Whenever a team makes a QB change this early in the season, I always wonder what the thinking was back in the offseason. I mean, we're only 3 games in and already teams are making changes.
In Cleveland, Derek Anderson is in and Brady Quinn is out. Cleveland has been horrific on offense, so I suppose they have to do something, but at some point people need to realize it's not the QB that's the problem but the rest of the offense. If the Browns want to change something, they can start with their offensive line starting at center and moving right, then tight end where they have no receiving talent whatsoever, and then wide receiver where it's Braylon Edwards and a whole lotta nothing. Of course that's impossible, so they'll instead make the cosmetic change of switching QBs. Anderson does throw a nice deep ball, so maybe that can inject some life into their offense. Most likely it won't, though, and the Browns look like a 1 or 2 win team to me.
It's obvious, though, that Quinn was not entrenched, which makes me wonder why he was even starting to begin with. If you don't have a QB you trust, Eric Mangini, FIND ONE. I've read that Mangini's favorite QB on the roster is actually 3rd stringer Bret Ratliff, who he brought over from the Jets. If that's true, then that's who he should start and just get it over with. But I'm sure there are internal pressures to try Quinn and Anderson first, since the organization invested so much in those two. It's almost laughable to think back to draft day and realize the Browns had the 5th pick, traded down a couple of times and took a center. The only teams that should be drafting centers in the first round are those who are really good everywhere else. The Browns, with needs at right tackle, tight end, wide receiver and any type of pass rusher (DE or OLB), were clearly not that type of team.
The Buccaneers benched Byron Leftwich and are going with Josh Johnson for the time being. This one's a real head scratcher in that...why did the Bucs even sign Leftwich to begin with? Maybe they thought they were contenders internally, and are only now realizing this team has rebuilding to do. They already knew, though, that they had their QB of the future on the roster (Josh Freeman) when they signed Leftwich. Why did they even bother? They could have gone with Johnson from the beginning, seen if he had any skills or not, and then eventually gone to Freeman once they feel he's ready for some game action. Instead they wasted time on Leftwich, and now Johnson's time on the field is probably limited before they get to 0-5 or 0-6 and feel compelled to get Freeman on the field. Starting Leftwich was just a waste of time.
I really like the Dolphins trading for Tyler Thigpen, by the way. I don't know if Thigpen is good enough to be a starter in this league, but I think he's a good guy to have for a backup. Honestly. I'd rather have him than Matt Cassel. If you watch Cassel play, you'll see he has no feel for the game. Thigpen, on the other hand, has limited skills (average arm strength and scattershot accuracy) but a tremendous feel for the game. He just knows how to make plays when things are breaking down. Cassel this past week was 14-18 for 90 yards. How is that even possible? That's a QB who is continually checking down in the face of a pass rush.
Wednesday, September 30, 2009
Tuesday, September 29, 2009
JaMarcus Russell
Russell is having a horrible season thus far. Probably the worst starting QB in the league, and I say that knowing two starters (Quinn and Leftwich) have already been benched. Russell's numbers thus far:
41% completion percentage, 1 TD, 4 INTs, 5 yards per attempt, 39.7 rating
That rating is basically what you'd get if you threw nothing but incompletions. Pretty bad stuff. So you might say, well maybe the Raiders should bench Russell. But then you remember that the backup had a game like this last year:
5-16, 18 yards, 2 INTs
That was Bruce Gradkowski last year against the Steelers. These are the Oakland Raiders' QBs for this season (and don't forget about Charlie Frye). I would have to say this is an early contender for worst collection of QBs an NFL team has had in awhile. Not even the Raiders collection of QBs in 2006, with Aaron Brooks and Andrew Walter, was this bad.
Another ridiculous fact about the Raiders thus far this season: starting WR Darrius Heyward-Bey has 1 reception. 1 reception in 3 games from a starting receiver; that is unreal.
41% completion percentage, 1 TD, 4 INTs, 5 yards per attempt, 39.7 rating
That rating is basically what you'd get if you threw nothing but incompletions. Pretty bad stuff. So you might say, well maybe the Raiders should bench Russell. But then you remember that the backup had a game like this last year:
5-16, 18 yards, 2 INTs
That was Bruce Gradkowski last year against the Steelers. These are the Oakland Raiders' QBs for this season (and don't forget about Charlie Frye). I would have to say this is an early contender for worst collection of QBs an NFL team has had in awhile. Not even the Raiders collection of QBs in 2006, with Aaron Brooks and Andrew Walter, was this bad.
Another ridiculous fact about the Raiders thus far this season: starting WR Darrius Heyward-Bey has 1 reception. 1 reception in 3 games from a starting receiver; that is unreal.
Sunday, September 27, 2009
I've criticized the Browns for this
So it's only fair to go after the Oakland Raiders. How in the flying hell do they expect JaMarcus Russell to succeed with two rookie receivers starting? Russell has taken a lot of criticizing, and it's definitely warranted. But the Raiders are putting him in position to fail, not succeed. No QB could have success with Darrius Heyward-Bey and Louis Murphy (who's a lot better than Heyward-Bey, by the way) as the starting receivers. I realize Chaz Schilens is injured, but when Chaz Schilens is that important to your team things have gone horribly wrong. This is such a failure of personnel it rivals what the Browns have done, surrounding their QBs with Braylon Edwards and whole lot of nothing.
Rich Gannon said more than once today that when Russell throws the Zach Miller, his completion percentage goes up. Well I wonder why that is? Gannon never said it, but it should be obvious that it's because Zach Miller is actually a good player while the Raiders continue to field the worst receiving corps in the NFL. This is not to absolve Russell, who looks more and more like a bust every single week. But if you were to write the textbook on how to ruin a young QB, what the Raiders have done with Russell would be a good place to start.
-Long rookie holdout CHECK
- Subpar receiving corps CHECK
- Changes in coaching staff every offseason CHECK
I hope for the sake of Russell, Brady Quinn and Derek Anderson they all get the hell out off their current teams and can join franchises that know how to put QBs in position to succeed.
Rich Gannon said more than once today that when Russell throws the Zach Miller, his completion percentage goes up. Well I wonder why that is? Gannon never said it, but it should be obvious that it's because Zach Miller is actually a good player while the Raiders continue to field the worst receiving corps in the NFL. This is not to absolve Russell, who looks more and more like a bust every single week. But if you were to write the textbook on how to ruin a young QB, what the Raiders have done with Russell would be a good place to start.
-Long rookie holdout CHECK
- Subpar receiving corps CHECK
- Changes in coaching staff every offseason CHECK
I hope for the sake of Russell, Brady Quinn and Derek Anderson they all get the hell out off their current teams and can join franchises that know how to put QBs in position to succeed.
"Parity" in the NFL
You hear the term "parity" a lot in the NFL, meaning all teams can compete and no one is a lot better or a lot worse than anyone else.
However, I would argue that the difference between the haves and have-nots has never been starker. I don't recall ever seeing so many bad teams in the league. The Lions, Browns, Chiefs, Rams and Buccaneers are all strong contenders for worst team in the league. The Redskins lost to the Lions today. The Raiders played an awful game today against the Broncos. The Broncos and Vikings have 3-0 starts via miracle wins and letting two of those awful teams beat themselves.
It just amazes me that every week, in a league in which every team is supposed to be able to compete, there are some teams that quite clearly cannot compete at all. The Lions, Rams, Chiefs and Browns are on awful streaks stretching back into previous seasons. The Raiders are on a 6-season streak of 10+ losses, and judging by today's results will be going for a seventh season. In the past two seasons we've seen an undefeated regular season, and a winless regular season. How is this possible in league with a salary cap?
I actually think college has talent more spread out than the NFL. Ten top-10 teams have gone down already in the first four weeks of the college season. #5 Penn St., #6 Cal and #9 Miami all lost by double digits. Then-#3 USC lost to Washington, who then lost at home to Stanford. Outside of the top two teams in the country (Florida and Texas), every team in college football looks vulnerable.
However, I would argue that the difference between the haves and have-nots has never been starker. I don't recall ever seeing so many bad teams in the league. The Lions, Browns, Chiefs, Rams and Buccaneers are all strong contenders for worst team in the league. The Redskins lost to the Lions today. The Raiders played an awful game today against the Broncos. The Broncos and Vikings have 3-0 starts via miracle wins and letting two of those awful teams beat themselves.
It just amazes me that every week, in a league in which every team is supposed to be able to compete, there are some teams that quite clearly cannot compete at all. The Lions, Rams, Chiefs and Browns are on awful streaks stretching back into previous seasons. The Raiders are on a 6-season streak of 10+ losses, and judging by today's results will be going for a seventh season. In the past two seasons we've seen an undefeated regular season, and a winless regular season. How is this possible in league with a salary cap?
I actually think college has talent more spread out than the NFL. Ten top-10 teams have gone down already in the first four weeks of the college season. #5 Penn St., #6 Cal and #9 Miami all lost by double digits. Then-#3 USC lost to Washington, who then lost at home to Stanford. Outside of the top two teams in the country (Florida and Texas), every team in college football looks vulnerable.
Here's a strategy I hate
I call it the prevent offense. The 49ers took over with just under 2 minutes left in the game, and a first down away from basically icing the game. The Vikings had all 3 of their timeouts, so they could stop the clock after 3 consecutive plays and get the ball back with about 1:30 remaining. 1:30 is plenty of time for an NFL team to drive down the field and get itself in position to score a TD. The 49ers needed a first down, otherwise the Vikings were going to have a chance.
The 49ers could either run 3 times, hope to get a first down on of them but if not at least force Minnesota to use all of its timeouts. Or they could put the ball in the air once and try to get the first down that way. Consider that Glen Coffee finished the game with 25 carries for 54 yards. In other words, they had no success running the ball today. Running the ball right into the middle of the line is playing into Minnesota's strength. So getting a first down by running was highly unlikely.
