My 2022 NFL Picks (Week 8)

If you had told me that the standings would look the way they do as we approach midseason, I most certainly would not have believed you.  The Giants and Jets are a combined 11-3.  The Falcons and Seahawks are in first place.  The Patriots and Steelers are in last.  And who knows what's going on with the Bucs and Packers?!  (I bet Brady's probably rethinking his unretirement.)

No, this is definitely not how we expected this season to be playing out.  But isn't that part of the fun sometimes?  You seriously never know what's gonna happen in this league from one week to the next.  Especially this season.

Thursday Night: Tampa Bay (Loss)

Broncos (2-5) vs Jaguars (2-5): Jacksonville-I'm going to skip my usual spiel about the Broncos being on national TV every week (which technically they are again) for a few reasons.  First, the game is at 7:30 am Denver time, so if people want to get up early to watch them, that's their problem.  Second, it's ESPN+, and I don't see this game moving the needle to get people to sign up for ESPN+ plus.  They either already have it or they don't.  This matchup ain't changing that.  Finally, there's a grand total of about 11 people who care about this game.  If you're one of them, knock yourself out!  Should be a fine display of terrible offense, three-and-outs, and punting for our British friends!

Panthers (2-5) at Falcons (3-4): Atlanta-The 3-4 Atlanta Falcons are in first place.  Just take a second to let that sink in.  The Falcons, who no one thinks are good by any stretch of the imagination, are in first place with a sub-.500 record in a division that includes Tom Brady.  Pretty wild, isn't it?  The good thing is that they won't be a sub-.500 division leader after this week.  They'll be a division leader whose record is exactly .500.

Bears (3-4) at Cowboys (5-2): Dallas-Dallas is in a very strange position.  The Cowboys know how good they are, but they also know that they're stuck being a wild card unless the Eagles start losing.  The only part of the equation they can control is whether or not they win themselves.  And this week they get Dak Prescott back.  They've been doing just fine without him, so it's not like they need him.  But still, it's not exactly like having your franchise quarterback makes you any worse.

Dolphins (4-3) at Lions (1-5): Miami-Miami is a completely different team with Tua.  They got him back last week and suddenly looked like the team that started 3-0 again.  Which means it's vital they keep him on his feet the rest of the season.  Because they can be a playoff team if they do.  The Lions have scored a total of six points in their last two games.  They don't have the offense to keep up.

Cardinals (3-4) at Vikings (5-1): Minnesota-OK, it's finally time to jump off the Cardinals bandwagon.  This is a team I legitimately thought would be good after what they did last season, but I just haven't seen it so far.  Those black helmets were as awesome as I thought they'd be though!  The Vikings, meanwhile, could have something special going on this season.  They've put it all together and, with the Packers struggling, have a chance to take real control of the NFC North at the halfway point.

Raiders (2-4) at Saints (2-5): New Orleans-As crazy as it sounds, if the Panthers and Saints both win, everybody in the NFC South will be 3-5.  I kinda want that to happen just to see the ridiculous four-way tie.  And it absolutely could.  While I think Carolina beating Atlanta is a bit of a stretch, the Saints should be able to do their part in setting up that scenario.

Patriots (2-4) at Jets (5-2): Jets-Just when I thought the Jets would actually be a home favorite against the Patriots for the first time in forever, the final line somehow has New England -1.5.  How?  Did they see the game on Monday night?!  This might be Belichick's worst team.  Of course, the Patriots usually go into MetLife Stadium and find a way to get it done, but I think this year will be different.

Steelers (2-5) at Eagles (6-0): Philadelphia-How's this for scheduling?  The Eagles' Thursday night game is next week...in Houston!  So, they're playing on Sunday and Thursday, which just happen to be the World Series off days.  No conflicts here!  (And the Philadelphia Union's MLS Cup playoff game is Sunday night, so again, no conflict.)  Good time to be a Philadelphia sports fan.  Especially when their first-place football team is about to be 7-0.

Titans (4-2) at Texans (1-4-1): Tennessee-Take what I just said about the Eagles and also apply it to the Texans, who have home games the day after and the day before the Astros (assuming the World Series heads back to Houston).  Of course, the difference is that Houston's football team isn't nearly as good.  Houston's old football team is.  The Titans need to take advantage of their division games and bulk their record up.  Which is exactly what they should do here.

