2025 MLB Playoff Preview

Think games in July don't matter?  The Yankees played two absolutely terrible series in Toronto in July.  If they'd gone 2-5 instead of 1-6 in those seven games, they would've won the AL East by two games and been the No. 1 seed in the American League instead of a wild card team.  It works the other way, too.  The Tigers have been utterly horrendous since mid-August.  They somehow pissed away a 15-game lead in the AL Central.  Yet, despite their best efforts, they're still going to the playoffs on the strength of their excellent first half.

Detroit wasn't the only team that collapsed.  The Mets managed to play themselves totally out of the playoffs, with Cincinnati (despite not being much better down the stretch) getting the last NL wild card spot instead.  Terry Francona is a freaking wizard!  Don't be surprised if he ends up winning NL Manager of the Year.  And, while the Reds probably have little to no chance against the Dodgers, it's still pretty awesome that Elly de la Cruz gets to play on the postseason stage.

And how about Cleveland?!  They did what the Tigers did last year, and then some!  Detroit certainly helped them, but the Guardians went from completely out of the playoffs to AL Central champs, and now they get to host the Tigers in a rematch of last season's ALDS.  They just played each other last week, too.  This is either really good for the Tigers, who could easily morph back into the team they were for the first three months of the season, or they'll be the 2025 version of last year's Orioles.  Great in the first half only to flame out in the Wild Card Series.

As we enter the postseason, it's wide open.  Of the 12 remaining teams, there are seven I could easily see making the World Series, if not winning it.  But those seven are just as capable of losing in the first round.  So, instead of doing a series-by-series preview, I've decided to do power rankings based on which team I think is most likely to win it all.

12. Reds: Getting here was such a tremendous achievement.  While many people considered the Reds an up-and-coming team, very few thought they'd reach the playoffs this year.  Especially when it was the Mets they chased down.  Alas, they have to face the Dodgers on the road in the Wild Card Series.  Great story, but their run ends here.

11. Guardians: I have nothing against the State of Ohio.  Honestly.  And I wouldn't be totally surprised if the Guardians continue this insane run.  Especially since they've been doing it with pitching, and that's what wins in the playoffs.  However, while I can see them beating the Tigers, I can't see them beating Detroit, then Seattle, then an AL East team, then the NL pennant winner.  As such, they're No. 11.

10. Red Sox: Boston won eight straight against the Yankees this season and has Garrett Crochet and Bryan Bello pitching Games 1 & 2 at Yankee Stadium.  They can very easily advance to face Toronto.  Similar to the Guardians, though, while I can see them winning one or even two series (against division rivals), it's hard to envision them winning two more (when they stop playing other AL East teams).

9. Cubs: The difference between winning the NL Central and being the No. 4 seed was huge.  The Brewers obviously had an incredible season, which the Cubs couldn't really do anything about.  But, as a result of being the wild card instead of the division winner, they have to play San Diego in a best-of-3.  I'd like their matchup much better against anybody else in the National League.  I don't like the matchup against the Padres.  Thus, the Cubs are my top Wild Card Series loser.

8. Tigers: It really depends on which Tigers team shows up.  The one that went on an insane run to end last season and carried it over into the start of this year?  Or the one that faltered down the stretch and blew a 15-game division lead?  If it's the first one, this is one of the best teams in baseball.  They're still capable of being that team.  They need to find it fast, though.  Playing Seattle (the actual best team in the American League) in the Division Series doesn't help their case, either.

7. Padres: Now we hit the teams where making a World Series run wouldn't be a surprise at all.  Last year, the Padres had a 2-1 lead on the Dodgers in the Division Series, only to get shut out in both of the last two games.  Then, this season, they hung with the Dodgers for most of the season before ending up as a wild card.  On paper, they're just as good as, if not better than the Cubs.  (Fun fact: this will be the first Cubs-Padres playoff series since the 1984 NLCS.)  They can give the Brewers a run for their money, too.  And, if they get past Milwaukee, it's easy to see them also beating whoever survives that Phillies-Dodgers series.

6. Blue Jays: Winning the division and getting the 1-seed was vital for the Blue Jays!  They are such a different team at home on the turf.  For Toronto, the home field truly is an advantage.  Especially this year.  All they have to do is win their home games and they'll end up in the World Series.  I think their Division Series matchup will be important, though.  Especially since they know it'll be a division rival they'll be facing.  They'd probably prefer the Yankees over the Red Sox.  Either way, they need to get the pitching to back up the hitting they've had all season if they want to make this a truly special year.

5. Dodgers: Can the Dodgers repeat as champions?  Of course!  Would it be a great way for Clayton Kershaw to go out?  Absolutely!  I think there are a few things standing in their way as they attempt to match the 1998-2000 Yankees, though.  The first is how streaky they were this season, which is what we've seen from the Dodgers in the playoffs repeatedly until last year.  They also have to play the extra series, which could either be good or bad.  Most importantly, if they beat the Reds, they have to play the Phillies.  They avoided that matchup in the NLCS last year.  This season, they won't get so lucky.  And the Phillies are better than them.