They chose to simply run the ball into the line three times and punt. Of course Minnesota stuffed all three runs, because that's what they do, not to mention it's horribly predictable. I hated this strategy at the time, and when you see how the game finished it looks even worse. The 49ers didn't once really try to convert that first down. They were more worried about forcing Minnesota to use its timeouts. But since Minnesota possessed all three, and not just one or two, they could stop the clock after each run and get the ball back with 1:30, enough time for a team to get down the field even without timeouts.
Had the 49ers passed the ball on 3rd down, which I think would have been the correct strategy, there's a good chance it wouldn't have worked and the pass would have fallen incomplete. The 49ers aren't a strong passing team, so it's not playing to their strengths. However, they had success throwing to Vernon Davis. And since Minnesota was playing to stop the run, they might have been able to get someone open and pick up that ever-important first down.
I think Mike Singletary coached scared at this moment. I think he was afraid to stop the clock for Minnesota, and if they had done that that strategy would have been criticized. "Mike, why did you throw the ball on 3rd down when you could have run and forced Minnesota to use their last timeout?" It's a matter of playing to win or playing scared. Running into the middle of the line three times when it's shown zero success all day is playing scared. That first down was very important, and the 49ers didn't even try to get it. Throwing the ball past the first down marker would have been playing to win. It might not have worked; Charlie Weis employed this strategy two weeks ago and it didn't work against Michigan, and he had to answer questions about it.
But let me ask this; can you really sleep at night after losing a game like that and knowing you didn't do everything in your power to win? If you leave it all on the field and lose, hey it happens. But if you elect to not even try to put Minnesota away, and then they complete a miracle pass to win, can you really feel good about that? I've always felt that if you do everything you can and still lose, you can live with that. But I hate losing games in which a killer instinct wasn't employed (i.e. throwing the ball past the first down marker to pick up an important first down) and you just kind of hope the other team doesn't make any plays to win.
I've seen Brad Childress twice punt the ball with under 2 minutes to go facing a 4th and short from inside the 50 yard line. I thought that was really weak as well, although each time the Vikings held on to win. But just because a strategy works doesn't mean it's the right strategy. Each time the only way the other team could win was by getting the ball back. A first down prevents that, while a punt facilitates that. So of course Childress elected to voluntarily give the other team the ball. This is essentially what Singletary did today. You can either try to get a first down and win the game on your own, or you can hand the other team the ball and hope they don't succeed. Playing scared works sometimes, but it's not optimal. Especially when the strategy you do employ (running the ball into the middle three times) has zero chance of success.
But hey; at least the Vikings didn't have any timeouts at the end. It really made a difference.
The 49ers could either run 3 times, hope to get a first down on of them but if not at least force Minnesota to use all of its timeouts. Or they could put the ball in the air once and try to get the first down that way. Consider that Glen Coffee finished the game with 25 carries for 54 yards. In other words, they had no success running the ball today. Running the ball right into the middle of the line is playing into Minnesota's strength. So getting a first down by running was highly unlikely.
They chose to simply run the ball into the line three times and punt. Of course Minnesota stuffed all three runs, because that's what they do, not to mention it's horribly predictable. I hated this strategy at the time, and when you see how the game finished it looks even worse. The 49ers didn't once really try to convert that first down. They were more worried about forcing Minnesota to use its timeouts. But since Minnesota possessed all three, and not just one or two, they could stop the clock after each run and get the ball back with 1:30, enough time for a team to get down the field even without timeouts.
Had the 49ers passed the ball on 3rd down, which I think would have been the correct strategy, there's a good chance it wouldn't have worked and the pass would have fallen incomplete. The 49ers aren't a strong passing team, so it's not playing to their strengths. However, they had success throwing to Vernon Davis. And since Minnesota was playing to stop the run, they might have been able to get someone open and pick up that ever-important first down.
I think Mike Singletary coached scared at this moment. I think he was afraid to stop the clock for Minnesota, and if they had done that that strategy would have been criticized. "Mike, why did you throw the ball on 3rd down when you could have run and forced Minnesota to use their last timeout?" It's a matter of playing to win or playing scared. Running into the middle of the line three times when it's shown zero success all day is playing scared. That first down was very important, and the 49ers didn't even try to get it. Throwing the ball past the first down marker would have been playing to win. It might not have worked; Charlie Weis employed this strategy two weeks ago and it didn't work against Michigan, and he had to answer questions about it.
But let me ask this; can you really sleep at night after losing a game like that and knowing you didn't do everything in your power to win? If you leave it all on the field and lose, hey it happens. But if you elect to not even try to put Minnesota away, and then they complete a miracle pass to win, can you really feel good about that? I've always felt that if you do everything you can and still lose, you can live with that. But I hate losing games in which a killer instinct wasn't employed (i.e. throwing the ball past the first down marker to pick up an important first down) and you just kind of hope the other team doesn't make any plays to win.
I've seen Brad Childress twice punt the ball with under 2 minutes to go facing a 4th and short from inside the 50 yard line. I thought that was really weak as well, although each time the Vikings held on to win. But just because a strategy works doesn't mean it's the right strategy. Each time the only way the other team could win was by getting the ball back. A first down prevents that, while a punt facilitates that. So of course Childress elected to voluntarily give the other team the ball. This is essentially what Singletary did today. You can either try to get a first down and win the game on your own, or you can hand the other team the ball and hope they don't succeed. Playing scared works sometimes, but it's not optimal. Especially when the strategy you do employ (running the ball into the middle three times) has zero chance of success.
But hey; at least the Vikings didn't have any timeouts at the end. It really made a difference.
Thursday, September 24, 2009
Vikings-49ers
The Vikings have played two games, and I don't feel like I know anything about them. Cleveland and Detroit might be the two worst teams in the league, so the only thing I'm sure of is that Minnesota isn't one of the worst teams in the league. But the passing game has been nothing but short passes, with absolutely nothing explosive. Basically, the game plan the past two weeks has been to get out of the way and let Cleveland and Detroit beat themselves. They obliged, but San Fransisco won't. Plays will need to be made out of the passing game, or the Vikings will lose.
The Vikings also need to stop taking off the first half of the game. They've played two terrible teams, and trailed at halftime each time. What's going to happen when they play a living, breathing opponent like the 49ers? The Vikings haven't started playing until about 1 o'clock, but of course the games start at noon.
If you want to be honest about it, the 49ers have been more impressive thus far. They went on the road and beat Arizona, and then beat Seattle at home. Both are much stiffer challenges than Cleveland and Detroit. Last season the Bills started 4-1 playing a really easy schedule, then were exposed as the frauds they were once the competition stiffened. I don't think the Vikings are frauds, but they need to start playing better. Slow starts and 150 yards out of the passing game aren't going to cut it now that the competition stiffens (except for St. Louis in a couple weeks, another contender for worst team in the league).
This game would scare me more if the 49ers had a better QB, but there's no way I'm believing in Shaun Hill. I would love to put this game in his and their mediocre receiver's hands. By the way, how is this for fate? From 2002-2005, Shaun Hill was the 3rd string QB behind Daunte Culpepper. Culpepper is now the backup in Detroit, while Hill starts for the 49ers. I never, in a million years would have believed that was possible. Shaun Hill is a starter in this league, Culpepper is a backup and Favre is a Viking. My 18-year-old self is spinning in his metaphoric grave.
The Vikings also need to stop taking off the first half of the game. They've played two terrible teams, and trailed at halftime each time. What's going to happen when they play a living, breathing opponent like the 49ers? The Vikings haven't started playing until about 1 o'clock, but of course the games start at noon.
If you want to be honest about it, the 49ers have been more impressive thus far. They went on the road and beat Arizona, and then beat Seattle at home. Both are much stiffer challenges than Cleveland and Detroit. Last season the Bills started 4-1 playing a really easy schedule, then were exposed as the frauds they were once the competition stiffened. I don't think the Vikings are frauds, but they need to start playing better. Slow starts and 150 yards out of the passing game aren't going to cut it now that the competition stiffens (except for St. Louis in a couple weeks, another contender for worst team in the league).
This game would scare me more if the 49ers had a better QB, but there's no way I'm believing in Shaun Hill. I would love to put this game in his and their mediocre receiver's hands. By the way, how is this for fate? From 2002-2005, Shaun Hill was the 3rd string QB behind Daunte Culpepper. Culpepper is now the backup in Detroit, while Hill starts for the 49ers. I never, in a million years would have believed that was possible. Shaun Hill is a starter in this league, Culpepper is a backup and Favre is a Viking. My 18-year-old self is spinning in his metaphoric grave.
Monday, September 21, 2009
The state of the Cleveland Browns
You know, it's amazing to me that a team could be built in the manner that the Cleveland Browns have been. I've watched the Browns play these first two weeks of the season, and they don't do a single thing well. There is so little talent on that roster, it's staggering.
The place where everyone will start is at QB, but I think that's the least of their concerns. They are asking their QBs (Quinn now, but it will no doubt be Anderson at some point) to complete passes to one legit receiving option, Braylon Edwards. Josh Cribbs and Mike Furrey are the other wideouts who see significant playing time, and then there's Robert Royal and Steve Heiden at TE. I can't overstate how amazing it is to me that a team went into a season with this arsenal. Jamal Lewis isn't much at RB anymore. Joe Thomas and Eric Steinbach form a nice left side of the offensive line, but the right side sucks with journeyman John St. Clair.
Okay, so maybe the Browns invested heavily in defense, since they've obviously neglected the offense. Nope, not really. If they hadn't fleeced Matt Millen and the Lions to get Shaun Rogers, they'd have two nice corners in Eric Wright and Brandon McDonald, D'Qwell Jackson at MLB and that's about it. Kamerion Wimbley continues to disappoint as a pass rusher, and that's all they have in that department.
