Brady In the Booth

We're in Year 2 of Tom Brady as a broadcaster, and it's already leaps and bounds better than Year 1.  I'm not saying Brady suddenly became John Madden or Troy Aikman or even Tony Romo.  But he isn't bad anymore.  Is that what you want from your No. 1 analyst who's making $37 million a year?  Of course not!  But the fact that people are no longer talking about how bad Brady is on a weekly basis is certainly preferable to last year.  Now, he's just another NFL game analyst.

You can tell that Brady is more comfortable in the booth, too, which I think has made a big difference.  He came in completely green.  Yes, he's the greatest quarterback of all-time.  But that didn't mean he'd automatically be just as great in his post-retirement career.  But as Brady gained experience, he got better.  And it's easy to see why FOX wanted him.  It's not just the name-recognition, which was obviously a big factor.  It's because they saw his potential as a broadcaster.

There's another big thing that I think has led to Tom Brady's marked improvement in Year 2 compared to Year 1.  Last year, he wasn't allowed to go to production meetings.  That may sound like a small thing.  It's actually huge.  Production meetings with the head coaches and quarterbacks are an important part of a broadcaster's prep work, and it's where they get information that they can't find out simply by watching film.  They're a vital piece if you want to have a quality broadcast where the announcers actually sound like they know what they're talking about.

Because he wasn't allowed to attend production meetings last season, Brady was essentially working with one hand tied behind his back.  In hindsight, that might be part of the reason why he relied so much on trying to show off his football knowledge (which is obviously vast, but his is also much more advanced than the viewer's).  He had to stick with what he knew because his knowledge of the players and teams in the game was limited to what he saw on film and whatever Kevin Burkhart, Erin Andrews or someone else on the crew told him.  That's a tough situation for anyone to be in, let alone a rookie broadcaster.

Of course, the reason Brady couldn't attend production meetings last year is because FOX and the NFL had to come up with special rules for him when he bought a minority stake of the Raiders.  Among the conditions is that he's not allowed to attend practice (another thing all broadcasters do during the week) or enter another team's facility (which is where the production meetings usually take place).  Those rules still apply, but the compromise they reached so that Brady can do his job is that he can attend production meetings remotely.

FOX's booth isn't the only one that Brady has been spotted in this season, however.  During the Raiders-Chargers game on Monday night, ESPN cut to a shot of Brady sitting in the Las Vegas coaches' booth wearing a headset.  Then the details emerged of how hands-on he is with the Raiders' players and coaches and what is or isn't allowed.  The NFL is basically putting its head in the sand, saying that everything is above board and Brady is following the rules that were established when his ownership stake was approved.  Others were highly skeptical, calling out the obvious conflict of interest.

As soon as it was announced that Brady was even interested in acquiring a minority stake of the Raiders, there were legitimate questions about how it would work.  How could the analyst on one of the networks' lead broadcast crew be given access to players, coaches and everything else from one team (a requirement for his FOX job) while being actively involved in the day-to-day business of another?  What's to stop him from taking what he's learned doing his broadcast research and sharing it with the appropriate Raiders personnel?

Over the past few days, we've found out just how hands-on Brady is with the Raiders.  Offensive Coordinator Chip Kelly mentioned how the two speak by phone a few times a week and Brady is very involved in several areas.  He doesn't have any input in game planning or anything else that compromises his FOX duties, Pete Carroll was quick to reassure everyone.  Except no one was reassured.  If anything, it got them even more fired up.

The frustrating part about all that, though, is how this situation only exists because the NFL let it.  It's a problem entirely of their own making.  It isn't FOX's fault.  I'd even venture to say that it isn't entirely Brady's.  He should've been made to decide, but wasn't.  So, why not try doing both if no one's going to say you can't? 

No, this is on the league.  The NFL should've made him make a choice.  Either you're a broadcaster or you're an owner.  To us, it doesn't make a difference.  But you need to decide which you are.  Instead, the NFL and Brady both wanted the best of both worlds, so that's what they gave him, which only ended up pissing off everybody else!

It's a setup that, frankly, shouldn't work.  There's a separation for that very reason!  The criticism of Brady's dual roles and the Brady Rules is extremely warranted!  What players and coaches share with broadcasters may not necessarily be something they want to share with the part-owner of another team.  Especially if Brady's FOX assignment that week is a Chiefs, Broncos or Chargers game.  Playoff teams last season or not, they'd have no incentive to divulge potentially sensitive information to one of the Raiders' minority owners.  Which is understandable.  But it also handcuffs Brady the Broadcaster.

Whether it's directed at Brady, the NFL or both, all of the criticism is valid.  And it isn't just coming from the 31 teams that aren't the Raiders.  The group of detractors keeps growing.  As do their concerns.  As do their reasons why they don't like the situation and their proposed solutions.  That chorus will only get louder, too.  Because Brady's in just the second year of his 10-year deal with FOX.  So, this will continue to be a talking point.

There are plenty of people who don't think Brady will stay at FOX for the entirety of his contract.  He certainly hasn't become the standout broadcaster they hoped/expected.  He's no longer terrible, but he isn't one of the top analysts, either.  Brady isn't even the best analyst at FOX!  That title goes to the man he replaced on the No. 1 crew--Greg Olsen.  And, while he may want to get better, broadcasting's clearly not his passion.  Not his only passion at least. 