4. Brewers: When the Brewers got swept by the Yankees to open the season, you never would've thought they'd end up winning 97 games and with homefield advantage throughout the playoffs.  The question is can they carry their incredible regular season into the playoffs?  They have a lot of history to overcome, too.  Milwaukee has made the postseason in seven of the last eight years.  The only series they've won in that time was the first--the 2018 NLDS against Colorado.  It's been six straight playoff series/Wild Card Games lost since then.  Should the Brewers finally get over the hump and win a series, though, that first World Series appearance as a member of the National League could definitely be in the cards.

3. Yankees: Yes, it was against the Twins, Orioles and White Sox.  What the Yankees did down the stretch to completely erase their AL East deficit can't be discounted, though.  They're playing their best baseball heading into the playoffs and seem to have fixed the problems that plagued them for two months over the summer.  However, and this is a big however, their playoff path includes two division rivals against whom they went a combined 9-17 this season.  It's equally conceivable to see them winning the World Series as it is to see them lose to either of their division foes.

2. Mariners: Seattle is the best team in the American League and has been for two months.  The Mariners made a bold statement with the Josh Naylor and Eugenio Suarez trades and, absent a small hiccup, have looked like legitimate World Series contenders since those moves.  They have the lineup.  They have the starting pitching.  They have the bullpen.  They have the most talked-about player in the game.  They're the only team in the Majors that's never been to the World Series.  That could easily change by the end of this month.

1. Phillies: My pick to win the World Series, though, is the team that shares a parking lot with the one that won the Super Bowl.  I though the Phillies were the best team entering the playoffs last year, only for their bullpen to completely abandon them against the Mets.  They took care of that situation at the trade deadline, getting a closer in Jhoan Duran.  That was the only real flaw this team had, and Duran has been magnificent in Philadelphia!  They're the most complete team in the field, which is why I think they're the team to beat.

NFL Picks, Week 4

Last week sure was crazy, wasn't it?  Not only were there upsets, so many games were decided on interceptions or special teams plays in the last second.  There's always a week like that, and it's usually early in the season.  How will Week 4 compare?  Will it be anywhere as crazy?  Or will it go back to normal and more closely resemble Weeks 1 & 2?

Thursday Night: Arizona (Loss)

Vikings (2-1) vs Steelers (2-1): Pittsburgh-The NFL's first-ever visit to Ireland, and the first of back-to-back games across the pond for the Vikings.  That could either be really great for them or make for a really long trip home next Sunday.  Then you have the Steelers, who are only playing this one game overseas, but it still annoys Aaron Rodgers, who thinks they should've left earlier.  It wouldn't surprise me if that negative attitude carries over into how the team plays, but I'm picking Pittsburgh anyway.

Commanders (2-1) at Falcons (1-2): Washington-Atlanta goes from completely dominating Minnesota to getting shut out by Carolina.  Am I the only one who's utterly confused by this team?  I don't even think they know who's gonna show up each week!  They've changed offensive play callers and switched from Michael Penix to Kirk Cousins.  Will that make any difference at all against Washington?  Honestly, probably not.

Saints (0-3) at Bills (3-0): Buffalo-New Orleans is one of the worst teams in the league.  Arguably THE worst.  Buffalo is one of the best teams in the league.  Arguably THE best.  Seems pretty straightforward what should happen in this game.  But, then again, Cleveland beat Green Bay last week, which is all the proof you need that anybody can beat anybody.

Browns (1-2) at Lions (2-1): Detroit-Getting that win in Baltimore on Monday night could end up being a big result for the Lions.  There's a big difference between 2-1 and 1-2, especially since the Packers lost, creating a three-way tie at the top.  Green Bay's loss last week was to Cleveland, which is in the middle of an NFC North swing.  The Lions, meanwhile, are in the midst of an AFC string.  They'll get to 2-0 on it heading into their matchup with Cincinnati.

Panthers (1-2) at Patriots (1-2): New England-Was last week's shutout a turning point or a result of playing the Falcons?  Either way, this is a great chance for Carolina to gain some momentum and post back-to-back wins for the first time in a while.   The Patriots had a chance to do that last week, but they lost to Pittsburgh.  This is a good chance for them to bounce back.  If they can be 2-2 going into their Sunday night game in Buffalo, they'll feel really good about their September.

Chargers (3-0) at Giants (0-3): Chargers-Russell Wilson's out and Jaxson Dart's in.  Which, frankly, probably won't make much of a difference.  The schedule isn't doing the Giants any favors regardless of who their quarterback is.  The Chargers are 3-0 with three division wins under their belts.  That'll soon be 0-4 as the questions about Brian Daboll's job security get even louder.

Eagles (3-0) at Buccaneers (3-0): Philadelphia-There are six 3-0 teams in the NFL.  Two of those teams are Tampa Bay and Philadelphia, who square off this weekend.  This is a real litmus test for the Bucs.  The Eagles have already survived two tough tests against the Chiefs and Rams.  Tampa Bay, meanwhile, has played Atlanta, Houston and the Jets.  So, they haven't exactly run the gauntlet.

Titans (0-3) at Texans (0-3): Houston-Both the AFC East and AFC South have two 0-3 teams.  Both of those divisions see their 0-3 teams facing each other this week.  In the AFC South, it's to determine who's less bad between the Titans and Texans.  Tennessee was competitive against Denver before getting outplayed in its last two games.  Houston has been in all three, but gotten some bad luck.  The Texans finally get their first win of the season.