So you have a team devoid of playmakers on both sides of the ball, but they did have the #5 pick in the last draft. Good opportunity to improve, right? Not if you're the Browns. They traded down a couple times and eventually took a center in the first round (amazingly, the second time this decade they've done that; few centers get taken in the first round and the Browns took two of them in this past decade). They passed on every single receiver in this draft, some of them multiple times. They passed on pass rushers, and even a tight end like Brandon Pettigrew would have been better than taking a center. They did take two receivers in the 2nd round though, and I've yet to see either of them actually play.
The Browns are a proud franchise; they're named after the legendary Paul Brown and once employed Jim Brown. It's sad to see a great fanbase like that get trampled on by their team, but this is one poorly run franchise. The very first pick they made after coming back to the NFL was Tim Couch, and it's been downhill ever since. I just can't believe a team went an entire offseason and thought this was an acceptable roster, for now or the future. The goal of the offseason should be to get better, but all the Browns did was trade their second receiving option (Kellen Winslow II) and not replace him. But at least they've got the center position covered (maybe).
The place where everyone will start is at QB, but I think that's the least of their concerns. They are asking their QBs (Quinn now, but it will no doubt be Anderson at some point) to complete passes to one legit receiving option, Braylon Edwards. Josh Cribbs and Mike Furrey are the other wideouts who see significant playing time, and then there's Robert Royal and Steve Heiden at TE. I can't overstate how amazing it is to me that a team went into a season with this arsenal. Jamal Lewis isn't much at RB anymore. Joe Thomas and Eric Steinbach form a nice left side of the offensive line, but the right side sucks with journeyman John St. Clair.
Okay, so maybe the Browns invested heavily in defense, since they've obviously neglected the offense. Nope, not really. If they hadn't fleeced Matt Millen and the Lions to get Shaun Rogers, they'd have two nice corners in Eric Wright and Brandon McDonald, D'Qwell Jackson at MLB and that's about it. Kamerion Wimbley continues to disappoint as a pass rusher, and that's all they have in that department.
So you have a team devoid of playmakers on both sides of the ball, but they did have the #5 pick in the last draft. Good opportunity to improve, right? Not if you're the Browns. They traded down a couple times and eventually took a center in the first round (amazingly, the second time this decade they've done that; few centers get taken in the first round and the Browns took two of them in this past decade). They passed on every single receiver in this draft, some of them multiple times. They passed on pass rushers, and even a tight end like Brandon Pettigrew would have been better than taking a center. They did take two receivers in the 2nd round though, and I've yet to see either of them actually play.
The Browns are a proud franchise; they're named after the legendary Paul Brown and once employed Jim Brown. It's sad to see a great fanbase like that get trampled on by their team, but this is one poorly run franchise. The very first pick they made after coming back to the NFL was Tim Couch, and it's been downhill ever since. I just can't believe a team went an entire offseason and thought this was an acceptable roster, for now or the future. The goal of the offseason should be to get better, but all the Browns did was trade their second receiving option (Kellen Winslow II) and not replace him. But at least they've got the center position covered (maybe).
Saturday, September 19, 2009
Just remember...
Brett Favre is a mere 90 yards away from breaking 200 for the season. You might be asking, are the Vikings really paying $12M this season for a guy who needs to almost double his output just to break the mundane 200 yard barrier? You bet they are. It's pretty sad when I have to watch my college team to see what a passing game looks like, but that's the world we live in.
Of course I should mention that Detroit's pass defense is absolutely terrible, so it's very possible Favre will have a pretty good day. Then again, Cleveland was no great shakes either.
I should also mention that Detroit played their two best games, by far, last season against Minnesota. So don't say I didn't forewarn you if Detroit pulls off the unthinkable and wins this game. It has scared me ever since I saw the schedule. Detroit is not going to lose forever, and week 2 seems like a prime candidate to get that monkey off their back. They are doing everyone a favor by starting Matthew Stafford, though. I like Stafford quite a bit but he's not ready to play. There's no shame in that; there have been a lot of successful QBs who weren't ready to play right away. It's Detroit's fault for putting him in this position. He threw some bad INTs last week and I'm sure that will continue.
Of course I should mention that Detroit's pass defense is absolutely terrible, so it's very possible Favre will have a pretty good day. Then again, Cleveland was no great shakes either.
I should also mention that Detroit played their two best games, by far, last season against Minnesota. So don't say I didn't forewarn you if Detroit pulls off the unthinkable and wins this game. It has scared me ever since I saw the schedule. Detroit is not going to lose forever, and week 2 seems like a prime candidate to get that monkey off their back. They are doing everyone a favor by starting Matthew Stafford, though. I like Stafford quite a bit but he's not ready to play. There's no shame in that; there have been a lot of successful QBs who weren't ready to play right away. It's Detroit's fault for putting him in this position. He threw some bad INTs last week and I'm sure that will continue.
Thoughts on today
* Memo to NFL and college announcers: when a receiver is catching the ball as he's falling down, he must maintain possession the whole way through. If he hits the ground and it bounces, it's incomplete. If it scrapes the ground, it's incomplete. This came up on Monday night with Raiders' receiver Louis Murphy, who was not given a TD because the ball scraped the ground as he was falling to the ground. It was the correct call, despite what the announcers in the booth apparently thought. And then during today's Notre Dame game, Michael Floyd caught a jump ball in the end zone, and as he hit the ground the ball came out. The announcers seemingly had no clue why this was called no catch on the field, and upheld upon review. It's because the defensive back was pushing him down as he caught it, thus beginning the falling motion, and then as he hit the ground the ball came out. I don't think this is that hard to understand, but it seems like a lot of football announcers are befuddled by this.
* I think my new cause will be to get pick plays eliminated from the passing game. Michigan St. today ran a successful pick play, and Texas Tech ran one for a TD. It's one thing if receivers run their routes together, and then one breaks off. But on both of these plays, one of the receivers did nothing but run up to the defensive back and essentially block him from covering the other receiver. This is illegal, but neither time was offensive pass interference called. The reason this irritates me is because it springs a receiver wide open. It's tough enough to play defensive back as it is, with all of the ticky tack illegal contact and pass interference penalties that are called, but to allow offenses to also run pick plays like Stockton and Malone is just unfair. I wish the NCAA and NFL would tell their officials to watch for this. They've gotten tougher on personal foul penalties, and a couple years ago they toughened up illegal contact in the secondary. Now it's time to eliminate pick plays. Leave that stuff on the basketball court.
* It is such classic USC to lose to Washington today that I'm almost embarrassed that I didn't call it. Instead I foolishly believed USC would play up to their talent level. USC does this every year, where they play an inferior Pac-10 team and lose. Two years ago it was Stanford, last year it was Oregon St. and this year it's Washington. It's like clockwork with that team. They win all the big ones and lose the little ones.
*Watching Washington this year, either Steve Sarkisian is the best coach ever, Jake Locker is the most valuable player ever, or Tyrone Willingham is the worst coach ever. I'm not sure there's any middle ground. I know I said this a couple weeks ago, but I saw Washington play Notre Dame last season and they were so embarrassingly untalented that I almost felt bad beating them. I don't think they crossed midfield until the 2nd half sometime. Now all of a sudden they're challenging LSU in week 1 and beating USC in week 3. These are two of the most talented teams in the country, and Washington is going toe-to-toe with them. To say this is unbelievable is an understatement.
* As great of a coach that Pete Carroll has been, and he's been pretty damn good at USC, I would have to say that two of the biggest upsets I've seen have happened under his watch. USC's loss to Stanford two years ago remains the gold standard, in my mind, for upsets. Stanford was terrible, USC was really good and the game was at USC. But this year's loss at Washington isn't far behind. I'm positive USC has backups that would start for Washington at certain positions.
* Call me Ebenezer Scrooge if you must, but I'm glad BYU and Utah lost this week, thus eliminating them from any ridiculous "they should be playing for a national title" talk. Smaller schools winning all of their games is fine, but let's be honest; half of the schools in the SEC and Big 12 could win a lot of games against their schedules. There's something to be said for winning all of your games (as USC shows every year, you can't take it for granted), but if you're in the SEC you've got to get through some combination of Florida, LSU, Alabama, Ole Miss, Georgia, Arkansas and Tennessee. If you're in the WAC like Boise St., you've got to get through teams like Hawaii and Nevada.
* It's time to start taking Miami seriously as well. They rolled over Georgia Tech and beat Florida St. in week 1. More importantly, Jacory Harris looks like he has really improved at QB. I always thought Randy Shannon was the right guy for the job, and it looks like they've turned a corner. You always knew Miami could get the talent if recruited correctly, and now that Shannon has cleaned up the mess that Larry Coker left, it looks like Miami is back to being a player on the national stage. Their next two games are against Virginia Tech and Oklahoma, so we've still got more to learn about this team. But I've got my eye on them as a potential national title sleeper. They can beat everybody in the ACC, and a win over Oklahoma would be huge for their national reputation.
* I'm no fan of the Patriots, but the roughing the passer penalty against Vince Wilfork on Monday night was perhaps the worst roughing the passer penalty I've ever seen. A mundane pass rush in which he brought Trent Edwards down as he was throwing the ball, with no malicious intent whatsoever. If I believed in reincarnation, I'd want to come back with someone who has the attitude of some of these refs. I want to come back as a person who's not afraid to call a big penalty in a crucial spot, and really get myself involved in the game. I mean, people pay money to see the officials, right? I would just love to carry that attitude around. "You think you have a 15 yard gain huh? Nope, I'm calling a hold that not even the opposing coach is clamoring for." Last week Armando Allen was called for taunting after scoring a 2-point conversion with about 4 minutes left against Michigan. The referee had no problem calling a BS penalty like taunting in a crucial spot, forcing Notre Dame to kickoff from their own 15 and giving Michigan great field position, potentially altering the outcome of the game. I just wish I had the balls to do things like that. It's like every official carries around an "I'm Keith Hernandez" swagger.
