2 Preview, Part II
Dallas Cowboys (12-5) at Minnesota Vikings (12-4)
X-factor: Tony Romo. I have no statistical proof or any evidence that led me to this decision. All I know is that this is my decision. If Tony Romo has a good game, the Cowboys' chances of winning increases. They still have to stop the Vikings' offense, but the overall success of the team lies with Romo.
Why the Cowboys can win: The Cowboys give up only 15.6 points per game, second in the NFL only to the New York Jets. Dallas gives up only 90.5 rushing yards a game, and their linebackers should hold Adrian Peterson to less than his usual 4.4 yards per carry. Dallas also has two wide receivers in the top ten in yards per catch, Miles Austin and Patrick Crayton.
Why the Cowboys can choke: Dallas has a guy named Romo who tends to choke in big games. Their defense only had 19 takeaways this season, second to last in the NFC. Momentum means nothing against top teams.
Why the Vikings can win: The Vikings are undefeated at home. Minnesota went 4-1 against teams that made the playoffs, with the lone loss coming against the Arizona Cardinals, in which Percy Harvin led the team in rushing with 22 yards...this won't happen again. Their defense is second in the NFC in yards per game. And they were considered a Super Bowl favorite for most of the season.
Why the Vikings can choke: Brett Favre and head coach Brad Childress tended to clash this year. The results? 2-3 in the last 5 regular season games, including losses to the Chicago Bears and Carolina Panthers. Adrian Peterson has become an increasingly inconsistent running back. His yards per carry each game since Week 10 are as follows: 7.4, 3.4, 3.4, 1.5, 3.7, 2.9, 3.9, 6.0. The two games that stand out in a good way came against the Lions and in the Giant Tank Game. So maybe I should switch "inconsistent" to "ineffective".
Semi-Relevant Opinion: The Cowboys need to replace Tony Romo. They will not be a great team with him. He is not very good.
1. Tony Romo wasn't wanted by an FBS college football team. He wasn't originally wanted by an NFL team. He played behind quarterbacks so old and washed-up they made Junior Seau look like Junior Seau, Junior. When did he become good?
2. Name the best quarterbacks in the NFL right now. My list, in a rough order, goes like this: Peyton Manning, Drew Brees, Tom Brady, Brett Favre, Phillip Rivers, Aaron Rodgers, Ben Roethlisberger, Matt Schaub, Kurt Warner, Carson Palmer, Eli Manning, Donovan McNabb. Does Romo even enter the debate until after McNabb is named? No. That's twelve quarterbacks before you even think about naming Romo. Which leads me to point number three.
3. If your player, coach, GM, doctor, teacher, accountant, salesman, or whatever else you can think of, is not in the top 25% at his position, then you need to get a better one as soon as possible. With 32 starting quarterbacks in the league, and Tony Romo about 14th in the league, and that's probably being generous, that does not put him in the highest 25%. It's time to get a good quarterback. It is definitely within Dallas's reach- they have the biggest market and the most money- so why not? The Tony Romo era is not working. Maybe they had a couple of solid regular seasons, but this has not translated into any actual success. It's time for Romo to go.
Prediction: Vikings 27, Cowboys 17. The deciding factor was that the Vikings were undefeated at home, including three wins against playoff teams. Could this game go either way? Absolutely. This one could definitely go either way. I see the Vikings winning this game, but would not be the least bit surprised if the Cowboys won.
New York Jets (10-7) at San Diego Chargers (13-3)
X-factor: Shonn Greene and Thomas Jones. One of them, or both, need to have a good game to prevent the Jets offense from becoming one-dimensional. Against a team as good as the Chargers, you need to establish the run and exploit the defensive gap that allowed 4.5 rushing yards per attempt.
Why the Jets can win: They have the best defense in the NFL. No, I didn't expect it either. I never would have predicted it at the beginning of the year. But they lead the league in every important defensive statistic except takeaways. The Jets can shut down any offense, especially a passing-is-the-only-means-of-production offense such as the Chargers.
Why the Jets can choke: I don't know if anyone else has noticed this, but the Jets offense is more than a little shaky. Mark Sanchez can be a typical halfway-competent rookie quarterback. And most importantly, the offense can flat out stink from time to time.
Why the Chargers can win: After the Week 6 loss to the Denver Broncos, the Chargers went into "screw you, we're not gonna lose" mode. They proceded to win the next ten games and hold the longest current winning streak. The Chargers are so good that they tanked the last two games and still won! Philip Rivers might just be so angry that he explodes.