If Tom Brady wants to dabble in ownership, he should be allowed.  No one is saying he shouldn't.  But if he wants to be an owner, he shouldn't also be a broadcaster.  Especially not with the type of access the member of a network's marquee crew would ordinarily get.  Because it's an obvious conflict of interest.  Which is something that everybody outside of the NFL office and Tom Brady himself already know!

NFL Picks, Week 2

The Micah Parsons trade could go down as the single transaction that had the biggest impact on this season.  Because, through two games, the Packers look like the best team in the NFC, if not all of football.  Green Bay is 2-0 with two wins over teams that made the playoffs last season, and looked great doing it.  But they're not the only team that was impressive in Week 1.  Not by a long shot.  Will any of those teams follow it with another solid performance like the Packers?

Thursday Night: Green Bay (Win)

Jaguars (1-0) at Bengals (1-0): Cincinnati-Jacksonville was one of those teams that looked super impressive in Week 1.  Although, how much of that was the fact they were playing Carolina?  The Bengals, meanwhile, only beat Cleveland by one.  Is that an indication that the Bengals might not really be as good as they think they are?  I guess we'll find out as they play their first home game.

Giants (0-1) at Cowboys (0-1): Dallas-Apparently, it doesn't matter who's playing quarterback for the Giants.  Their offense is bad regardless.  I'd also like to know what they did to get two division road games to start the season, while the Jets have two home games.  Anyway, they need to figure it out if they don't want this to turn into a repeat of last season.  So does Dallas, frankly.  Although, despite the loss, Cowboys should take some positives out of their game against the Eagles.

Bears (0-1) at Lions (0-1): Detroit-Losing to the Packers may have been a good thing for Detroit.  Did people expect it to be as thorough as it was?  No.  But Green Bay's also a really good team.  We'll find out a lot more about the Lions this week as they take on their former Offensive Coordinator.  The Bears must've seen the Bills-Ravens game and said "We can do that, too."  Now they're staring 0-2 in the face.

Rams (1-0) at Titans (0-1): Rams-One of the most surprising teams in Week 1 was the Titans.  They obviously lost, but they gave the Broncos all they could handle.  And Cam Ward actually looked better than I thought he would.  The Rams' offense left a lot to be desired against the Texans.  But that defensive performance was solid.  I'm looking for another one this week.  They go to 2-0.

Patriots (0-1) at Dolphins (0-1): Miami-Miami had one of the worst efforts out of anybody last week.  Will being at home against a division rival make any difference?  The good news is they really can't do any worse than they did against the Colts.  They've also always played well against New England.  This, of course, is Mike Vrabel's first Patriots-Dolphins game as New England's head coach, but it shouldn't go much differently than all those he experienced as a player.

49ers (1-0) at Saints (0-1): San Francisco-What were the Saints wearing last week?!  They looked like freakin' Purdue!  That's true about both the uniforms and the way they played.  New Orleans isn't a good team.  I'm not sure if San Francisco's good or not, but the 49ers are definitely better than the Saints.  And they started the season with a road win, too.

Bills (1-0) at Jets (0-1): Buffalo-If the Bills hadn't completed that ridiculous comeback on Sunday night, the entire AFC East would be 0-1.  Instead, they showed some incredible mettle and are already in first place.  The Jets actually looked pretty good against the Steelers, too, but ultimately ended up losing by two.  It'll be interesting to see how they bounce back against the best team in the division.

Seahawks (0-1) at Steelers (1-0): Pittsburgh-Vintage Aaron Rodgers showed up in his Steelers debut...and they still only barely beat the Jets!  The question is will he get as fired up to face the Seahawks?  I mean, he should.  It IS the home opener.  That, hopefully, should be enough motivation for anybody.  With a win, Rodgers will get that early embrace from Steelers fans that he never got from Jets faithful.

Browns (0-1) at Ravens (0-1): Baltimore-That loss on Sunday night will end up having lasting effects for the Ravens.  They're obviously 0-1, but the Bills also now own the tiebreaker against them.  The AFC North is gonna be competitive this year, too, so will it end up costing them in the division?  Their home opener is also their first division game, so there's no room for any sort of Week 1 hangover.  They need to get over last week's loss quick if they want to avoid falling to 0-2.

Broncos (1-0) at Colts (1-0): Indianapolis-You take Daniel Jones out of New York and suddenly he looks like a viable NFL quarterback!  That was by far one of the most surprising developments to come out of Week 1.  I know it was just one game.  But if the Colts can continue to play like that all season, Houston's reign atop the AFC South might come to an end.  I'm also curious to see how Denver follows up that game against the Titans where I think the best word to describe it is they "survived."

Panthers (0-1) at Cardinals (1-0): Arizona-Arizona's early-season schedule is the exact opposite of Green Bay's.  The Cardinals got two of the worst teams in the league to start the year.  New Orleans last week, now Carolina this week.  So, they'll go to 2-0.  Is it the same 2-0 as the Packers?  Definitely not.  But it's still 2-0.

