A lot of stuff happened in 2013. Not all of it was good. In fact, it seems like most of the sports news we've heard over the past 12 months was overwhelmingly negative. But there were plenty of wonderful memories to take away from 2013 also. Andy Murray finally won Wimbledon. Usain Bolt once again proved his brilliance. The Ravens beat the 49ers in another classic Super Bowl. We had an old-school Stanley Cup Finals and an old-school World Series.
And the stage is set for 2014 to be just as epic. After all, 2014 gives us a Winter Olympics and a World Cup. But before we turn the page to 2014, let's look back on the year that was. In true Joe Brackets tradition, with this final post of the calendar year, it's time to take a look at the best games of the year. (And just as we did 12 games for 2012, this year's list features a lucky number 13.)
13. America's Cup, Final Race-September 25, San Francisco
The America's Cup is held so infrequently that it's tough to follow. But this one was worth watching. With nine wins needed to take the cup, Emirates Team New Zealand built an 8-1 lead on defending champion Oracle Team USA. Oracle, though, incredibly, came all the way back to tie the series at 8-8 and force a decisive race, only the third in America's Cup history. They won that one, too, to cap the amazing comeback and retain the oldest trophy in international sports.
12. Louisville 82, Baylor 81 (NCAA Women's Oklahoma City Regional Semifinal)-March 31, Oklahoma City
The 2013 NCAA Tournament was supposed to be Baylor's march to a second straight title that would cement Brittany Griner's place among the all-time greats of women's college basketball. Someone forgot to tell Louisville. The Cardinals pulled off one of the biggest upsets in NCAA Women's Tournament history by effectively taking Griner out of the game and firing away from three. It worked. Louisville took the lead on a pair of free throws with 2.6 seconds left, then Odyssey Sims missed a shot at the buzzer that would've won it for Baylor. Louisville ended up going all the way to the National Championship Game, where they lost to UConn.
11. Indianapolis 500-May 26, Indianapolis
The Indy 500 is becoming a staple of this list. It's not intentional. It's just that we've had some really good Indy 500s over the past couple years. And the 2013 race was incredible. There were 68 lead changes, double the previous record (set all the way back in 2012). A caution flag came out with seven laps left, and when the race went back to green, Tony Kanaan shot to the lead. Another caution came out almost immediately, which meant that, unlike NASCAR with its green-white-checkered finish, the race would end under yellow. Even the critics of this rule didn't mind this time, though. Because those were three victory laps for Tony Kanaan, who finally got to drink the milk in Gasoline Alley.
10. United States 3, Panama 2 (FIFA World Cup Qualifying)-October 15, Panama City
The U.S. had already clinched a berth in the World Cup, as well first place in CONCACAF qualifying prior to its final game at Panama. The game was meaningless for the Americans, but it meant everything for Panama, which would move into the playoff with New Zealand with a win, as well as Mexico, which stood to advance if Panama lost. It looked like, incredibly, Mexico would fail to get out of CONCACAF qualifying when Panama took a 2-1 lead into second half stoppage time. Then Graham Zusi scored to tie the game. Aron Johansson then scored less than a minute later to, incredibly, give the Americans a shocking 3-2 victory and save Mexico.
9. Netherlands 7, Cuba 6 (World Baseball Classic, Second Round)-March 11, Tokyo
Cuba played the Netherlands in the first game of the second round and the Dutch won, sending Cuba into the loser's bracket. They met again three days later with a berth in the semifinals at stake. Everybody expected the Cubans to win, especially after they took a 6-4 lead in the eighth. But then the Dutch tied it on a two-run homer by Braves shortstop Andrelton Simmons in the bottom of the eighth. After Cuba left two runners on in the top of the ninth, the Dutch loaded the bases with one out in the bottom half. Kalian Sams then lifted a fly ball to center to knock in Andruw Jones and give the Netherlands a thrilling 9-8 victory.
8. Novak Djokovic vs. Juan Martin Del Potro (Wimbledon Semifinals)-July 5, London
It was a rematch of the 2012 Olympic bronze medal match, which Del Potro won on Centre Court. This semifinal was an absolute classic that took a Wimbledon record 4:44 to complete (which was still eight hours shorter than the Isner-Mahut match in 2010). It was nearly five hours of brilliant tennis. After splitting the first two sets, Djokovic took the third in the tiebreak. The fourth set also went to a tiebreak, which Del Potro won 8-6 to stay alive. Djokovic rallied to take the fifth, though, winning the match 7-5, 4-6, 7-6, 6-7, 6-3. Perhaps as a result, he was on the receiving end of history two days later, losing to Andy Murray in straight sets in the final.
7. Louisville 82, Michigan 76 (NCAA Championship Game)-April 8, Atlanta
The NCAA Tournament gave us its usual dose of classic games, none more so than the Louisville-Michigan Championship Game. Michigan led by as many as 12 points in the first half before Louisville got four straight three-pointers from Luke Hancock to pull within 38-37 at halftime. Louisville eventually took a 10-point lead in the second half, but Michigan got back within four with less than a minute left. Hancock sealed it with a pair of free throws, though, and the Cardinals sent the old Big East out in style, by making Rick Pitino the first coach in history to win National Championships at two different schools.
6. British Open, Final Round-July 21, Gullane, Scotland
Yes, I actually have a golf tournament not only on the list, but ranked this highly. Because from what I hear, this was an absolutely incredible finish. Phil Mickleson started the day tied for ninth, five strokes back. Leader Lee Westwood had a rough final day, though, shooting four-over on the day to end up in a tie for third. Mickleson, meanwhile, shot -2 thru nine holes to get back even for the tournament. He then shot four birdies on the back nine to end up -3, but there were still plenty of golfers on the course. None of them could catch him, though, as Mickleson hoisted the Claret Jug for the first time.
5. Heat 103, Spurs 100, OT (NBA Finals, Game 6)-June 18, Miami
If the Heat were going to defend their title, they were gonna have to do it the hard way. They fell behind 3-2 in the series and headed home knowing they'd have to win both games. And Miami promptly fell behind by 10 after three quarters. The Heat then started the fourth on a 20-7 run to get back into the game, but San Antonio still led by three late. LeBron missed a three-pointer that would've tied it, but Chris Bosh grabbed the rebound and fed Ray Allen, who hit a trey from the corner to send the game into overtime. Miami ended up winning in overtime, then won again two nights later for its second straight championship. This won the Best Game ESPY, but I think part of the reason for that is ESPN's obsession with the NBA.
4. Cardinals 5, Red Sox 4 (World Series, Game 3)-October 26, St. Louis
This was a classic game in a classic World Series. With the series tied at 1-1, St. Louis took a 2-0 lead in the bottom of the first. The Red Sox tied it with one in the fifth and one in the sixth before the Cardinals put up another two-spot in the seventh, and Boston tied it again at 4-4 in the top of the eighth. But it was the ninth inning of Game 3 that will be remembered for a long, long time. For some reason, John Farrell let pitcher Brandon Workman hit (despite having Mike Napoli on the bench) in the top of the ninth, only to have him face two batters in the bottom half. He came out after Yadier Molina singled, then Allen Craig doubled off Boston closer Koji Uehara. That's where this game became truly unforgettable. With the infield in, Jon Jay hit a grounder to second. Dustin Pedroia threw Molina out at home, then catcher Jarrod Saltalamacchia tried to get Craig at third, but his throw went into left field. Craig headed for home, but was tripped by third baseman Will Middlebrooks and out at the plate. However, he was called safe (correctly) on obstruction, giving the Cardinals the victory in one of the wildest finishes you'll ever see.
3. Blackhawks 4, Bruins 3, 3 OT (Stanley Cup Final, Game 1)-June 12, Chicago
We were soured by Lockout 2.0, but the NHL more than made up for it with a scintillating Stanley Cup Final between two of the Original Six. And Game 1 was simply a preview of what was in store for the rest of the series. Boston had leads of 2-0 and 3-1 before Chicago scored twice in the third to tie it. And it would stay that way for a while. Finally, at the 12:08 mark of the third overtime, Chicago's Andrew Shaw deflected Michal Rozsival's shot past Tuukka Rask to give the Blackhawks a 4-3 victory. The triple-overtime classic was the fifth-longest game in Staley Cup Final history and the first of three overtime games in the series.
2. Auburn 34, Alabama 28-November 30, Auburn, Ala.
Heading into this year's Iron Bowl between No. 1 Alabama and No. 4 Auburn, many experts were calling for a classic. They were right. It was 21-14 Alabama at halftime and 28-21 early in the fourth. Auburn tied it with 32 seconds left, but Alabama managed to get to the Auburn 38 and tried a 57-yard field goal on the final play of the game. It was short, and Auburn's Chris Davis fielded it nine yards deep in the end zone. Then, just like famous Alabama alum Forrest Gump, he started running. And he didn't stop until he was in the other end zone--100 yards away. Incredibly, Auburn had won 34-28, ending Alabama's hopes for a third straight BCS title.
1. Broncos 51, Cowboys 48-October 6, Arlington, Texas
This was one of the most entertaining football games I've seen in a long time. That's why I rank the Dallas-Denver shootout as the No. 1 game of 2013. Dallas led 14-7 after one, but Peyton threw two TD passes and ran for another in the second to put the Broncos up 28-20 at halftime. The Cowboys took the lead early in the fourth quarter, then Denver tied it at 41-41 on a 50-yard field goal by Matt Prater. After Dallas went back in front, 48-41, a nine-play, 73-yard Denver drive was capped by Knowshon Moreno's game-tying 1-yard run with 2:24 left. Tony Romo threw one of his trademark costly interceptions on the ensuing Cowboys drive, giving Denver the ball already in field goal range. On 3rd-and-1 from the two, Moreno got the first down, but, because Dallas didn't have any timeouts left, intentionally didn't score. The Broncos then ran the clock all the way down and Prater kicked a game-winning 28-yard chip shot as time expired. It was truly a classic.
Tuesday, December 31, 2013
Sunday, December 29, 2013
Week 17 NFL Picks
So, before I get into the picks for the final week of the regular season, a little NFL story. I was walking down 6th Avenue towards Rockefeller Center to see the tree earlier tonight and who walks by me on the street? None other than Shannon Sharpe.
Now on to the picks. As usual, all 16 games are division matchups. But even more remarkably, 13 of the 16 have some bearing on the playoff races. Some more than others, obviously, but there are two winner-take-all games in the NFC and the AFC has three teams tied for the second wild card spot, not one of which controls their own destiny. I think they achieved what they had in mind when they made that change a couple years ago to have only division games in the final week.
Panthers (11-4) at Falcons (4-11): Carolina-Who would've thought when they were 1-3 that Carolina would have a chance to wrap up the division and a first-round bye in Week 17? The Panthers can even get home field with a win and a Seahawks loss, but they'll settle for clinching the South and the No. 2 seed, something that was made possible by their win over the Saints last week. And since the Seahawks-Rams game is a late game, Seattle's going to go into it knowing they'll have to play their starters. Because the Panthers will be the NFC South champions.
Ravens (8-7) at Bengals (10-5): Cincinnati-The third-best game of the week, and probably the biggest game in the AFC. With a win, Cincinnati will still have a chance at the 2-seed and keep the pressure on New England (which kicks off at 4:30). Baltimore, meanwhile, needs a win to have a chance to defend its title. The Ravens could win and still be out, though. Things are that crazy in the race for that second AFC wild card. Something else to consider is that if Baltimore does win and get the help it needs, these two could be doing this all over again next weekend. I don't think that happens, though. The Bengals are excellent at home and have been one of the most unsung good teams in the league all season.
Texans (2-13) at Titans (6-9): Tennessee-One of the three that doesn't matter. The only suspense in this game is whether or not the Texans can win and snap their 13-game losing streak. A win could possibly cost them the No. 1 pick, though. As one of the two teams to lose to Houston this year, the Titans want to make sure that doesn't happen again. All's not lost in Houston, though. Look at Kansas City this year. From 2-14 and the No. 1 pick to the playoffs.
Jaguars (4-11) at Colts (10-5): Indianapolis-The level of mattering in this one is minimal. The Colts can still theoretically move up to the No. 2 or 3 seed, but they pretty much know that they're hosting the Chiefs next week. So, I'm not sure how long Indy's starters will play. If they do, the Colts win. Even if not, I'd imagine Indy pulls it out.
Jets (7-8) at Dolphins (8-7): Miami-It's incredible to think that the Jets, a team many people thought would be among the worst in the NFL, can finish .500 with a win in their finale. Except, they won last week, so, following the trend of the Jets' season, they'll lose this week. That, and they're playing a Dolphins team that can (and will) clinch a playoff berth. With a victory and a Cincinnati win over Baltimore (or a Chargers win over Kansas City), Miami's in. Welcome to the playoffs, Dolphins.
Lions (7-8) at Vikings (4-10-1): Detroit-The week after we said goodbye to Candlestick, we say farewell to the Metrodome. That's the only intrigue left in this game, which had any remaining relevance sucked out of it when the Lions capped their really bad week with an overtime loss to the Giants. It's incredible that Detroit went from division leaders to eliminated in six days, but that's a story for another day. I'll say the Lions win this one and at least get themselves back to .500.
Redskins (3-12) at Giants (6-9): Giants-Our third and final irrelevant game of the weekend pits the Redskins against the Giants in the final game at the Meadowlands before the Super Bowl. It might also be Mike Shanahan's final game as Washington's coach. If they play their cards right, the Redskins can steal the No. 1 pick away from the Texans. As for the Giants, finishing 7-9 would actually be fairly impressive considering that 0-6 start. It would also give them the same record as the Jets this season.
Browns (4-11) at Steelers (7-8): Pittsburgh-Speaking of teams that got off to horrible starts, Pittsburgh is, incredibly, still alive for the remaining AFC playoff berth. It's highly unlikely, considering the number of things they need to have happen in order to do that, but it's impressive nonetheless. Beating their archrivals to end the season .500 is a small consolation, but considering how bad this season was going for the Steelers, I'm sure they'll take it.
Packers (7-7-1) at Bears (8-7): Chicago-Aaron Rodgers returns for the NFC North championship game against the same Bears team that knocked him out on that Monday night in Lambeau. Rodgers is a better alternative than Matt Flynn or whoever else the Packers might send out there, but how effective is he going to be in a winner-take-all game after having nearly two months off? I normally wouldn't count Aaron Rodgers out, but I'd like his chances a little better if they were playing in Green Bay. Instead they're going into Soldier Field against a Bears team that had a chance to wrap up the division last Sunday night, but got completely thumped by the Eagles instead. Even still, I actually do trust Jay Cutler in this situation. For some reason, I don't think the Bears put together two clunkers in a row. Especially with so much at stake. And against the Packers.
Broncos (12-3) at Raiders (4-11): Denver-Peyton's record is taken care of, but he and the rest of the Broncos' starters have to play the whole game in Oakland. Because the Patriots can still technically take away home field. And home field advantage is very important to the Denver Broncos. They're not gonna let it slip away.
Bills (6-9) at Patriots (11-4): New England-New England's in a very interesting situation. They're likely going to be the No. 2 seed, but can still move up to No. 1 or potentially fall all the way to No. 4 (and a matchup with Kansas City that they don't want). After what they did in Baltimore last week to wrap up yet another division title, the Patriots seem to be peaking at just the right time. They'll beat the Bills in Foxboro to, at the very least, secure a bye.
Buccaneers (4-11) at Saints (10-5): New Orleans-Thanks to an ill-timed two-game losing streak, New Orleans has gone from having a bye to a road game next week. If they're not careful, the Saints could end up being left out of the playoffs entirely. The good news for them is that they return to the Superdome this week, and all they need to do is win to get in. New Orleans is one of the best teams in the NFC. They SHOULD be in the playoffs.
49ers (11-4) at Cardinals (10-5): San Francisco-The Arizona Cardinals are the best team that's not going to make the playoffs. It's even more remarkable to think that Arizona could be 11-5 and miss the playoffs. So much for the NFC West being the worst division in football! Even with a 49ers win, Arizona would be 10-6 and without-a-doubt, the best third-place team we've seen in a while (and that includes the AFC North two years ago). San Francisco can still win the division and even potentially get home field, so the 49ers still have something to play for. That's what makes this one difficult to pick. By a very narrow margin, I'm going with San Francisco.
Chiefs (11-4) at Chargers (8-7): San Diego-If that game was a tough one to pick, this one is nearly impossible. Kansas City has nothing to play for and will rest several starters accordingly. It means everything for the Chargers, though. Except it might not. If the Dolphins and Bengals win in their early games, San Diego's eliminated. And you'd have to wonder what the Chargers' motivation is if they know they're out. I think that will be the case, but since Kansas City has very little interest in winning the game, that might not matter too much. I think the Chargers win anyway. Besides, 9-7 looks so much better than 8-8.
Rams (7-8) at Seahawks (12-3): Seattle-Remember a couple years ago, before the Week 17 Sunday night game became the exclusive domain of the Dallas Cowboys, when the Rams and Seahawks met in the finale in Seattle with the NFC West at stake? Seattle won to become the first 7-9 division champion in NFL history. Well, this year, things are a little different. And the Seahawks, incredibly, haven't clinched the home field advantage that has seemed inevitably theirs all season yet. Arizona showed us last week that the Seahawks aren't invincible at Qwest Field. It'll still be tough for the two NFC teams that have to go there in the playoffs, though.
Eagles (9-6) at Cowboys (8-7): Philadelphia-The 256th and final game of the NFL regular season once again features the Dallas Cowboys in a winner-take-all showdown for the NFC East title. Maybe the third time's the charm. And, in a change of script, it can't be Tony Romo's fault they lose this time. (I wouldn't be surprised to see some people say that, if Dallas loses, it was because they didn't have Romo.) The Eagles won't lose if they play the way they played last week. Plus, they've got the advantage of Nick Foles running that red-hot offense. An offense that's much different than the one that only scored three points the first time they played the Cowboys. They were 3-5. Since then, they've won six out of seven. Make it seven out of eight for the NFC East champs.