Commanders (3-4) at Colts (3-3-1): Indianapolis-A few weeks ago, I saw a graphic on social media predicting who the Colts' quarterback every year for the next decade would be.  After all those years with Peyton Manning and then Andrew Luck, Indianapolis has become the place where veteran QB's careers go to die.  Matt Ryan is just the latest example.  He's out, Sam Ehlinger is in.  And his first game as the starter is against the guy they tried last year--Carson Wentz.  Oh, the way these things happen sometimes!

49ers (3-4) at Rams (3-3): San Francisco-Every time the 49ers play the Rams, San Francisco wins.  The NFC Championship Game was the (pretty big) exception.  But otherwise, it's like clockwork.  The 49ers play the Rams, San Francisco wins.  So why should I think this one will be any different?  I still think the Rams are the better team, but I've learned my lesson.

Giants (6-1) at Seahawks (4-3): Seattle-After the Giants beat the Ravens, I checked out their upcoming schedule and saw that it's pretty favorable for them heading into that Thanksgiving matchup in Dallas.  This was the one game I had circled as a potential loss, though.  Traveling to Seattle is never easy to begin with.  Then add in the fact that they were just in Jacksonville, and it makes the trip that much longer.  Then, of course, there's the fact that the Seahawks are actually playing well and will have the 12th Man behind them.

Packers (3-4) at Bills (5-1): Buffalo-When they selected this one for Sunday Night Football before the season, it made complete sense.  On paper, it was a great matchup between two perennially good teams with marquee quarterbacks.  One of these two teams has been exactly that.  The Bills have lived up to all of the preseason hype, and Josh Allen is probably your leading MVP candidate right now.  The Packers?  Not so much.  They've lost three straight for the first time in I can't even remember.  And it's about to become four.

Bengals (4-3) at Browns (2-5): Cincinnati-Lots of orange on Halloween night in Cleveland!  It's almost as if they planned it that way!  Anyway, the Bengals seem to have found their stride after a shaky start.  They've won four out of five since an 0-2 start, and the only loss in that span was by two points in Baltimore.  The Browns, meanwhile, are about where I thought they'd be as they get ready to welcome back their sexual abuser of a quarterback after the bye.

This Week: 0-1
Last Week: 9-5
Overall: 60-48-1

Astros vs Phillies

Ah, yes.  Astros vs. Phillies.  The World Series we all saw coming!  Houston, the 106-win juggernaut that was far-and-away the best team in the American League this season vs. Philadelphia, the 87-win third-place team that only made the playoffs because they added a team this season.  Although, frankly, we probably should've seen it coming.  Because these two were so dominant in their Division Series wins that them each making quick work of the LCS shouldn't have been a surprise.

It's funny how in the National League, there were three 100-win teams and a very good San Diego club, but the team best-equipped for a long playoff run might've been the Phillies.  They've had the mentality this whole time that as long as they got in, they had a chance.  That's why none of the good teams wanted to see them in the postseason!  And they were right!  They're 9-2 in the postseason, including a 5-0 mark at home. 

The Astros, meanwhile, are 7-0 in the postseason.  So, we've got two teams that have been absolute buzzsaws with a combined postseason mark of 18-2.  Which means something's gotta give!  At the very least, we're probably looking at a series that actually goes longer than five games!  (MLB is disappointed with the LCS ratings, but that's what happens when you play only one game over the minimum!)

What's so unique about this World Series, too, is that the Astros and Phillies ended the World Series against each other.  They played a three-game series in Houston from Oct. 3-5, with the Astros winning two out of three.  But the one game that the Phillies won is the game that clinched them their playoff berth.

Aaron Nola threw a two-hit shutout in that game.  And he's a big reason why the Phillies are here.  He and Zack Wheeler, actually.  Philadelphia's plan was to ride its two aces, then go from there.  So far, it's been working exactly how they envisioned.