Eagles (1-0) at Chiefs (0-1): Kansas City-That trip to Brazil sure made the Chiefs' season a lot more interesting.  Now, if they fall in the Super Bowl rematch, they'll suddenly be looking at 0-2.  While I wouldn't classify this as a "must-win," it certainly feels like it for Kansas City.  They obviously also want some redemption for what happened the last time they played the Eagles.

Falcons (0-1) at Vikings (1-0): Minnesota-On Sunday night, it's JJ McCarthy and Michal Penix Jr.  McCarthy led the Vikings to a fourth-quarter comeback win in Chicago, while Penix and the Falcons lost at home to Tampa Bay.  That's been a common theme for Atlanta since they handed him the reins late last season.  If he's the answer they think he is, they'll need to win those games.  As for McCarthy, I think he is the answer the Vikings have been looking for.  They keep pace with the Packers atop the division.

Buccaneers (1-0) at Texans (0-1): Tampa Bay-These Monday night doubleheaders will be going away once the NFL-ESPN deal is finalized, so this is the last year they'll be on the schedule.  And the front half of this week's is in Houston.  The Texans had all kinds of trouble offensively against the Rams.  Sadly, I don't think things will get much better against Tampa Bay.  The Bucs improve to 2-0 and the Texans fall to 0-2.

Chargers (1-0) at Raiders (1-0): Chargers-An interesting little schedule quirk here.  The NFL wanted to give the Chargers a home game after their trip to Brazil, but they couldn't because SoFi was already booked for a concert.  So, the compromise was a short trip to Las Vegas for the back half of the Monday night doubleheader.  Can they come out of this with a pair of division wins (before playing Denver next week)?  

Last Week: 12-4
This Week: 1-0
Overall: 13-4

Tokyo Finally Gets Its Spotlight

We all remember what happened five years ago.  It's not like anybody can forget.  And, of course, the Tokyo Olympics were severely impacted as a result.  Tokyo spent a billion dollars to tear down and completely rebuild its National Stadium, only for it to set empty as the weirdest Olympics in history took place inside.  There were some great moments at the 2020-21 Olympics.  Just nobody got to witness them in person.

Now, finally, four years later, the best track & field athletes in the world return to Tokyo for the World Championships.  And, this time, they get to do it in a full stadium.  It's a fitting reward for both Japan and the athletes.  After the COVID Olympics, it's all come full circle and everyone is back in Tokyo.  Only this time, they'll do it with people in the stands cheering them on.  Which is the way it should be.

One result of the 2020 Olympics being delayed was a full five-year run of there being a track & field global championship every year.  It started in Tokyo with the Olympics.  Now it ends in Tokyo with the World Championships.  During the week, USATF made an Instagram post celebrating the 15 athletes who've been on all five teams.  That really is quite an impressive streak if you think about it.  Especially when you consider that 15 includes some of the biggest names in the sport...and some others you wouldn't expect.

This World Championships also gets the event back on its regular two-year cycle.  Because of the Olympic delay, the 2021 World Championships were pushed back a year, as well, so we ended up going three years between the 2019 Worlds in Doha and the 2022 Worlds in Oregon...then only just over a year until the 2023 Worlds in Budapest.  Now we're back to two years in between.

They've also made a schedule change that will apply to all World Championships moving forward.  The 2019 Worlds were in October.  In 2022, they were in July (partially because they had to squeeze them in around events that were already scheduled for that summer).  Then the last World Championships in 2023 took place in late August.  World Athletics has since set mid-September as the regular date for the World Championships so that it can serve as a culmination to the season.

At the Tokyo Olympics, they controversially decided to move the marathons and race walks to Sapporo because of the intense summer heat in Tokyo.  With the World Championships being held later in the year, World Athletics determined that moving those road events wouldn't be necessary.  Well, as fate would have it, Tokyo is in the midst of a heat wave, with summer-like temperatures.  As a result, while they won't be relocated, the marathons and race walks have had their times adjusted.  They'll now start a half-hour earlier than originally planned.  But at least they're actually in Tokyo.

The race walks will actually get the World Championships underway.  It's the 35 km walk, an event that's only in the World Championships.  At the Paris Olympics, it was replaced by a mixed marathon team race walking event, which ended up being a one-and-done on the Olympic program.  In LA, the mixed 4x100 relay will make its Olympic debut.  They aren't having a mixed 4x100 here, though.  That won't make its World Championships debut until 2027.  So, we'll have to make-do with just the mixed 4x400 for now.

In 2023, Femke Bol fell in the final steps of the mixed 4x400, costing the Netherlands the gold.  It was such a great way to start the World Championships!  Having that mixed 4x400 final as the last event on opening night was a stroke of brilliance!  The meet ends with a bang with the men's and women's 4x400 relays, so it only makes sense to have it start with a bang with the mixed 4x400.  Especially since it's such an unpredictable event.  And where did the mixed 4x400 relay make its Olympic debut?  Oh, that's right!  Tokyo!

As for what will happen at this year's World Championships, I really have no idea!  They're later in the season than they've been in the past.  Will the athletes who posted good times in April or May still be in peak form?  Or did those who didn't compete early in the season plan their schedule just right so that they can peak now?  There are a ton of athletes with injury concerns, too.  Ryan Crouser, for example, has been out almost all year.  So, we have no idea where his fitness is at!  Crouser is far and away the best shot putter in the world though!