Clinching Playoff Berths: Miami, Chicago, Philadelphia
Last Week: 10-6
Season: 154-85-1
Now on to the picks. As usual, all 16 games are division matchups. But even more remarkably, 13 of the 16 have some bearing on the playoff races. Some more than others, obviously, but there are two winner-take-all games in the NFC and the AFC has three teams tied for the second wild card spot, not one of which controls their own destiny. I think they achieved what they had in mind when they made that change a couple years ago to have only division games in the final week.
Panthers (11-4) at Falcons (4-11): Carolina-Who would've thought when they were 1-3 that Carolina would have a chance to wrap up the division and a first-round bye in Week 17? The Panthers can even get home field with a win and a Seahawks loss, but they'll settle for clinching the South and the No. 2 seed, something that was made possible by their win over the Saints last week. And since the Seahawks-Rams game is a late game, Seattle's going to go into it knowing they'll have to play their starters. Because the Panthers will be the NFC South champions.
Ravens (8-7) at Bengals (10-5): Cincinnati-The third-best game of the week, and probably the biggest game in the AFC. With a win, Cincinnati will still have a chance at the 2-seed and keep the pressure on New England (which kicks off at 4:30). Baltimore, meanwhile, needs a win to have a chance to defend its title. The Ravens could win and still be out, though. Things are that crazy in the race for that second AFC wild card. Something else to consider is that if Baltimore does win and get the help it needs, these two could be doing this all over again next weekend. I don't think that happens, though. The Bengals are excellent at home and have been one of the most unsung good teams in the league all season.
Texans (2-13) at Titans (6-9): Tennessee-One of the three that doesn't matter. The only suspense in this game is whether or not the Texans can win and snap their 13-game losing streak. A win could possibly cost them the No. 1 pick, though. As one of the two teams to lose to Houston this year, the Titans want to make sure that doesn't happen again. All's not lost in Houston, though. Look at Kansas City this year. From 2-14 and the No. 1 pick to the playoffs.
Jaguars (4-11) at Colts (10-5): Indianapolis-The level of mattering in this one is minimal. The Colts can still theoretically move up to the No. 2 or 3 seed, but they pretty much know that they're hosting the Chiefs next week. So, I'm not sure how long Indy's starters will play. If they do, the Colts win. Even if not, I'd imagine Indy pulls it out.
Jets (7-8) at Dolphins (8-7): Miami-It's incredible to think that the Jets, a team many people thought would be among the worst in the NFL, can finish .500 with a win in their finale. Except, they won last week, so, following the trend of the Jets' season, they'll lose this week. That, and they're playing a Dolphins team that can (and will) clinch a playoff berth. With a victory and a Cincinnati win over Baltimore (or a Chargers win over Kansas City), Miami's in. Welcome to the playoffs, Dolphins.
Lions (7-8) at Vikings (4-10-1): Detroit-The week after we said goodbye to Candlestick, we say farewell to the Metrodome. That's the only intrigue left in this game, which had any remaining relevance sucked out of it when the Lions capped their really bad week with an overtime loss to the Giants. It's incredible that Detroit went from division leaders to eliminated in six days, but that's a story for another day. I'll say the Lions win this one and at least get themselves back to .500.
Redskins (3-12) at Giants (6-9): Giants-Our third and final irrelevant game of the weekend pits the Redskins against the Giants in the final game at the Meadowlands before the Super Bowl. It might also be Mike Shanahan's final game as Washington's coach. If they play their cards right, the Redskins can steal the No. 1 pick away from the Texans. As for the Giants, finishing 7-9 would actually be fairly impressive considering that 0-6 start. It would also give them the same record as the Jets this season.
Browns (4-11) at Steelers (7-8): Pittsburgh-Speaking of teams that got off to horrible starts, Pittsburgh is, incredibly, still alive for the remaining AFC playoff berth. It's highly unlikely, considering the number of things they need to have happen in order to do that, but it's impressive nonetheless. Beating their archrivals to end the season .500 is a small consolation, but considering how bad this season was going for the Steelers, I'm sure they'll take it.
Packers (7-7-1) at Bears (8-7): Chicago-Aaron Rodgers returns for the NFC North championship game against the same Bears team that knocked him out on that Monday night in Lambeau. Rodgers is a better alternative than Matt Flynn or whoever else the Packers might send out there, but how effective is he going to be in a winner-take-all game after having nearly two months off? I normally wouldn't count Aaron Rodgers out, but I'd like his chances a little better if they were playing in Green Bay. Instead they're going into Soldier Field against a Bears team that had a chance to wrap up the division last Sunday night, but got completely thumped by the Eagles instead. Even still, I actually do trust Jay Cutler in this situation. For some reason, I don't think the Bears put together two clunkers in a row. Especially with so much at stake. And against the Packers.
Broncos (12-3) at Raiders (4-11): Denver-Peyton's record is taken care of, but he and the rest of the Broncos' starters have to play the whole game in Oakland. Because the Patriots can still technically take away home field. And home field advantage is very important to the Denver Broncos. They're not gonna let it slip away.
Bills (6-9) at Patriots (11-4): New England-New England's in a very interesting situation. They're likely going to be the No. 2 seed, but can still move up to No. 1 or potentially fall all the way to No. 4 (and a matchup with Kansas City that they don't want). After what they did in Baltimore last week to wrap up yet another division title, the Patriots seem to be peaking at just the right time. They'll beat the Bills in Foxboro to, at the very least, secure a bye.
Buccaneers (4-11) at Saints (10-5): New Orleans-Thanks to an ill-timed two-game losing streak, New Orleans has gone from having a bye to a road game next week. If they're not careful, the Saints could end up being left out of the playoffs entirely. The good news for them is that they return to the Superdome this week, and all they need to do is win to get in. New Orleans is one of the best teams in the NFC. They SHOULD be in the playoffs.
49ers (11-4) at Cardinals (10-5): San Francisco-The Arizona Cardinals are the best team that's not going to make the playoffs. It's even more remarkable to think that Arizona could be 11-5 and miss the playoffs. So much for the NFC West being the worst division in football! Even with a 49ers win, Arizona would be 10-6 and without-a-doubt, the best third-place team we've seen in a while (and that includes the AFC North two years ago). San Francisco can still win the division and even potentially get home field, so the 49ers still have something to play for. That's what makes this one difficult to pick. By a very narrow margin, I'm going with San Francisco.
Chiefs (11-4) at Chargers (8-7): San Diego-If that game was a tough one to pick, this one is nearly impossible. Kansas City has nothing to play for and will rest several starters accordingly. It means everything for the Chargers, though. Except it might not. If the Dolphins and Bengals win in their early games, San Diego's eliminated. And you'd have to wonder what the Chargers' motivation is if they know they're out. I think that will be the case, but since Kansas City has very little interest in winning the game, that might not matter too much. I think the Chargers win anyway. Besides, 9-7 looks so much better than 8-8.
Rams (7-8) at Seahawks (12-3): Seattle-Remember a couple years ago, before the Week 17 Sunday night game became the exclusive domain of the Dallas Cowboys, when the Rams and Seahawks met in the finale in Seattle with the NFC West at stake? Seattle won to become the first 7-9 division champion in NFL history. Well, this year, things are a little different. And the Seahawks, incredibly, haven't clinched the home field advantage that has seemed inevitably theirs all season yet. Arizona showed us last week that the Seahawks aren't invincible at Qwest Field. It'll still be tough for the two NFC teams that have to go there in the playoffs, though.
Eagles (9-6) at Cowboys (8-7): Philadelphia-The 256th and final game of the NFL regular season once again features the Dallas Cowboys in a winner-take-all showdown for the NFC East title. Maybe the third time's the charm. And, in a change of script, it can't be Tony Romo's fault they lose this time. (I wouldn't be surprised to see some people say that, if Dallas loses, it was because they didn't have Romo.) The Eagles won't lose if they play the way they played last week. Plus, they've got the advantage of Nick Foles running that red-hot offense. An offense that's much different than the one that only scored three points the first time they played the Cowboys. They were 3-5. Since then, they've won six out of seven. Make it seven out of eight for the NFC East champs.
Clinching Playoff Berths: Miami, Chicago, Philadelphia
Last Week: 10-6
Season: 154-85-1
Saturday, December 28, 2013
Starting Pitcher Needed, Enter Tanaka
Even before Robinson Cano left for Seattle, one of the Yankees' biggest needs this offseason was pitching. Especially a solid starting pitcher to insert behind CC Sabathia, Ivan Nova and Hiroki Kuroda. Most just assumed that pitcher would be Japanese ace Masahiro Tanaka. Then they changed the posting system, and whether or not Tanaka was even coming to America became a question.
Well, Rakuten has finally posted Tanaka, and the Yankees need to be the team that wins his services. Even if it means going over this self-imposed $189 million salary cap, getting Tanaka is an absolute must. This is a potential ace, and the available pitching talent via free agency is significantly weaker. If they don't get him, they'll have to make a trade (which might be why they're still hanging on to Gardner.)
The Yankees have been hesitant to jump into the mix on these big-name international free agents ever since their epic failures on Hideki Irabu and Kei Igawa. (Although, it should be noted, they also struck gold with Hideki Matsui.) As a result, they missed out on Aroldis Chapman and Yoenis Cespedes and Yu Darvish. But these are the Yankees. They've become pretty well-known for going all-in on free agents they really want. And that's certainly the case here. Because they need a starting pitcher. Big time. And they know Tanaka's the best one available.
It's pretty clear why the Yankees want Tanaka. He went 24-0 last season, as Rakuten won its first Japan Series title. Oh yeah, he's only 25 years old and has been a pro since he was 18. From what all the scouts say, Tanaka is the real deal. All the more reason to make sure he's wearing Yankee Pinstripes in 2014.
Heading into the offseason, a lot of people assumed that was going to be a mere formality. The Yankees would make an offer that blew everyone else out of the water, and that posting fee wouldn't count against the $189 million. Then they changed the posting system. Now it's $20 million up front, and everybody's allowed to talk to him, with the player then deciding where he wants to go. Suddenly, it's not automatic that he's going to be a Yankee. And they've also gone from very little of the actual money counting to almost all of it counting. Doesn't matter. Getting Tanaka should still be the utmost priority.
For a team that needs to fill at least two holes in its rotation, getting a starter is paramount. The free agent starting pitchers out there include the likes of Bronson Arroyo and Matt Garza. Both are quality, middle-of-the-rotation Major League starters. But neither one is an ace. From all indications, Masahiro Tanaka is. He could be the difference-maker the Yankees need.
The last time the Yankees missed the playoffs, they made a splash in free agency, singing CC Sabathia, A.J. Burnett and Mark Teixiera. The result was their most recent World Series title in 2009. So far this offseason, they've been just as aggressive, picking up Brian McCann, Carlos Beltran and Jacoby Ellsbury. They also lost Robinson Cano, a loss they think they can overcome. The rotation, though, can't be patched together so easily. And Andy Pettitte isn't coming back this time. You can only coax a guy out of retirement so many times.
One of their problems in 2008 was that they were banking on Joba Chamberlain, Phil Hughes and Ian Kennedy anchoring the rotation. We all saw how well that worked. None of the three is even on the Yankees anymore (and good riddance to the two who just left). The bargain-basement additions of Bartolo Colon and Freddy Garcia worked out, for the most part, in 2011...until they didn't in 2012. Going back even further, remember names like Javier Vazquez, Carl Pavano and Kevin Brown? Well, barring a Gardner-for-starter trade, a Tanaka-less rotation would feature some combination of David Phelps, David Huff, Adam Warren, Vidal Nuno and Michael Pineda behind Sabathia, Nova and Kuroda (who they were lucky to get back for another year). It could be like that all over again.
I'm not saying Masahiro Tanaka is a can't-miss free agent. What I am saying is that he's worth the risk. Because, on paper, a Yankees team with Masahiro Tanaka is better than one without him. So, regardless of what it costs and who else is in the mix, the Yankees have to do everything in their power to make sure Tanaka's pitching in the Bronx in 2014 and beyond.
Well, Rakuten has finally posted Tanaka, and the Yankees need to be the team that wins his services. Even if it means going over this self-imposed $189 million salary cap, getting Tanaka is an absolute must. This is a potential ace, and the available pitching talent via free agency is significantly weaker. If they don't get him, they'll have to make a trade (which might be why they're still hanging on to Gardner.)
The Yankees have been hesitant to jump into the mix on these big-name international free agents ever since their epic failures on Hideki Irabu and Kei Igawa. (Although, it should be noted, they also struck gold with Hideki Matsui.) As a result, they missed out on Aroldis Chapman and Yoenis Cespedes and Yu Darvish. But these are the Yankees. They've become pretty well-known for going all-in on free agents they really want. And that's certainly the case here. Because they need a starting pitcher. Big time. And they know Tanaka's the best one available.
It's pretty clear why the Yankees want Tanaka. He went 24-0 last season, as Rakuten won its first Japan Series title. Oh yeah, he's only 25 years old and has been a pro since he was 18. From what all the scouts say, Tanaka is the real deal. All the more reason to make sure he's wearing Yankee Pinstripes in 2014.
Heading into the offseason, a lot of people assumed that was going to be a mere formality. The Yankees would make an offer that blew everyone else out of the water, and that posting fee wouldn't count against the $189 million. Then they changed the posting system. Now it's $20 million up front, and everybody's allowed to talk to him, with the player then deciding where he wants to go. Suddenly, it's not automatic that he's going to be a Yankee. And they've also gone from very little of the actual money counting to almost all of it counting. Doesn't matter. Getting Tanaka should still be the utmost priority.
For a team that needs to fill at least two holes in its rotation, getting a starter is paramount. The free agent starting pitchers out there include the likes of Bronson Arroyo and Matt Garza. Both are quality, middle-of-the-rotation Major League starters. But neither one is an ace. From all indications, Masahiro Tanaka is. He could be the difference-maker the Yankees need.
The last time the Yankees missed the playoffs, they made a splash in free agency, singing CC Sabathia, A.J. Burnett and Mark Teixiera. The result was their most recent World Series title in 2009. So far this offseason, they've been just as aggressive, picking up Brian McCann, Carlos Beltran and Jacoby Ellsbury. They also lost Robinson Cano, a loss they think they can overcome. The rotation, though, can't be patched together so easily. And Andy Pettitte isn't coming back this time. You can only coax a guy out of retirement so many times.
One of their problems in 2008 was that they were banking on Joba Chamberlain, Phil Hughes and Ian Kennedy anchoring the rotation. We all saw how well that worked. None of the three is even on the Yankees anymore (and good riddance to the two who just left). The bargain-basement additions of Bartolo Colon and Freddy Garcia worked out, for the most part, in 2011...until they didn't in 2012. Going back even further, remember names like Javier Vazquez, Carl Pavano and Kevin Brown? Well, barring a Gardner-for-starter trade, a Tanaka-less rotation would feature some combination of David Phelps, David Huff, Adam Warren, Vidal Nuno and Michael Pineda behind Sabathia, Nova and Kuroda (who they were lucky to get back for another year). It could be like that all over again.
I'm not saying Masahiro Tanaka is a can't-miss free agent. What I am saying is that he's worth the risk. Because, on paper, a Yankees team with Masahiro Tanaka is better than one without him. So, regardless of what it costs and who else is in the mix, the Yankees have to do everything in their power to make sure Tanaka's pitching in the Bronx in 2014 and beyond.
Monday, December 23, 2013
A Festivus For the Rest of Us
Happy Festivus! The pole has been put up, the feats of strength have been performed, the donations to the Human Fund have all been made. There's just one thing left to do. It's time for the airing of grievances. I've got a lot of problems with you people, and you're gonna hear about them!
Happy Festivus to All, and to All a Good Night!
- NBA, a lot of things about your league suck, but mainly, your Christmas games aren't special anymore. That's what happens when there's five of them. A third of the league is playing on Christmas. And that Clippers-Warriors game doesn't quite have that cachet that's going to have everyone drop what they're doing to watch it.
- NHL, same goes with you and the "Stadium Series." Way to take the luster off the Winter Classic. And, for God's sake, why is there an outdoor hockey game scheduled for Southern California? Wait, never mind, I'm sure it was 80 degrees and there were plenty of girls in bikinis watching when these guys were learning the game on the frozen ponds of Canada.
- By the way, your new divisions, especially the name "Metropolitan Division," and playoff format are stupid.
- NFL, if it snows in New York on Super Bowl Sunday (which it probably will), it's your own damn fault! Outdoors. In New York. In February. Did anybody ever actually think this was a good idea? It wasn't then, and it isn't now.
- FIFA, your seeding process for the World Cup sucks. You can't tell me that Belgium and Switzerland deserved to be seeded over the Netherlands and Italy. Or that it's fair to those two nations that they ended up in the groups they got stuck in.
- And everyone has known all along that you shouldn't've let Qatar buy the 2022 World Cup. Moving it out of the summer isn't quite going to work the way you think it will, either. The Olympics are in February, so you can't do then. And you can't really do October because then you're messing with the European season for basically three whole years (and not to mention going against NFL/college football and the baseball playoffs in the U.S.).
- MLB Players, stop with your ridiculous reactions when players appeal PED suspensions. They've got every right to appeal. It's in the CBA. If you were in that situation, you'd be entitled to do the same thing.
- MLB Owners, stop rewarding these same guys with ridiculous long-term deals. That's the real problem with the joint-drug program. There's no disincentive if you can serve a 50-game suspension, then go and sign the type of contracts that Melky Cabrera got last year, or Jhonny Peralta and Bartolo Colon got this year.