Colts (3-0) at Rams (2-1): Rams-Is there any story in the NFL better than Daniel Jones in the first month of the season?  He's found the Fountain of Youth in what's typically the Indianapolis QB Retirement Home.  Instead, Jones is the early leader for Comeback Player of the Year.  The Colts could get snapped back into reality this week, though.  Because the Rams are loaded.  And playing at home.

Jaguars (2-1) at 49ers (3-0): San Francisco-Jacksonville being 2-1 may be a bit of a surprise for some people.  Considering who they've played, their record doesn't really shock me too much.  How they've played certainly has, though.  Meanwhile, the 49ers being 3-0 isn't a surprise to anybody.  This is what they normally do when they're healthy.  That 3-0 is about to be 4-0.

Ravens (1-2) at Chiefs (1-2): Kansas City-One of these teams will end September at 1-3.  I don't think anyone saw that coming.  Although, when you consider who the Ravens and Chiefs have played this season, maybe it shouldn't be overly shocking.  The fact that one of them will be 1-3 doesn't change the fact that these are two of the best teams in football.  Yes, it was the Giants.  But last week was also the first time the Chiefs played like the Chiefs all season.  As for the Ravens, they'll be fine.  Even at 1-3.

Bears (1-2) at Raiders (1-2): Las Vegas-While either the Ravens or Chiefs will enter October at 1-3, either the Bears or Raiders will enter October at 2-2.  Which, again, shows that your early-season record is sometimes a sign of who you've played rather than how good you are.  Although, I must say, Chicago's win over Dallas last week was impressive.  Can they follow it up against the Raiders?  I don't think so.  At least not enough to leave Las Vegas with a win.

Packers (2-1) at Cowboys (1-2): Green Bay-This Sunday night matchup already had plenty of intrigue before the Micah Parsons trade.  Now you add that layer to it, too, and it becomes a must-watch.  Dallas clearly misses Parsons.  And could definitely use him.  You know Parsons will want to make a statement in his return to Jerry World.  Translation: Look Out Dak!  Expect him to be in the Cowboys' backfield all night and the Packers to rebound from that shocking loss last week in Cleveland.

Jets (0-3) at Dolphins (0-3): Miami-When they made this Part I of the Monday night doubleheader, I don't think the NFL expected both the Jets and Dolphins to be 0-3.  And, frankly, neither one has been worth watching at all.  The Jets' offense was good in Week 1, but has disappeared since.  Miami, meanwhile, has notched back-to-back division losses.  If they have any chance of giving Buffalo a race, they can't fall to 0-3 in the division.

Bengals (2-1) at Broncos (1-2): Denver-Part II of the Monday night doubleheader isn't much better.  Cincinnati's first game without Joe Burrow went about as well as you might've expected.  A 48-10 shellacking in Minnesota!  As for the Broncos, they may be 1-2, but their two losses came in road games to strong opponents by a combined four points.  At home against the Bengals, it should be a different story.

This Week: 0-1
Last Week: 11-5
Overall: 35-14

Judge or Raleigh

Back in 2012, there was a heated debate about who should win AL MVP--Miguel Cabrera or Mike Trout.  The Trout camp's main argument was "his WAR is so much better," while the Miggy camp had the fact that Cabrera won the Triple Crown in their favor.  The Tigers also won the pennant in 2012, while the Angels missed the playoffs (as they have in all but one season during Trout's career).  In the end, it wasn't even close.  Cabrera got 22 of the 28 first-place votes and easily won MVP honors.

It was a similar situation in 2022, when Aaron Judge set the AL home run record, but there was still the "Shohei Ohtani's WAR" group.  That MVP vote was an even bigger blowout.  Ohtani got only two first-place votes--from the two Angels representatives (who, it should be noted, were the ones accusing other voters of being biased)!  Judge unanimously won his second MVP last season, and this year he could win his third...unless Cal Raleigh wins it.

Judge and Raleigh have been the two best players in baseball this season.  If they played in opposite leagues, there's no question that they'd both be the MVP.  But, since they're both in the American League, only one can win and the other will have to settle for being First Team All-MLB.  And this time, unlike Judge's first two MVP campaigns, I don't think he's a lock.  In fact, I have no idea who'll end up winning.  The vote figures to be thisclose.

ESPN.com's Jeff Passan surveyed players a few weeks ago, and the players overwhelmingly chose Judge.  The players don't vote for the postseason awards.  The writers do.  And the writers are far less certain Judge is the MVP.  That doesn't mean he won't win.  It just means Raleigh has plenty of support.  Which he should.

A generational talent who's right smack in the middle of his prime, Judge will win his first batting title this season.  He's also hit 50 home runs for the fourth time, becoming just the fourth player ever with four 50-home run seasons.  Judge also leads the Majors in slugging, on-base percentage and OPS, and he's the American League leader in runs scored.  This is despite missing 10 games due to an injury to his throwing arm, then being limited to DH duty after he returned.

Raleigh, meanwhile, is having a historic season.  He has 60 home runs.  He's just the seventh player in Major League history to hit that many in a season.  It's the record for a catcher and the record for a switch-hitter.  Raleigh is also the American League leader in RBIs while playing 157 games, 121 of them as the starting catcher.  For a team that won its first division title in 24 years.