Crouser's one of a handful of athletes with a unique chance to bookend this five-year journey with two gold medals in Tokyo.  While others who didn't win gold at the Tokyo Olympics will have a chance at redemption.  Noah Lyles settled for bronze at the Olympics.  Grant Holloway was upset and took silver...his only loss in the past decade!  You know he wants to rewrite his Tokyo story!  So does the entire U.S. men's team for that matter.  The Tokyo Olympics were an incredible disappointment.  Crouser and the 4x400 relay were the only two gold medals of those Games.  Contrast that to last year's Olympics, when the U.S. men won a medal in every track event except the 800 (where Bryce Hoppel was fourth) and the 4x100 relay (which has been a problem for 25 years).

There were two iconic races at the Tokyo Olympics four years ago.  One was the men's 400 hurdles, where Karsten Warholm broke the world record and Rai Benjamin ran the second-fastest time ever.  Benjamin won the Olympic title last year.  Their showdown could be another epic.  Sydney McLaughlin-Levrone, meanwhile, won't be running the 400 hurdles this time around.  She'll be running the straight 400 meters instead.  And it's not crazy to think she could medal.  Maybe even win.

Ultimately, though, we come into these World Championships with a lot of unknowns.  Which isn't a bad thing.  The unpredictability is part of what makes it fun.  And I definitely think we'll see some people crowned World Champions this week who weren't on anybody's radar coming in.  The post-Olympic Worlds are always transitional as people take the year off or those who didn't make the team look to leave their mark.  And let's not forget the younger athletes who are using this opportunity to burst onto the scene.

Will some of the favorites also win?  Of course!  It'll be shocking if Mondo Duplantis, Yaroslava Mahuchikh and Grant Holloway don't win.  Ditto with Femke Bol in the women's 400 hurdles with McLaughlin-Levrone doing the open 400.  And some Olympic champions will look to hopefully get that World Championship that's so far eluded them (Jakob Ingebrigtsen in the men's 1500, Val Allman in the women's discus).  There are those hoping for Olympic redemption (Chase Jackson, Molly Caudery), and those looking for their breakout "I'm here!" moment (Anna Hall).

Plenty of rivalries will be front & center, too.  Noah Lyles vs. Kishane Thompson in the men's 100.  Lyles vs. Kenny Bednarek in the 200.  Benjamin vs. Warholm.  The women's 100, where there are about six favorites, including the legend Shelly-Ann Fraser-Pryce, who's calling it a career after this.  The women's 400 should be a great race between McLaughlin-Levrone, Mariledy Paulino of the Dominican Republic and Bahrain's Salwa Eid Nasser.  And what can Faith Kipyegon do?!

Those are just some of the names who'll be featured this week in Tokyo.  And there are so many others who I didn't mention.  Track & field is the biggest sport at the Olympics, with the most medal events and the most athletes.  The World Championships are even bigger.  They've been waiting all year for it, too, so we should really see something special.  Actually, they haven't just been waiting a year.  They've been waiting five years!

Track & field's five consecutive years of a global outdoor championship, something that had never happened before and likely won't again, comes to an end in Tokyo.  It's a full circle moment.  Because it's ending right back where it started.  Except this time, it'll be completely different.  The athletes won't be competing in an empty stadium in silence.  They'll hear the roar of the crowd in a full stadium.  It's what they, and Tokyo, deserve.

The Quarterback Victim Complex

With the way Aaron Rodgers was talking in his postgame press conference after the Steelers' Week 1 victory over the Jets, you would've thought the Jets somehow did him dirty.  Yet, all week leading up to the game, it was "just another game" or "just one of 17."  So, which is it Aaron?  Was it just another game?  Or were you looking for some sort of "revenge" against a team that wronged you only in your own mind?  Because it can't be both!

Of course, Rodgers would almost certainly be singing a different tune had he played poorly and/or had the Steelers lost.  Then he would've repeated his same pregame talking points and downplayed the importance of the game.  It's only after he played well in a Steelers win that he felt "vindicated" enough to roast his former team.  Because, after all, what's Aaron Rodgers if not a victim?

Meanwhile, the actual reality of the situation is that the New York Jets leveraged their entire franchise to cater to Aaron Rodgers.  They acquired players because they were his buddies.  They hired an unqualified offensive coordinator simply because he was Rodgers' preferred coach.  They made Robert Saleh the fall guy last season instead of benching Rodgers.  In short, the Jets spent two years trying to make Aaron Rodgers happy.

Let's not forget, either, that Aaron Rodgers basically forced his way onto the Jets two years ago.  He wasn't a free agent.  The Packers didn't have to trade him.  But they knew he didn't want to be there anymore, so they gave him what he wanted.  Rodgers chose to be a Jet.  And the Jets went out of their way to accommodate his every wish.  So, spare me with this idea that they somehow screwed you over.

No one could've foreseen him tearing his ACL on the fourth play of the first series of his first game with the team.  But the 2024 season wasn't exactly a good one for either the Jets or their quarterback.  He'd be the first to admit that the marriage didn't work out.  Which is OK.  It happens.  So why is he so bitter about the divorce?

Granted, the NFL didn't exactly help matters here by scheduling Steelers at Jets for Week 1.  But, when the schedule came out, Rodgers hadn't signed with Pittsburgh yet.  So, the idea of this being a "revenge game" was the furthest thing from their minds.  Hence the 1:00 start time.  It was only after Rodgers joined the Steelers that the game became relevant.  And he was gonna make sure of it.