Why the Chargers can choke: Their running game flat out sucks. Former MVP LaDanian Tomlinson averages 3.3 yards per carry. Backup Darren Sproles averages 3.7 a carry. That's not good. The Chargers are known to choke in the playoffs. Philip Rivers might just be so angry that he implodes.
Semi-Relevant Opinion: I don't like Philip Rivers because of his jawing. Jawing in football is different from trash talking in basketball. In basketball, trash talking is part of the game, and when someone stops getting trashed, that implies respect. In football, a team could be losing by thirty in the fourth quarter, but their linebacker will still be jawing if he makes a tackle. This is just dumb, there's no purpose to it. Larry Bird was the best trash talker of all time. Quick trivia question for you- who was the best football jawer of all time? Answer: No one. Not only does it mean nothing (so no one pays attention to it), but they all say the same thing!
Read the lips of football players who jaw. Here's what I got from a select few players- Shawne Merriman: "All day baby! All day!" Michael Strahan: "All day baby! All day!" Sebastian Janokowski: "Całe dziecko dnia! Cały dzień!" Ok, bad example, but you get my point.
Prediction: Jets 17, Chargers 10. No, seriously. The Chargers rushing offense will go nowhere, as it usually does, and the Jets secondary will demolish the pass. I think.
-Tucker Warner
X-factor: Tony Romo. I have no statistical proof or any evidence that led me to this decision. All I know is that this is my decision. If Tony Romo has a good game, the Cowboys' chances of winning increases. They still have to stop the Vikings' offense, but the overall success of the team lies with Romo.
Why the Cowboys can win: The Cowboys give up only 15.6 points per game, second in the NFL only to the New York Jets. Dallas gives up only 90.5 rushing yards a game, and their linebackers should hold Adrian Peterson to less than his usual 4.4 yards per carry. Dallas also has two wide receivers in the top ten in yards per catch, Miles Austin and Patrick Crayton.
Why the Cowboys can choke: Dallas has a guy named Romo who tends to choke in big games. Their defense only had 19 takeaways this season, second to last in the NFC. Momentum means nothing against top teams.
Why the Vikings can win: The Vikings are undefeated at home. Minnesota went 4-1 against teams that made the playoffs, with the lone loss coming against the Arizona Cardinals, in which Percy Harvin led the team in rushing with 22 yards...this won't happen again. Their defense is second in the NFC in yards per game. And they were considered a Super Bowl favorite for most of the season.
Why the Vikings can choke: Brett Favre and head coach Brad Childress tended to clash this year. The results? 2-3 in the last 5 regular season games, including losses to the Chicago Bears and Carolina Panthers. Adrian Peterson has become an increasingly inconsistent running back. His yards per carry each game since Week 10 are as follows: 7.4, 3.4, 3.4, 1.5, 3.7, 2.9, 3.9, 6.0. The two games that stand out in a good way came against the Lions and in the Giant Tank Game. So maybe I should switch "inconsistent" to "ineffective".
Semi-Relevant Opinion: The Cowboys need to replace Tony Romo. They will not be a great team with him. He is not very good.
1. Tony Romo wasn't wanted by an FBS college football team. He wasn't originally wanted by an NFL team. He played behind quarterbacks so old and washed-up they made Junior Seau look like Junior Seau, Junior. When did he become good?
2. Name the best quarterbacks in the NFL right now. My list, in a rough order, goes like this: Peyton Manning, Drew Brees, Tom Brady, Brett Favre, Phillip Rivers, Aaron Rodgers, Ben Roethlisberger, Matt Schaub, Kurt Warner, Carson Palmer, Eli Manning, Donovan McNabb. Does Romo even enter the debate until after McNabb is named? No. That's twelve quarterbacks before you even think about naming Romo. Which leads me to point number three.
3. If your player, coach, GM, doctor, teacher, accountant, salesman, or whatever else you can think of, is not in the top 25% at his position, then you need to get a better one as soon as possible. With 32 starting quarterbacks in the league, and Tony Romo about 14th in the league, and that's probably being generous, that does not put him in the highest 25%. It's time to get a good quarterback. It is definitely within Dallas's reach- they have the biggest market and the most money- so why not? The Tony Romo era is not working. Maybe they had a couple of solid regular seasons, but this has not translated into any actual success. It's time for Romo to go.
Prediction: Vikings 27, Cowboys 17. The deciding factor was that the Vikings were undefeated at home, including three wins against playoff teams. Could this game go either way? Absolutely. This one could definitely go either way. I see the Vikings winning this game, but would not be the least bit surprised if the Cowboys won.