The biggest argument for Raleigh is the home runs.  There's no denying that it's a staggering total.  Especially for a catcher.  Hitting 60 home runs doesn't guarantee you the MVP, though.  In fact, of the nine previous 60-HR seasons, only four of them resulted in an MVP.  In 1998, when Mark McGwire and Sammy Sosa had their epic battle, it was McGwire who set the record, but Sosa who was the NL MVP.  That stat comes with an asterisk, though, since Babe Ruth wasn't eligible for AL MVP in 1927 because they had a stupid rule where you couldn't be MVP more than once at the time.  (The craziest stat in baseball history, BTW, is how Sammy Sosa has three 60-home run seasons, a Major League record, yet NEVER led the league in homers!)

He's so much more than just the homers, though.  The fact that Raleigh is doing all this while playing catcher can't be discounted.  Catchers aren't supposed to put up this type of offensive numbers.  Especially not to this degree.  And the fact that he's been able to keep it up all season while playing a premium defensive position can't be discounted.  If Ohtani can get credit for doing what he does offensively while pitching, it stands to reason that Raleigh should get the same consideration for catching.  (Plus, Big Dumper is one of the best nicknames in sports!)

Team success should be a factor, too.  It's why it's called Most Valuable Player instead of Player of the Year.  The value he brings to his team matters.  We know the value Judge brings to the Yankees.  His importance was especially felt during his absence.  But the Yankees would still be a playoff team without Judge.  Can you say the same about the Mariners without Raleigh?  He's the biggest reason why they won their first AL West title since 2001 and have a very realistic chance at their first-ever World Series appearance.

Since both the Yankees and Mariners will make the playoffs, the team success thing is really kind of a wash.  Which means it'll come down to the other numbers.  Raleigh obviously has the advantage in home runs and RBIs.  Judge has the head-to-head lead in everything else.  By a lot.  Which swings the pendulum back on Judge's side.  Still, though, I don't think it's a lock for either player.  This isn't like last year where Bobby Witt Jr. was clearly going to finish second in MVP voting.  Judge and Raleigh should be 1-2 on all 30 ballots, but in which order?  That could decide who gets it.

I'm obviously a Yankees fan and a Judge fan.  But even I'm torn about it.  Judge is having another tremendous year.  If not for what Raleigh's doing, he'd be a lock for his second straight MVP and third in the last four seasons.  But Raleigh is doing what he's doing.  And what he's doing, from the catcher position, is so impressive that I think I'm actually leaning in that direction.

There's another possible factor that could come into play here, and it'll be very interesting to see if it does.  Will Raleigh benefit from Judge fatigue?  Has Aaron Judge become so exceptional that his "average" season would still be considered outstanding for somebody else?  And, voters who may not want to vote for Judge actually have somebody else they can vote for without it looking suspicious.  Cal Raleigh gives them an excuse not to vote for Aaron Judge.

That argument goes both ways, however.  I wouldn't necessarily categorize it as "Judge fatigue" as much as I'd consider it "spreading the wealth."  Judge has already won two MVPs and could easily win a few more if he keeps doing what he's doing.  Especially now that Ohtani is in the National League.  Cal Raleigh is having a career year.  He may never put up numbers like this again.  So, why not take the opportunity to reward that and give the MVP to someone new in the process?  I'm not saying this is what'll happen.  But I'm also not saying there's anything wrong with that thought process.

When MLB awards season hits in November, AL MVP will be the award people are most interested in.  Because it really could go either way.  An argument can be made for Judge.  An argument can be made for Raleigh.  I don't envy the voters who'll have to make that decision.  Because they both deserve to win AL MVP this season.

Africa's Turn

When the Tokyo Olympics were postponed, then held behind closed doors, World Athletics President Seb Coe promised that, as a way of making it up to them, the World Championships would come to Tokyo and be held in the Olympic Stadium.  He made good on that promise, with the recently-completed World Championships taking place in Tokyo.  The next World Championships are in Beijing, which may also be a consolation prize for their pandemic-affected Olympics.  The 2029 World Championships haven't been awarded yet, but the continent where they should happen is obvious.  Africa.

The 2022 World Championships were given to Oregon without a vote because World Athletics wanted to hold the meet in the United States.  That really pissed off a lot of European cities that wanted to bid.  But it also set a precedent that if World Athletics has a specific host in mind and a reason why, they'll make sure that location gets the opportunity.  And it's beyond time for Africa to get that opportunity.

It's by no means a guarantee, though.  We'll have back-to-back World Championships outside of Europe and four out of the last five dating back to Doha 2019.  There have never been three in a row outside of Europe.  Since Europe is the hotbed of the sport, you know they'll make the case that the 2029 Worlds should be somewhere on the continent.  London, in particular, is interested in staging another World Championships after the spectacular 2017 edition.

There's a very strong case to be made for holding the 2029 World Championships in London or somewhere else in Europe.  It would be completely reasonable for World Athletics to do that, and it wouldn't really be controversial.  But in that case, the 2031 World Championships (which will be awarded at the same time as 2029) should definitely go to Africa.  They can't not award one of the two to an African city.  Because it's long past due.