That's the thing about Aaron Rodgers.  He can't not be in the spotlight.  His ego won't allow it.  It was the same thing in Green Bay.  He had to be the center of attention.  Rodgers brings drama with him.  As long as he's performing and his team is winning, they're willing to put up with it.  But even though they were winning, the Packers eventually got tired of it.  Which is why they were more than willing to get rid of him once he didn't want to be there anymore.

It was also pretty clear by the middle of last season that Rodgers didn't want to be a Jet anymore, either.  So, again, what's the problem then?  Is the entire thing because they didn't want you either?  Or because they were up front about it and flat out said so themselves before you got the chance to say you weren't coming back?  (I'm not even sure how that would've worked since you were a free agent, so they would've had to have been interested in you coming back to even offer you a contract.)

Did having Aaron Rodgers make the Jets more relevant in 2023 and 2024?  Absolutely.  They were in primetime every freakin' week at the beginning of last season because of him!  But that just magnified everything, including his struggles, even more.  And New York isn't exactly Green Bay.  Had he performed and the team won, he would've been embraced like he was by Packers fans.  But he didn't perform and they didn't win.  So, what type of reaction was he expecting then?

Aaron Rodgers is headed for the Hall of Fame.  There's no doubt about that.  But there's also no doubt about the fact that he brings the drama, most of which he creates himself.  In addition to being a drama queen, he's a headache.  It must be exhausting for everyone in the organization.  Is it any surprise, then, that after he wears out his welcome, teams decide they don't want to be a part of his circus anymore?

Rodgers, of course, isn't the only drama queen quarterback who's mastered making himself the victim.  It's been a decade and Colin Kaepernick is still whining.  He's 37 years old and hasn't played in 10 years, yet he still insists he's being treated unfairly.  Much like Rodgers, Kaepernick refuses to acknowledge his own role in creating the situation he found himself in.  But why would he?  The truth isn't anywhere near as good a narrative.

According to Kaepernick, the only reason he isn't playing quarterback in the NFL today is because all 32 teams conspired to keep him out of the league due to his stance on social issues.  Whether there was any truth to that at the beginning is no longer relevant.  The fact of the matter today is that he's a 37-year-old who's been out of football for a decade and, frankly, wasn't that good then.  Colin Kaepernick always conveniently ignores that fact.  He simply wasn't a very good quarterback.  Certainly not worth the hassle or the money he thinks he's worth.

Frankly, I think Kaepernick knows all this, too.  But that doesn't fit into the story where he's a martyr for his cause.  If a team had signed him and given him the chance to play, Kaepernick would've had to perform.  If he didn't, he couldn't play that victim role anymore.  That doesn't work for his narrative.  Kaepernick needs to not play so that he can keep blaming all 32 teams for not signing him and using persecution as his reason.

Colin Kaepernick and Aaron Rodgers have that in common.  They both created their situation, but they'll never admit their role in it.  It's much easier to blame somebody else and play the victim.  Even if it isn't true.  After all, that's the only way they can be the hero in their own story.

Hall of Fame Hats

With Max Scherzer pitching and CC Sabathia being honored at Yankee Stadium today, it got me thinking about the Hall of Fame.  Scherzer especially.  Specifically, which hat will be on Scherzer's plaque when he's inducted?  Or, will he take the Greg Maddux/Mike Mussina cop out route and go logo-less on his hat?

Scherzer's far from the only current or recently-retired future Hall of Famer who'll have a decision to make regarding his hat in Cooperstown.  Players changing teams multiple times in their careers has become so commonplace that the players like Derek Jeter who spend their entire career in one place are an anomaly nowadays.  Sure, you've got the Aaron Judges and Mike Trouts and Clayton Kershaws, but they're the outliers in modern baseball.

For most of those current/recent players who are headed to the Hall of Fame, there's a question of which team's hat they'll wear on their plaque.  It's easier for some than for others.  But, assuming they all have to make a choice when the time comes, here's the hat they should wear.  Whether they actually will or not is a different question.

Max Scherzer (Nationals): Might as well start with Scherzer since he was the inspiration for this whole thing.  He's been on a lot of teams, but the decision really comes down to Tigers or Nationals.  And, frankly, it's not really that tough at all.  Scherzer won a Cy Young in Detroit.  He was the best freakin' pitcher in baseball in Washington and won a World Series with the Nationals!

Justin Verlander (Tigers): Much like Scherzer, Verlander has been on plenty of teams in his career.  Unlike Scherzer, you could make a legitimate argument for either the Tigers or Astros.  Verlander spent his first 12 years in Detroit, won a Rookie of the Year, a Cy Young and an MVP as the Tigers made two World Series appearances.  Then, in one of the best deadline deals of all time, he went to Houston, helped the Astros win two World Series and continued to be his dominant self.  I'm saying Detroit because he was a Tiger longer, but Verlander is one case where the logoless hat would be warranted.

Bryce Harper (Phillies): I'm not saying Harper is definitely Hall of Fame-bound.  But he's certainly on that track.  And, should he continue on this trajectory, he'll have spent the majority of his career with the Phillies and reached all of his major milestones while playing for Philadelphia.  Assuming the Phillies also have some team success between now and when his contract expires in 2031, there really won't be a question.