* I think my new cause will be to get pick plays eliminated from the passing game. Michigan St. today ran a successful pick play, and Texas Tech ran one for a TD. It's one thing if receivers run their routes together, and then one breaks off. But on both of these plays, one of the receivers did nothing but run up to the defensive back and essentially block him from covering the other receiver. This is illegal, but neither time was offensive pass interference called. The reason this irritates me is because it springs a receiver wide open. It's tough enough to play defensive back as it is, with all of the ticky tack illegal contact and pass interference penalties that are called, but to allow offenses to also run pick plays like Stockton and Malone is just unfair. I wish the NCAA and NFL would tell their officials to watch for this. They've gotten tougher on personal foul penalties, and a couple years ago they toughened up illegal contact in the secondary. Now it's time to eliminate pick plays. Leave that stuff on the basketball court.
* It is such classic USC to lose to Washington today that I'm almost embarrassed that I didn't call it. Instead I foolishly believed USC would play up to their talent level. USC does this every year, where they play an inferior Pac-10 team and lose. Two years ago it was Stanford, last year it was Oregon St. and this year it's Washington. It's like clockwork with that team. They win all the big ones and lose the little ones.
*Watching Washington this year, either Steve Sarkisian is the best coach ever, Jake Locker is the most valuable player ever, or Tyrone Willingham is the worst coach ever. I'm not sure there's any middle ground. I know I said this a couple weeks ago, but I saw Washington play Notre Dame last season and they were so embarrassingly untalented that I almost felt bad beating them. I don't think they crossed midfield until the 2nd half sometime. Now all of a sudden they're challenging LSU in week 1 and beating USC in week 3. These are two of the most talented teams in the country, and Washington is going toe-to-toe with them. To say this is unbelievable is an understatement.
* As great of a coach that Pete Carroll has been, and he's been pretty damn good at USC, I would have to say that two of the biggest upsets I've seen have happened under his watch. USC's loss to Stanford two years ago remains the gold standard, in my mind, for upsets. Stanford was terrible, USC was really good and the game was at USC. But this year's loss at Washington isn't far behind. I'm positive USC has backups that would start for Washington at certain positions.
* Call me Ebenezer Scrooge if you must, but I'm glad BYU and Utah lost this week, thus eliminating them from any ridiculous "they should be playing for a national title" talk. Smaller schools winning all of their games is fine, but let's be honest; half of the schools in the SEC and Big 12 could win a lot of games against their schedules. There's something to be said for winning all of your games (as USC shows every year, you can't take it for granted), but if you're in the SEC you've got to get through some combination of Florida, LSU, Alabama, Ole Miss, Georgia, Arkansas and Tennessee. If you're in the WAC like Boise St., you've got to get through teams like Hawaii and Nevada.
* It's time to start taking Miami seriously as well. They rolled over Georgia Tech and beat Florida St. in week 1. More importantly, Jacory Harris looks like he has really improved at QB. I always thought Randy Shannon was the right guy for the job, and it looks like they've turned a corner. You always knew Miami could get the talent if recruited correctly, and now that Shannon has cleaned up the mess that Larry Coker left, it looks like Miami is back to being a player on the national stage. Their next two games are against Virginia Tech and Oklahoma, so we've still got more to learn about this team. But I've got my eye on them as a potential national title sleeper. They can beat everybody in the ACC, and a win over Oklahoma would be huge for their national reputation.
* I'm no fan of the Patriots, but the roughing the passer penalty against Vince Wilfork on Monday night was perhaps the worst roughing the passer penalty I've ever seen. A mundane pass rush in which he brought Trent Edwards down as he was throwing the ball, with no malicious intent whatsoever. If I believed in reincarnation, I'd want to come back with someone who has the attitude of some of these refs. I want to come back as a person who's not afraid to call a big penalty in a crucial spot, and really get myself involved in the game. I mean, people pay money to see the officials, right? I would just love to carry that attitude around. "You think you have a 15 yard gain huh? Nope, I'm calling a hold that not even the opposing coach is clamoring for." Last week Armando Allen was called for taunting after scoring a 2-point conversion with about 4 minutes left against Michigan. The referee had no problem calling a BS penalty like taunting in a crucial spot, forcing Notre Dame to kickoff from their own 15 and giving Michigan great field position, potentially altering the outcome of the game. I just wish I had the balls to do things like that. It's like every official carries around an "I'm Keith Hernandez" swagger.
Tuesday, September 15, 2009
Notre Dame-Michigan
I suppose I should comment on the Notre Dame-Michigan game from last Saturday. A crushing defeat, to say the least.
First off, let me say that Charlie Weis absolutely made the right decision to put the ball in the air with about 2:20 remaining in the game. Some people have criticized him for this, and even I was a bit shocked by it at first. But this is what it boils down to; Notre Dame needed to convert one more first down to really seal the victory, and Weis put the ball in his best player's hands. It didn't work out, but that doesn't mean it was the wrong decision. Weis called two straight runnng plays before this, and the second one was stuffed for no gain. Michigan was not going to allow Notre Dame to run for that first down, and Weis knew that. So he called for a pass play to pick up that ever-important first down. Each of the two passes on that ill-fated drive had a good chance of completion (I will forever believe that if Michael Floyd had been healthy, the 3rd down pass would have been complete and game over; instead it was freshman Shaquelle Evans, and he and Clausen were off), and it just didn't work out.
This is what bothers me about the "to the victor go the spoils" society we live in. When decisions don't work out, we automatically assume it was the wrong decision. And when they do work, we assume it was the correct decision. But this is obviously not true. Last night Tom Cable went for it on 4th and 15 from his own 43, with over 2 minutes remaining and possessing 2 timeouts (3 if you include the 2 minute warning). I mean, this is utter insanity. But since it improbably worked out, Cable looks like a genius. And the same goes for Weis. If Clausen completes either of those two passes and Notre Dame runs out the clock from there, he looks like a genius. Since they went incomplete and Michigan ended up winning, he's an idiot. Whether you agree with the call or not, the fact that it didn't work out is not reason enough to say it was a bad decision.
What's really worrisome thus far for Notre Dame is the lack of productivity they're getting from they're defensive line. It's a young d-line and they are not playing well right now. Ian Williams at nose tackle has been especially bad, which is why both Nevada and Michigan gashed Notre Dame for big gains up the middle. The defensive ends are generating zero pressure, which after the first week I thought was maybe by design (meaning, the d-ends hold up the tackles and allow blitzing linebackers to roam free) but now I'm not so sure. I can't say the secondary has played great either, although they were basically hung out to dry this past week by the lack of a pass rush.
The offense has been a well-oiled machine though. I don't think there's a member of the starting unit who's off to a slow start. The running game was terrific this past week, and Clausen and his receivers are on fire to start the season. Michael Floyd might be the most gifted player I've ever seen at Notre Dame. The offensive line has been about 100X better than last year, with the right side of Eric Olsen, Trever Robinson and Sam Young playing especially well. I have nothing bad to say about this offense; to say they've been terrific is an understatement.
Notre Dame cannot, repeat CANNOT, lose any more game until their meeting with USC in mid-October. They are more talented than every team they'll be playing up until that point. I never expected Notre Dame to go undefeated this season, so a loss at Michigan is not the end of the world, but there can be no more slip-ups until USC. I like Weis and I want him to succeed, but any more slip-ups and it might just be time to find a new coach to captain this talented squad.
One last thing; I wouldn't be surprised if at the end of the year we look back at this loss to Michigan as not being bad at all. Michigan has looked really good on offense to start the season, and they won't face a passing game as good as Notre Dame's probably again this season. In other words, I think there's a good chance Michigan will be competing for the Big Ten title. If you can look at Terrelle Pryor's start to this season and be encouraged, then God bless you.
First off, let me say that Charlie Weis absolutely made the right decision to put the ball in the air with about 2:20 remaining in the game. Some people have criticized him for this, and even I was a bit shocked by it at first. But this is what it boils down to; Notre Dame needed to convert one more first down to really seal the victory, and Weis put the ball in his best player's hands. It didn't work out, but that doesn't mean it was the wrong decision. Weis called two straight runnng plays before this, and the second one was stuffed for no gain. Michigan was not going to allow Notre Dame to run for that first down, and Weis knew that. So he called for a pass play to pick up that ever-important first down. Each of the two passes on that ill-fated drive had a good chance of completion (I will forever believe that if Michael Floyd had been healthy, the 3rd down pass would have been complete and game over; instead it was freshman Shaquelle Evans, and he and Clausen were off), and it just didn't work out.
This is what bothers me about the "to the victor go the spoils" society we live in. When decisions don't work out, we automatically assume it was the wrong decision. And when they do work, we assume it was the correct decision. But this is obviously not true. Last night Tom Cable went for it on 4th and 15 from his own 43, with over 2 minutes remaining and possessing 2 timeouts (3 if you include the 2 minute warning). I mean, this is utter insanity. But since it improbably worked out, Cable looks like a genius. And the same goes for Weis. If Clausen completes either of those two passes and Notre Dame runs out the clock from there, he looks like a genius. Since they went incomplete and Michigan ended up winning, he's an idiot. Whether you agree with the call or not, the fact that it didn't work out is not reason enough to say it was a bad decision.
What's really worrisome thus far for Notre Dame is the lack of productivity they're getting from they're defensive line. It's a young d-line and they are not playing well right now. Ian Williams at nose tackle has been especially bad, which is why both Nevada and Michigan gashed Notre Dame for big gains up the middle. The defensive ends are generating zero pressure, which after the first week I thought was maybe by design (meaning, the d-ends hold up the tackles and allow blitzing linebackers to roam free) but now I'm not so sure. I can't say the secondary has played great either, although they were basically hung out to dry this past week by the lack of a pass rush.