New York Jets (10-7) at San Diego Chargers (13-3)
X-factor: Shonn Greene and Thomas Jones. One of them, or both, need to have a good game to prevent the Jets offense from becoming one-dimensional. Against a team as good as the Chargers, you need to establish the run and exploit the defensive gap that allowed 4.5 rushing yards per attempt.
Why the Jets can win: They have the best defense in the NFL. No, I didn't expect it either. I never would have predicted it at the beginning of the year. But they lead the league in every important defensive statistic except takeaways. The Jets can shut down any offense, especially a passing-is-the-only-means-of-production offense such as the Chargers.
Why the Jets can choke: I don't know if anyone else has noticed this, but the Jets offense is more than a little shaky. Mark Sanchez can be a typical halfway-competent rookie quarterback. And most importantly, the offense can flat out stink from time to time.
Why the Chargers can win: After the Week 6 loss to the Denver Broncos, the Chargers went into "screw you, we're not gonna lose" mode. They proceded to win the next ten games and hold the longest current winning streak. The Chargers are so good that they tanked the last two games and still won! Philip Rivers might just be so angry that he explodes.
Why the Chargers can choke: Their running game flat out sucks. Former MVP LaDanian Tomlinson averages 3.3 yards per carry. Backup Darren Sproles averages 3.7 a carry. That's not good. The Chargers are known to choke in the playoffs. Philip Rivers might just be so angry that he implodes.
Semi-Relevant Opinion: I don't like Philip Rivers because of his jawing. Jawing in football is different from trash talking in basketball. In basketball, trash talking is part of the game, and when someone stops getting trashed, that implies respect. In football, a team could be losing by thirty in the fourth quarter, but their linebacker will still be jawing if he makes a tackle. This is just dumb, there's no purpose to it. Larry Bird was the best trash talker of all time. Quick trivia question for you- who was the best football jawer of all time? Answer: No one. Not only does it mean nothing (so no one pays attention to it), but they all say the same thing!
Read the lips of football players who jaw. Here's what I got from a select few players- Shawne Merriman: "All day baby! All day!" Michael Strahan: "All day baby! All day!" Sebastian Janokowski: "Całe dziecko dnia! Cały dzień!" Ok, bad example, but you get my point.
Prediction: Jets 17, Chargers 10. No, seriously. The Chargers rushing offense will go nowhere, as it usually does, and the Jets secondary will demolish the pass. I think.
-Tucker Warner
Friday, January 15, 2010
Clippers Curse Continues
Hello First Tee fans!
It’s been a while (for both Tucker and I) writing and updating, but we’re back!
I know I promised you a Blake Griffin update before my absence, so it’s only fitting that it’s the first article that I return with.
There isn’t much to say when it comes to the curse of the Clippers. It’s pretty much been around for their entire existence. Seeing that Blake Griffin won’t be returning until next season is icing on the cake for this condemned team.
Blake Griffin announced his biggest fear on Thursday (Jan 14, 2009) that he would have season ending surgery to repair his knee (B. Griffin fractured his left knee cap after jumping down from a dunk).
Originally the healing process was estimated to be about 6 weeks with the proper rest and therapy, but what wasn’t released to the public was that this was the fastest option that Big Blake had. The other option was surgery from the start. Unfortunately the first-draft pick of the 2009 draft will be sidelined, but that could possibly be beneficial to him in the end.
Weighing out the pros and cons of sitting an injured, yet phenomenal, athlete can be a difficult when your team isn’t that great to begin with. But in Blake’s case, you can’t rush it back. Seeing that the Clips don’t have much of a chance getting into the playoffs this year (shocker!), why wouldn’t you take the time off and prep for next year? He needs to take the time to study film and plays, and grow stronger. Besides, it’s not like it’s a big deal for the team in a sense because it’s his first season, the guys haven’t played with him enough to say it’s going to cost them in the long run. As long as he uses his time wisely, he can develop more so now than ever. The only con I can possibly think of is that ticket sales probably aren’t as high as they were expected to be; yet I’m sure that’s not the first time in Clipper’s history. Come on, your competing with Kobe, even Blake said the entire city of L.A. isn’t big enough for the Laker’s star.
So it’s another disappointing season for Clipper’s fans, though I’m sure it’s not a surprise. Hang in there guys; you’ve got Manny to spare you over the summer.
--Meg
NFL Playoffs Round 2 Preview, Part I
Arizona Cardinals (11-6) at New Orleans Saints (13-3)
X-factor: Kurt Warner. He has the best completion percentage in NFL playoff history, he is second on the career playoff list for completion percentage, and he is throwing to the best wide receiver in the league. Need I say more?