Zack Greinke (Royals): The recently-retired Greinke is probably the most borderline Hall of Fame candidate of those I'll present here.  I do think Greinke makes a compelling case and will eventually be elected, though.  And which team he'd represent is just as big of a question.  Greinke played for a lot of teams, but was a Royal the longest and won his only career Cy Young in Kansas City.  The longest he spent anywhere else was 3 1/2 years in Arizona.

Mookie Betts (Dodgers): Betts is on a Hall of Fame track.  I don't think there's anyone who doubts that.  He was great on the Red Sox, winning an AL MVP and a World Series ring in Boston.  He's been just as great with the Dodgers, with whom he's won two more World Series rings (so far).  Mookie has also signed a long-term deal to stay in LA (and is actually only being paid until the end of his contract), so there's plenty more to come for him in a Dodgers uniform.

Freddie Freeman (Braves): Mookie's Dodgers teammate Freddie Freeman, however, will sport a different hat on his Hall of Fame plaque.  No matter what he does the rest of his career, Freeman should represent Atlanta in Cooperstown.  He wanted to spend his entire career with the Braves and likely would've had his agents not screwed up his free agency (right after Atlanta won the World Series).  This is another close one, but he'll always be a Brave.

Shohei Ohtani (Dodgers): Why not finish off the trifecta of Dodgers stars?  (Kershaw's only been a Dodger, so that one is obvious.)  If Ohtani were going into the Hall of Fame today, it would be as an Angel.  But by the time his career is over (and by the time the Dodgers stop paying him), most people will only see him in Dodger Blue.  His first year brought an MVP and a World Series title.  There's still eight more years to go on his contract.

Juan Soto (Mets): Soto's not a future Hall of Famer quite yet.  But he's well on his way.  Keep in mind, the guy's already in his ninth season and he's still only 26.  We all know about the ridiculous contract he signed with the Mets in the offseason.  Which means he'll end up playing the vast majority of his career in Queens.  So, should his career stay on its current path, there leaves little doubt which team he'll ultimately represent.

Manny Machado (Padres): Machado has been on the Padres since 2019.  It's crazy to think that he's been there for seven years, isn't it?  And he's gonna be there until 2033.  Machado's been top three in NL MVP voting twice with San Diego and is already the Padres' all-time home run leader.  When his career ends, it's Machado wearing a Padres brown & yellow uniform that will be the first vision that comes to mind.

Giancarlo Stanton (Yankees): Don't laugh.  He's gonna end up getting in.  Especially if he's healthy enough to hit 53 home runs over the next month and two seasons.  "Playoff Stanton" is already the stuff of legends.  And that legend will only grow if "Playoff Stanton" shows up for the team that finally ends the Yankees' championship drought.  That, I think, will be the difference-maker that makes him go into the Hall of Fame as a Yankee rather than a Marlin.

You'll notice a couple of names that I omitted from this list.  Because it's obvious that Albert Pujols will go in as a Cardinal and Miguel Cabrera will be a Tiger.  There's absolutely no debate about either one of them.  The others, though?  They'll all require a conversation and, ultimately, a decision.  Unless, of course, they take the easy way out and have them go in with a blank hat.

NFL Picks, Week 1

We've made it to the start of another NFL season.  And the league is celebrating by having a primetime game on four of the next five nights.  Although, they've already said no Week 1 Friday night game in Brazil next season.  Not because they don't want to.  Because they can't since Labor Day is later next year.  When will the Australia game end up getting scheduled then?  Something to ponder for the 2026 season.

Anyway, the season kicking off means the first installment of my weekly picks.  For those of you who aren't familiar with the rules, I don't care about the spread.  I just pick straight winners.  Your record isn't determined by whether you cover the spread or not.  The picks will also not normally include the Thursday night game.  I'll still pick it, but won't post my picks for the rest of the week until the weekend.  Week 1 and Thanksgiving are the only exceptions.  So, with all that out of the way, here we go...

Cowboys at Eagles: Philadelphia-For the traditional NFL Kickoff matchup involving the Super Bowl champion, they opted for the Cowboys as the opponent.  Dallas is a huge draw, so it makes a lot of sense.  Especially since it's been a while since the Eagles and Cowboys have played each other in Week 1.  I'm curious to see how the Cowboys look, but, frankly, this isn't the best matchup for them to start the season.  The Eagles may be the defending champs, but they have a brutal start.  They need a win here.

Chiefs vs Chargers: Kansas City-Last year, the Eagles began the season with the long trip to Sao Paulo, won, and carried it all the way to a Super Bowl title.  I'm not saying the team they beat in February will follow the same script.  No one would be surprised if they did, though.  And, if they do, the Brazilian fans would've gone 2-for-2 in seeing the eventual champion's first win of the season in Week 1.

Buccaneers at Falcons: Atlanta-It sounds crazy, but this game could go a long way in determining who wins the NFC South.  The Falcons swept the Bucs last season, but gave away the division by dropping their last two games, and Tampa Bay took full advantage.  While some might argue that Tampa is the better team, Atlanta has a lot to prove after last year's collapse.  The fact that they're playing at home against a team they beat twice last season certainly works in their favor.