The offense has been a well-oiled machine though. I don't think there's a member of the starting unit who's off to a slow start. The running game was terrific this past week, and Clausen and his receivers are on fire to start the season. Michael Floyd might be the most gifted player I've ever seen at Notre Dame. The offensive line has been about 100X better than last year, with the right side of Eric Olsen, Trever Robinson and Sam Young playing especially well. I have nothing bad to say about this offense; to say they've been terrific is an understatement.
Notre Dame cannot, repeat CANNOT, lose any more game until their meeting with USC in mid-October. They are more talented than every team they'll be playing up until that point. I never expected Notre Dame to go undefeated this season, so a loss at Michigan is not the end of the world, but there can be no more slip-ups until USC. I like Weis and I want him to succeed, but any more slip-ups and it might just be time to find a new coach to captain this talented squad.
One last thing; I wouldn't be surprised if at the end of the year we look back at this loss to Michigan as not being bad at all. Michigan has looked really good on offense to start the season, and they won't face a passing game as good as Notre Dame's probably again this season. In other words, I think there's a good chance Michigan will be competing for the Big Ten title. If you can look at Terrelle Pryor's start to this season and be encouraged, then God bless you.
Sunday, September 13, 2009
Notre Dame NFL players
5 years ago there were basically no former Notre Dame players in the NFL. Bert Berry was playing for the Broncos, Jarious Jackson was a 3rd stringer for the Broncos and Luke Pettitgout was a starting LT for the Giants. That was about it. Now I look around and the landscape isn't so bare. Brady Quinn is starting for the Browns. Ryan Harris and David Bruton play for the Broncos. Chinedum Ndukwe plays for the Bengals. Ryan Grant and Julius Jones are starting RBs. John Carlson is playing really well for the Seahawks. Anthony Fasano is a good player for the Dolphins. Justin Tuck is a beast for the Giants, and Victor Abiamiri and Trevor Laws are in the defensive line rotation for the Eagles. It just goes to show what a poor job Bob Davie did as head coach at Notre Dame. He didn't just not win very many games, but he didn't develop any NFL talent as well. I look at the current Notre Dame roster and I see some future NFL players as well (Clausen, Floyd, Rudolph and Young for sure).
*I just want to say that as I'm typing this, we're at halftime of the Bears-Packers opening night game, and both offensive lines are playing terribly. I know everyone will focus on the QBs, and Cutler has been especially bad so far. But man, Orlando Pace cannot play anymore, and I have not seen Cutler drop back with a clean pocket all night. And the Packers have a new starting RT named Allen Barbre who is really struggling with Adewale Ogunleye. It's very easy to blame QBs for everything, but these offensive lines are not helping one bit.
*I just want to say that as I'm typing this, we're at halftime of the Bears-Packers opening night game, and both offensive lines are playing terribly. I know everyone will focus on the QBs, and Cutler has been especially bad so far. But man, Orlando Pace cannot play anymore, and I have not seen Cutler drop back with a clean pocket all night. And the Packers have a new starting RT named Allen Barbre who is really struggling with Adewale Ogunleye. It's very easy to blame QBs for everything, but these offensive lines are not helping one bit.
Thoughts from today
*Someone prove to me the myth of "the running game opens up the passing game." Adrian Peterson had 180 yards today; Favre threw for 110. Remember how all those 8 and 9 man fronts (and by the way, the only 9 man front the Vikings have seen recently was in goalline situations) were supposed to open up the Vikings' offense? In actuality, the Vikings' passing game hasn't been this closed (that would be the opposite of open, right?) in a long time. Even the most anemic performances from Johnson, Holcomb, Bollinger, Frerotte and Jackson usually produced more than 110 yards (less, if you subtract the 4 sacks Favre took today). I will say that Favre didn't throw any of patented oh-my-god interceptions. But what did Favre do today that Rosenfels or Jackson couldn't have done? Not a damn thing. And we waited all off-season for this guy and gave him a $25M contract. I don't think that was done so we could throw for 110 yards against the Cleveland Browns.
*Now you might be thinking, well Favre just doesn't have his timing down with his receivers. And you know what? That's true. He threw a fade to Sidney Rice today that may as well have landed on Mars, it was so far off. But guess what? That was his choice. He could have signed in May, recovered from his arm surgery and then taken part in all of training camp and pre-season. He chose to sit out until the middle of August. So I don't want to hear it. When you think you're so damn good you can sit out all of training camp and still perform in the NFL, you have to prove it no questions asked.
*Jake Delhomme has gone from an average QB who can give Steve Smith opprotunities to make plays to a terrible QB who can give the other team opprotunities to make plays. And frankly, I've been blindsided by it. I was never under the impression Delhomme was great, but he was okay and he worked for Carolina. Now Carolina has a huge mess on their hands.
*I don't know how Cincinnati went 3 quarters and 14 minutes without scoring a single point against Denver, but I'm just going to make the blanket statement that Marvin Lewis needs to go. I almost talked myself into Cincinnati as a sleeper team, until I realized they're the freaking Bengals and coached by a guy who "saved" his job by going 4-11-1 last season. Only in Cincinnati is 7.5 games below .500 considered a save; Bruce Coslet used to do the same thing back in the 1990s. The Raiders may be dysfunctional, but at least it's in a fun way. The Bengals are just sad, and Carson Palmer's entire career is going to waste because of it.
*I wish I could hop in a DeLorean and go back to the Browns' offseason meetings when it was decided that Josh Cribbs, Mike Furrey and Robert Royal were acceptable secondary passing options to Braylon Edwards, just so I could knock them all over the head with a chair. Brady Quinn had to try to make plays throwing mostly to RBs and Robert Royal. Braylon Edwards, in typical fashion, had a chance to make a big sprawling catch and dropped it. I just can't believe an NFL team was constructed like this. At what point in the offseason do you say, Cribbs, Royal, Furrey, we're good here? And yes, I realize they were counting on Donte Stallworth until his off-field incident. Like he's so good it would make a difference. I actually felt bad beating the Browns with these players. It's like beating on a handicapped kid.
*Vanderbilt is a mediocre SEC program, and yet the Bears have three offensive starters from that school (Cutler, Earl Bennett, Chris Williams). That may be a fact that only interests me but seriously...Vanderbilt?
*Just for the record, Mike Holmgren, Mike Shanahan and Jon Gruden have a combined four Super Bowl victories, and two other losses by Holmgren. Marty Schottenheimer has 200 career victories. They are currently without jobs. Brad Childress, Dick Jauron and Marvin Lewis have zero career playoff victories and are gainfully employed.
*Now you might be thinking, well Favre just doesn't have his timing down with his receivers. And you know what? That's true. He threw a fade to Sidney Rice today that may as well have landed on Mars, it was so far off. But guess what? That was his choice. He could have signed in May, recovered from his arm surgery and then taken part in all of training camp and pre-season. He chose to sit out until the middle of August. So I don't want to hear it. When you think you're so damn good you can sit out all of training camp and still perform in the NFL, you have to prove it no questions asked.
*Jake Delhomme has gone from an average QB who can give Steve Smith opprotunities to make plays to a terrible QB who can give the other team opprotunities to make plays. And frankly, I've been blindsided by it. I was never under the impression Delhomme was great, but he was okay and he worked for Carolina. Now Carolina has a huge mess on their hands.
*I don't know how Cincinnati went 3 quarters and 14 minutes without scoring a single point against Denver, but I'm just going to make the blanket statement that Marvin Lewis needs to go. I almost talked myself into Cincinnati as a sleeper team, until I realized they're the freaking Bengals and coached by a guy who "saved" his job by going 4-11-1 last season. Only in Cincinnati is 7.5 games below .500 considered a save; Bruce Coslet used to do the same thing back in the 1990s. The Raiders may be dysfunctional, but at least it's in a fun way. The Bengals are just sad, and Carson Palmer's entire career is going to waste because of it.
*I wish I could hop in a DeLorean and go back to the Browns' offseason meetings when it was decided that Josh Cribbs, Mike Furrey and Robert Royal were acceptable secondary passing options to Braylon Edwards, just so I could knock them all over the head with a chair. Brady Quinn had to try to make plays throwing mostly to RBs and Robert Royal. Braylon Edwards, in typical fashion, had a chance to make a big sprawling catch and dropped it. I just can't believe an NFL team was constructed like this. At what point in the offseason do you say, Cribbs, Royal, Furrey, we're good here? And yes, I realize they were counting on Donte Stallworth until his off-field incident. Like he's so good it would make a difference. I actually felt bad beating the Browns with these players. It's like beating on a handicapped kid.
*Vanderbilt is a mediocre SEC program, and yet the Bears have three offensive starters from that school (Cutler, Earl Bennett, Chris Williams). That may be a fact that only interests me but seriously...Vanderbilt?
*Just for the record, Mike Holmgren, Mike Shanahan and Jon Gruden have a combined four Super Bowl victories, and two other losses by Holmgren. Marty Schottenheimer has 200 career victories. They are currently without jobs. Brad Childress, Dick Jauron and Marvin Lewis have zero career playoff victories and are gainfully employed.
Friday, September 11, 2009
Predictions
One of my favorite parts of the week right before the NFL regular season starts are the predictions that come out. Everybody seems to realize that roughly 50% of the playoff field will turn over from season to season, and yet every year people tend to pick the same teams to make the playoffs. I saw a guy on NFL Network last night who's AFC playoff field was the exact same from last season except he substituted New England for Miami, and the Patriots had the same record as Miami last season.
But you know what? I have trouble finding new playoff teams as well. I look at some of the teams who would be considered "sleepers" (and where does this term come from anyways? To me, a sleeper is a team that will be asleep all season), and I don't like any of them. Oakland, Kansas City, Buffalo, Cleveland, Cincinnati, Detroit, Tampa Bay, San Fransisco and St. Louis would all be considered sleepers, and I can't say I like a single one of them this season. Cincinnati maybe, but I have a biased opinion of Palmer that probably affects my thinking there. The one team that was bad last year that I think could be good this year, Seattle, is a team that others have picked up on as well. But yet there's a good chance 2 or 3 of those teams are going to the playoffs. I just can't imagine which ones.