Houston, meanwhile, has more than just two aces.  Sure, they've got Cy Young candidates Justin Verlander and Framber Valdez heading the rotation (and going against Nola and Wheeler in Games 1 & 2), but let's not forget about Lance McCullers and Cristian Javier (or Luis Garcia or Jose Urquidy or whoever starts Game 4), either.  That pitching staff, frankly, is why the Astros have been so dominant all season.

And that, I think, is what will make the difference in the series.  Because once the starter's out of the game, you have to deal with the Houston bullpen.  They don't have a lefty, but they haven't all season and it hasn't been a problem so far. 

I've also never been completely sold on that lefty vs. lefty relief matchup in the postseason anyway.  During the regular season, absolutely!  But if the Astros did have a lefty, you know he'd be coming in to face Kyle Schwarber and Bryce Harper, so they'd both get at least three at-bats against him during the series.  (Just like you know Yordan Alvarez and Kyle Tucker will definitely see Brad Hand a few times each.)  The advantage has to swing to the hitter at some point, even if it is lefty-lefty.

Harper, Schwarber and Co. have had quite the postseason so far.  The Phillies have gotten their great starting pitching, but their offense simply wouldn't stop hitting against either the Braves or the Padres.  (Actually, they haven't stopped hitting since that six-run ninth in Game 1 against the Cardinals.)  But they haven't faced pitching anywhere near as good as what they'll see from Houston.  I also wonder if that five-day break between the NLCS and World Series will also have any impact on the Phillies' bats.

For most of the Phillies, this is their first World Series.  That's obviously not the case for the Astros, who are here for the second straight season, third time in the last four years, and fourth time in six years.  Their loads of postseason experience can't be overlooked.  Because how many times has it paid dividends before?  Answer: a ton in this postseason alone!

Simply put, Houston is one of the most complete baseball teams we've seen in a while.  This dynasty might've started under questionable circumstances, but the Astros are long past that garbage can scandal.  Now they're just a damn good team!  And, if they do win a second World Series this season, there wouldn't be any asterisk associated with it.  It would be well-earned.

Earned is exactly what it would be in this series.  Because even though the Astros are heavily favored and there was a 19-win difference between these teams in the regular season, the Phillies won't go down anywhere near as quietly as the Mariners and Yankees did.  And they certainly won't be taken lightly.

Philadelphia has had quite a run, and that crowd at Citizens Bank Park will be raucous for the three middle games.  Plus, thanks to that short NLCS, they'll have Nola and Wheeler set up to pitch four of the seven games, so if they can outduel Verlander (who's playing in his fifth World Series and still has zero career World Series wins) and/or the offense is able to stay hot and do what the Mariners' and Yankees' offenses couldn't, they definitely have a chance to pull the upset.

Ultimately, though, I think the Astros are just too good.  Dusty Baker finally gets his first ring.  Bryce Harper has to wait for his.  Houston in six.

Women's World Cup Draw Review

How do you know the FIFA calendar is way off because of this super-late World Cup?  Because they already had the draw for the 2023 Women's World Cup...before they play the 2022 Men's World Cup!  In fact, I had no idea the draw was even happening until I saw the analysis of it on ESPN.  Of course, since the tournament's taking place in Australia and New Zealand, that means games will be early in the morning.  And the draw was early in the morning, too, so I likely would've missed it anyway even if I had known it was happening.

I'm also not a big fan of the placeholder spots for teams that haven't qualified yet.  For Qatar, it was a necessity because of how screwed up the qualifying calendar became.  But they were back for Australia/New Zealand.  Although, they were worse.  Because they're for the winners of the three qualifying tournaments--which all have teams from different confederations in them!  So it made a complete mess of the geographic avoidance principle. 

As a result, it's possible (though unlikely) that Vietnam and Thailand could be in the same group.  That should never happen for any confederation other than UEFA.  If they did what UEFA did for the Euro and had the playoff winners provisionally in one group, but able to move to another, I'd be a little more OK with it.  But frankly, I just think qualifying should be done before the draw.  Then it wouldn't be a problem.

This will also be the first Women's World Cup with 32 teams, which I have mixed feelings about.  There are too many good women's national teams, so they did need to expand from 24.  But are there 32 teams good enough to have a competitive-enough tournament that isn't watered down?  I guess we'll find out.