- Hall of Fame Voters, stop being the only ones who care about past performance-enhancing drug use. No one seemed to care then, and you have no idea who was doing what and who wasn't. Barry Bonds, Roger Clemens, Mark McGwire, et al., are all eligible for the Hall of Fame. You can't pick and choose whose numbers are valid and whose aren't, especially with the guys you only suspect of doing stuff.
- Yankees, stop signing free agent outfielders! You now have six outfielders on the roster, yet didn't want to trade Gardner for Brandon Phillips. Who plays second base. A position you need. Badly. How about you forget about 35-year-old outfielders and get something you really need? Like a starting pitcher and a couple relievers.
- Syracuse, you killed the Big East, and now you're complaining about your schedule in the ACC! Do me a favor and just shut up. What did you expect? You're the ones that wanted to be in a ridiculous 14-team conference. Suck it up and deal with it.
- ESPN, Tim Tebow hasn't played quarterback in the NFL in two years. We don't need the daily updates or the weekly speculation that whatever team's quarterback just got hurt will sign him. I get that Brett Favre's retired so you need someone new to obsess over, but that ship has sailed.
- MSG, when the Knicks and Rangers are both playing, sometimes people want to watch the Rangers. Move the Knicks over to MSG2 every once in a while!
- Lindsey Vonn, stop trying to ski on your torn ACL. Unless you don't want to go to Sochi. There's no benefit on trying to ski on that knee right now (especially since you keep making it worse), and NBC tops the list of those who'll be pretty unhappy if you miss the Olympics.
- Sochi Olympics, there's no need for an extra day. You have 98 events. How is it possible that you need 18 days for 98 events, but they only need 17 days for more than 300 events in the Summer Games? (I'm not counting those two days of soccer games before the Opening Ceremony, which are necessary.) I don't get it. Is this all just about having an extra night of figure skating in prime time?
Happy Festivus to All, and to All a Good Night!
Sunday, December 22, 2013
NFL Week 16 Picks
There's only two weeks left. Eight days until the NFL season is over. And that means the playoff races are getting awfully tight. Berths can be clinched all over the place this week, and we've even got a potential playoff preview in Kansas City, as well as a couple possible division-deciders and a Super Bowl XLV rematch in Green Bay. Oh yeah, and it's 70 degrees in New York and Philadelphia, a vast difference from the snow.
Dolphins (8-6) at Bills (5-9): Miami-This game is one of the trickiest ones all week. Miami has historically struggled in Buffalo in December, so a Bills win doesn't seem that far out of the question. And if that happens, New England wraps up yet another AFC East title. But the Dolphins are on a roll and know that they need this one to clinch that playoff berth that's theirs for the taking. Especially since Baltimore won last week. I think that's enough for the Dolphins to overcome their December-in-Buffalo aversion.
Vikings (4-9-1) at Bengals (9-5): Cincinnati-The Bengals are lucky that their final two games are at home. Because they're not a good road team. Take last week. They had a chance to move up to the No. 2 seed in the AFC after the Patriots' loss, then get completely smacked in Pittsburgh. The Ravens next week aren't a gimme, either, so the Bengals can't slip up against the Vikings. They're still the favorites to win the AFC North, though, and will clinch the division with a win and a Patriots win over Baltimore.
Colts (9-5) at Chiefs (11-3): Kansas City-We're likely to see this matchup again two weeks from now in a wild card game. Both teams are already in, and they both need some help to avoid that 4-5 matchup. Kansas City's chances of getting out of it look a little better. With that Denver loss last week, the Chiefs are back to being tied with the Broncos, so if they win out and the Broncos lose one of their last two, the Chiefs will actually get the No. 1 seed. First they've got to get by the Colts, though. I think they will. Both this week and two weeks from now.
Buccaneers (4-10) at Rams (6-8): St. Louis-St. Louis is the team nobody wants to play right now, especially after they beat the Saints last week. Fortunately for all the playoff contenders, they're playing the Bucs. This will be a very scary team next season. As for this season, they'll be going for .500 in their finale.
Browns (4-10) at Jets (6-8): Jets-A 61-yard field goal in the final minute of the Monday night game ended any delusions Jets fans had about their team actually making the playoffs. So, no, they won't be playing a home game in the Super Bowl (as if that was going to happen even if they got in). Now that there's absolutely nothing for them to play for, they may mail it in. But in the alternating win-loss formula of their season, this week is a win, perhaps Rex's last.
Cowboys (7-7) at Redskins (3-11): Dallas-After last week, Dallas doesn't deserve to be in the playoffs. How do you blow that lead? At home? And why are you throwing the ball when you're team that's UP in the second half? If they lose to Washington and the Eagles win, they won't have a chance to win the division in the finale for the third straight year. Next week will be meaningless. Fortunately, they're playing a Redskins team that has already shut down Robert Griffin III and is only playing for draft position. Although they would like nothing more than playing spoiler.
Saints (10-4) at Panthers (10-4): New Orleans-We're right back where we started when these two faced each other two weeks ago. The winner clinches a playoff spot, and if it's New Orleans, they also wrap up the NFC South and a first-round bye. Big difference between Week 17 being very important or totally meaningless. Carolina's been very good at home, and that defense makes them a very scary team come playoff time. But they were absolutely crushed in New Orleans just two weeks ago. That's why I've got to go with the Saints here.
Titans (5-9) at Jaguars (4-10): Tennessee-Believe it or not, Jacksonville can actually end up finishing the season in second place! That speaks more to the quality of the AFC South than it does about the Jaguars, but there's no denying Jacksonville's had an incredible turnaround since we all thought they might potentially go 0-16 at midseason. The Titans are one of the teams they've beaten. I'll give Tennessee the benefit of the doubt and say it doesn't happen again.
Broncos (11-3) at Texans (2-12): Denver-Losing last week might've actually been a good thing for the Broncos. Because they went from having absolutely nothing to play for in the last two games to needing wins in both. And that No. 1 seed is incredibly important. The Broncos won't go to the Super Bowl if they have to go on the road and play that extra game. The good news about those last two games is that they're against the Texans and Raiders.
Giants (5-9) at Lions (7-7): Detroit-No team had it rougher last week than the Lions. They began the week in first place. By the end if it, they were in third and no longer controlled their own destiny. However, they have the easiest remaining schedule of the three NFC North contenders. The Giants are going through the motions. If that. Last week was embarrassing.
Cardinals (9-5) at Seahawks (12-2): Seattle-It's almost not fair that the Seahawks' final two games are at home. In fact, their loss in San Francisco two weeks ago marks the last time Seattle will play a game outside of their own stadium or Giants Stadium this season. And how much of an advantage was it that they got a little Super Bowl tune-up last week? The Cardinals are hot and definitely making a push towards sneaking into the playoffs, but they've drawn the short straw this week with a trip to Seattle. The Seahawks will officially clinch that No. 1 seed that's been theirs for most of the season.
Steelers (6-8) at Packers (7-6-1): Green Bay-The second half of last week's game in Dallas made this game a lot more interesting. Suddenly the Packers' chances of winning the division are very real, and Matt Flynn is finally giving them someone to keep the seat warm for Aaron Rodgers, who could return for the potential do-or-die game next week in Chicago. The only way that game's do-or-die, though, is if the Packers beat Pittsburgh at Lambeau. After last week, I'm not banking against that.
Raiders (4-10) at Chargers (7-7): San Diego-San Diego has beaten both Denver and Kansas City this season and, as a result, the Chargers are still in contention for that second wild card spot. They'd be in better shape if they didn't also have a loss to the Raiders, but they have a chance to avenge that this week. With a win, they'll be 8-7 heading into next week's rematch with the Chiefs. If they lose, next week doesn't matter at all.
Patriots (10-4) at Ravens (8-6): New England-This was a perfectly fine Sunday night game, but they flexed it out. I'm somewhat surprised by that. Anyway, the whole AFC playoff picture will be a lot clearer after this one. If Baltimore wins out, they don't just clinch a playoff berth, they'll actually win the AFC North! I should probably know better than to bet against them, but I also know better than to bet against Tom Brady. And, as a result of last week, the Patriots haven't clinched anything yet. If they lose, they're in danger of dropping into wild card weekend. You also never see New England lose back-to-back games. That's why I'm going with the Patriots here.
Bears (8-6) at Eagles (8-6): Philadelphia-I'm not complaining too badly about that Sunday-night thing because this is the one they flexed in. Chicago and Philadelphia are both division leaders, and they're both playing the second-place team next week, so there's a very good chance that one's going to play consecutive Sunday night games. Anyway, with everything that's at stake, this game is huge. Both Marc Trestman and Chip Kelly were brought in because of playoff failures by the previous coach. Now they each have a chance to win a division title in their first season. The Eagles will know coming in if they can wrap up the NFC East, while the Bears have both the Packers and Lions on their heels, so they know they need a win regardless. In addition, the winner here has the inside track on the 3-seed, which means avoiding Carolina in the playoffs. I'm not saying either one should be thinking about that, but it adds to the intrigue nonetheless. As for a winner, I'll say the Eagles since the game's in Philadelphia, and that's really the only reason.
Falcons (4-10) at 49ers (10-4): San Francisco-San Francisco is technically the only team that can beat out Seattle for homefield, but everyone knows the 49ers will be on the road throughout the playoffs. That means the final Monday nighter of the season will also be the final game at Candlestick. A Seahawks win strangely helps the 49ers, too, because a win and a Cardinals loss wraps up a playoff berth. (Although it would be fun if they're playing a winner-take-all game for a wild card next week.) As for the whole Candlestick Farewell thing, do you really think they're going to close the stadium with a loss to the Falcons? I don't.
Last Week: 9-7
Season: 144-79-1
Dolphins (8-6) at Bills (5-9): Miami-This game is one of the trickiest ones all week. Miami has historically struggled in Buffalo in December, so a Bills win doesn't seem that far out of the question. And if that happens, New England wraps up yet another AFC East title. But the Dolphins are on a roll and know that they need this one to clinch that playoff berth that's theirs for the taking. Especially since Baltimore won last week. I think that's enough for the Dolphins to overcome their December-in-Buffalo aversion.
Vikings (4-9-1) at Bengals (9-5): Cincinnati-The Bengals are lucky that their final two games are at home. Because they're not a good road team. Take last week. They had a chance to move up to the No. 2 seed in the AFC after the Patriots' loss, then get completely smacked in Pittsburgh. The Ravens next week aren't a gimme, either, so the Bengals can't slip up against the Vikings. They're still the favorites to win the AFC North, though, and will clinch the division with a win and a Patriots win over Baltimore.
Colts (9-5) at Chiefs (11-3): Kansas City-We're likely to see this matchup again two weeks from now in a wild card game. Both teams are already in, and they both need some help to avoid that 4-5 matchup. Kansas City's chances of getting out of it look a little better. With that Denver loss last week, the Chiefs are back to being tied with the Broncos, so if they win out and the Broncos lose one of their last two, the Chiefs will actually get the No. 1 seed. First they've got to get by the Colts, though. I think they will. Both this week and two weeks from now.
Buccaneers (4-10) at Rams (6-8): St. Louis-St. Louis is the team nobody wants to play right now, especially after they beat the Saints last week. Fortunately for all the playoff contenders, they're playing the Bucs. This will be a very scary team next season. As for this season, they'll be going for .500 in their finale.
Browns (4-10) at Jets (6-8): Jets-A 61-yard field goal in the final minute of the Monday night game ended any delusions Jets fans had about their team actually making the playoffs. So, no, they won't be playing a home game in the Super Bowl (as if that was going to happen even if they got in). Now that there's absolutely nothing for them to play for, they may mail it in. But in the alternating win-loss formula of their season, this week is a win, perhaps Rex's last.
Cowboys (7-7) at Redskins (3-11): Dallas-After last week, Dallas doesn't deserve to be in the playoffs. How do you blow that lead? At home? And why are you throwing the ball when you're team that's UP in the second half? If they lose to Washington and the Eagles win, they won't have a chance to win the division in the finale for the third straight year. Next week will be meaningless. Fortunately, they're playing a Redskins team that has already shut down Robert Griffin III and is only playing for draft position. Although they would like nothing more than playing spoiler.
Saints (10-4) at Panthers (10-4): New Orleans-We're right back where we started when these two faced each other two weeks ago. The winner clinches a playoff spot, and if it's New Orleans, they also wrap up the NFC South and a first-round bye. Big difference between Week 17 being very important or totally meaningless. Carolina's been very good at home, and that defense makes them a very scary team come playoff time. But they were absolutely crushed in New Orleans just two weeks ago. That's why I've got to go with the Saints here.
Titans (5-9) at Jaguars (4-10): Tennessee-Believe it or not, Jacksonville can actually end up finishing the season in second place! That speaks more to the quality of the AFC South than it does about the Jaguars, but there's no denying Jacksonville's had an incredible turnaround since we all thought they might potentially go 0-16 at midseason. The Titans are one of the teams they've beaten. I'll give Tennessee the benefit of the doubt and say it doesn't happen again.
Broncos (11-3) at Texans (2-12): Denver-Losing last week might've actually been a good thing for the Broncos. Because they went from having absolutely nothing to play for in the last two games to needing wins in both. And that No. 1 seed is incredibly important. The Broncos won't go to the Super Bowl if they have to go on the road and play that extra game. The good news about those last two games is that they're against the Texans and Raiders.
Giants (5-9) at Lions (7-7): Detroit-No team had it rougher last week than the Lions. They began the week in first place. By the end if it, they were in third and no longer controlled their own destiny. However, they have the easiest remaining schedule of the three NFC North contenders. The Giants are going through the motions. If that. Last week was embarrassing.
Cardinals (9-5) at Seahawks (12-2): Seattle-It's almost not fair that the Seahawks' final two games are at home. In fact, their loss in San Francisco two weeks ago marks the last time Seattle will play a game outside of their own stadium or Giants Stadium this season. And how much of an advantage was it that they got a little Super Bowl tune-up last week? The Cardinals are hot and definitely making a push towards sneaking into the playoffs, but they've drawn the short straw this week with a trip to Seattle. The Seahawks will officially clinch that No. 1 seed that's been theirs for most of the season.
Steelers (6-8) at Packers (7-6-1): Green Bay-The second half of last week's game in Dallas made this game a lot more interesting. Suddenly the Packers' chances of winning the division are very real, and Matt Flynn is finally giving them someone to keep the seat warm for Aaron Rodgers, who could return for the potential do-or-die game next week in Chicago. The only way that game's do-or-die, though, is if the Packers beat Pittsburgh at Lambeau. After last week, I'm not banking against that.
Raiders (4-10) at Chargers (7-7): San Diego-San Diego has beaten both Denver and Kansas City this season and, as a result, the Chargers are still in contention for that second wild card spot. They'd be in better shape if they didn't also have a loss to the Raiders, but they have a chance to avenge that this week. With a win, they'll be 8-7 heading into next week's rematch with the Chiefs. If they lose, next week doesn't matter at all.
Patriots (10-4) at Ravens (8-6): New England-This was a perfectly fine Sunday night game, but they flexed it out. I'm somewhat surprised by that. Anyway, the whole AFC playoff picture will be a lot clearer after this one. If Baltimore wins out, they don't just clinch a playoff berth, they'll actually win the AFC North! I should probably know better than to bet against them, but I also know better than to bet against Tom Brady. And, as a result of last week, the Patriots haven't clinched anything yet. If they lose, they're in danger of dropping into wild card weekend. You also never see New England lose back-to-back games. That's why I'm going with the Patriots here.
Bears (8-6) at Eagles (8-6): Philadelphia-I'm not complaining too badly about that Sunday-night thing because this is the one they flexed in. Chicago and Philadelphia are both division leaders, and they're both playing the second-place team next week, so there's a very good chance that one's going to play consecutive Sunday night games. Anyway, with everything that's at stake, this game is huge. Both Marc Trestman and Chip Kelly were brought in because of playoff failures by the previous coach. Now they each have a chance to win a division title in their first season. The Eagles will know coming in if they can wrap up the NFC East, while the Bears have both the Packers and Lions on their heels, so they know they need a win regardless. In addition, the winner here has the inside track on the 3-seed, which means avoiding Carolina in the playoffs. I'm not saying either one should be thinking about that, but it adds to the intrigue nonetheless. As for a winner, I'll say the Eagles since the game's in Philadelphia, and that's really the only reason.
Falcons (4-10) at 49ers (10-4): San Francisco-San Francisco is technically the only team that can beat out Seattle for homefield, but everyone knows the 49ers will be on the road throughout the playoffs. That means the final Monday nighter of the season will also be the final game at Candlestick. A Seahawks win strangely helps the 49ers, too, because a win and a Cardinals loss wraps up a playoff berth. (Although it would be fun if they're playing a winner-take-all game for a wild card next week.) As for the whole Candlestick Farewell thing, do you really think they're going to close the stadium with a loss to the Falcons? I don't.
Last Week: 9-7
Season: 144-79-1
Friday, December 20, 2013
Lots of NCAA Championship Hosts
Earlier this year, the NCAA announced that it was changing the system by which it would award National Championships. Instead of doing it at all different times on a sport-by-sport basis, they moved to a system where they announced all the championships at once. A few exceptions obviously apply (the Final Four, the College World Series), but my early take on this new system is very positive.
For the most part, we now know where all NCAA Championships will be held until 2017-18. The only sports where they didn't announce anything were baseball and softball. That's because of the tournament format in those two sports. The higher-seeded teams host each of the first two rounds before the College World Series, which is always in Omaha (baseball) and Oklahoma City (softball). Higher-seeded teams get to host first-round games in a lot of other sports, too, so mostly what was announced were regional and championship locations.