Why the Cardinals can win: The Cardinals can score at will. They make big plays in clutch situations. Kurt Warner is one of the best playoff quarterbacks of all time, and he might have a little extra heart because this might be his last year. They scored 51 points last week, against the same team that held them to only 7 in Week 17. According to SCOUTS, Inc, the Cardinals have the advantage at every position except for offensive line and defensive backs. They retain pretty much the same team that won the NFC Championship last year.
Why the Cardinals can choke: Their quarterback is 38 years old and is about as mobile as a mountain. (Really. During Round 1 against the Packers, Warner was facing a 3rd and 6 late in the fourth quarter. The blitz came from the sides and there was a big gap in the line where Warner could have handily [In order to not make the first down by running, he would've had to pull a Mary Decker...or a hamstring] ran for the first. He stepped back and threw instead. Still got the first, but that's beside the point.) Their running game is average at best. They gave up 45 points to the Packers and allowed them to come back from a 20-plus deficit.
Why the Saints can win: That's virtually all they did this season, until they unintentionally intentionally lost, but that's another story. They became so good at scoring, at one point they were able to score six points by downing the ball. Drew Brees got so many yards through the air that Southwest Airlines awarded him frequent flier points. Their running game is multi-dimensional- the Saints have three guys who can run the ball efficiently.
Why the Saints can choke: Did you see the past few games? They lost a close game to the Cowboys (didn't tank or choke), lost in overtime to the Buccaneers (didn't tank, just choked), and lost to the Panthers (tanked and choked- on a related note, backup quarterback Mark Brunell's line from that game looked like this: 15/29, 102 yards, 0 TDs, 1 INT, 45.5 passer rating. 45.5??? Isn't that Brunell's age?). The Saints haven't soundly beaten an opponent since Week 12.
Semi-Relevant Opinion: The Over/Under for this game is 57. Last week, the Cardinals scored 51 points themselves. I'm taking the under, or I would if I was of legal gambling age.
Completely Irrelevant Opinion: How is it possible that an 18 year old American citizen can serve in the Armed Forces, but can't bet two hundred bucks on a Patriots game? This is ridiculous.
Prediction: Cardinals 31, Saints 24. No, really. The Cardinals have Kurt Warner, in the playoffs, against a defense that gave up 30 points to the Redskins.
Baltimore Ravens (10-7) at Indianapolis Colts (14-2)
X-factor: Peyton Manning. He won the MVP award, and by all accounts is the best quarterback in the NFL, and one of the five best of all time. (Don't argue against me. It's true.)
Why the Ravens can win: To be honest, I'm not so sure they can win. If anything works, it will be their running game- Ray Rice and Willis McGahee are perhaps the best running back tandem in the league. This won't happen though.
Outlandish Statement: If the Ravens beat the Colts this weekend, I will bury myself alive!
Why the Ravens can choke: The Ravens haven't beaten the Colts since December 2001. In the regular season, the Ravens were 1-6 against teams who made the playoffs. Joe Flacco is non-existant in clutch situations, especially in the playoffs (last week he only completed 4 passes of his 10 attempts, for 34 yards).
Why the Colts can win: The Colts have not lost a game they were actually trying to win. Peyton Manning is the best quarterback in the NFL. Not only have the Colts beaten the Ravens in their past four meetings, but they have also covered the point spread. The Colts are the best team in the NFL.
Why the Colts can lose: This is the only hope the Ravens have. The Colts will need to choke, and choke big, for the Ravens to win this game. Peyton Manning threw five interceptions in a loss to the Chargers a few years ago. The Ravens have a secondary that is good enough to make this happen, but the odds of Peyton Manning choking like a chain smoker on a playoff game in Saturday are about one in a million, if that. Good luck Baltimore.
Semi-Relevant Opinion: The Ravens can win with Joe Flacco only if they improve their receiving corps. The Ravens top three receiving leaders are a productive-but-old wideout (Derrick Mason), a running back (Ray Rice), and a tight end (Todd Heap). None of the other receivers have ever caught more than seven passes in a game, and never more than 100 yars in a game. Of the top three, one will retire within two years (he already retired once! It will happen again!) and one is not a downfield option by definition. I'll admit that Heap will continue to be a productive option for the next few years, but is a tight end what you really want as the future of your receiving team?
Prediction: Colts 34, Ravens 13. Would I be flabbergasted by an upset by the Ravens? It's professional sports, of course not. However, I would be willing to wager an non-vital organ on the Colts if the payoff was over $10,000. Again, this is only if I was of legal gambling age.
Stay tuned for Part II!
-Tucker
X-factor: Kurt Warner. He has the best completion percentage in NFL playoff history, he is second on the career playoff list for completion percentage, and he is throwing to the best wide receiver in the league. Need I say more?