The expansion to 32 teams also means that more teams are seeded, although the other five seeded teams in the top pot along with the United States and the two co-hosts ended up being European, pushing Canada and Brazil (among others) into Pot 2.  That obviously makes Pot 2 stronger, but, again, you also ended up with some weaker teams in Pot 3 (and a really weak Pot 4).

So, unfortunately, I think the teams advancing to the round of 16 will be very predictable.  Because the groups do seem to be somewhat balanced.  Each group has two good teams, one decent team, and one team that will be in way over its head.

Group A: New Zealand, Norway, Philippines, Switzerland
New Zealand is the lowest ranked of the seeded teams, but they get the traditional spot in Group A as co-hosts.  Norway's No. 12 in the world, which actually makes them the best team in this group.  Switzerland's ranking is only one spot ahead of New Zealand's, so it could make for a very interesting race between those three for the two spots in the knockout round.

Group B: Australia, Ireland, Nigeria, Canada
Congratulations to Nigeria on escaping the USA-Sweden group!  Of course, they instead get a group with the co-hosts and the Olympic champions.  Australia and Canada will both be very hard to beat.  Also, great job by Ireland to qualify for the first time.  Tough group for them to get out of, though.

Group C: Spain, Costa Rica, Zambia, Japan
Probably the weakest group.  Zambia was the African qualifier for the Olympics last year and actually earned a point thanks to a 4-4 draw with China, but they also lost 10-3 to the Netherlands!  Playing Spain and Japan won't be any easier.  I'm actually a little surprised that Japan's ranking has dropped so much, but I still see those two easily qualifying.

Group D: England, Chile/Senegal/Haiti, Denmark, China
There's actually potential for this group to become interesting.  Chile and Senegal are both worthwhile teams.  I can see either one giving Denmark and/or China a game.  Denmark and China play each other in the first game, which will be huge for both of them, since the winner probably advances along with European champion England, who'll enter the tournament as one of the favorites.

Group E: United States, Vietnam, Netherlands, Portugal/Cameroon/Thailand
Poor Vietnam.  They get to be the Asian opponent that's completely overmatched by the USA in its opening game.  Hopefully the Americans at least act like they've ever scored a goal before in their lives this time!  We came thisclose to having the rematch of the 2019 final between the United States and the Netherlands in the first game.  Instead, it'll be the second game.  (Also, this is the first time the U.S. isn't in a group with Sweden since 1999.)

Group F: France, Jamaica, Brazil, Chinese Taipei/Paraguay/Papua New Guinea/Panama
See what I mean about the TBA spots for the teams in the qualifying tournament?  It's possible to have both Brazil and Paraguay OR both Jamaica and Panama in this group.  Although, frankly, whoever comes out of that qualifying tournament doesn't really matter.  They don't have a chance against France and Brazil.  Neither does Jamaica.

Group G: Sweden, South Africa, Italy, Argentina
Sweden has absolutely no competition here.  Italy's No. 14 in the world and Argentina is No. 29.  South Africa, meanwhile, is No. 54.  The Italians are by far the best of those three, but Sweden definitely has a very favorable draw.  It's not too bad for Italy, either.  Although, second place in this group probably gets Germany in the round of 16, so maybe not.

Group H: Germany, Morocco, Colombia, South Korea
Morocco is the first Arab team ever to qualify for the Women's World Cup, an outstanding achievement that will hopefully only help the game grow for young girls in other Arab nations.  Of course, opening the tournament against Germany won't be particularly fun.  That other opening game between Colombia and South Korea could be very interesting, though.  Colombia's the stronger team, but not by much, so that one could easily be like Denmark-China.

Of course, the group draw is only step one.  And the 32-team field should actually make for a stronger round of 16.  No third-place qualifiers hopefully also means that teams will be more aggressive since there's no benefit in settling for a draw.  (Likewise, there's less of a need to run up the score when your GD is only within your group.)

And I wonder if the bigger field, even if it'll lead to a few more blowouts, will actually make the later rounds of the tournament stronger.  Look at this year's Women's Euro.  All four semifinalists were fantastic!  So, if we get that as a result, I suppose I can get on board with 32 teams.