Of all possible African candidates, the most obvious would seem to be Nairobi.  Kenya has already submitted its paperwork to bid for 2029, and Kenyan officials were in Tokyo, where they met with Coe.  Kenya previously put in a bid for this year's edition, but they were awarded to Tokyo not just to fulfill Coe's promise, but because of infrastructure concerns.  To address those concerns, they've made upgrades at three different stadiums in Nairobi, a clear sign that they're serious and making the necessary preparations.

Kenya also has a history of hosting World Athletics events.  The final edition of the World U18 Championships in 2017 was held in Nairobi, as were the 2021 World U20 Championships.  Those events are/were obviously a much smaller scale than the senior World Athletics Championships, but Kenya staged them both successfully (one of them during a pandemic), showing their ability and preparedness to hold the main event.

Also of note is how Kenya is one of the most successful nations at the World Championships.  In fact, Kenya is second all-time behind the United States in both gold (72) and total medals (182).  Kenya was also second on the medal table in Tokyo with seven gold and 11 total medals.

They're no longer just a distance-running power, either.  The strength of Kenya's team is still its distance runners, obviously.  But Julius Yego, the 2015 World Champion and 2016 Olympic silver medalist, finished sixth in the men's javelin and they had a team in both men's relays, as well as the mixed 4x400.  Ferdinand Omanyala made the final in the men's 100 at Worlds two years ago and won gold at the 2022 Commonwealth Games.  So, they're becoming a very well-rounded team, especially on the men's side (historically, Kenyans haven't competed in most of the field events).

Africa's success in Tokyo wasn't limited to Kenya, either.  Botswana emerged as a major player, taking gold and bronze in the men's 400 before winning another gold in the men's 4x400 relay, with South Africa grabbing bronze in that race.  (That doesn't even include Botswana's Olympic 200-meter champion Letsile Tebogo.)  Tanzania won its first-ever World Championship in the men's marathon.  Former World Champions from Morocco, Algeria and Nigeria all came home with silver.  So, it wouldn't just be the host country's athletes on display.  A World Championships in any African country would be a home meet for all of them, too.

While Kenya is the logical choice, it isn't the only option.  Ethiopia, Kenya's big distance-running rival, has also expressed interest in hosting the 2029 or 2031 Worlds.  I'd say Kenya would have the upper hand with World Athletics.  But the fact that multiple African federations have stated their interest shows just how big a deal this is for the entire continent.  I'm not even sure they care whether it's Kenya or Ethiopia.  They just want the World Championships in Africa.

Hosting the World Athletics Championships could be a precursor to the ultimate goal, too.  Africa is the only continent to have never hosted the Olympics--something observers of worldwide sport are keenly aware of.  The Youth Olympics will take place in Dakar, Senegal next year, the first IOC-organized event ever held on African soil.  Then Morocco will co-host the 2030 World Cup.  The World Athletics Championships are the biggest global sporting event outside of the Olympics in terms of number of athletes and participating nations, so it would be the logical next step before the first African Olympics.  (It's worth noting here that the IOC is how headed by an African, Zimbabwean Kirsty Coventry.)

Which isn't to say there wouldn't be concerns.  The U.S. didn't attend the 2021 World U20 Championships, citing safety concerns, among other issues (some of which were pandemic-related).  So, athlete safety and logistics would both need to be seriously considered and addressed in the bid materials.  Is that enough of a reason not to bring the World Championships to Africa for the first time, though?  Absolutely not! 

And, let's call a spade a spade, too.  The U.S. withdrew from the 2021 World U20s because USATF didn't really care about the meet.  The regular World Championships?  Different story!  Even if those security concerns still exist, there's no way the U.S. isn't going to the World Championships!  That's also true for every other country in the world.  So, while those concerns may be legitimate, fear for athlete safety won't and shouldn't be the reason why the World Championships don't go to Africa.

Most importantly, World Athletics knows all of this.  They know the significance of bringing the World Championships to Africa for the first time and how bad the optics will be if passed over for both 2029 and 2031.  Which is why I'm confident Nairobi will be awarded one of the two editions, with the other likely going to a city in Europe.  The order, frankly, doesn't matter.  As long as we know the World Championships are headed somewhere they've never been--Africa. It's long past time to remedy that glaring omission.

Tops In Tokyo

The 2025 World Athletics Championships are over, and with them so is that ridiculous run of five global championships in five consecutive years.  It ended where it all began--in Tokyo, with one major exception.  This time, there were fans.  And what a difference it made!  A packed stadium full of cheering fans brought out the best from track & field's best.  Tokyo waited four years for it, and they were treated to quite the spectacle.

Mondo Duplantis broke the world record.  Because he always does.  Which was just one of several all-time great performances during the week.  Sydney McLaughlin-Levrone showed just how special a talent she really is by winning the 400 without hurdles.  Olympic champions followed up their gold medals in Paris with a World title.  There were some disappointments and surprises, too, as well as some breakthroughs.  They're the ones who we need to keep an eye on leading up to LA.

After winning 14 gold medals in Paris, Team USA won 16 in Tokyo!  There are 48 events at the World Athletics Championships.  Americans won a third of them!  Those 16 gold medals set a record.  The other 32 gold medals were split between 20 countries, with Kenya grabbing seven of them.  Overall, a record 53 countries won medals, including first-timers Samoa, Saint Lucia and Uruguay and first-time gold medalist Tanzania.