One of the biggest changes came in women's basketball, where they took many of Big East Commissioner Val Ackerman's suggestions. She recommended moving away from the predetermined first- and second-round sites that have been used for the past several years and often resulted in lower-seeded teams hosting a higher-seeded opponent. It also led to a bunch of poorly-attended games at venues that didn't include a home team. That'll change next year. The top 16 seeds will host. That's the way it should be. But, teams will not be allowed to host regionals. They controversially moved back to that this year, and it was met with the appropriate criticism. Once they're down to 16, the women's game is balanced enough that they should be at a neutral site with berths in the Final Four at stake. Next year that'll be the case. Regionals won't be on campus, and if they are, the host school can't play there.
The one suggestion Ackerman made that they didn't adopt, at least not yet, is moving the dates of the Women's Final Four from the current Sunday-Tuesday back to the old Friday-Sunday. I'm sure they'll adopt this soon enough, though. A Friday-Sunday format makes much more sense. They also left open the possibility that all three divisions could have the Final Four in the same city over the same weekend, something that has been discussed for a while.
Men's basketball wasn't touched. The 2015 sites had already been announced, and the NCAA has absolutely no reason to alter its selection process for host sites in the men's basketball tournament. What they've been doing has worked, and it's the most lucrative championship the NCAA has. The next two Final Fours after this season's in Dallas will take place in Indianapolis and Houston.
Likewise, the new College Football Playoff championship game has its own selection process. The semifinals will rotate among six existing bowls: Rose & Sugar, then Orange & Cotton, then Fiesta & Peach, and the championship game will be bid on just like the Super Bowl and Final Four. We know the first three championship games will take place in Dallas (2015), Phoenix (2016) and Tampa (2017). Division I-AA football wasn't included in the site selection, either. That's because they've got a long-term agreement to have the championship game in Frisco, Texas. (In fact, Division II football will continue to be in Kansas City and Division III will still be in Salem, Va., every year).
Another bold move was the awarding of the Division I Outdoor Track & Field Championships beyond 2018, which now have a quasi-permanent home themselves. Every year from now until 2021, the Outdoor Track & Field Championships will be held at the University of Oregon's Hayward Field, meaning the event will be held in Eugene eight straight times. Hayward Field, by the way, is also hosting the 2014 World Junior Championships and 2016 U.S. Olympic Trials, as well as the 2015 U.S. Nationals. If you're a track fan in the U.S., Eugene, Oregon is the place to be.
Some of the other highlights include the 2016 NCAA Wrestling Championships at Madison Square Garden, the first NCAA championship event at MSG since 1950. (The men's basketball tournament returns to the Garden with the 2014 East Regional.) The 2017 Men's Frozen Four in Chicago for the first time. All three divisions in field hockey will be in Louisville in 2017, and both men's and women's lacrosse will be in Philadelphia in 2015 and 2016.
We'll see how this new system of awarding NCAA Championships years in advance plays out, but I don't see a downside to it. It gives the cities plenty of time for preparation, and it's good for coaches and athletes to know where they could potentially be going if they make the Tournament. And in sports where home games have always been part of the equation, they didn't mess with that formula. Which was the right decision. Because not only does it help attendance, but the top teams deserve to have that advantage in the early rounds of the NCAA Tournament. They've earned it.
Although, if you notice, they have a lot of neutral site finals. Even if there's a host school, it's not necessarily on campus. That's also a good move. Because when you're crowning a champion, you want the playing field to be as level as possible.
For the most part, we now know where all NCAA Championships will be held until 2017-18. The only sports where they didn't announce anything were baseball and softball. That's because of the tournament format in those two sports. The higher-seeded teams host each of the first two rounds before the College World Series, which is always in Omaha (baseball) and Oklahoma City (softball). Higher-seeded teams get to host first-round games in a lot of other sports, too, so mostly what was announced were regional and championship locations.
One of the biggest changes came in women's basketball, where they took many of Big East Commissioner Val Ackerman's suggestions. She recommended moving away from the predetermined first- and second-round sites that have been used for the past several years and often resulted in lower-seeded teams hosting a higher-seeded opponent. It also led to a bunch of poorly-attended games at venues that didn't include a home team. That'll change next year. The top 16 seeds will host. That's the way it should be. But, teams will not be allowed to host regionals. They controversially moved back to that this year, and it was met with the appropriate criticism. Once they're down to 16, the women's game is balanced enough that they should be at a neutral site with berths in the Final Four at stake. Next year that'll be the case. Regionals won't be on campus, and if they are, the host school can't play there.
The one suggestion Ackerman made that they didn't adopt, at least not yet, is moving the dates of the Women's Final Four from the current Sunday-Tuesday back to the old Friday-Sunday. I'm sure they'll adopt this soon enough, though. A Friday-Sunday format makes much more sense. They also left open the possibility that all three divisions could have the Final Four in the same city over the same weekend, something that has been discussed for a while.
Men's basketball wasn't touched. The 2015 sites had already been announced, and the NCAA has absolutely no reason to alter its selection process for host sites in the men's basketball tournament. What they've been doing has worked, and it's the most lucrative championship the NCAA has. The next two Final Fours after this season's in Dallas will take place in Indianapolis and Houston.
Likewise, the new College Football Playoff championship game has its own selection process. The semifinals will rotate among six existing bowls: Rose & Sugar, then Orange & Cotton, then Fiesta & Peach, and the championship game will be bid on just like the Super Bowl and Final Four. We know the first three championship games will take place in Dallas (2015), Phoenix (2016) and Tampa (2017). Division I-AA football wasn't included in the site selection, either. That's because they've got a long-term agreement to have the championship game in Frisco, Texas. (In fact, Division II football will continue to be in Kansas City and Division III will still be in Salem, Va., every year).
Another bold move was the awarding of the Division I Outdoor Track & Field Championships beyond 2018, which now have a quasi-permanent home themselves. Every year from now until 2021, the Outdoor Track & Field Championships will be held at the University of Oregon's Hayward Field, meaning the event will be held in Eugene eight straight times. Hayward Field, by the way, is also hosting the 2014 World Junior Championships and 2016 U.S. Olympic Trials, as well as the 2015 U.S. Nationals. If you're a track fan in the U.S., Eugene, Oregon is the place to be.
Some of the other highlights include the 2016 NCAA Wrestling Championships at Madison Square Garden, the first NCAA championship event at MSG since 1950. (The men's basketball tournament returns to the Garden with the 2014 East Regional.) The 2017 Men's Frozen Four in Chicago for the first time. All three divisions in field hockey will be in Louisville in 2017, and both men's and women's lacrosse will be in Philadelphia in 2015 and 2016.
We'll see how this new system of awarding NCAA Championships years in advance plays out, but I don't see a downside to it. It gives the cities plenty of time for preparation, and it's good for coaches and athletes to know where they could potentially be going if they make the Tournament. And in sports where home games have always been part of the equation, they didn't mess with that formula. Which was the right decision. Because not only does it help attendance, but the top teams deserve to have that advantage in the early rounds of the NCAA Tournament. They've earned it.
Although, if you notice, they have a lot of neutral site finals. Even if there's a host school, it's not necessarily on campus. That's also a good move. Because when you're crowning a champion, you want the playing field to be as level as possible.
Thursday, December 19, 2013
Sports Figures of the Year
In the past few days, we've had Barbara Walters' final "Most Fascinating People of the Year" special, as well as Peyton Manning's selection as Sports Illustrated Sportsman of the Year. That got me thinking about the year in sports and what sports figures truly had the biggest, most compelling, or most newsworthy stories of the year. And believe me, there were plenty to choose from. But I've compiled a list of the 13 individuals who I think stand out the most, for a number of reasons...
13. Diana Nyad, Marathon Swimmer: The only woman on my list, Nyad gets the nod over Andy Murray for my final spot. She made history by swimming unaided from Cuba to Florida in September. While not strictly a "sports" moment, what she did was certainly a monumental athletic achievement, and it was one that transcended sports. That's why I think she absolutely qualifies as one of the top "Sports Figures of the Year."
12. Oscar Pistorius, Paralympic Sprinter: In 2012, Pistorius was all over the news because he represented South Africa at both the Olympics and Paralympics. In 2013, he was all over the news for a totally different reason. Pistorius shot and killed his girlfriend on Valentine's Day and is still claiming "self-defense." (How he thinks anybody is stupid enough to believe that is a different question.) It completely changed the public perception of the "Blade Runner," as well as raising questions about the South African legal system. This is the O.J. trial for a new generation, and this story will continue to make headlines throughout the 2014 murder trial.
11. Lance Armstrong, Retired Cyclist: After all these years, and a scathing USADA report, Lance Armstrong finally admitted to years of blood doping and performance-enhancing drug use, including all seven of his Tour de France victories. For many, it was confirmation of what they long suspected. For others, his admission (on a made-for-TV special) wasn't nearly enough. I'm still not sure how I feel. I was among the supporters who was duped for so long and now feels like a fool. But I also agree with claims he made in last week's ESPN The Magazine that he was singled-out because people didn't like him. I also think that once some time passes, Lance Armstrong can be a very valuable tool in cleaning up a long-dirty sport that desperately needs some healing.
10. Tim McCarver, MLB Broadcaster: I start the Top 10 with a selection that might seem a little out-of-the-blue. But Tim McCarver's retirement was certainly a big story, if not the biggest, in sports media this year. "Who will replace him?" became a season-long question that still hasn't been answered. Love him or hate him, watching a baseball game without Tim McCarver will be very different. And all of the various tributes to McCarver during the season were very touching and heart-felt.
9. Mariano Rivera, Yankees Pitcher: Then there was the Mariano Rivera Farewell Tour. One of the classiest men ever to play the game went out in a very classy way, with nothing but respect and admiration from fans in every stop along the way. There were the Hollywood Mo-ments (the standing ovation and MVP award at the All*Star Game top the list), even if there wasn't a Hollywood ending (although Derek Jeter and Andy Pettitte removing him from his final game was perfect, and something I'll never forget). The last man to wear No. 42 deserved every minute of it, too.
8. BCS Commissioners: I grouped them all together because I didn't think it would be fair to single-out just one. The BCS may be in its final season, but the entire landscape of college sports has been changed because if it. Conference realignment (and the dissolution of the original Big East), massive TV contracts, potentially an entirely new business model. These are all a direct result of the BCS conferences. And we're probably in for more. Especially if the ACC, Big Ten, Big 12, Pac-12 and SEC get the additional autonomy within the NCAA that they're seeking.
7. Roger Goddell, NFL Commissioner: Of all the NFL-related stories this year, one man was at the center of them: the commissioner. From the concussion lawsuit to the New York Super Bowl to Beyoncé making the lights go out to every player-discipline case, Goddell's stamp is firmly all over the NFL, which has maintained its status as the king of American team sports. This position easily could've gone to Richie Incognito and/or Jonathan Martin, but even in that situation, who was at the forefront? That's right. Roger Goddell.
6. Vladimir Putin, Russian President: He's not a sports figure, so why is the President of Russia on this list? Well, it's because he had as much of an impact on the sports world as any athlete in 2013. Russia passed a controversial "anti-gay" law earlier this year. The law has plenty of critics, some of the most outspoken of which competed at the World Track & Field Championships in Moscow in August. More importantly, with the Sochi Olympics coming up in February, there are plenty of concerns about discrimination against athletes and fans who travel to Russia for the Games.
5. Alex Rodriguez, Yankees Third Baseman: The poster boy of MLB's war against PEDs, A-Rod was nailed the hardest when punishments were handed down in the Biogenesis case, but he was the only one to appeal. I'm not saying anything about my opinion on that suspension, but he was well within his rights to appeal it, which is why I think the reaction that he got from players and fans while playing through his appeal was completely ridiculous. We still don't know how the whole thing is going to play out, and the lawsuit against MLB seems a bit frivolous, but whatever the ultimate decision is will be significant in this landmark case.
4. Peyton Manning, Broncos Quarterback: Sports Illustrated had him at No. 1, put I only have Peyton at No. 4. I'm not saying he's undeserving of Sportsman of the Year honors, but I personally feel there are three other sports figures who had a bigger impact in 2013. As for Peyton, he's having one of his best years yet, one of potentially historic proportions. He started it by throwing an NFL-record seven TD passes on opening night, has led the Broncos to the best record in the AFC, will probably break the touchdown record, and is the likely MVP. All with the same class that has defined his entire career. As for the reports of Peyton Manning being done, they were greatly exaggerated.
3. Thomas Bach, IOC President: In September, the German Bach was elected to perhaps the most powerful position in international sports. The first Olympic gold medalist to become IOC President, he inherits a very healthy Olympic movement that's in great shape. He wants to make plenty of changes, though, most notably streamlining the bid process, as well as reviewing the process by which sports are added to/removed from the program. He also wants to start an Olympic TV network. Then there's the Olympics themselves. And Bach has had to deal with plenty of fallout regarding the new Russian law leading up to the Sochi Games, his first as President.
2. David Ortiz, Red Sox DH: While I never have been, never will be, and never can be a fan of David Ortiz, my respect for him grew tremendously in 2013. First, there was his speech at the Red Sox' first home game after the Boston Marathon tragedy, when he summed up the feelings of the entire city in five simple words: "This is our effing city!" Then he carried the team throughout the season and all the way through the playoffs. And in the World Series, when they trailed 2-1 and were losing Game 4, there was that dugout speech that rallied the team together and sparked the comeback. Oh yeah, and he was more locked-in during the World Series than I've ever seen from anyone before.
1. Jason Collins, NBA Forward: To me, the narrative-changing storyline in all of sports that came out in 2013 was a literal coming out. That of Jason Collins in a Sports Illustrated cover story in April. When Collins publicly announced that he's gay, he became the first active athlete in a men's team sport to do so. It was a complete game-changer. He received an incredible outpouring of support, and his announcement proved, if nothing else, that America was finally ready to accept an openly gay professional athlete. In the days, weeks and months following Collins' announcement, a number other gay athletes to come out. Somebody needed to be the first, and he made it OK for the rest of them to get that burden off their chests. It's no longer a stigma. Or something that needs to be hidden. Because sexuality has nothing to do with athletic ability. We can all thank Jason Collins for helping us realize that.
The great thing about lists like this is that they're completely subjective. These are my Top 13 Sports Figures of 2013. Yours might be different. That's the beauty of it. But in my eyes, there's no debate. In a year where gay rights were in the news for a number of reasons, Jason Collins stands out. Not just because he came out, but because of the courage it took for him to make the announcement, and how comfortable he was about it. I really admire that.
13. Diana Nyad, Marathon Swimmer: The only woman on my list, Nyad gets the nod over Andy Murray for my final spot. She made history by swimming unaided from Cuba to Florida in September. While not strictly a "sports" moment, what she did was certainly a monumental athletic achievement, and it was one that transcended sports. That's why I think she absolutely qualifies as one of the top "Sports Figures of the Year."
12. Oscar Pistorius, Paralympic Sprinter: In 2012, Pistorius was all over the news because he represented South Africa at both the Olympics and Paralympics. In 2013, he was all over the news for a totally different reason. Pistorius shot and killed his girlfriend on Valentine's Day and is still claiming "self-defense." (How he thinks anybody is stupid enough to believe that is a different question.) It completely changed the public perception of the "Blade Runner," as well as raising questions about the South African legal system. This is the O.J. trial for a new generation, and this story will continue to make headlines throughout the 2014 murder trial.
11. Lance Armstrong, Retired Cyclist: After all these years, and a scathing USADA report, Lance Armstrong finally admitted to years of blood doping and performance-enhancing drug use, including all seven of his Tour de France victories. For many, it was confirmation of what they long suspected. For others, his admission (on a made-for-TV special) wasn't nearly enough. I'm still not sure how I feel. I was among the supporters who was duped for so long and now feels like a fool. But I also agree with claims he made in last week's ESPN The Magazine that he was singled-out because people didn't like him. I also think that once some time passes, Lance Armstrong can be a very valuable tool in cleaning up a long-dirty sport that desperately needs some healing.
10. Tim McCarver, MLB Broadcaster: I start the Top 10 with a selection that might seem a little out-of-the-blue. But Tim McCarver's retirement was certainly a big story, if not the biggest, in sports media this year. "Who will replace him?" became a season-long question that still hasn't been answered. Love him or hate him, watching a baseball game without Tim McCarver will be very different. And all of the various tributes to McCarver during the season were very touching and heart-felt.
9. Mariano Rivera, Yankees Pitcher: Then there was the Mariano Rivera Farewell Tour. One of the classiest men ever to play the game went out in a very classy way, with nothing but respect and admiration from fans in every stop along the way. There were the Hollywood Mo-ments (the standing ovation and MVP award at the All*Star Game top the list), even if there wasn't a Hollywood ending (although Derek Jeter and Andy Pettitte removing him from his final game was perfect, and something I'll never forget). The last man to wear No. 42 deserved every minute of it, too.
8. BCS Commissioners: I grouped them all together because I didn't think it would be fair to single-out just one. The BCS may be in its final season, but the entire landscape of college sports has been changed because if it. Conference realignment (and the dissolution of the original Big East), massive TV contracts, potentially an entirely new business model. These are all a direct result of the BCS conferences. And we're probably in for more. Especially if the ACC, Big Ten, Big 12, Pac-12 and SEC get the additional autonomy within the NCAA that they're seeking.
7. Roger Goddell, NFL Commissioner: Of all the NFL-related stories this year, one man was at the center of them: the commissioner. From the concussion lawsuit to the New York Super Bowl to Beyoncé making the lights go out to every player-discipline case, Goddell's stamp is firmly all over the NFL, which has maintained its status as the king of American team sports. This position easily could've gone to Richie Incognito and/or Jonathan Martin, but even in that situation, who was at the forefront? That's right. Roger Goddell.