2022 Postmortem

Hal Steinbrenner may want to check the paperwork.  Because he sure as hell doesn't own the New York Yankees at the moment.  The Houston Astros do.  And there's really no way to sugar coat it.  The Yankees didn't just get swept in the ALCS because they didn't hit.  They lost because they got outplayed by the better team.  Plain and simple.

Back in the heyday of the Yankees-Red Sox rivalry in the early 2000s, Pedro Martinez famously said that the Yankees were his "daddy."  Well, in recent years, it's become pretty clear who the Yankees' "daddy" is.  And, if he were alive, you can bet George wouldn't stand for it.

That, to me, is the biggest difference between Hal Steinbrenner's Yankees and George Steinbrenner's Yankees.  George would've fired Brian Cashman and Aaron Boone a long time ago.  Hal's probably gonna stick with them again, even as the team's World Series drought is now at 13 years.  Or, maybe I should say 13 years and counting.  Especially since beating the Astros won't suddenly become an easier task.

Every season ends exactly the same way for the Yankees.  No matter how good they are in the regular season, they completely lose the ability to hit in the playoffs.  Every offseason, they think they've found the solution to fix it.  Then the postseason comes and the home runs are replaced by strikeouts.  Year after year, it's the same.  Their flaws are exposed by a better team.  And one team in particular has been a thorn in their side.

This season, the Yankees and Astros played 11 times including the ALCS.  Houston went 9-2 in those games.  The two games the Yankees won were on walk-offs.  And in one of those, they were down 6-3 going to the bottom of ninth and put up a four-spot to win 7-6.  They didn't have the lead at the end of an inning during the game until Game 4 of the ALCS...the 92nd inning between the teams in 2022!  That's not exactly a rivalry.  That's pretty much about as one-sided as it can get.

What makes the whole thing worse is that the Yankees seem content to let the Astros be better than them.  One of the biggest reasons why they haven't been to the World Series since 2009 is because they can't beat Houston.  The Astros have eliminated the Yankees from the playoffs four times since 2015, with three of those coming in the ALCS.

By this point, you'd figure they'd know that they'll have to go through Houston.  Yet the Astros have proven time and again that they're better in every facet of the game.  They have better starting pitching, a better bullpen, a better lineup, they actually make contact.  Or, to put it another way, the Astros are built to win in October.  The Yankees are built to win from April-July.

Sure, the Yankees had more injuries than I can count in the second half of the season.  The team they were when they got off to such a torrid start and the team that limped down the stretch before fizzling out in the playoffs weren't even close to the same squad.  They had an entire bullpen's worth of relievers on the injured list, and the pitchers in the actual bullpen were nowhere near the same quality.

The injuries were obviously a big factor, but would Michael King or Chad Green or Ron Marinaccio or even Aroldis Chapman have actually made that much of a difference?  The starting pitching, in fact, was actually pretty good.  It might've even been the only reason the Yankees had a chance in the first two games.  But the lack of hitting, the real issue, made it so that one mistake meant the game.  Just ask Luis Severino about that.

Houston, meanwhile, was firing on all cylinders.  Even if the Yankees had been at full strength, they would've had a tough time beating the Astros.  Would it have been a closer series?  I'd like to think so.  But the end result very likely would've been the same.  Which is why the Yankees need to change their approach.

Winning the AL East is always priority No. 1.  Cashman goes into the offseason with that mindset.  Build a team that's good enough to finish ahead of Baltimore, Boston, Tampa Bay and Toronto.  And, in case you've never noticed, the Yankees, Red Sox and Blue Jays are built the exact same way.  A bunch of power hitters, an ace starter with a solid if not great rotation behind him, and a solid bullpen.  The Rays and Orioles are built differently, but that's mainly because they have to operate with a smaller payroll than the other three.

What does winning the AL East get you, though?  Other than home field advantage in the first round of the playoffs, not a damn thing!  And that's the issue.  They build a team that's designed to be good for six months when it's the seventh month that's the most important.  And having the best team in the regular season means absolutely nothing if you don't have the best team in the playoffs.  Which is something the Yankees haven't had in quite some time!