Bengals at Browns: Cincinnati-Remember last season, how FOX made Cowboys-Browns the Week 1 national game for Brady's debut broadcast and neither team came anywhere near the playoffs?  This season, they didn't make that mistake.  The Battle of Ohio is in the 1:00 window.  Joe Burrow is back and a lot of people believe the Bengals are a potential playoff team.  This is their first chance to show if that faith in them is warranted or not.  Although, even if they do win (as they should), there will still be questions.  Their opponent is Cleveland, after all.

Dolphins at Colts: Miami-Call me crazy, but I like the Dolphins in this one.  I can't really explain why.  I just feel like this is the type of game that the Colts lose and it ends up costing them a playoff berth.  It'll probably be close the entire way, then either Miami makes a late field goal to win it or Indianapolis misses a field goal down by two.

Raiders at Patriots: Las Vegas-Both teams have new head coaches, Pete Carroll in Las Vegas and Mike Vrabel in New England.  They're both looking to get off to a good start under their new head coach.  The Patriots have much further to go, while the Raiders' problem is that they're in the same division as three really good teams that made the playoffs last season.  If they want to keep pace with the Chiefs, Chargers and Broncos, they need to take the opener.

Cardinals at Saints: Arizona-Arizona has a chance to be a sleeper team this season.  The Cardinals went 8-9 last year and will be that annoying team nobody wants to play.  New Orleans gets first crack at them.  Unfortunately for the Saints, they don't match up well with Arizona.  Well, frankly, they don't match up well with anybody, but the Cardinals are an especially bad matchup.  Arizona picks up the season-opening road win.

Steelers at Jets: Pittsburgh-When they made the schedule, they had no idea Aaron Rodgers would sign with Pittsburgh.  It just worked out that way.  His Steelers debut will be on the road against the team for whom he played the last two seasons.  You can't make this stuff up!  Maybe Rodgers will give Jets fans a chance to see what they didn't while he was wearing their uniform.  Look for Pittsburgh to start the season with a win.

Giants at Commanders: Washington-This is perhaps the most fascinating of all the Week 1 matchups.  The Giants lost a lot of one-score games last season because of poor quarterback play.  Now they've got Russell Wilson as he looks to revive his career.  The Commanders won a lot of one-score games, especially down the stretch, and carried that momentum all the way to the NFC Championship Game.  Now there are expectations on them.  Can they live up to them?  And how will the new-look Giants fare against an opponent they feel they can beat?

Panthers at Jaguars: Jacksonville-My guess is these two are playing each other in Week 1 to celebrate the 30th anniversary of their coming into the league together.  Of course, they've had different levels of success since both reaching their respective Conference Championship Game in Year 2.  The Panthers have been to two Super Bowls.  The Jaguars are one of four teams to have never played in one.  Don't expect that to change this season.  Although, they're better than Carolina and playing at home, so they should at least start 1-0.

Titans at Broncos: Denver-Denver couldn't have asked for a better matchup to open the season.  The Titans aren't supposed to be very good, and they know it.  They also know they have a really tough stretch after opening with two AFC South opponents.  AFC West teams need to beat AFC South teams.  Should Denver falter here, it could end up costing them in the long run.

49ers at Seahawks: Seattle-Everything that could go wrong did for San Francisco last season.  Seattle, meanwhile, finished 10-7 and only missed the playoffs on a tiebreaker.  That didn't stop them from making some big time changes, bringing in Sam Darnold and Cooper Kupp.  You've also got a 49ers team that has all of those guys who missed time due to injury last season back.  Will they play like the 49ers of two years ago?  Or will the Seahawks hold them off and get the early division win?

Lions at Packers: Green Bay-These are possibly the two best teams in the NFC.  I know the Eagles and Rams would have something to say about that, but this NFC North matchup was a great selection as the national game.  We'll know more about both teams after they meet again on Thanksgiving, but whoever wins will get that early advantage.  In the NFC North, that could end up being huge.  Expect that advantage to go to Green Bay.

Texans at Rams: Rams-Matthew Stafford is expected to start for the Rams, who started 5-6 last season only to finish 5-1 and win the NFC West title.  They also won a playoff game and were the only team that was competitive against the Eagles in the playoffs.  So, they've got a lot of confidence heading into 2025.  As they should.  The Rams won't get off to a slow start this year.

Ravens at Bills: Buffalo-The NFL really likes giving the Ravens a tough road game against the team that beat the in the playoffs the previous season in primetime in Week 1.  Last season, it was a trip to Kansas City, and they ended up losing by two.  This season, they return to the scene of their two-point Divisional Playoff loss in Buffalo.  Yes, it's Week 1.  But it's not a stretch to say this game is big for both teams, who could easily meet in the playoffs again.  And, if they do, the Bills will have the tiebreaker because of their Week 1 head-to-head victory.

Vikings at Bears: Minnesota-Wrapping up an opening week that features eight divisional matchups, the Vikings begin the J.J. McCarthy Era in Chicago on Monday night.  The entire NFC North is playing each other, so Minnesota will go into this one knowing either the Lions or Packers already lost.  With how tight this division is projected to be among all three of those teams (who all made the playoffs last season), that's a huge advantage.  So is playing the Bears.