6. Vladimir Putin, Russian President: He's not a sports figure, so why is the President of Russia on this list? Well, it's because he had as much of an impact on the sports world as any athlete in 2013. Russia passed a controversial "anti-gay" law earlier this year. The law has plenty of critics, some of the most outspoken of which competed at the World Track & Field Championships in Moscow in August. More importantly, with the Sochi Olympics coming up in February, there are plenty of concerns about discrimination against athletes and fans who travel to Russia for the Games.
5. Alex Rodriguez, Yankees Third Baseman: The poster boy of MLB's war against PEDs, A-Rod was nailed the hardest when punishments were handed down in the Biogenesis case, but he was the only one to appeal. I'm not saying anything about my opinion on that suspension, but he was well within his rights to appeal it, which is why I think the reaction that he got from players and fans while playing through his appeal was completely ridiculous. We still don't know how the whole thing is going to play out, and the lawsuit against MLB seems a bit frivolous, but whatever the ultimate decision is will be significant in this landmark case.
4. Peyton Manning, Broncos Quarterback: Sports Illustrated had him at No. 1, put I only have Peyton at No. 4. I'm not saying he's undeserving of Sportsman of the Year honors, but I personally feel there are three other sports figures who had a bigger impact in 2013. As for Peyton, he's having one of his best years yet, one of potentially historic proportions. He started it by throwing an NFL-record seven TD passes on opening night, has led the Broncos to the best record in the AFC, will probably break the touchdown record, and is the likely MVP. All with the same class that has defined his entire career. As for the reports of Peyton Manning being done, they were greatly exaggerated.
3. Thomas Bach, IOC President: In September, the German Bach was elected to perhaps the most powerful position in international sports. The first Olympic gold medalist to become IOC President, he inherits a very healthy Olympic movement that's in great shape. He wants to make plenty of changes, though, most notably streamlining the bid process, as well as reviewing the process by which sports are added to/removed from the program. He also wants to start an Olympic TV network. Then there's the Olympics themselves. And Bach has had to deal with plenty of fallout regarding the new Russian law leading up to the Sochi Games, his first as President.
2. David Ortiz, Red Sox DH: While I never have been, never will be, and never can be a fan of David Ortiz, my respect for him grew tremendously in 2013. First, there was his speech at the Red Sox' first home game after the Boston Marathon tragedy, when he summed up the feelings of the entire city in five simple words: "This is our effing city!" Then he carried the team throughout the season and all the way through the playoffs. And in the World Series, when they trailed 2-1 and were losing Game 4, there was that dugout speech that rallied the team together and sparked the comeback. Oh yeah, and he was more locked-in during the World Series than I've ever seen from anyone before.
1. Jason Collins, NBA Forward: To me, the narrative-changing storyline in all of sports that came out in 2013 was a literal coming out. That of Jason Collins in a Sports Illustrated cover story in April. When Collins publicly announced that he's gay, he became the first active athlete in a men's team sport to do so. It was a complete game-changer. He received an incredible outpouring of support, and his announcement proved, if nothing else, that America was finally ready to accept an openly gay professional athlete. In the days, weeks and months following Collins' announcement, a number other gay athletes to come out. Somebody needed to be the first, and he made it OK for the rest of them to get that burden off their chests. It's no longer a stigma. Or something that needs to be hidden. Because sexuality has nothing to do with athletic ability. We can all thank Jason Collins for helping us realize that.
The great thing about lists like this is that they're completely subjective. These are my Top 13 Sports Figures of 2013. Yours might be different. That's the beauty of it. But in my eyes, there's no debate. In a year where gay rights were in the news for a number of reasons, Jason Collins stands out. Not just because he came out, but because of the courage it took for him to make the announcement, and how comfortable he was about it. I really admire that.
Tuesday, December 17, 2013
Crazy Week, Whole Playoff Picture Screwed Up
If I've learned anything about the NFL this season, it's that you can't predict anything in the NFL. There were a number of games this past weekend that had playoff implications, and they all yielded results that impacted the entire race. So, basically, everybody that could've clinched something lost, a number of teams that needed to win did, and the Week 16 and 17 games will be crazy. Especially with a number of these playoff contenders playing each other.
Let's start in the AFC, where Denver's loss to the Chargers on Thursday night is what got this all started. That opened things up for the Patriots, who would've moved into the No. 1 position had they beaten the Dolphins. Except New England lost, meaning they had to wait around and see if Cincinnati would knock them out of the second bye. Then the Bengals go get absolutely shellacked on Sunday night in Pittsburgh, keeping the top three spots exactly the same. That wasn't all, either. The Dolphin win put them into the second wild card spot over the Ravens, who then got it back with their Monday night win in Detroit, which was only clinched on a 61-yard field goal in the final minute.
The big winners here? Well, obviously, Baltimore. The AFC North wasn't even considered a possibility entering play this week. Now the Ravens are in a position that if they win their last two games, they'll win a division that everyone has assumed Cincinnati would win for weeks now. Of course, winning their last two is easier said than done (the Ravens have the Patriots and Bengals left), but I wouldn't sleep on Baltimore, either. They won the Super Bowl last year for a reason.
The AFC's other big winner was Kansas City. They crushed Oakland as expected, locking up their playoff berth. But the AFC West is suddenly back in play. Denver still has the upper hand by virtue of their sweeping the season series with the Chiefs, but the Chiefs still have hope of hosting a playoff game at Arrowhead. Two wins and Bronco loss is all it takes. Chances are we'll still have a Kansas City-Indianapolis wild card game. It doesn't seem so guaranteed anymore, though.
Moving over to the NFC, the only thing that seems certain is that Seattle will be the No. 1 seed (and very tough to beat). The Seahawks just need a win or a 49er loss to wrap up home field. Other than that, though, we've got really no idea how the NFC is going to play out. That's thanks to Dallas, Detroit and New Orleans losses in Week 15.
We'll start in the South, the division that will give us the NFC's No. 2 seed. It's looked like a virtual certainty for much of the season that that would be New Orleans. Especially after the Saints beat Carolina handily in Week 14. So what happens in Week 15? The Panthers win and the Saints, inexplicably, get smacked in St. Louis. So, going into the rematch on Sunday, we're right back where we started. The winner will boast first-place in the NFC South and be in the driver's seat for the No. 2 seed (in fact, the Saints would clinch that spot with a win), but that doesn't seem too guaranteed. Carolina is extremely tough at home, and New Orleans has struggled on the road.
Speaking of the Panthers, it looks like they're going to be in the playoffs no matter what, with that other wild card probably coming out of the West. The 49ers are hot, the defending NFC champions, and playing like a playoff team. I'd still be surprised if they're not the No. 6 seed, but that Week 17 matchup with Arizona has suddenly become a lot more significant. The 49ers can't slip up on Monday night against Falcons. Otherwise, that becomes a winner-take-all showdown for the NFC's second wild card spot and a trip to Dallas/Philadelphia in the playoffs. And as for the Cardinals, wait 'til next year. They're going to be really good next season. They might even end up guest starring in the 2013 playoffs.
I saved the "best" for last. Nobody wants to win the NFC East or the NFC North. Dallas, Dallas, Dallas. Where do I start with the Cowboys? That was some of the worst game management I've ever seen on Sunday. How do you blow a 23-point halftime lead? More importantly, why are you throwing the ball when you have a 23-point halftime lead and a terrible defense? Frankly, the Cowboys deserved to lose that game. And as a result, the Week 17 showdown that most people thought would decide the division could end up being completely meaningless. If the Eagles beat the Bears and Dallas loses to Washington on Sunday, Philadelphia clinches the division. And even if Dallas does get into the playoffs, there's no chance they get beyond that first game. Especially if it's against Carolina.
The craziest division of them all, though, is the NFC North. We've got a three-way race between the Lions, Bears and Packers, all of whom seem to be trying not to get in. Detroit entered Week 15 in first place. When Week 15 ended, the Lions were in third. And no longer in control of their own destiny. The Bears, meanwhile, are just as confusing as the Cowboys. Chicago looks terrible one week, then looks like world-beaters the next. But now they've got Jay Cutler back, so the Bears might be in prime position to make a run. Except their final two games are against the Eagles and the Packers. Ah yes, the Packers. Tony Dungy has theorized that they're going to be the team that wins the NFC North, and that tie takes them out of all potential tiebreakers. It would be crazy if they get Aaron Rodgers back for the final two games and end up winning the division.
There are a few key games that are going to have alot of bearing on the playoff race over the next two weeks. On Sunday, we've got Patriots-Ravens, Saints-Panthers and Bears-Eagles, as well as Seahawks-Cardinals. Then, of course, Week 17 features the now-traditional slate of division matchups, none more important than Chicago-Green Bay, San Francisco-Arizona, Baltimore-Cincinnati and Dallas-Philadelphia. Who wins these games and ends up in the playoffs might not be decided by who's playing the best football, either. It might be decided by who ends up playing worst. Because if this week is any indication, there are some teams that desperately want to be in the playoffs, and others that don't deserve to be there. We'll find out over the next two weeks which is which.
Let's start in the AFC, where Denver's loss to the Chargers on Thursday night is what got this all started. That opened things up for the Patriots, who would've moved into the No. 1 position had they beaten the Dolphins. Except New England lost, meaning they had to wait around and see if Cincinnati would knock them out of the second bye. Then the Bengals go get absolutely shellacked on Sunday night in Pittsburgh, keeping the top three spots exactly the same. That wasn't all, either. The Dolphin win put them into the second wild card spot over the Ravens, who then got it back with their Monday night win in Detroit, which was only clinched on a 61-yard field goal in the final minute.
The big winners here? Well, obviously, Baltimore. The AFC North wasn't even considered a possibility entering play this week. Now the Ravens are in a position that if they win their last two games, they'll win a division that everyone has assumed Cincinnati would win for weeks now. Of course, winning their last two is easier said than done (the Ravens have the Patriots and Bengals left), but I wouldn't sleep on Baltimore, either. They won the Super Bowl last year for a reason.
The AFC's other big winner was Kansas City. They crushed Oakland as expected, locking up their playoff berth. But the AFC West is suddenly back in play. Denver still has the upper hand by virtue of their sweeping the season series with the Chiefs, but the Chiefs still have hope of hosting a playoff game at Arrowhead. Two wins and Bronco loss is all it takes. Chances are we'll still have a Kansas City-Indianapolis wild card game. It doesn't seem so guaranteed anymore, though.
Moving over to the NFC, the only thing that seems certain is that Seattle will be the No. 1 seed (and very tough to beat). The Seahawks just need a win or a 49er loss to wrap up home field. Other than that, though, we've got really no idea how the NFC is going to play out. That's thanks to Dallas, Detroit and New Orleans losses in Week 15.
We'll start in the South, the division that will give us the NFC's No. 2 seed. It's looked like a virtual certainty for much of the season that that would be New Orleans. Especially after the Saints beat Carolina handily in Week 14. So what happens in Week 15? The Panthers win and the Saints, inexplicably, get smacked in St. Louis. So, going into the rematch on Sunday, we're right back where we started. The winner will boast first-place in the NFC South and be in the driver's seat for the No. 2 seed (in fact, the Saints would clinch that spot with a win), but that doesn't seem too guaranteed. Carolina is extremely tough at home, and New Orleans has struggled on the road.
Speaking of the Panthers, it looks like they're going to be in the playoffs no matter what, with that other wild card probably coming out of the West. The 49ers are hot, the defending NFC champions, and playing like a playoff team. I'd still be surprised if they're not the No. 6 seed, but that Week 17 matchup with Arizona has suddenly become a lot more significant. The 49ers can't slip up on Monday night against Falcons. Otherwise, that becomes a winner-take-all showdown for the NFC's second wild card spot and a trip to Dallas/Philadelphia in the playoffs. And as for the Cardinals, wait 'til next year. They're going to be really good next season. They might even end up guest starring in the 2013 playoffs.
I saved the "best" for last. Nobody wants to win the NFC East or the NFC North. Dallas, Dallas, Dallas. Where do I start with the Cowboys? That was some of the worst game management I've ever seen on Sunday. How do you blow a 23-point halftime lead? More importantly, why are you throwing the ball when you have a 23-point halftime lead and a terrible defense? Frankly, the Cowboys deserved to lose that game. And as a result, the Week 17 showdown that most people thought would decide the division could end up being completely meaningless. If the Eagles beat the Bears and Dallas loses to Washington on Sunday, Philadelphia clinches the division. And even if Dallas does get into the playoffs, there's no chance they get beyond that first game. Especially if it's against Carolina.
The craziest division of them all, though, is the NFC North. We've got a three-way race between the Lions, Bears and Packers, all of whom seem to be trying not to get in. Detroit entered Week 15 in first place. When Week 15 ended, the Lions were in third. And no longer in control of their own destiny. The Bears, meanwhile, are just as confusing as the Cowboys. Chicago looks terrible one week, then looks like world-beaters the next. But now they've got Jay Cutler back, so the Bears might be in prime position to make a run. Except their final two games are against the Eagles and the Packers. Ah yes, the Packers. Tony Dungy has theorized that they're going to be the team that wins the NFC North, and that tie takes them out of all potential tiebreakers. It would be crazy if they get Aaron Rodgers back for the final two games and end up winning the division.
There are a few key games that are going to have alot of bearing on the playoff race over the next two weeks. On Sunday, we've got Patriots-Ravens, Saints-Panthers and Bears-Eagles, as well as Seahawks-Cardinals. Then, of course, Week 17 features the now-traditional slate of division matchups, none more important than Chicago-Green Bay, San Francisco-Arizona, Baltimore-Cincinnati and Dallas-Philadelphia. Who wins these games and ends up in the playoffs might not be decided by who's playing the best football, either. It might be decided by who ends up playing worst. Because if this week is any indication, there are some teams that desperately want to be in the playoffs, and others that don't deserve to be there. We'll find out over the next two weeks which is which.
Saturday, December 14, 2013
Week 15 NFL Picks
It looks like the weather is going to wreak havoc on the NFL again this week. Fortunately, the Patriots-Dolphins game is in Miami, but the Seahawks are going to get a preview of what the Super Bowl might be like when they visit the Giants at the Meadowlands. We've also got Cleveland and Pittsburgh at home. But that crucial Ravens-Lions game on Monday night won't be affected because of Ford Field's roof. Last week, the snow actually led to a lot of high-scoring contests. I'm curious to see what it'll do this time.
Redskins (3-10) at Falcons (3-10): Atlanta-Last place in the NFC is at stake between two division winners from last season. The Redskins have shut RGIII down for the season, which I think is a good move (they're not going anywhere and he's been hurt all year, why risk it any further?), and Kirk Cousins will get the start. Both teams are a mess, but Atlanta is in slightly better shape. It really doesn't matter, but since the Falcons are less bad, I'm going with them.
Bears (7-6) at Browns (4-9): Chicago-I'm still incredibly confused about Chicago. This much I know, though, the Good Bears showed up Monday night against the Cowboys, keeping their playoff hopes alive in the process. Suddenly, the NFC North is once again very winnable. But they can't fall back into their habit of losing games that they should win. Matchups against the Browns fall into that category.
Texans (2-11) at Colts (8-5): Indianapolis-Coming into the season, we all thought this game might decide the winner of the AFC South. Well, the season has played out a little differently. Indy has already clinched the division and knows it'll probably host Kansas City in a wild card game, while Houston is playing out the string in a lost season, trying desperately to end an 11-game losing streak. The Texans are in the pole position for the No. 1 pick, and they've turned to Wade Phillips for the final three games after finally parting ways with Gary Kubiak. Phillips won't do much to improve his chances of getting the gig full-time this week.
Patriots (10-3) at Dolphins (7-6): New England-Denver's loss on Thursday night certainly changed things in the AFC. Suddenly, New England can take over the No. 1 seed with a win in Miami. That would also wrap up yet another division title for Bradicheck. However, a loss and a Bengals win drops the Patriots to the No. 3 seed. Very interesting possibilites indeed. Made even more interesting by the fact that the Dolphins have playoff chances themselves. This won't be your typical Patriots division game massacre. Miami usually plays them tough regardless, and I fully expect the Dolphins, who have a ton to play for themselves, to give New England quite a challenge. We'll probably see the usual result, though, and that's a Patriots win.
Eagles (8-5) at Vikings (3-9-1): Philadelphia-Thanks to their five-game winning streak, as well as the Cowboys' loss in Chicago on Monday night, the Eagles have a one-game lead in the NFC East. They need to keep it up, too, because they have to go into that Week 17 showdown with the Cowboys either ahead or tied if they have any hope of winning the division. They also know that Dallas has a much tougher game this week. The Eagles know they can't afford NOT to take care of business at the Metrodome.
Seahawks (11-2) at Giants (5-8): Seattle-Seattle missed its chance to wrap up a bye last week, but that's really just a mere formality at this point. In fact, a win and a Saints loss wraps up home field for the Seahawks. Considering how unbeatable they are at home, I wouldn't be surprised if the Seahawks are treating this game as a dress rehearsal for when they return (they hope) to the Meadowlands in February.
49ers (9-4) at Buccaneers (4-9): San Francisco-The Niners needed a win last week, and they got one. And after that big win over Seattle, San Francisco moved right back into playoff position. They know they're not going to win the division, which means they'll have to go on the road in the playoffs, which makes this a good game for them. The 49ers are the better team and they should win, but Tampa Bay's not a pushover and they have to travel cross-country for this game. They also end the season in Arizona, with a playoff berth potentially at stake. For that game to matter, San Francisco needs to win a winnable game against Tampa Bay.