Kansas City, Cleveland, Detroit and St. Louis seem very talent-deficient right now. Oakland and Buffalo are dysfunctional. Tampa Bay and San Fransisco have QB concerns (if the 49ers had a slightly better QB, even freaking Jake Delhomme, I could probably get behind them), and I don't think they're good enough to overcome that. And then there's Cincinnati, which has offensive line concerns and I really wonder how good they are defensively. I just can't get behind any of these teams. But I know I'm wrong about at least two of them.
I also enjoy articles about "potential breakout stars," where the potential breakout stars are players like Andre Johnson or Calvin Johnson. Uhh, they've already broken out, thank you very much.
But you know what? I have trouble finding new playoff teams as well. I look at some of the teams who would be considered "sleepers" (and where does this term come from anyways? To me, a sleeper is a team that will be asleep all season), and I don't like any of them. Oakland, Kansas City, Buffalo, Cleveland, Cincinnati, Detroit, Tampa Bay, San Fransisco and St. Louis would all be considered sleepers, and I can't say I like a single one of them this season. Cincinnati maybe, but I have a biased opinion of Palmer that probably affects my thinking there. The one team that was bad last year that I think could be good this year, Seattle, is a team that others have picked up on as well. But yet there's a good chance 2 or 3 of those teams are going to the playoffs. I just can't imagine which ones.
Kansas City, Cleveland, Detroit and St. Louis seem very talent-deficient right now. Oakland and Buffalo are dysfunctional. Tampa Bay and San Fransisco have QB concerns (if the 49ers had a slightly better QB, even freaking Jake Delhomme, I could probably get behind them), and I don't think they're good enough to overcome that. And then there's Cincinnati, which has offensive line concerns and I really wonder how good they are defensively. I just can't get behind any of these teams. But I know I'm wrong about at least two of them.
I also enjoy articles about "potential breakout stars," where the potential breakout stars are players like Andre Johnson or Calvin Johnson. Uhh, they've already broken out, thank you very much.
Thursday, September 10, 2009
Brady Quinn to start for the Browns
This Sunday is going to be an odd experience for me. The opposing team is going to start a QB that I like about a million times more than I like my own. I'm glad Quinn is starting and I want him to do well...but not against the Vikings. It'll be weird if he struggles on Sunday, because that'll be good for Minnesota but bad for his career. On the flip side, if he plays really well and beats Minnesota I'd be crushed. I guess in the long run I hope he does well, but not this week. The problem with that is, I don't think Mangini will hesitate to switch QBs. It wouldn't surprise me if he switched at halftime of this week if the Browns are struggling.
How will the Browns beat the Vikings?
Most weeks I can imagine a way in which the opposing team can beat the Vikings. With the Cardinals you worry about their passing game, for instance. The Ravens and Steelers are all about defense. But I'm struggling to find a way in which the Browns can beat the Vikings besides turnovers. What do the Browns do well? Okay, they have Braylon Edwards. He's an extremely talented player who drops about half the passes thrown his way. But what else do they have at receiver? Nothing to worry about. Jamal Lewis is a plodder for a runner, and the Vikings specialize in stopping the run. Lewis' style plays right into the hands of Pat and Kevin Williams.
The Browns don't have much on defense either. The only potential pass rusher I see is Kamerion Wimbley, who hasn't played well since his rookie season a couple years ago. Shaun Rogers is pretty good at nose tackle, but I don't think a nose tackle is going to kill the Vikings on his own. Much like I don't think Edwards can kill the Vikings on his own. The Browns' secondary has a couple of corners who are young and tough to get a read on because they don't get much of a pass rush.
Edwards at receiver, Rogers at nose tackle and Josh Cribbs returning kicks. That's all I can see about the Browns that's really worrisome. And without help I just don't think that can beat the Vikings. It really seems like turnovers are the only way Minnesota can lose this game, and I'm not ruling that out with Favre at QB.
The Browns don't have much on defense either. The only potential pass rusher I see is Kamerion Wimbley, who hasn't played well since his rookie season a couple years ago. Shaun Rogers is pretty good at nose tackle, but I don't think a nose tackle is going to kill the Vikings on his own. Much like I don't think Edwards can kill the Vikings on his own. The Browns' secondary has a couple of corners who are young and tough to get a read on because they don't get much of a pass rush.
Edwards at receiver, Rogers at nose tackle and Josh Cribbs returning kicks. That's all I can see about the Browns that's really worrisome. And without help I just don't think that can beat the Vikings. It really seems like turnovers are the only way Minnesota can lose this game, and I'm not ruling that out with Favre at QB.
Making the Richard Seymour trade even better
The Richard Seymour trade is insane enough as it is. Only a team on the cusp of Super Bowl contention should pull the trigger on trading future first round picks for veterans about to enter the wrong side of the 30. I don't believe the Raiders are on the cusp of Super Bowl contention. Seymour is also a free agent at the end of the year, and as of now hasn't even reported to the Raiders. It sure looks like he will, at most, play one season for the Raiders, then bolt as a free agent. In other words, he'll be long gone by the time that first round pick comes due.
But what really makes this trade an all-time great, in my view, is the fact that the Raiders made it possible for the Patriots to trade Seymour in the first place. Back on draft day the Raiders had the 40th pick and traded it to New England, which used the pick on Boston College DT Ron Brace. If the Patriots didn't have Brace on the roster, they probably wouldn't have traded Seymour. They are trying to win a Super Bowl, after all, and they need defensive linemen to do that. In other words, the Raiders not only traded for Seymour but helped the Patriots draft his replacement.
Of course it's not that cut and dried. The Patriots had the 49th pick and may have taken Seymour's replacement then. Obviously if you change one thing about history, you change everything. But you have to appreciate how this insane trade by the Raiders was made possible by...the Raiders.
Here's the final tally on the Raiders-Patriots trades from this off-season:
Patriots:
2011 first round pick
40th pick (Boston College DT Ron Brace)
DE/OLB Derrick Burgess
Raiders:
DE/DT Richard Seymour
49th pick (Ohio S Michael Mitchell)
124th pick (Florida WR Louis Murphy)
199th pick (Missouri DE Stryker Sulak, released before training camp)
A year from today there's a very good chance Seymour will no longer be a Raider, leaving the Raiders with Mitchell and Murphy, while the Patriots will still have a first round pick coming plus Brace (who knows if Burgess will still be on the roster).
But what really makes this trade an all-time great, in my view, is the fact that the Raiders made it possible for the Patriots to trade Seymour in the first place. Back on draft day the Raiders had the 40th pick and traded it to New England, which used the pick on Boston College DT Ron Brace. If the Patriots didn't have Brace on the roster, they probably wouldn't have traded Seymour. They are trying to win a Super Bowl, after all, and they need defensive linemen to do that. In other words, the Raiders not only traded for Seymour but helped the Patriots draft his replacement.
Of course it's not that cut and dried. The Patriots had the 49th pick and may have taken Seymour's replacement then. Obviously if you change one thing about history, you change everything. But you have to appreciate how this insane trade by the Raiders was made possible by...the Raiders.
Here's the final tally on the Raiders-Patriots trades from this off-season:
Patriots:
2011 first round pick
40th pick (Boston College DT Ron Brace)
DE/OLB Derrick Burgess
Raiders:
DE/DT Richard Seymour
49th pick (Ohio S Michael Mitchell)
124th pick (Florida WR Louis Murphy)
199th pick (Missouri DE Stryker Sulak, released before training camp)
A year from today there's a very good chance Seymour will no longer be a Raider, leaving the Raiders with Mitchell and Murphy, while the Patriots will still have a first round pick coming plus Brace (who knows if Burgess will still be on the roster).
Monday, September 7, 2009
My Top 25 - Week 1
This is my top 25 after one week of college football.
1. Florida
2. Texas
3. USC
Comment: I think these three teams are head-and-shoulders above the rest. USC starting a freshman QB scares me, but otherwise these are the most talented teams in the country.
4. Oklahoma St.
5. Alabama
6. Penn St.
7. California
8. Ohio St.
Comment: I'm ranking Oklahoma St.'s win over Georgia ahead of Alabama's win over Virginia Tech. I normally wouldn't rank Penn St. ahead of Cal after Cal beat Maryland and Penn St. beat Akron, but Penn St. held Akron to single digits in yards in the first half, so I'll give it to them. Ohio St. was unimpressive in victory, but I think they're better than any other team below them.
9. LSU
10. Ole Miss
11. BYU
12. Boise St.
Comment: LSU was also unimpressive in victory, but I think they're more talented than Ole Miss. BYU and Boise St. had great wins, but I just don't think they're better than LSU or Ole Miss. Sorry.
13. Missouri
14. Notre Dame
15. Georgia Tech
16. Oklahoma
Comment: Missouri manhandled a Big 10 team, so they get ranked higher than Notre Dame manhandling a WAC team and Georgia Tech winning by 20 over an FCS team. Oklahoma was extremely disappointing, Sam Bradford or not. I refuse to give them points for happened last season. If they start playing up to their alleged talent level, I'll raise them.
17. Michigan
18. Cincinnati
19. Nebraska
Comment: Michigan looks good to me now that they have two QBs to run Rich Rod's offense. Cincinatti won big on the road in a conference matchup. I'm not comfortable with Nebraska here, but they did win and win big. The next two teams both lost, and I don't like crediting them for that.
20. Georgia
21. Virginia Tech
Comment: This is probably too low for both of these teams, but as soon as they start winning I'll bump them back up. I just refuse to latch onto to what happened last season, as it doesn't matter anymore. If Georgia and Virginia Tech are good, and I think they are, they'll start winning and I'll adjust accordingly. Until then, this is where they sit.