2025 NFC Preview

Can the Eagles repeat?  Can the Lions finish the deal after last season's playoff loss?  Can the Rams, who are built to win now, do just that?  Are the Packers for real?  Are the Vikings?  And how do the Commanders follow up last season's shocking run to the NFC Championship Game?  Those are just the questions about last year's playoff teams.

There are plenty of questions surrounding the rest of the NFC, too.  How will Dallas rebound after missing the playoffs last season and inexplicably trading Micah Parsons?  Will the 49ers continue their trend of either missing the playoffs or making the NFC Championship Game?  How much better will the Giants be after a 3-14 record that was the result of bad luck as much as being a bad team?  And who will win the NFC South?

While the AFC has three top teams and everybody else, the NFC is much more wide open.  There are easily half a dozen teams that can realistically think Super Bowl.  I'm not even sure winning the division is imperative either.  It'll be helpful, obviously, but look at what happened last year.  The Lions were the 1-seed and went one and out, while Washington won two road games to get to the NFC Championship Game.  Now the Commanders have the burden of expectations, though.

NFC East: No team has repeated in the NFC East since the Eagles' run of division dominance 20 years ago.  Philadelphia's in a position to break that string, although the other three teams in the division will certainly have something to say about that.  I do think the Eagles are the division favorites, but that's mainly because Washington and Dallas both have something to prove.  The Commanders have to back up what they did last season, while the Cowboys want to show everyone that last season was the anomaly.

Although, the Micah Parsons trade did nothing but add more questions.  It certainly didn't do anything to improve the Cowboys.  In fact, I think it knocked them from being a solid playoff contender to a team staring at a 7-10 or 8-9 season.  And, while still the worst team in the division, the Giants will be much improved.  They not only have an actual quarterback now, they have two!  They don't need the Seattle Russell Wilson.  They just need him not to be the Denver Russell Wilson.  Even that would be an improvement, though.  Are they a playoff team?  No.  Will they be 3-14 again?  Also no.

NFC North: Minnesota had perhaps the worst luck in the league last season.  The Vikings went 14-3 and were a wild card team who lost in the first round of the playoffs!  It was enough for the Lions to propose a rule change that playoff seeding be based strictly on record.  Of course, that was a once-in-a-generation type of situation.  And Minnesota also vastly overachieved last year.  I'm very curious to see how the J.J. McCarthy Experience will go, too.

Meanwhile, the expectations on the Lions aren't quite as high entering this season, which could be a good thing.  They're still really good and legit Super Bowl contenders, but they may not even win the division.  That's because I think the Green Bay Packers are the best team in the NFC North.  Especially now that they've added Parsons, one of the best pass rushers in the league.  And the Bears will be a good last-place team.  They'll be 6-11, mainly because of their division record.

NFC South: Tampa Bay's been on a run of division titles over the last few seasons.  But that has as much to do with how bad the other three teams are rather than anything about them.  Much like the AFC South, the NFC South has two bad teams in Carolina and New Orleans.  Which leaves us with just Atlanta to challenge the Bucs at the top.

I feel like a broken record, regularly expressing confidence in the Falcons only to see them fizzle out late in the season with a playoff berth in their grasp.  Yet, here I am, picking them to win the NFC South yet again.  Call me crazy, but I think no quarterback controversy and being committed to Michael Penix Jr. will make a big difference.  If not and Atlanta falls apart down the stretch again, expect 3rd- or 4th-seeded Tampa Bay to lose at home in the wild card round again.

NFC West: Consistency has been the Rams' trademark really since Sean McVay took over as head coach.  Last season, they weren't great, yet they still won the division and a playoff game.  This year, they make a big change at wide receiver.  Cooper Kupp is out and Davante Adams is in.  Frankly, that's not really a significant difference at all.  They'll keep doing what they're doing and Matthew Stafford will have a lot of passing yards.

Seattle, now with Sam Darnold at quarterback, is a team worth watching.  The Seahawks will either be really good and make the playoffs or finish 6-11.  I'm not sure which.  And how can the 49ers not bounce back after having players miss more games due to injury than anyone else last season?  Especially since the benefit of finishing last is getting to play all the bad teams the following year.  Let's not forget that Arizona went 8-9 last season, either.  The Cardinals could easily emerge as a sleeper playoff team.

In the AFC, it wouldn't be a surprise if all four of last year's division champions repeat.  In the NFC, it wouldn't be a surprise if all four are different.  I do see the Eagles and Rams defending, but the North and South will change hands.  Green Bay's the best team in the North, so the Packers win that division.  In the South, meanwhile, I've got Atlanta. 

As for the wild card teams, the Lions get one.  Unless something completely catastrophic happens, there's no way Detroit doesn't make the playoffs.  I'm also gonna go out on a limb (although, probably not too far of one) and say San Francisco ends up back in the postseason.  The third wild card, meanwhile, goes to the Vikings, who just edge out Washington, Seattle and Dallas for the final spot.

A lot of projections have either the Eagles or Lions winning the NFC title.  I don't think enough people are looking at the Rams as seriously as they should.  Or the Packers, for that matter.  That could easily be your NFC Championship Game matchup, though, with the Rams winning and facing the Bills in the Super Bowl.  And, call me crazy, but this finally may be the year for the Bills.