Bills (4-9) at Jaguars (4-9): Jacksonville-This week's AFC installment of "The Bad Teams Have to Play Somebody, too." Coming into the season (even a few weeks ago), I had this tabbed as an easy Buffalo win. But Jacksovnille, amazingly, is the better team right now. They've won four out of five. Granted, it hasn't been against the cream of the crop, but it's still four out of five. Make it five out of six.
Chiefs (10-3) at Raiders (4-9): Kansas City-The Chiefs can clinch their playoff spot this week, and the AFC West is even suddenly back in play thanks to the Chargers. We've all known for weeks that Kansas City was going to make the playoffs, and the Chiefs have bounced back nicely after hitting that little snag. They're only 1-3 against the division, but that 1 was against the Raiders, and there's no reason to belive they won't beat their archrivals again.
Jets (6-7) at Panthers (9-4): Carolina-The Jets won last week and think they're playoff contenders again. They're still not. The Panthers, meanwhile, finally had their winning streak snapped with that humbling defeat in New Orleans on Sunday night. In the end, that's going to be good for Carolina in the long run. Now they know what they'll have to do to win in January. Becuase, unlike the Jets, the Panthers actually are going to make the playoffs.
Packers (6-6-1) at Cowboys (7-6): Dallas-Last week at the end of Sunday Night Football, Tony Dungy was trying to make the argument that the Packers aren't just going to make the playoffs, they're going to win the NFC North. His reasoning was that their tie takes them out of all the tiebreakers. That's true, but he forgot to consider a couple things: Green Bay's remaining schedule is very tough, and Aaron Rodgers is still out. If the Packers are going to make a run, they need him healthy. And he's not playing again this week against a Dallas team that has shown an incredible ability to bounce back this season. Considering how badly they got smacked on Monday night, I'm expecting Dallas to pull out a good one this week.
Cardinals (8-5) at Titans (5-8): Arizona-Here's where we get to start finding some stuff out about the Arizona Cardinals. Are they really playoff contenders? Their record says they are. But they also need to win games, especially road games, as favorites. This week's contest against the Titans in Nashville is one of those. I'm buying what Bruce Arians is selling, but I might be jumping off the Cardinals bandwagon if they can't figure out a way to win this one.
Saints (10-3) at Rams (5-8): New Orleans-St. Louis is the team that nobody good wants to play. The Saints, though, can wrap up their playoff spot this week, and they need to keep playing well if they want to hold off Carolina. If they play the way they did last week against the Panthers and not the week before against Seattle, New Orleans could be a Super Bowl team. The Rams will keep it close, but the Saints will win.
Bengals (9-4) at Steelers (5-8): Cincinnati-Cincinnati is inching closer to an AFC North title, and they can actually wrap it up this week with a win and a Ravens loss. They can even still get a bye if everything falls their way. The Bengals are THAT good, and very few people know about them. Well, they finally get a Sunday night audience against the rival Steelers to show everyone. Of course, Pittsburgh would love to play the role of spoiler, which is really all they've got left this season. Not gonna happen, though.
Ravens (7-6) at Lions (7-6): Baltimore-The game with the biggest playoff implications this week might be the one on Monday night. Baltimore currently has the lead for that second AFC wild card, but their remaining schedule is brutal (division-leading Detroit, division-leading New England, division-leading Cincinnati). I'm not entirely sure Baltimore comes out of that gauntlet unscathed. The Lions, meanwhile, are in a big-time fight for a division title themselves. They'll know coming in what their situation will be, and Detroit could even end up in third place at the end of this week's games. So, yeah, Monday night's important. As for the winner, I just have this feeling it'll be Baltimore.
This Week: 0-1
Last Week: 13-3
Season: 135-73-1
Redskins (3-10) at Falcons (3-10): Atlanta-Last place in the NFC is at stake between two division winners from last season. The Redskins have shut RGIII down for the season, which I think is a good move (they're not going anywhere and he's been hurt all year, why risk it any further?), and Kirk Cousins will get the start. Both teams are a mess, but Atlanta is in slightly better shape. It really doesn't matter, but since the Falcons are less bad, I'm going with them.
Bears (7-6) at Browns (4-9): Chicago-I'm still incredibly confused about Chicago. This much I know, though, the Good Bears showed up Monday night against the Cowboys, keeping their playoff hopes alive in the process. Suddenly, the NFC North is once again very winnable. But they can't fall back into their habit of losing games that they should win. Matchups against the Browns fall into that category.
Texans (2-11) at Colts (8-5): Indianapolis-Coming into the season, we all thought this game might decide the winner of the AFC South. Well, the season has played out a little differently. Indy has already clinched the division and knows it'll probably host Kansas City in a wild card game, while Houston is playing out the string in a lost season, trying desperately to end an 11-game losing streak. The Texans are in the pole position for the No. 1 pick, and they've turned to Wade Phillips for the final three games after finally parting ways with Gary Kubiak. Phillips won't do much to improve his chances of getting the gig full-time this week.
Patriots (10-3) at Dolphins (7-6): New England-Denver's loss on Thursday night certainly changed things in the AFC. Suddenly, New England can take over the No. 1 seed with a win in Miami. That would also wrap up yet another division title for Bradicheck. However, a loss and a Bengals win drops the Patriots to the No. 3 seed. Very interesting possibilites indeed. Made even more interesting by the fact that the Dolphins have playoff chances themselves. This won't be your typical Patriots division game massacre. Miami usually plays them tough regardless, and I fully expect the Dolphins, who have a ton to play for themselves, to give New England quite a challenge. We'll probably see the usual result, though, and that's a Patriots win.
Eagles (8-5) at Vikings (3-9-1): Philadelphia-Thanks to their five-game winning streak, as well as the Cowboys' loss in Chicago on Monday night, the Eagles have a one-game lead in the NFC East. They need to keep it up, too, because they have to go into that Week 17 showdown with the Cowboys either ahead or tied if they have any hope of winning the division. They also know that Dallas has a much tougher game this week. The Eagles know they can't afford NOT to take care of business at the Metrodome.
Seahawks (11-2) at Giants (5-8): Seattle-Seattle missed its chance to wrap up a bye last week, but that's really just a mere formality at this point. In fact, a win and a Saints loss wraps up home field for the Seahawks. Considering how unbeatable they are at home, I wouldn't be surprised if the Seahawks are treating this game as a dress rehearsal for when they return (they hope) to the Meadowlands in February.
49ers (9-4) at Buccaneers (4-9): San Francisco-The Niners needed a win last week, and they got one. And after that big win over Seattle, San Francisco moved right back into playoff position. They know they're not going to win the division, which means they'll have to go on the road in the playoffs, which makes this a good game for them. The 49ers are the better team and they should win, but Tampa Bay's not a pushover and they have to travel cross-country for this game. They also end the season in Arizona, with a playoff berth potentially at stake. For that game to matter, San Francisco needs to win a winnable game against Tampa Bay.
Bills (4-9) at Jaguars (4-9): Jacksonville-This week's AFC installment of "The Bad Teams Have to Play Somebody, too." Coming into the season (even a few weeks ago), I had this tabbed as an easy Buffalo win. But Jacksovnille, amazingly, is the better team right now. They've won four out of five. Granted, it hasn't been against the cream of the crop, but it's still four out of five. Make it five out of six.
Chiefs (10-3) at Raiders (4-9): Kansas City-The Chiefs can clinch their playoff spot this week, and the AFC West is even suddenly back in play thanks to the Chargers. We've all known for weeks that Kansas City was going to make the playoffs, and the Chiefs have bounced back nicely after hitting that little snag. They're only 1-3 against the division, but that 1 was against the Raiders, and there's no reason to belive they won't beat their archrivals again.
Jets (6-7) at Panthers (9-4): Carolina-The Jets won last week and think they're playoff contenders again. They're still not. The Panthers, meanwhile, finally had their winning streak snapped with that humbling defeat in New Orleans on Sunday night. In the end, that's going to be good for Carolina in the long run. Now they know what they'll have to do to win in January. Becuase, unlike the Jets, the Panthers actually are going to make the playoffs.
Packers (6-6-1) at Cowboys (7-6): Dallas-Last week at the end of Sunday Night Football, Tony Dungy was trying to make the argument that the Packers aren't just going to make the playoffs, they're going to win the NFC North. His reasoning was that their tie takes them out of all the tiebreakers. That's true, but he forgot to consider a couple things: Green Bay's remaining schedule is very tough, and Aaron Rodgers is still out. If the Packers are going to make a run, they need him healthy. And he's not playing again this week against a Dallas team that has shown an incredible ability to bounce back this season. Considering how badly they got smacked on Monday night, I'm expecting Dallas to pull out a good one this week.
Cardinals (8-5) at Titans (5-8): Arizona-Here's where we get to start finding some stuff out about the Arizona Cardinals. Are they really playoff contenders? Their record says they are. But they also need to win games, especially road games, as favorites. This week's contest against the Titans in Nashville is one of those. I'm buying what Bruce Arians is selling, but I might be jumping off the Cardinals bandwagon if they can't figure out a way to win this one.
Saints (10-3) at Rams (5-8): New Orleans-St. Louis is the team that nobody good wants to play. The Saints, though, can wrap up their playoff spot this week, and they need to keep playing well if they want to hold off Carolina. If they play the way they did last week against the Panthers and not the week before against Seattle, New Orleans could be a Super Bowl team. The Rams will keep it close, but the Saints will win.
Bengals (9-4) at Steelers (5-8): Cincinnati-Cincinnati is inching closer to an AFC North title, and they can actually wrap it up this week with a win and a Ravens loss. They can even still get a bye if everything falls their way. The Bengals are THAT good, and very few people know about them. Well, they finally get a Sunday night audience against the rival Steelers to show everyone. Of course, Pittsburgh would love to play the role of spoiler, which is really all they've got left this season. Not gonna happen, though.
Ravens (7-6) at Lions (7-6): Baltimore-The game with the biggest playoff implications this week might be the one on Monday night. Baltimore currently has the lead for that second AFC wild card, but their remaining schedule is brutal (division-leading Detroit, division-leading New England, division-leading Cincinnati). I'm not entirely sure Baltimore comes out of that gauntlet unscathed. The Lions, meanwhile, are in a big-time fight for a division title themselves. They'll know coming in what their situation will be, and Detroit could even end up in third place at the end of this week's games. So, yeah, Monday night's important. As for the winner, I just have this feeling it'll be Baltimore.
This Week: 0-1
Last Week: 13-3
Season: 135-73-1
Wednesday, December 11, 2013
Another Unnecessary Overreaction
Major League Baseball announced today that they're going to implement a rules change banning home plate collisions, potentially as early as next season. There's been talk about this for a while, but the powers that be were finally able to get their way and push it across. If the players' union approves it, the rules change goes into effect next year. Otherwise, it'll be implemented in 2015.
All of the delays in this rule being put into place got me optimistic. I was hoping they wouldn't actually do it. Because I think it's a mistake. It's an unnecessary overreaction to some freak injuries, most notably Buster Posey's season-ending broken leg in 2011. But mostly, you're changing the way the game is played. That's why I think it's the wrong move.
The whole point of baseball is trying to score more runs than the other team. Runners on third base are still going to round for home and try to score. Fielders are still going to throw home so that they can't. Collisions are inevitable. Especially when the ball and the runner get there at the same time.
Catchers are taught to block the plate. The good ones know how to do it right without getting hurt. Likewise, base runners are taught to try and knock the ball out of the catcher's glove, in addition to making sure they touch the plate. That's the way baseball is played. What's the alternative? Just letting the guy score?
Now you're telling them that they suddenly have to play the game differently. Under the new rule, catchers won't be allowed to block the plate and base runners won't be allowed to target catchers. And evidently the umpires will be able to immediately go to replay to determine whether or not either of those things occurred. The most ridiculous part is that catchers or runners who break the new rules will be subject to "disciplinary action." What that means exactly, who knows? Are they ejected from the game? Fined? Suspended?
Injury concerns are obviously a big reason why people pushed for this rules change. After Posey got hurt, everybody starting freaking out. You had GMs and managers telling their catchers not to block the plate, going against everything they've ever been taught since Little League. You had runners saying they were going to slide differently so that they wouldn't get hurt. If a catcher or base runner wants to take it upon himself to change the way he plays, that's his prerogative. But it's something different entirely to mandate it. Whether you're the team or the league.
They claim that concussions are another big worry that has led to this new rule. Well, guess what? There are plenty of other ways you can get a concussion playing baseball. Catchers can get a concussion from getting hit by a foul ball. Same thing with batters getting hit by a pitch. And runners can be sliding head first into second, get kneed in the head by the shortstop, and end up with a concussion that way (a la Justin Morneau). Then there are the two fielders from one team who run into each other, with one (or both) having to leave the game concussed. Or the outfielder trying to rob a home run who runs into the wall or gets hit in the head by the ball. Not to mention the line drives back to the mound, which opens up a whole other ball of wax.
I get what they're trying to do here, and I admire that their biggest concern is player safety. Before there was Posey, there was the most famous home plate collision of all-time, Pete Rose knocking out Ray Fosse to win the 1970 All-Star Game. Even though he played a few more years, Fosse's career was never the same. And that was the All-Star Game! It just goes to show the intensity that goes into the game. You had guys doing everything it took to win. That's the way baseball is supposed to be played.
That's the biggest reason why I'm opposed to a rules change banning plays at the plate. Plays at the plate are a part of baseball. It's been that way for 150 years. Sure, they're not banning plays at the plate per se, but in reality, that's what they're doing. And that's wrong. The worst part, too, is that this will inevitably trickle down into all levels of baseball, changing the sport completely. And not in a good way.
And if you didn't like a World Series game ending on a (correct) obstruction call, just wait until Game 7 of the World Series is decided when the winning run scored easily because the catcher wasn't allowed to block the plate. Yeah, great rule.
All of the delays in this rule being put into place got me optimistic. I was hoping they wouldn't actually do it. Because I think it's a mistake. It's an unnecessary overreaction to some freak injuries, most notably Buster Posey's season-ending broken leg in 2011. But mostly, you're changing the way the game is played. That's why I think it's the wrong move.
The whole point of baseball is trying to score more runs than the other team. Runners on third base are still going to round for home and try to score. Fielders are still going to throw home so that they can't. Collisions are inevitable. Especially when the ball and the runner get there at the same time.
Catchers are taught to block the plate. The good ones know how to do it right without getting hurt. Likewise, base runners are taught to try and knock the ball out of the catcher's glove, in addition to making sure they touch the plate. That's the way baseball is played. What's the alternative? Just letting the guy score?
Now you're telling them that they suddenly have to play the game differently. Under the new rule, catchers won't be allowed to block the plate and base runners won't be allowed to target catchers. And evidently the umpires will be able to immediately go to replay to determine whether or not either of those things occurred. The most ridiculous part is that catchers or runners who break the new rules will be subject to "disciplinary action." What that means exactly, who knows? Are they ejected from the game? Fined? Suspended?
Injury concerns are obviously a big reason why people pushed for this rules change. After Posey got hurt, everybody starting freaking out. You had GMs and managers telling their catchers not to block the plate, going against everything they've ever been taught since Little League. You had runners saying they were going to slide differently so that they wouldn't get hurt. If a catcher or base runner wants to take it upon himself to change the way he plays, that's his prerogative. But it's something different entirely to mandate it. Whether you're the team or the league.
They claim that concussions are another big worry that has led to this new rule. Well, guess what? There are plenty of other ways you can get a concussion playing baseball. Catchers can get a concussion from getting hit by a foul ball. Same thing with batters getting hit by a pitch. And runners can be sliding head first into second, get kneed in the head by the shortstop, and end up with a concussion that way (a la Justin Morneau). Then there are the two fielders from one team who run into each other, with one (or both) having to leave the game concussed. Or the outfielder trying to rob a home run who runs into the wall or gets hit in the head by the ball. Not to mention the line drives back to the mound, which opens up a whole other ball of wax.
I get what they're trying to do here, and I admire that their biggest concern is player safety. Before there was Posey, there was the most famous home plate collision of all-time, Pete Rose knocking out Ray Fosse to win the 1970 All-Star Game. Even though he played a few more years, Fosse's career was never the same. And that was the All-Star Game! It just goes to show the intensity that goes into the game. You had guys doing everything it took to win. That's the way baseball is supposed to be played.
That's the biggest reason why I'm opposed to a rules change banning plays at the plate. Plays at the plate are a part of baseball. It's been that way for 150 years. Sure, they're not banning plays at the plate per se, but in reality, that's what they're doing. And that's wrong. The worst part, too, is that this will inevitably trickle down into all levels of baseball, changing the sport completely. And not in a good way.
And if you didn't like a World Series game ending on a (correct) obstruction call, just wait until Game 7 of the World Series is decided when the winning run scored easily because the catcher wasn't allowed to block the plate. Yeah, great rule.
Monday, December 9, 2013
Three Managers, Three Hall of Famers?
There's going to be plenty of drama heading into the Baseball Hall of Fame election at the beginning of January. Who's going to get in, and how many first-timers? But the Veterans Committee vote, which will be announced on Monday, is just as loaded. The three greatest managers of their era--Joe Torre, Bobby Cox and Tony La Russa--are all up for election, as well as George Steinbrenner, Marvin Miller, Billy Martin and six players. Who's going to get in and who's going to get left out from this incredibly deserving group is just as intriguing a question.
Let's start with how much harder it is to get in on this ballot than the writers' ballot. There's only 16 voters and the 75 percent to get elected is still required, which means, obviously, 12 votes. But here's the catch--each voter is limited to five selections. So, assuming everybody votes for all three managers (which I doubt), there's only 32 total votes left to spread among the remaining nine men. And there's plenty of sentiment out there to right an incredible wrong and finally give Marvin Miller his rightful place in the Hall of Fame, an honor he should've received while he was alive. Basically, what I'm saying here is that it doesn't look good for the players.