Those were just some of the superlatives we saw over nine days in Japan.  There were too many to count, in fact.  But I'll, of course, give it a try anyway!

Five-timers Club: Saturday Night Live isn't the only one with a Five-timers Club.  Ryan Crouser (men's shot put), Mondo Duplantis (men's pole vault) and Faith Kipyegon (women's 1500) are track & field's Five-timers Club.  They won the gold medal in their event at all five of the global championships from 2021-25, starting and ending their runs in Tokyo.

Hello, World: Collen Kebinatshipi celebrated his coming out party.  The 21-year-old won gold in the men's 400 in an electrifying world-leading 43.53 seconds.  He then anchored Botswana to gold in the men's 4x400 relay.  This guy was the breakout star of the World Championships and could be the face of the 400 meters for the next decade.

It's Melissa's World, We're All Just Living In It: Melissa Jefferson-Wooden entered the World Championships as the favorite in the women's 100.  No one expected a dominant, Championship-record 10.61-second performance.  Then she won the 200 in similarly dominant fashion.  In the women's 4x100 relay, she made it 3-for-3.

Finally A World Champ: Val Allman won a surprise Olympic gold in Tokyo four years ago.  She then won bronze and silver at the World Championships before defending her Olympic title in the women's discus.  The only thing that was missing was the World Championships gold medal.  Until now.  In the same stadium where she won her first Olympic title, she finally won her first World title.

She Has Arrived: Anna Hall has been the Next Big Thing in the heptathlon for the past few years.  Heptathlon legend Jackie Joyner-Kersee is her biggest fan.  Hall won bronze at the 2022 World Championships, then silver in 2023.  Last summer in Paris, she was injured and finished fifth.  In Tokyo, she reached the top of the podium, joining her friend and mentor as the only Americans ever to win the World Championship in the heptathlon.

That's One Way to Bounce Back: Cole Hocker won Olympic gold in the men's 1500 last year and was among the favorites in Tokyo.  He was disqualified in the semifinals, though.  Hocker was still entered in the 5000 and ended up leaving the World Championships with a gold medal anyway...in his weaker event.

From Selling Phones to Grabbing Gold: Cordell Tinch was out of track & field from 2020-22, selling cell phones in Wisconsin.  He returned to the sport in 2023 and made the team for the World Championships.  Last year, he finished fourth at Olympic Trials.  Now he's a World Champion.

Sweet Redemption: At the Tokyo Olympics, Rai Bejamin lost to Karsten Warholm in the Race of the Games and arguably the best 400 hurdles race in history.  Noah Lyles was the heavy favorite in the 200 at those Olympics, but settled for bronze in the empty stadium.  In their return to Tokyo, Benjamin left no doubt who the best men's 400 hurdler in the world currently is, backing up his Olympic gold with his first World title.  Lyles, meanwhile, ran a 19.51 in the semifinals and a 19.52 in the final to join Usain Bolt as a four-time consecutive World Champion in the 200.  They also anchored the U.S. relays, with Lyles adding another gold in the 4x100.

Yes, She Cam: We've become accustomed to Mondo Duplantis bettering his world record by a centimeter every time we see him.  There's another field event athlete who's just as dominant in their event.  Camryn Rogers in the women's hammer throw.  She had the five furthest throws of the competition en route to her second straight World title.  That's just the half of it, though.  Rogers became just the second woman in history with an 80-meter effort.

Saying Farewell: Two legends of the sport called it a career in Tokyo.  Shelly-Ann Fraser-Pryce, the five-time World and three-time Olympic champion in the women's 100, made the final and finished sixth before winning her 17th career World Championships medal--a silver--in the 4x100 relay.  Dalilah Muhammad, the former world record holder and 2016 Olympic champion in the women's 400 hurdles (before Sydney McLaughlin and Femke Bol took over the event) made one last World Championships final and finished seventh in her last race.

NFL Picks, Week 3

After two weeks, the NFL was pretty evenly divided.  There were 10 teams that were 2-0, 12 that were 1-1 and 10 that were 0-2.  Although, those records are not equal.  Some are the result of who you've played more than anything else.  There are 0-2 teams that are better than 2-0 teams.  So, there's still plenty that we don't know (and we probably won't for a long time).  The 3-0 Bills, though, are a safe bet to be in the mix all season.

Thursday Night: Buffalo (Win)

Packers (2-0) at Browns (0-2): Green Bay-Green Bay is another team that we can already tell is really good.  The Packers won two games in five days against opponents that made the playoffs last season.  That had never happened before in NFL history.  And now they've had 10 days off before their matchup against a team that very much did not make the playoffs last season.  The Packers go to 3-0 and the Browns go to 0-3.

Colts (2-0) at Titans (0-2): Indianapolis-Leave the Giants, become the best player in the league.  That's apparently how it works.  It happened with Saquon Barkley, and it's happening so far with Daniel Jones.  Can he keep it up?  Probably not.  But he's got the Colts off to a 2-0 start and in first place in a weak division.  They should be able to build on that lead by picking up a division victory here.

Bengals (2-0) at Vikings (1-1): Minnesota-Cris Collinsworth said it best on Sunday night.  The Vikings have played one really good quarter of football this season and seven really bad/mediocre quarters.  Yet that one quarter was enough to get a win.  They should get a second against a Cincinnati team that'll be without Joe Burrow for the next two months at least.  As we saw when he got hurt two years ago, the Bengals simply aren't as good without him.