Why the Cardinals can win: The Cardinals can score at will. They make big plays in clutch situations. Kurt Warner is one of the best playoff quarterbacks of all time, and he might have a little extra heart because this might be his last year. They scored 51 points last week, against the same team that held them to only 7 in Week 17. According to SCOUTS, Inc, the Cardinals have the advantage at every position except for offensive line and defensive backs. They retain pretty much the same team that won the NFC Championship last year.
Why the Cardinals can choke: Their quarterback is 38 years old and is about as mobile as a mountain. (Really. During Round 1 against the Packers, Warner was facing a 3rd and 6 late in the fourth quarter. The blitz came from the sides and there was a big gap in the line where Warner could have handily [In order to not make the first down by running, he would've had to pull a Mary Decker...or a hamstring] ran for the first. He stepped back and threw instead. Still got the first, but that's beside the point.) Their running game is average at best. They gave up 45 points to the Packers and allowed them to come back from a 20-plus deficit.
Why the Saints can win: That's virtually all they did this season, until they unintentionally intentionally lost, but that's another story. They became so good at scoring, at one point they were able to score six points by downing the ball. Drew Brees got so many yards through the air that Southwest Airlines awarded him frequent flier points. Their running game is multi-dimensional- the Saints have three guys who can run the ball efficiently.
Why the Saints can choke: Did you see the past few games? They lost a close game to the Cowboys (didn't tank or choke), lost in overtime to the Buccaneers (didn't tank, just choked), and lost to the Panthers (tanked and choked- on a related note, backup quarterback Mark Brunell's line from that game looked like this: 15/29, 102 yards, 0 TDs, 1 INT, 45.5 passer rating. 45.5??? Isn't that Brunell's age?). The Saints haven't soundly beaten an opponent since Week 12.
Semi-Relevant Opinion: The Over/Under for this game is 57. Last week, the Cardinals scored 51 points themselves. I'm taking the under, or I would if I was of legal gambling age.
Completely Irrelevant Opinion: How is it possible that an 18 year old American citizen can serve in the Armed Forces, but can't bet two hundred bucks on a Patriots game? This is ridiculous.
Prediction: Cardinals 31, Saints 24. No, really. The Cardinals have Kurt Warner, in the playoffs, against a defense that gave up 30 points to the Redskins.
Baltimore Ravens (10-7) at Indianapolis Colts (14-2)
X-factor: Peyton Manning. He won the MVP award, and by all accounts is the best quarterback in the NFL, and one of the five best of all time. (Don't argue against me. It's true.)
Why the Ravens can win: To be honest, I'm not so sure they can win. If anything works, it will be their running game- Ray Rice and Willis McGahee are perhaps the best running back tandem in the league. This won't happen though.
Outlandish Statement: If the Ravens beat the Colts this weekend, I will bury myself alive!
Why the Ravens can choke: The Ravens haven't beaten the Colts since December 2001. In the regular season, the Ravens were 1-6 against teams who made the playoffs. Joe Flacco is non-existant in clutch situations, especially in the playoffs (last week he only completed 4 passes of his 10 attempts, for 34 yards).
Why the Colts can win: The Colts have not lost a game they were actually trying to win. Peyton Manning is the best quarterback in the NFL. Not only have the Colts beaten the Ravens in their past four meetings, but they have also covered the point spread. The Colts are the best team in the NFL.
Why the Colts can lose: This is the only hope the Ravens have. The Colts will need to choke, and choke big, for the Ravens to win this game. Peyton Manning threw five interceptions in a loss to the Chargers a few years ago. The Ravens have a secondary that is good enough to make this happen, but the odds of Peyton Manning choking like a chain smoker on a playoff game in Saturday are about one in a million, if that. Good luck Baltimore.
Semi-Relevant Opinion: The Ravens can win with Joe Flacco only if they improve their receiving corps. The Ravens top three receiving leaders are a productive-but-old wideout (Derrick Mason), a running back (Ray Rice), and a tight end (Todd Heap). None of the other receivers have ever caught more than seven passes in a game, and never more than 100 yars in a game. Of the top three, one will retire within two years (he already retired once! It will happen again!) and one is not a downfield option by definition. I'll admit that Heap will continue to be a productive option for the next few years, but is a tight end what you really want as the future of your receiving team?
Prediction: Colts 34, Ravens 13. Would I be flabbergasted by an upset by the Ravens? It's professional sports, of course not. However, I would be willing to wager an non-vital organ on the Colts if the payoff was over $10,000. Again, this is only if I was of legal gambling age.
Stay tuned for Part II!
-Tucker
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)