Of the six players on the ballot, I think Tommy John and Steve Garvey will receive the highest number of votes. I've been a Garvey advocate for a long time. He was my Jack Morris during his time on the regular ballot. Garvey was the premier first baseman in the National League in the 1970s. To me, being the best player at your position in an entire league for a whole decade is Hall of Fame-worthy. John is better known nowadays for having a surgery named after him, but his career lasted 26 years (due in large part to a certain medical procedure) and he won 288 games.
Neither one of those players will come close to getting in, though. Again, the biggest question here is whether all three managers will be elected or not. And if they're not, which of the three will be left out.
It would be most fitting if Bobby Cox was inducted this year. Greg Maddux will definitely be elected by the writers and Tom Glavine may be as well. Along with John Smoltz, those two pitchers were at the heart of that Braves dynasty, and it would be pretty cool to see Cox go into Cooperstown with them. He's definitely going to be elected eventually. Nobody's ever going to do what he was able to do with the Braves again. 25 years with the same team. 14 straight division titles. Five National League pennants. Sure, Atlanta only won one World Series during his tenure, but that shouldn't be held against him.
After all, Cox lost two of those World Series to Torre's Yankees. Torre and Steinbrenner almost seem like a Cooperstown package deal, but I think the likelihood of a Torre election is far greater than that of a Steinbrenner election. Of course, it was Steinbrenner who brought Torre to the Yankees, and it proved to be the greatest move either of them ever made. Four World Championships in his first five seasons as manager. Four straight pennants from 1998-2001 and six in eight years from 1996-2003. Not to mention 12 postseason appearances in 12 years with the Yankees, then two more in his first two years managing the Dodgers in 2008-09. All this after a borderline Hall of Fame 18-year playing career.
I like Torre's chances at election. But I like Tony La Russa's more. He's third all-time in wins, behind only managerial giants Connie Mack and John McGraw. Two World Championships in St. Louis and one in Oakland, making him one of only two managers (along with Hall of Famer Sparky Anderson) to win a World Series in both leagues. Six pennants during ridiculously successful stints with the A's and Cardinals, as well as an ALCS appearance with the White Sox in 1983. I think La Russa is the most likely candidate to be elected.
If there's any justice in this world, Marvin Miller's name will be announced as a Hall of Famer on Monday, and a member of his family will deliver the speech that Miller himself should've delivered in Cooperstown come July. It's an absolute travesty that he's not in the Hall of Fame yet. Because Marvin Miller has meant as much or more to the game of baseball as everyone who already has a plaque in Cooperstown. In the past, it's been mostly owners and other team executives voting on the Veterans Committee, and a lot of them had a lot of resentment towards Marvin Miller for the rights he earned the players. And it's a shame. Well, there are only four owners/executives on the committee this year. The rest is current Hall of Famers and a couple historians/writers. They know how important Marvin Miller was to the game of baseball. I hope they correct this egregious omission that's gone on way too long. No one belongs in the Hall of Fame more than Marvin Miller. He missed by one vote the last time he was up for election in 2010. Three years ago, he would've been around to celebrate. It's a shame that he won't be able to if he gets that one more vote this year.
The most interesting figure in this group of 12 is Steinbrenner. He was definitely larger than life and he definitely had that love him or hate him personality, but he was also one of the most influential owners in baseball from the time he purchased the Yankees in 1973 until his death in 2010. Steinbrenner understood the business of baseball better than anybody, and he was the first to use free agency to his advantage in building back-to-back World Series winners in 1977-78. Then there was the dynasty in the 90s. In all, the Yankees won seven World Championships and 11 AL pennants under Steinbrenner. He was also responsible for the creation of the YES Network and the construction of the New Yankee Stadium.
Steinbrenner fired Billy Martin so many times that the two are synonymous. Martin's also on the ballot, and it would be some sort of poetic justice if they went into the Hall of Fame together. But I don't think either one will. At least not this year.
If I had a vote, my choices would be easy. I wouldn't vote for a single player. I'd vote for La Russa, Torre, Cox, Miller and Steinbrenner. As for the actual vote, I think La Russa and Torre will be elected, while Cox will just miss out. And I'd love to see Marvin Miller elected, as well. It's not a slam-dunk, but I also like his chances. Not one of these candidates deserves it more.
Let's start with how much harder it is to get in on this ballot than the writers' ballot. There's only 16 voters and the 75 percent to get elected is still required, which means, obviously, 12 votes. But here's the catch--each voter is limited to five selections. So, assuming everybody votes for all three managers (which I doubt), there's only 32 total votes left to spread among the remaining nine men. And there's plenty of sentiment out there to right an incredible wrong and finally give Marvin Miller his rightful place in the Hall of Fame, an honor he should've received while he was alive. Basically, what I'm saying here is that it doesn't look good for the players.
Of the six players on the ballot, I think Tommy John and Steve Garvey will receive the highest number of votes. I've been a Garvey advocate for a long time. He was my Jack Morris during his time on the regular ballot. Garvey was the premier first baseman in the National League in the 1970s. To me, being the best player at your position in an entire league for a whole decade is Hall of Fame-worthy. John is better known nowadays for having a surgery named after him, but his career lasted 26 years (due in large part to a certain medical procedure) and he won 288 games.
Neither one of those players will come close to getting in, though. Again, the biggest question here is whether all three managers will be elected or not. And if they're not, which of the three will be left out.
It would be most fitting if Bobby Cox was inducted this year. Greg Maddux will definitely be elected by the writers and Tom Glavine may be as well. Along with John Smoltz, those two pitchers were at the heart of that Braves dynasty, and it would be pretty cool to see Cox go into Cooperstown with them. He's definitely going to be elected eventually. Nobody's ever going to do what he was able to do with the Braves again. 25 years with the same team. 14 straight division titles. Five National League pennants. Sure, Atlanta only won one World Series during his tenure, but that shouldn't be held against him.
After all, Cox lost two of those World Series to Torre's Yankees. Torre and Steinbrenner almost seem like a Cooperstown package deal, but I think the likelihood of a Torre election is far greater than that of a Steinbrenner election. Of course, it was Steinbrenner who brought Torre to the Yankees, and it proved to be the greatest move either of them ever made. Four World Championships in his first five seasons as manager. Four straight pennants from 1998-2001 and six in eight years from 1996-2003. Not to mention 12 postseason appearances in 12 years with the Yankees, then two more in his first two years managing the Dodgers in 2008-09. All this after a borderline Hall of Fame 18-year playing career.
I like Torre's chances at election. But I like Tony La Russa's more. He's third all-time in wins, behind only managerial giants Connie Mack and John McGraw. Two World Championships in St. Louis and one in Oakland, making him one of only two managers (along with Hall of Famer Sparky Anderson) to win a World Series in both leagues. Six pennants during ridiculously successful stints with the A's and Cardinals, as well as an ALCS appearance with the White Sox in 1983. I think La Russa is the most likely candidate to be elected.
If there's any justice in this world, Marvin Miller's name will be announced as a Hall of Famer on Monday, and a member of his family will deliver the speech that Miller himself should've delivered in Cooperstown come July. It's an absolute travesty that he's not in the Hall of Fame yet. Because Marvin Miller has meant as much or more to the game of baseball as everyone who already has a plaque in Cooperstown. In the past, it's been mostly owners and other team executives voting on the Veterans Committee, and a lot of them had a lot of resentment towards Marvin Miller for the rights he earned the players. And it's a shame. Well, there are only four owners/executives on the committee this year. The rest is current Hall of Famers and a couple historians/writers. They know how important Marvin Miller was to the game of baseball. I hope they correct this egregious omission that's gone on way too long. No one belongs in the Hall of Fame more than Marvin Miller. He missed by one vote the last time he was up for election in 2010. Three years ago, he would've been around to celebrate. It's a shame that he won't be able to if he gets that one more vote this year.
The most interesting figure in this group of 12 is Steinbrenner. He was definitely larger than life and he definitely had that love him or hate him personality, but he was also one of the most influential owners in baseball from the time he purchased the Yankees in 1973 until his death in 2010. Steinbrenner understood the business of baseball better than anybody, and he was the first to use free agency to his advantage in building back-to-back World Series winners in 1977-78. Then there was the dynasty in the 90s. In all, the Yankees won seven World Championships and 11 AL pennants under Steinbrenner. He was also responsible for the creation of the YES Network and the construction of the New Yankee Stadium.
Steinbrenner fired Billy Martin so many times that the two are synonymous. Martin's also on the ballot, and it would be some sort of poetic justice if they went into the Hall of Fame together. But I don't think either one will. At least not this year.
If I had a vote, my choices would be easy. I wouldn't vote for a single player. I'd vote for La Russa, Torre, Cox, Miller and Steinbrenner. As for the actual vote, I think La Russa and Torre will be elected, while Cox will just miss out. And I'd love to see Marvin Miller elected, as well. It's not a slam-dunk, but I also like his chances. Not one of these candidates deserves it more.
Sunday, December 8, 2013
Week 14 NFL Picks
Getting down to the nitty-gritty now. The Seahawks became the first team to clinch a playoff spot on Monday night, and a whole bunch of others can join them this weekend. And, as fate would have it, we've got a bunch of those good teams playing each other. That's what football in December should be about. It's looking like a pretty good slate of games in Week 14.
Colts (8-4) at Bengals (8-4): Cincinnati-The winner here gets the inside track at the No. 3 seed and avoiding Denver (if Cincinnati wins, they've still got a decent chance at a bye, since they beat New England). The Colts can even clinch the AFC South with a win or a Titans loss in Denver. Since this one's an early game, though, Indy won't already know whether or not its in the playoffs at kickoff. The Bengals are a dangerous playoff sleeper. Nobody's talking about them as a Super Bowl contender, but they're on the verge of their third straight playoff appearance. I'm not counting the Bengals out come January. And Cincinnati's the better team. They'll prove it here.
Falcons (3-9) at Packers (5-6-1): Green Bay-They flexed it out of Sunday night for obvious reasons. It looks like Aaron Rodgers is still a no-go for Green Bay, and the nation saw loud and clear how bad this team is without him on Thanksgiving. The Falcons finally snapped their losing streak last week, but only because the Bills gifted them one in Toronto. They haven't won a game in this country since October 20. One of these two has to win. I'll play the weather card and say the Packers pull it out and keep their waning playoff chances alive.
Browns (4-8) at Patriots (9-3): New England-New England once again has just gone about its business. The Patriots can clinch yet another AFC East title and move closer to yet another first-round bye with a win. Although, they do have tough ones coming up at wild card contenders Miami and Baltimore in the next two weeks. All the more reason I'm fairly certain they'll beat Cleveland at home.
Raiders (4-8) at Jets (5-7): Oakland-In a week full of good games, this is the Sunday equivalent of that Jaguars-Texans game we were subjected to on Thursday. This game doesn't matter. The loser's pretty much done. The Jets suck slightly more right now, so I'll say the Raiders "win" by default.
Lions (7-5) at Eagles (7-5): Detroit-Fun fact: I flew from Detroit to Philadelphia this afternoon, although not on a private charter like the Lions. Anyway, it's a matchup of division leaders that's very important for Philly. I think the Lions are going to end up winning the North, simply because of the problems both the Bears and the Packers are having right now. It'll be a fight for the Eagles to win the East, and it'll probably come down to that last game against the Cowboys. The Eagles really need to win this one to make sure that Dallas game means something, but I'm not sure they will.
Dolphins (6-6) at Steelers (5-7): Miami-Don't look now, but Pittsburgh is back in the playoff race. Although, that loss in Baltimore on Thanksgiving night probably doomed the Steelers. The Dolphins' playoff chances are a lot better. In fact, they're tied with Baltimore for the last spot with nothing but division games left after this one. No margin for error for Miami the rest of the way. I'm gonna say the Dolphins win and stay even (at the very least) with the Ravens.
Bills (4-8) at Buccaneers (3-9): Tampa Bay-Remember the middle of the season when we were all trying to figure out when and if Tampa Bay and/or Jacksonville would ever win? Boy, how times have changed. The Jaguars have won three straight and four out of five, and the Bucs are looking to win four out of five themselves. I don't know what happened with the Bills against Atlanta last week. It was bad, though. The Bucs make it four out of five.
Chiefs (9-3) at Redskins (3-9): Kansas City-After three straight losses (all in division games), Kansas City is suddenly staring at the 5-seed. Their chances of making the playoffs are still pretty good, though. In fact, they can wrap up a berth this week. The Redskins were quasi-screwed at the end of the Giants game, but I don't think they would've won anyway. Regardless, Washington's a mess. KC snaps its skid.
Vikings (3-8-1) at Ravens (6-6): Baltimore-With Detroit, New England and Cincinnati left on the schedule, it's not an easy road for the Ravens to get back to the playoffs. But if they get in, they're certainly going to earn it. What that also means, though, is that they absolutely CANNOT, under any circumstances, lose to Minnesota at home.
Titans (5-7) at Broncos (10-2): Denver-Denver doesn't have to do much to clinch a playoff spot. One win or one Dolphins/Ravens loss the rest of the way locks up a berth. Of course, the Broncos are looking at home field right now, and that's the goal, especially now that the division is pretty much out of the way thanks to that sweep of Kansas City. The Titans will provide a small challenge, but not enough to knock off the Broncos in Denver.
Rams (5-7) at Cardinals (7-5): Arizona-That was a tough loss for the Cardinals last week. It put the 49ers back in the driver's seat for the second NFC wild card. With San Francisco playing the Seahawks this week (and Carolina playing New Orleans), it's Arizona's chance to jump right back in the postseason conversation. It's also the Rams' chance to play the role of spoiler. I'm going Arizona, though.
Giants (5-7) at Chargers (5-7): San Diego-The Chargers aren't out of it yet, and they're a good December team. The Giants need to win out and get a lot of help, but I think even they'd admit their playoff chances are slim to none (a loss and a 49ers win eliminates the Giants). It doesn't help that their remaining schedule is brutal (fly cross-country, then play Seattle and Detroit). A San Diego win can put the Giants out of their misery.
Seahawks (11-1) at 49ers (8-4): San Francisco-I don't think there's any doubt that Seattle is far-and-away the best team in the NFC, if not the entire NFL. They thoroughly dismantled the Saints on Monday night. With a win here, their magic number to clinch the 1-seed is one. (Even with a loss, it's still two, seeing as they already beat both New Orleans and Carolina.) As a result, this game is much more important for San Francisco. The 49ers have been embarrassed each of the last two times they played the Seahawks. They haven't forgotten that. They want to make a statement of their own and hand Seattle its first conference loss of the season.
Panthers (9-3) at Saints (9-3): New Orleans-They flexed this one into Sunday night, and can you blame them? The Panthers and Saints are playing twice in the next three weeks, with the 2-seed in the NFC likely at stake. Nobody wants to play Carolina right now. An eight-game winning streak to move into a tie for first place. Nobody wants to play in the Superdome, either. That, I think, is going to be the X-factor in this one. The winning streak ends at the hands of the Saints.
Cowboys (7-5) at Bears (6-6): Dallas-Another important Monday nighter. First-place Dallas is on extended rest after that Thanksgiving win over the Raiders. Chicago, meanwhile, is still the most confusing team in all of football. The Bears are virtually out of the wild card race, but can definitely still win the North. This game and Philly-Detroit will obviously have huge impacts on each other. I don't trust the Bears enough to pick them here, but I also think this is the game where the Cowboys are most likely to slip up before that (probably) winner-take-all season finale against the Eagles.
This Week: 1-0
Last Week: 12-4
Season: 123-69-1
Colts (8-4) at Bengals (8-4): Cincinnati-The winner here gets the inside track at the No. 3 seed and avoiding Denver (if Cincinnati wins, they've still got a decent chance at a bye, since they beat New England). The Colts can even clinch the AFC South with a win or a Titans loss in Denver. Since this one's an early game, though, Indy won't already know whether or not its in the playoffs at kickoff. The Bengals are a dangerous playoff sleeper. Nobody's talking about them as a Super Bowl contender, but they're on the verge of their third straight playoff appearance. I'm not counting the Bengals out come January. And Cincinnati's the better team. They'll prove it here.
Falcons (3-9) at Packers (5-6-1): Green Bay-They flexed it out of Sunday night for obvious reasons. It looks like Aaron Rodgers is still a no-go for Green Bay, and the nation saw loud and clear how bad this team is without him on Thanksgiving. The Falcons finally snapped their losing streak last week, but only because the Bills gifted them one in Toronto. They haven't won a game in this country since October 20. One of these two has to win. I'll play the weather card and say the Packers pull it out and keep their waning playoff chances alive.
Browns (4-8) at Patriots (9-3): New England-New England once again has just gone about its business. The Patriots can clinch yet another AFC East title and move closer to yet another first-round bye with a win. Although, they do have tough ones coming up at wild card contenders Miami and Baltimore in the next two weeks. All the more reason I'm fairly certain they'll beat Cleveland at home.
Raiders (4-8) at Jets (5-7): Oakland-In a week full of good games, this is the Sunday equivalent of that Jaguars-Texans game we were subjected to on Thursday. This game doesn't matter. The loser's pretty much done. The Jets suck slightly more right now, so I'll say the Raiders "win" by default.
Lions (7-5) at Eagles (7-5): Detroit-Fun fact: I flew from Detroit to Philadelphia this afternoon, although not on a private charter like the Lions. Anyway, it's a matchup of division leaders that's very important for Philly. I think the Lions are going to end up winning the North, simply because of the problems both the Bears and the Packers are having right now. It'll be a fight for the Eagles to win the East, and it'll probably come down to that last game against the Cowboys. The Eagles really need to win this one to make sure that Dallas game means something, but I'm not sure they will.