Steelers (1-1) at Patriots (1-1): Pittsburgh-Maybe the Steelers got a little too amped up for Week 1 and the Jets.  Because they had absolutely nothing against the Seahawks.  New England also surprised me last week the other way.  I didn't think much of the Patriots' chances in Miami, but they came away with the road win.  So, this one presents a very interesting matchup.  I think Pittsburgh is better, though.  And I think the Steelers are eager to bounce back and show that last week was just a bad game.

Rams (2-0) at Eagles (2-0): Philadelphia-The Rams are the team that came the closest to beating the Eagles in the playoffs last season.  You know Philadelphia remembers that.  They certainly won't be overlooking the Rams.  Will the Rams have enough to beat the Eagles, though?  That's the question.  I'm not sure they'll have enough.  Especially since everyone got the Eagles all fired up and pissed off because of the conversations about the Tush Push (which should be banned) during the week.

Jets (0-2) at Buccaneers (2-0): Tampa Bay-In Week 1, the Jets marched back and forth up the field, matching the Steelers score for score.  In Week 2, their offense completely disappeared in a loss to Buffalo.  Will they remember to bring it with them to their first road game of the season?  For Tampa, it hasn't exactly been pretty.  But they've gotten the job done.  This team finds different ways to win games.  Which will make them very dangerous come playoff time.  That's a long way away, of course.  They'll just have to settle for a 3-0 start.

Raiders (1-1) at Commanders (1-1): Washington-For as good as the Commanders looked against the Giants, the Packers' defense sure brought them back down to Earth.  They aren't as good as they were in Week 1.  They aren't as bad as they were in Week 2.  Like most things, the truth lies somewhere in the middle.  Maybe it's playing at home against teams they should beat that's the difference.  I guess we'll find out against a Raiders squad that will annoy the crap out of them, but is a team Washington should easily be able to handle.

Falcons (1-1) at Panthers (0-2): Atlanta-Well, would you look at that?  Atlanta's defense showed up last week!  I don't want to get too far ahead of myself since the Falcons beat the Eagles in Week 2 last year and we saw how that season ended.  But there's definitely something encouraging about their performance on the road against Minnesota.  The fact that Carolina is their next opponent certainly bodes well for their being a follow-up performance.

Texans (0-2) at Jaguars (1-1): Houston-Here's where we start to really find out about the Texans.  Their first game against a team that wasn't an NFC division winner last year.  Are they 0-2 because of who they've played or because of who they are?  And who are the Jaguars?  The team that looked great beating Carolina in Week 1 or the team that had trouble stopping Cincinnati in a loss last week?

Broncos (1-1) at Chargers (2-0): Chargers-We might be experiencing a changing of the guard in the AFC West.  Because the Los Angeles Chargers haven't been home yet (officially) and they're already 2-0 with a pair of division wins.  A win here not only makes them 3-0, it makes them 3-0 in the division and gives them a two-game lead (with the tiebreaker on all three currently).  That's a pretty good position to be in after only three games and could easily put them in the driver's seat the entire rest of the way.

Saints (0-2) at Seahawks (1-1): Seattle-Did Seattle get a little lucky last week?  Absolutely!  But they also really took it to the Steelers for most of the game and earned that victory.  The Saints, meanwhile, are already 0-2 against the NFC West after losses to Arizona and San Francisco.  Make it 0-3.  They haven't done anything to show me they can go into Seattle and win.

Cowboys (1-1) at Bears (0-2): Dallas-Jerry Jones said after the Giants game that the Cowboys needed help on the pass rush, which is why they signed Jadeveon Clowney.  Now, they wouldn't have needed help on the pass rush if they hadn't traded their best pass rusher a week before the season started, but I digress.  Brandon Aubrey's two clutch kicks are the reason they won that instant classic last week.  They were thisclose to being 0-2.  Instead, they'll be 2-1 after Week 3.

Cardinals (2-0) at 49ers (2-0): San Francisco-There's a three-way tie atop the NFC West, where the Cardinals, 49ers and Rams are all 2-0.  That'll obviously change this week with Arizona meeting San Francisco.  They both won surprisingly close games in New Orleans, while the Cardinals barely held on against Carolina last week.  So, we'll find out how good their 2-0 actually is as they play by far their strongest opponent of the season so far.

Chiefs (0-2) at Giants (0-2): Kansas City-This is an example of not all 0-2 records being equal.  You know there's a large number of people enjoying the fact that Kansas City started the season with two losses, completely ignoring the fact that those losses were to the Chargers and Eagles.  The Chiefs will be fun.  In fact, I wouldn't be surprised to see them still end 13-4.  The Giants, meanwhile, really needed to hold on last week.  Because things aren't getting any easier for them.  Five of their next six games are against playoff teams from last season (the three from the AFC West and Philadelphia twice).

Lions (1-1) at Ravens (1-1): Baltimore-Neither one of these two has had it particularly easy to start the season.  They both lost on the road to playoff teams in Week 1, then beat up on a weaker opponent in Week 2.  Now they play each other, and one of them will fall below .500.  That won't be the end of the world for a good team that will have lost to a pair of good teams, but it's not a situation either wants to be in, either.  It's the situation the Lions will find themselves facing, though.