22. Kansas
23. North Carolina
24. Miami
25. Michigan St.
Comment: Kansas and North Carolina beat awful opponents huge, which should happen but sometimes doesn't, so I credit them for taking care of business. Miami had a great win over Florida St., but the lack of defense in that game is what struck me. Good to see Jacory Harris developing on schedule. Michigan St. did the same as Kansas and North Carolina, I just don't think they're as good as those teams.
I'm not entirely comfortable with this list, but I'm going with it for now and the season will sort itself out.
1. Florida
2. Texas
3. USC
Comment: I think these three teams are head-and-shoulders above the rest. USC starting a freshman QB scares me, but otherwise these are the most talented teams in the country.
4. Oklahoma St.
5. Alabama
6. Penn St.
7. California
8. Ohio St.
Comment: I'm ranking Oklahoma St.'s win over Georgia ahead of Alabama's win over Virginia Tech. I normally wouldn't rank Penn St. ahead of Cal after Cal beat Maryland and Penn St. beat Akron, but Penn St. held Akron to single digits in yards in the first half, so I'll give it to them. Ohio St. was unimpressive in victory, but I think they're better than any other team below them.
9. LSU
10. Ole Miss
11. BYU
12. Boise St.
Comment: LSU was also unimpressive in victory, but I think they're more talented than Ole Miss. BYU and Boise St. had great wins, but I just don't think they're better than LSU or Ole Miss. Sorry.
13. Missouri
14. Notre Dame
15. Georgia Tech
16. Oklahoma
Comment: Missouri manhandled a Big 10 team, so they get ranked higher than Notre Dame manhandling a WAC team and Georgia Tech winning by 20 over an FCS team. Oklahoma was extremely disappointing, Sam Bradford or not. I refuse to give them points for happened last season. If they start playing up to their alleged talent level, I'll raise them.
17. Michigan
18. Cincinnati
19. Nebraska
Comment: Michigan looks good to me now that they have two QBs to run Rich Rod's offense. Cincinatti won big on the road in a conference matchup. I'm not comfortable with Nebraska here, but they did win and win big. The next two teams both lost, and I don't like crediting them for that.
20. Georgia
21. Virginia Tech
Comment: This is probably too low for both of these teams, but as soon as they start winning I'll bump them back up. I just refuse to latch onto to what happened last season, as it doesn't matter anymore. If Georgia and Virginia Tech are good, and I think they are, they'll start winning and I'll adjust accordingly. Until then, this is where they sit.
22. Kansas
23. North Carolina
24. Miami
25. Michigan St.
Comment: Kansas and North Carolina beat awful opponents huge, which should happen but sometimes doesn't, so I credit them for taking care of business. Miami had a great win over Florida St., but the lack of defense in that game is what struck me. Good to see Jacory Harris developing on schedule. Michigan St. did the same as Kansas and North Carolina, I just don't think they're as good as those teams.
I'm not entirely comfortable with this list, but I'm going with it for now and the season will sort itself out.
Saturday, September 5, 2009
Hallelujah
The Vikings cut John David Booty today, which was absolutely the right move. Booty just does not have NFL talent. Period. They may try to put him on the practice squad, and I can live with that. But to cut or trade Jackson and keep Booty would be ridiculous. Jackson is much better and much more talented, not to mention not that much older.
And how about the Raiders cutting Jeff Garcia today? I'd like this move a lot better if Oakland's backup QBs weren't Bruce Gradkowski and Charlie Frye (hey, when you've got a chance to reunite the 2006 Browns you have to do it), but either way I never felt Garcia was a good fit for Oakland. I mean, what was the point of signing him? Here's the Oakland Raiders, we like QBs with size and strong arms, and then they sign Jeff Garcia. And they draft a receiver in Heyward-Bey that Garcia could never throw the ball to downfield. What was the point? It's like the left hand doesn't know what the right hand is doing. Par for the course with that franchise, which cut their 6th round pick Stryker Sulak before he even signed a contract. Why did you draft him then? Who the hell knows with the Raiders.
And how about the Raiders cutting Jeff Garcia today? I'd like this move a lot better if Oakland's backup QBs weren't Bruce Gradkowski and Charlie Frye (hey, when you've got a chance to reunite the 2006 Browns you have to do it), but either way I never felt Garcia was a good fit for Oakland. I mean, what was the point of signing him? Here's the Oakland Raiders, we like QBs with size and strong arms, and then they sign Jeff Garcia. And they draft a receiver in Heyward-Bey that Garcia could never throw the ball to downfield. What was the point? It's like the left hand doesn't know what the right hand is doing. Par for the course with that franchise, which cut their 6th round pick Stryker Sulak before he even signed a contract. Why did you draft him then? Who the hell knows with the Raiders.
Thoughts on today
* I woke up this morning and it felt like Christmas. I haven't been this excited about a Notre Dame team in a long time, maybe ever. This team has top-end players and depth. It was just a matter of putting it all together on the field. Well, they did not disappoint. Today's 35-0 win over Nevada was a bigger victory than anything I imagined. I never anticipated shutting out Nevada's pistol offense that led all of college football in rushing last season. And sure, Nevada had a few trips into the red zone that could have result in points but didn't, but a shut out is a shut out. And Jimmy Clausen is red hot right now. He has 7 incompletions total in his last two starts. If only they could play WAC teams every week, they'd go 11-1 or 12-0 every year like Boise State does.
*Coming into today, it wasn't a stretch to think next week's Notre Dame-Michigan game would be a battle to see which coach gets fired first. But I don't think that's the case anymore. Notre Dame looks to be firmly in control of their season, and Michigan looked much, and I can't emphasize this enough, MUCH better on offense today than they did at any point last season. Rich Rod finally has the QBs he needs. The only problem is they're true freshmen. I'm starting to think, though, that teams need to kick Michigan while their down because this may not last. One more season of ups and downs and next year they could be ready to roll.
* Right now I'm watching LSU struggle with Washington (17-13 lead in the 3rd quarter) and I'm starting to wonder if Les Miles is actually a good coach or not. LSU recruits really well every year, so you can't tell me they don't have talent. I know they've lost some players to the NFL the past couple of years, but this is getting ridiculous. I don't mean to draw everything back to Notre Dame...but I'm going to anyways. I saw Washington play Notre Dame last year, and they were awful. Sure, Jake Locker wasn't playing in that game, but I don't think they crossed midfield until the 2nd half sometime. I mean Notre Dame was just miles better, which leads me to believe LSU should be the same. LSU probably has backups who could start for Washington. And yet, here we are. LSU went 8-5 last year, and who knows what will happen tonight. I'm not saying Les Miles is a bad coach; what I'm saying is this feels a little too much like Larry Coker's tenure at Miami. He inherited a powerhouse, lost 1 game over a two-year period, and then subsequently got worse every season until he was finally fired. Miami, quite honestly, still hasn't recovered from his tenure.
* Illinois was probably the biggest bust today. They got manhandled by Missouri. And yes I realize that Arrelious Benn left the game with an injury. Boo hoo. Ron Zook is a recruter and nothing more. Juice Williams should be ashamed of himself as well. He's something like a 10th year senior (or maybe it just feels like it) and still hasn't elevated his game to the level a veteran QB like him should. Urban Meyer took over a tremendous roster from Zook at Florida, and whoever takes over for Zook at Illinois will probably also be getting a pretty good roster. Not to the same level, but Illinois should be better than this.
* Speaking of bad coaches, what exactly does Al Groh have to do to get fired from Virginia? Go take a piss on Robert E. Lee's grave? Virginia has done nothing but go downhill under Groh, and today they lost to William & Mary. To be fair, William & Mary did produce Darren Sharper...over a decade ago. I hate seeing schools like Virginia, which with the right coach could absolutely compete for ACC championships, continue to flounder with the wrong coach. North Carolina brought in Butch Davis, Georgia Tech brought in Paul Johnson, and Virginia needs to follow suit.
*Coming into today, it wasn't a stretch to think next week's Notre Dame-Michigan game would be a battle to see which coach gets fired first. But I don't think that's the case anymore. Notre Dame looks to be firmly in control of their season, and Michigan looked much, and I can't emphasize this enough, MUCH better on offense today than they did at any point last season. Rich Rod finally has the QBs he needs. The only problem is they're true freshmen. I'm starting to think, though, that teams need to kick Michigan while their down because this may not last. One more season of ups and downs and next year they could be ready to roll.
* Right now I'm watching LSU struggle with Washington (17-13 lead in the 3rd quarter) and I'm starting to wonder if Les Miles is actually a good coach or not. LSU recruits really well every year, so you can't tell me they don't have talent. I know they've lost some players to the NFL the past couple of years, but this is getting ridiculous. I don't mean to draw everything back to Notre Dame...but I'm going to anyways. I saw Washington play Notre Dame last year, and they were awful. Sure, Jake Locker wasn't playing in that game, but I don't think they crossed midfield until the 2nd half sometime. I mean Notre Dame was just miles better, which leads me to believe LSU should be the same. LSU probably has backups who could start for Washington. And yet, here we are. LSU went 8-5 last year, and who knows what will happen tonight. I'm not saying Les Miles is a bad coach; what I'm saying is this feels a little too much like Larry Coker's tenure at Miami. He inherited a powerhouse, lost 1 game over a two-year period, and then subsequently got worse every season until he was finally fired. Miami, quite honestly, still hasn't recovered from his tenure.
* Illinois was probably the biggest bust today. They got manhandled by Missouri. And yes I realize that Arrelious Benn left the game with an injury. Boo hoo. Ron Zook is a recruter and nothing more. Juice Williams should be ashamed of himself as well. He's something like a 10th year senior (or maybe it just feels like it) and still hasn't elevated his game to the level a veteran QB like him should. Urban Meyer took over a tremendous roster from Zook at Florida, and whoever takes over for Zook at Illinois will probably also be getting a pretty good roster. Not to the same level, but Illinois should be better than this.