Dolphins (6-6) at Steelers (5-7): Miami-Don't look now, but Pittsburgh is back in the playoff race. Although, that loss in Baltimore on Thanksgiving night probably doomed the Steelers. The Dolphins' playoff chances are a lot better. In fact, they're tied with Baltimore for the last spot with nothing but division games left after this one. No margin for error for Miami the rest of the way. I'm gonna say the Dolphins win and stay even (at the very least) with the Ravens.
Bills (4-8) at Buccaneers (3-9): Tampa Bay-Remember the middle of the season when we were all trying to figure out when and if Tampa Bay and/or Jacksonville would ever win? Boy, how times have changed. The Jaguars have won three straight and four out of five, and the Bucs are looking to win four out of five themselves. I don't know what happened with the Bills against Atlanta last week. It was bad, though. The Bucs make it four out of five.
Chiefs (9-3) at Redskins (3-9): Kansas City-After three straight losses (all in division games), Kansas City is suddenly staring at the 5-seed. Their chances of making the playoffs are still pretty good, though. In fact, they can wrap up a berth this week. The Redskins were quasi-screwed at the end of the Giants game, but I don't think they would've won anyway. Regardless, Washington's a mess. KC snaps its skid.
Vikings (3-8-1) at Ravens (6-6): Baltimore-With Detroit, New England and Cincinnati left on the schedule, it's not an easy road for the Ravens to get back to the playoffs. But if they get in, they're certainly going to earn it. What that also means, though, is that they absolutely CANNOT, under any circumstances, lose to Minnesota at home.
Titans (5-7) at Broncos (10-2): Denver-Denver doesn't have to do much to clinch a playoff spot. One win or one Dolphins/Ravens loss the rest of the way locks up a berth. Of course, the Broncos are looking at home field right now, and that's the goal, especially now that the division is pretty much out of the way thanks to that sweep of Kansas City. The Titans will provide a small challenge, but not enough to knock off the Broncos in Denver.
Rams (5-7) at Cardinals (7-5): Arizona-That was a tough loss for the Cardinals last week. It put the 49ers back in the driver's seat for the second NFC wild card. With San Francisco playing the Seahawks this week (and Carolina playing New Orleans), it's Arizona's chance to jump right back in the postseason conversation. It's also the Rams' chance to play the role of spoiler. I'm going Arizona, though.
Giants (5-7) at Chargers (5-7): San Diego-The Chargers aren't out of it yet, and they're a good December team. The Giants need to win out and get a lot of help, but I think even they'd admit their playoff chances are slim to none (a loss and a 49ers win eliminates the Giants). It doesn't help that their remaining schedule is brutal (fly cross-country, then play Seattle and Detroit). A San Diego win can put the Giants out of their misery.
Seahawks (11-1) at 49ers (8-4): San Francisco-I don't think there's any doubt that Seattle is far-and-away the best team in the NFC, if not the entire NFL. They thoroughly dismantled the Saints on Monday night. With a win here, their magic number to clinch the 1-seed is one. (Even with a loss, it's still two, seeing as they already beat both New Orleans and Carolina.) As a result, this game is much more important for San Francisco. The 49ers have been embarrassed each of the last two times they played the Seahawks. They haven't forgotten that. They want to make a statement of their own and hand Seattle its first conference loss of the season.
Panthers (9-3) at Saints (9-3): New Orleans-They flexed this one into Sunday night, and can you blame them? The Panthers and Saints are playing twice in the next three weeks, with the 2-seed in the NFC likely at stake. Nobody wants to play Carolina right now. An eight-game winning streak to move into a tie for first place. Nobody wants to play in the Superdome, either. That, I think, is going to be the X-factor in this one. The winning streak ends at the hands of the Saints.
Cowboys (7-5) at Bears (6-6): Dallas-Another important Monday nighter. First-place Dallas is on extended rest after that Thanksgiving win over the Raiders. Chicago, meanwhile, is still the most confusing team in all of football. The Bears are virtually out of the wild card race, but can definitely still win the North. This game and Philly-Detroit will obviously have huge impacts on each other. I don't trust the Bears enough to pick them here, but I also think this is the game where the Cowboys are most likely to slip up before that (probably) winner-take-all season finale against the Eagles.
This Week: 1-0
Last Week: 12-4
Season: 123-69-1
Friday, December 6, 2013
First Reaction to the Draw
Can you say "Group of Death?" That's exactly what the USA is facing after today's brutal World Cup draw. I don't feel as bad as I would if they USA had been drawn into Group D with Uruguay, Italy and England (the unfortunate assignment that was drawn by Costa Rica), but this one is just as brutal. And as they were drawing Pot 3, I was praying for H (and came thisclose to it).
So, other than the initial shock of the U.S. being drawn into the same group as perennial power Germany and perennial thorn-in-the-side Ghana, here are my thoughts on the entire World Cup draw, going in group order:
Group A: Brazil, Croatia, Mexico, Cameroon
Our opening match will be Brazil vs. Croatia is Sao Paulo. You knew Brazil was going to get it somewhat easy if they didn't get that second European team, and sure enough, that was the case. Should be fairly easy for the hosts to make it out of this group. The European team certainly could've been tougher, and Cameroon is the lowest-ranked side in the entire tournament. You never know what you're going to get from Mexico, though. They, of course, almost didn't get out of CONCACAF qualifying, then completely dominated New Zealand in the two-legged play-in. If that Mexican team shows up, look out. Overall, a very favorable draw for El Tri. I think the Mexico-Croatia winner joins Brazil in round two.
Group B: Spain, Netherlands, Chile, Australia
We knew one of the seeds was going to end up getting the Netherlands in its group and sure enough it was Spain. And, as fate would have it, the first match in this group is a rematch of the 2010 final (FIFA, do you still think not seeding the Dutch was a good idea?). The winner of that match is in the driver's seat to avoid the Round of 16 matchup with Brazil (and it would really be unfortunate if we end up with Brazil-Spain in the Round of 16 instead of the final). This is probably the third-best group in terms of quality of the four teams. Australia's no pushover, and Chile, especially playing in South America, is going to be a tough matchup for both of the favored sides. However, Spain and the Netherlands are simply too good. It's a shame that they have to play each other this early in the tournament.
Group C: Colombia, Greece, Cote d'Ivoire, Japan
Colombia perhaps got it the best of all the seeds. This group is certainly winnable for them, especially since they'll have the quasi-homefield advantage. This is also a great draw for Cote d'Ivoire. They're the strongest African squad, and they suffered being in the Group of Death in 2010, so I guess this is their reward. I fully expect them to advance, and I don't think winning the group is out of the question. Japan also might sneak in there. I didn't really consider the Japanese as a contender for round two until the draw came out and they ended up in a group where them finishing second doesn't seem like that far of a reach. I'll take Colombia and Cote d'Ivoire to advance, though.
Group D: Uruguay, Costa Rica, England, Italy
Group of Death, Part I. Good luck Costa Rica. There are three former World Cup champions in this group, and one of them isn't going to advance. First off, let's talk about the ridiculousness of "Pot X" and Italy ending up as the odd-man out when it came to the European teams. They should've been seeded. That's point No. 1. But then to take them and put them with the African teams, knowing that they were automatically going to face a South American seed? Time to rethink your seeding and draw procedures before Russia 2018. Anyway, there's no way Uruguay doesn't come out of this group, especially with the proximity of Uruguay to Brazil. Those fans are going to be loud! It really could come down to who wins that England-Italy game for the second spot, although how much the three beat Costa Rica by could definitely come into play. I've gotta think the Italians, after their terrible World Cup in 2010, then after getting screwed in the seeding, then getting screwed in the draw, will be pissed off enough to make everyone else in the group pay. Italy and Uruguay (the teams that played in the bronze medal match at the Confederations Cup) advance.
Group E: Switzerland, Ecuador, France, Honduras
The French should be saying a big "Merci" to FIFA (or, more specifically the French head of UEFA) for this draw. Because instead of being in Pot 2 like they should've been as the lowest-ranked European team, they end up in a group where Les Bleues advancing to round two doesn't seem that far-fetched. The Swiss shouldn't have been seeded, and this along with H, is probably the softest group of them all. Ecuador's going to win this group. There's no doubt in my mind about that. They couldn't have asked for a better draw. Honduras even has a shot to come out of Group E. I think that second spot goes to one of the two luckiest European teams in the field, though. Whoever wins the Switzerland-France game moves on. Since the French have a tendency to stink it up at the World Cup, though, I'll say it's Switzerland. After all, they did beat Spain in the opening game in 2010.
Group F: Argentina, Bosnia-Herzegovina, Iran, Nigeria
A dream draw for Argentina, a side that I wouldn't be surprised to win the whole thing. They even got a game near the border in Porto Alegre, so it's their dream draw not just in terms of teams, but in terms of where they're going to play (their opener's at Maracana). Nigeria seems to always end up in the same group as Argentina, but this time that could be a good thing. There's no prohibitive favorite for the second spot, which seems wide open. Bosnia's also got to like its chances in its World Cup debut. I don't think I'm going out on a limb to say that Bosnia's the second-best team in this group. In fact, I see them advancing alongside the Argentines.
Group G: Germany, Portugal, Ghana, United States
So much for those visions of grandeur for Team USA. Group of Death II is about as bad as it could've gotten for the U.S. Probably the only thing worse would've been Italy or Holland instead of Portugal. I'm not saying they can't or even that they won't advance. All I'm saying is that Group H would've been a lot more preferable to Group G. You do have the Klinsmann vs. Germany storyline and the Boateng brothers storyline, as well as Portugal's memories of losing to the U.S. in 2002, and the Americans' knowledge that it was Ghana that knocked them out of the previous two World Cups. Other than Germany being the favorite, this group is way too wide-open to make any sort of predictions. Although, that's usually the case with the Group of Death. I don't have that much faith in Portugal, so I'll say the second spot goes to the USA-Ghana winner. If the Americans lose that game, the World Cup could be over before it starts, especially with Germany looming in the final game of group play. Whoever finishes second in this group, though, has a decent-looking path to the semifinals. Better than even Germany's. So, I guess that's some kind of reward for coming out of the toughest draw.
Group H: Belgium, Algeria, Russia, South Korea
From arguably the best group in the entire tournament, to arguably the worst. Belgium's probably going to win the group by default. Once again, an undeserving seed gets a cupcake of a draw and virtual free pass to the second round. Algeria's not going to advance, so they're not even worth discussing. Russia could be interesting. Second place in this group (or even first) is very attainable, and that would set the Russians up on a nice path leading up to their hosting in 2018. South Korea's a dark horse though. Talk about a gift. They're capable of beating all three of these teams. It wouldn't surprise me at all to see the Koreans advance. Regardless, the two teams that move on lose to the Group G teams in the Round of 16. (And, for the record, if that dude pulls out Korea's ball first and the U.S. ends up in this group, they probably end up as group favorites. But so is the luck of the draw, especially when FIFA's involved.)
That's my initial take. There's still six months until the World Cup, though, so I don't want to get too involved in making picks right now beyond my first impressions of who I think might end up coming out. Way too much time left. Let the discussions begin, though. One thing's for sure, however. I can't wait until Brazil-Croatia on June 12.
So, other than the initial shock of the U.S. being drawn into the same group as perennial power Germany and perennial thorn-in-the-side Ghana, here are my thoughts on the entire World Cup draw, going in group order:
Group A: Brazil, Croatia, Mexico, Cameroon
Our opening match will be Brazil vs. Croatia is Sao Paulo. You knew Brazil was going to get it somewhat easy if they didn't get that second European team, and sure enough, that was the case. Should be fairly easy for the hosts to make it out of this group. The European team certainly could've been tougher, and Cameroon is the lowest-ranked side in the entire tournament. You never know what you're going to get from Mexico, though. They, of course, almost didn't get out of CONCACAF qualifying, then completely dominated New Zealand in the two-legged play-in. If that Mexican team shows up, look out. Overall, a very favorable draw for El Tri. I think the Mexico-Croatia winner joins Brazil in round two.
Group B: Spain, Netherlands, Chile, Australia
We knew one of the seeds was going to end up getting the Netherlands in its group and sure enough it was Spain. And, as fate would have it, the first match in this group is a rematch of the 2010 final (FIFA, do you still think not seeding the Dutch was a good idea?). The winner of that match is in the driver's seat to avoid the Round of 16 matchup with Brazil (and it would really be unfortunate if we end up with Brazil-Spain in the Round of 16 instead of the final). This is probably the third-best group in terms of quality of the four teams. Australia's no pushover, and Chile, especially playing in South America, is going to be a tough matchup for both of the favored sides. However, Spain and the Netherlands are simply too good. It's a shame that they have to play each other this early in the tournament.
Group C: Colombia, Greece, Cote d'Ivoire, Japan
Colombia perhaps got it the best of all the seeds. This group is certainly winnable for them, especially since they'll have the quasi-homefield advantage. This is also a great draw for Cote d'Ivoire. They're the strongest African squad, and they suffered being in the Group of Death in 2010, so I guess this is their reward. I fully expect them to advance, and I don't think winning the group is out of the question. Japan also might sneak in there. I didn't really consider the Japanese as a contender for round two until the draw came out and they ended up in a group where them finishing second doesn't seem like that far of a reach. I'll take Colombia and Cote d'Ivoire to advance, though.
Group D: Uruguay, Costa Rica, England, Italy
Group of Death, Part I. Good luck Costa Rica. There are three former World Cup champions in this group, and one of them isn't going to advance. First off, let's talk about the ridiculousness of "Pot X" and Italy ending up as the odd-man out when it came to the European teams. They should've been seeded. That's point No. 1. But then to take them and put them with the African teams, knowing that they were automatically going to face a South American seed? Time to rethink your seeding and draw procedures before Russia 2018. Anyway, there's no way Uruguay doesn't come out of this group, especially with the proximity of Uruguay to Brazil. Those fans are going to be loud! It really could come down to who wins that England-Italy game for the second spot, although how much the three beat Costa Rica by could definitely come into play. I've gotta think the Italians, after their terrible World Cup in 2010, then after getting screwed in the seeding, then getting screwed in the draw, will be pissed off enough to make everyone else in the group pay. Italy and Uruguay (the teams that played in the bronze medal match at the Confederations Cup) advance.
Group E: Switzerland, Ecuador, France, Honduras
The French should be saying a big "Merci" to FIFA (or, more specifically the French head of UEFA) for this draw. Because instead of being in Pot 2 like they should've been as the lowest-ranked European team, they end up in a group where Les Bleues advancing to round two doesn't seem that far-fetched. The Swiss shouldn't have been seeded, and this along with H, is probably the softest group of them all. Ecuador's going to win this group. There's no doubt in my mind about that. They couldn't have asked for a better draw. Honduras even has a shot to come out of Group E. I think that second spot goes to one of the two luckiest European teams in the field, though. Whoever wins the Switzerland-France game moves on. Since the French have a tendency to stink it up at the World Cup, though, I'll say it's Switzerland. After all, they did beat Spain in the opening game in 2010.
Group F: Argentina, Bosnia-Herzegovina, Iran, Nigeria
A dream draw for Argentina, a side that I wouldn't be surprised to win the whole thing. They even got a game near the border in Porto Alegre, so it's their dream draw not just in terms of teams, but in terms of where they're going to play (their opener's at Maracana). Nigeria seems to always end up in the same group as Argentina, but this time that could be a good thing. There's no prohibitive favorite for the second spot, which seems wide open. Bosnia's also got to like its chances in its World Cup debut. I don't think I'm going out on a limb to say that Bosnia's the second-best team in this group. In fact, I see them advancing alongside the Argentines.
Group G: Germany, Portugal, Ghana, United States
So much for those visions of grandeur for Team USA. Group of Death II is about as bad as it could've gotten for the U.S. Probably the only thing worse would've been Italy or Holland instead of Portugal. I'm not saying they can't or even that they won't advance. All I'm saying is that Group H would've been a lot more preferable to Group G. You do have the Klinsmann vs. Germany storyline and the Boateng brothers storyline, as well as Portugal's memories of losing to the U.S. in 2002, and the Americans' knowledge that it was Ghana that knocked them out of the previous two World Cups. Other than Germany being the favorite, this group is way too wide-open to make any sort of predictions. Although, that's usually the case with the Group of Death. I don't have that much faith in Portugal, so I'll say the second spot goes to the USA-Ghana winner. If the Americans lose that game, the World Cup could be over before it starts, especially with Germany looming in the final game of group play. Whoever finishes second in this group, though, has a decent-looking path to the semifinals. Better than even Germany's. So, I guess that's some kind of reward for coming out of the toughest draw.
Group H: Belgium, Algeria, Russia, South Korea
From arguably the best group in the entire tournament, to arguably the worst. Belgium's probably going to win the group by default. Once again, an undeserving seed gets a cupcake of a draw and virtual free pass to the second round. Algeria's not going to advance, so they're not even worth discussing. Russia could be interesting. Second place in this group (or even first) is very attainable, and that would set the Russians up on a nice path leading up to their hosting in 2018. South Korea's a dark horse though. Talk about a gift. They're capable of beating all three of these teams. It wouldn't surprise me at all to see the Koreans advance. Regardless, the two teams that move on lose to the Group G teams in the Round of 16. (And, for the record, if that dude pulls out Korea's ball first and the U.S. ends up in this group, they probably end up as group favorites. But so is the luck of the draw, especially when FIFA's involved.)
That's my initial take. There's still six months until the World Cup, though, so I don't want to get too involved in making picks right now beyond my first impressions of who I think might end up coming out. Way too much time left. Let the discussions begin, though. One thing's for sure, however. I can't wait until Brazil-Croatia on June 12.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)