Last Week: 12-4
This Week: 1-0
Overall: 25-8

Consequences of Megaconferences

Michigan State fans lost their collective minds when they found out that the Spartans' game at USC would have an 11:00 Eastern kickoff.  Meanwhile, what did they expect?  The game is on the West Coast (meaning it could be scheduled late) and FOX has an 11:00 TV window.  It's part of the reason why the Big Ten added the West Coast teams in the first place.  So, why were they surprised by the late kickoff?

Be as angry as you want about the 11:00 kickoff.  It's something that was bound to happen when conference road games on the West Coast were added to the mix.  Last year, Rutgers (which is much further east than Michigan State) played at USC in the Friday 11:00 timeslot after Game 1 of the World Series (and it ended up getting moved to FS1 in New York because of extended World Series postgame).  Where was the uproar about that?

Meanwhile, you know what time USC's game at Illinois next week kicks off?  Noon Eastern!  Evidently, it's completely OK with fans of other Big Ten schools for the Trojans to play at 9 a.m. Pacific time.  Yet when their own team goes to LA and has a late kickoff, that's somehow totally unacceptable.  Even though the Big Ten schedules it so that they'll have at most one West Coast game per season, while the West Coast teams have to come East multiple times.

I'm not suggesting people should have sympathy for UCLA, USC, Oregon and Washington because of their travel situation.  They knew it would be part of the deal when they agreed to join the Big Ten.  Just as the other Big Ten schools knew travel to the West Coast would be part of the deal for them.  So, whining about having to start late when they visit the West Coast teams is just that.  Whining.

This is exactly what the Big Ten wanted when they raided the Pac-12.  They envisioned a full day of Big Ten football starting at noon and ending after midnight when the West Coast game finishes.  Those West Coast games won't just be UCLA, USC, Oregon and Washington playing each other!  Somebody has to be the road team!  That's just the reality of the situation.

It's also the same thing in the ACC, by the way.  Don't forget, they picked up Stanford and Cal out of the remnants of the Pac-12.  When Stanford hosts Florida State (which, like Michigan State, is in the Eastern time zone), you know what time the game starts?  10:30 Eastern.  Again, where's the uproar about that?  Ditto with Cal-North Carolina, which kicks off way past Bill Belichick's bedtime.

Also, not for nothing, most college football games are played on weekends.  It's not like fans are being asked to stay up until 2:00 then go to work in the morning.  (That, by the way, is what baseball fans do for an entire week multiple times a season.)  You can sleep in the next day.  It's also one game over the course of the season.  So, it's not exactly the end of the world!

With conferences now stretching from Coast to Coast, this is a new reality that fans need to get used to.  If your team is scheduled to go to the West Coast, there's a good chance that the game will start late.  The TV networks have a college football timeslot they need to fill, after all.  And it's really no different than asking those West Coast teams to start early when they go on the road.  So, no, it's not unreasonable for Michigan State-USC to start at 11 or for Cal-North Carolina to start at 10:30.

What's ironic about these fans' complaints, too, is how many of them will stay up and watch those late games anyway.  I get that there's a difference between watching something because it's on and not really caring who wins or if you fall asleep before it's over and being invested in the outcome.  Those fans also seem to forget that, while it's not convenient for them, the 11:00 Eastern/8:00 Pacific start time is convenient for fans of their team's opponent.  Specifically for people attending the game.  While college football is a TV sport, you can't forget about the people actually in the stadium.

And, frankly, a college football game kicking off a few hours later than fans on the East Coast are used to pales in comparison to how bad it is for fans on the West Coast.  Noon on the East Coast is 9 a.m. there.  Do you think that's a convenient time for them?  (If you live on the West Coast, to watch live coverage of something that's taking place in Asia, you need to get up at 3-4 a.m., if not earlier.)  Yet, do you hear them complaining?  No!  Because they know it's part of the deal.

Long road trips and inconvenient start times are a part of the new reality.  It's simply unrealistic to think every game will be scheduled at the same time of day or that when they are played will be convenient for everybody.  Especially when you have designated TV windows and the conference chooses which game goes on which network at what time.  A marquee matchup is more likely to be played in primetime on the East Coast (which is the late afternoon on the West Coast).  A matchup that isn't marquee, meanwhile, will get one of those less desirable timeslots. 

Of course, there's an easy solution to these TV timeslot issues.  They could have a conference that's made up entirely (or, at least, primarily) of schools based on the West Coast.  Then, they could play each other in those late timeslots after everybody else played earlier in the day.  Oh wait...they already had that, didn't they?  I wonder what happened.  Because that sounds like a great idea.

So, no, I've got no sympathy for the "poor" Michigan State fans who'll have to "suffer" through a game that kicks off at 11 p.m. local time.  The Big Ten (and its member schools) wanted this.  And you reap what you sow.  Adding the four West Coast teams to the league meant some long road trips and late games.  Everyone signed off on it.  It's what led to the complete decimation of another conference.  It's a little too late to be having buyer's remorse.

These megaconferences are most likely here to stay.  So are games on the West Coast with late start times that feature conference opponents from the opposite side of the country.  The fan bases of those East Coast schools can complain about it all they want.  But they'd better get used to it.  Because it probably ain't changing anytime soon.

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.