* Speaking of bad coaches, what exactly does Al Groh have to do to get fired from Virginia? Go take a piss on Robert E. Lee's grave? Virginia has done nothing but go downhill under Groh, and today they lost to William & Mary. To be fair, William & Mary did produce Darren Sharper...over a decade ago. I hate seeing schools like Virginia, which with the right coach could absolutely compete for ACC championships, continue to flounder with the wrong coach. North Carolina brought in Butch Davis, Georgia Tech brought in Paul Johnson, and Virginia needs to follow suit.
Thursday, September 3, 2009
Good lord
*I'm glad I didn't stay home and watch college football tonight. South Carolina scored 7 points...and won. NC State has a QB named Russell Wilson who's supposed to be good...I say supposed to, because I can't believe a good QB could lead his team to only 3 points against a less-than-vaunted South Carolina defense. And at what point does Spurrier just throw in the towel? This game had to kill him inside. You wonder if he regrets ever leaving Florida. I mean sure, he made a lot of money with the Redskins and he makes a lot now at South Carolina. But he's done a less-than-steller job at South Carolina, and Urban Meyer is building a dynasty of his own. Spurrier could have been like Paterno or Bowden, staying at a university for the rest of his life and becoming synonomous with that school. Instead he traded himself off as a hired gun, and is basically irrelevant at South Carolina. Danny Weurffel's not walking through that door. I hope the money was worth it.
That Oregon-Boise State looked brutal too. Oregon didn't get a first down until the 3rd quarter. I don't care if you're playing the 2000 Baltimore Ravens, that is pathetic. And yet Boise State didn't blow out Oregon as they could have. It's laughable to me that people will point to this game at the end of the year as to why Boise State belongs in the BCS. This game sucked, and neither team should get credit. Boise State was just a little less worse than Oregon.
*I don't put much, if any, stock in NFL preseason, but it's hard to watch the Arizona Cardinals thus far and feel good about them. I like this team, I want them to do well, but it has not been a good preseason. Last week the Packers first-teamers embarrassed them, and tonight Warner threw an INT against Denver backups. On the bright side, Chris (I refuse to call him Beanie) Wells does look good and he adds another dimension to their offense. But this has all the makings of a team reverting after losing the Super Bowl. I hope I'm wrong, if for no other reason than the NFC West sucks enough already.
Speaking of the Packers, they've looked really good. Starters on both sides of the ball have played well, and Aaron Rodgers looks to be in midseason form already. I may have underrated their ability to switch to a 3-4. It hasn't looked like a problem at all, and B.J. Raji is currently coming off the bench. If their d-line wasn't good he'd be starting. I'm still skeptical of Aaron Kampman though. And I never like the idea of moving your best player. Kampman was doing just fine where he was, why mess with it?
One more team that's looked really bad is the Buffalo Bills. It's funny because they'd like to run some no-huddle this season on offense. But of course if you aren't gaining first downs, all the no-huddle does is put your defense back on the field quicker. What's also funny is the Bills are the perfect symbol of mediocrity. They go 7-9 every year. Dick Jauron is a mediocre (at best) head coach. Turk Schonert is a mediocre (at best) offensive coordinator. Trent Edwards has been a rather mediocre QB thus far. Marshawn Lynch is an okay runner, but is really special? Lee Evans disappears for weeks at a time. Aaron Schobel has gone from being a good pass rusher to mediocrity. This franchise is absolutely stuck in a rut, and signing an old receiver isn't going to solve anything. The last time the Bills played a playoff game was the Music City Miracle. We are about 4 months away from the 10 year anniversary of that game, so yeah it's been awhile.
*I'm watching a replay of the Broncos-Cardinals preseason game tonigh, and Matt Leinart is airmailing receivers like crazy. At what point do people admit that Leinart just sucks? He was only good in college because he played with an NFL team. It wouldn't surprise me if every starter on offense for the 2005 Trojans played in the NFL at some point. Off the top of my head there's Reggie Bush, Lendale White, Dwayne Jarrett, Steve Smith, Dominique Byrd (a tight end), Winston Justice and I believe Deuce Lutui (Cardinals) and Ryan Kalil (Panthers) were starting o-linemen then as well. Leinart was really no better than Ken Dorsey, who also played for an NFL team at Miami, but nobody convinced themselves Dorsey was a great pro prospect. He was a 6th round pick, and honestly that was too high. 6th round would have been just about right for Leinart.
That Oregon-Boise State looked brutal too. Oregon didn't get a first down until the 3rd quarter. I don't care if you're playing the 2000 Baltimore Ravens, that is pathetic. And yet Boise State didn't blow out Oregon as they could have. It's laughable to me that people will point to this game at the end of the year as to why Boise State belongs in the BCS. This game sucked, and neither team should get credit. Boise State was just a little less worse than Oregon.
*I don't put much, if any, stock in NFL preseason, but it's hard to watch the Arizona Cardinals thus far and feel good about them. I like this team, I want them to do well, but it has not been a good preseason. Last week the Packers first-teamers embarrassed them, and tonight Warner threw an INT against Denver backups. On the bright side, Chris (I refuse to call him Beanie) Wells does look good and he adds another dimension to their offense. But this has all the makings of a team reverting after losing the Super Bowl. I hope I'm wrong, if for no other reason than the NFC West sucks enough already.
Speaking of the Packers, they've looked really good. Starters on both sides of the ball have played well, and Aaron Rodgers looks to be in midseason form already. I may have underrated their ability to switch to a 3-4. It hasn't looked like a problem at all, and B.J. Raji is currently coming off the bench. If their d-line wasn't good he'd be starting. I'm still skeptical of Aaron Kampman though. And I never like the idea of moving your best player. Kampman was doing just fine where he was, why mess with it?
One more team that's looked really bad is the Buffalo Bills. It's funny because they'd like to run some no-huddle this season on offense. But of course if you aren't gaining first downs, all the no-huddle does is put your defense back on the field quicker. What's also funny is the Bills are the perfect symbol of mediocrity. They go 7-9 every year. Dick Jauron is a mediocre (at best) head coach. Turk Schonert is a mediocre (at best) offensive coordinator. Trent Edwards has been a rather mediocre QB thus far. Marshawn Lynch is an okay runner, but is really special? Lee Evans disappears for weeks at a time. Aaron Schobel has gone from being a good pass rusher to mediocrity. This franchise is absolutely stuck in a rut, and signing an old receiver isn't going to solve anything. The last time the Bills played a playoff game was the Music City Miracle. We are about 4 months away from the 10 year anniversary of that game, so yeah it's been awhile.
*I'm watching a replay of the Broncos-Cardinals preseason game tonigh, and Matt Leinart is airmailing receivers like crazy. At what point do people admit that Leinart just sucks? He was only good in college because he played with an NFL team. It wouldn't surprise me if every starter on offense for the 2005 Trojans played in the NFL at some point. Off the top of my head there's Reggie Bush, Lendale White, Dwayne Jarrett, Steve Smith, Dominique Byrd (a tight end), Winston Justice and I believe Deuce Lutui (Cardinals) and Ryan Kalil (Panthers) were starting o-linemen then as well. Leinart was really no better than Ken Dorsey, who also played for an NFL team at Miami, but nobody convinced themselves Dorsey was a great pro prospect. He was a 6th round pick, and honestly that was too high. 6th round would have been just about right for Leinart.
Tuesday, September 1, 2009
Random game I'm looking forward to
How about Ohio State playing Navy this weekend? I know nobody respects Navy, but Notre Dame plays them every year and their option attack can give you fits if you aren't prepared for it. Ohio State should have the athletes on defense to stop it, and there's no way Navy should be able to slow down Terrelle Pryor. But this seems like a trap game to me. Ohio State plays USC next week, and it wouldn't surprise me at all if they overlooked Navy this weekend. And Navy is good enough to knock them off if they aren't careful.
If I had any balls whatsoever, I'd call this my upset of the week. This is a matchup that intrigues me greatly, mainly because I'd like to see how Ohio State contends with Navy's option. And wouldn't it be crushing for Ohio State if they lost before their big matchup with USC?
If I had any balls whatsoever, I'd call this my upset of the week. This is a matchup that intrigues me greatly, mainly because I'd like to see how Ohio State contends with Navy's option. And wouldn't it be crushing for Ohio State if they lost before their big matchup with USC?
What keeps me awake at night
*What if Notre Dame loses on Saturday? I've been waiting for this game for about 8 months. I've been waiting to wash out the bad taste in my mouth left over from the end of last season (Hawaii Bowl notwithstanding). What if they lay an egg and lose to Nevada? It would be crushing, that's for sure. I'd like to see them at least compete for a BCS bowl, but that goes out the window with a loss this weekend. I don't even want to think about such a possibility.
*What if the Vikings lose in week 2 at Detroit? Back in 2001, the Vikings lost to an 0-12 Lions team, and I thought that was humiliating. But that '01 team wasn't any good (5-11) and Todd Bouman started that game at QB. This Vikings team should be very good. We have he-who-shall-not-be-named at QB. I don't want to live with the stigma of being the team that ended Detroit's long losing streak. I really wish they played Detroit later in the season, so the Lions could get that win out of the way and then at least a loss wouldn't be as humiliating.
*What if the Vikings lose in week 2 at Detroit? Back in 2001, the Vikings lost to an 0-12 Lions team, and I thought that was humiliating. But that '01 team wasn't any good (5-11) and Todd Bouman started that game at QB. This Vikings team should be very good. We have he-who-shall-not-be-named at QB. I don't want to live with the stigma of being the team that ended Detroit's long losing streak. I really wish they played Detroit later in the season, so the Lions could get that win out of the way and then at least a loss wouldn't be as humiliating.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)