I'm not saying winning the AL East isn't important.  Of course it is!  And winning the division should be a goal.  But it shouldn't be THE goal.  If you want to win the World Series, you need to build a team that's capable of beating the team that's had your number time and again.  Simply put, stop building your team just to beat the Red Sox, Blue Jays, Rays and Orioles.  Build one that can beat the Astros, too!  Because Houston's not going away anytime soon. 

It was Einstein who defined insanity as "doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results."  Yet that's exactly what the Yankees have been doing.  What they've been doing hasn't been working.  So it's time to try something new.  Which starts with firing Brian Cashman and Aaron Boone.  It's something George would've done a loooooonnnnng time ago!

My 2022 NFL Picks (Week 7)

Something crazy happened when I went to make my pick in my survival pool this week.  I couldn't!  Then I went to the league page and saw the reason why.  I had already won the league!  After Week 6!  We were playing with three strikes, and everyone else had still been eliminated after only six games.  Crazy!

But then I thought about that and realized it probably shouldn't be all that surprising.  Because this season has been absolutely nuts so far!  Case in point, 12 of the 16 teams in the NFC have at least three losses.  Only the Eagles, Giants, Cowboys and Vikings have two or fewer (and the Giants' loss was to Dallas, while one of the Cowboys' losses was to Philadelphia).  Meanwhile, in the AFC, the Jets are currently a wild card, while the Patriots and Steelers are both in last place!  

And, frankly, I think things will only get crazier.  At this rate, we're looking at a 10-7 division winner and probably a few 9-8 wild card teams.  Unless things start to settle out, which, based on the first six weeks, doesn't seem too likely...

Thursday Night: Arizona (Win)

Falcons (3-3) at Bengals (3-3): Cincinnati-How is Atlanta tied for first?  That's a serious question.  Because the Falcons are not very good!  But they're somehow finding ways to win games.  And with Tampa Bay struggling out of the gate, here we are.  The Bengals, meanwhile, still aren't back to last year's form, but they're getting there.  They'll creep over .500 for the first time this season.

Lions (1-4) at Cowboys (4-2): Dallas-Dallas went 4-1 without Dak Prescott.  Now they get him back, which will only make them that much better.  Keep in mind, both of the Cowboys' losses were on Sunday Night Football, so as long as it's not Sunday night, they're in good shape.  It's also crazy that they have the third-best record in the NFC but would be the 6-seed if the playoffs started today!  The NFC East is the NFC Beast once again.  So they need to keep winning the non-division games to have any chance of moving up.

Colts (3-2-1) at Titans (3-2): Tennessee-This is a weird one.  Tennessee is in first place in the AFC South, but that's only because the Titans had their bye last week.  The Colts are a half-game back because of their tie, further proof that ties can both help you and hurt you.  Things will be a lot clearer after their first head-to-head meeting.  Tennessee will either lead by a game-and-a-half or it'll be Indy with the game-and-a-half advantage (I think; throwing a bye in makes this even more confusing!).  Anyway, go with Option A.  The 4-2 Titans leading by 1.5 games.

Packers (3-3) at Commanders (2-4): Green Bay-Good news Packers fans!  They don't have to play another New York team the rest of the season!  I'm not sure what to take away from those two games.  Are the Giants and Jets better than people thought?  Are the Packers worse?  Is it a little bit of both?  If they fall in Washington and make it three straight, I think we'll know the answer.

Buccaneers (3-3) at Panthers (1-5): Tampa Bay-Tampa Bay is one of the many teams in the NFL that confuses me.  The Bucs should be running away with the NFC South, which, frankly, is one of the weakest divisions in football, better than only the AFC South.  Instead they're 3-3 after some just confounding losses.  Losing to Kansas City isn't bad, but they gave up 41 points in that game!  Meanwhile, their offense was completely stifled by both the Packers and Steelers.  They can't possibly lose to Carolina.  Can they?

Giants (5-1) at Jaguars (2-4): Giants-Say what you want about the Giants and whether or not they're actually good.  The fact remains.  They're 5-1 and have a very soft schedule over the next few weeks.  Jaguars, Seahawks, Texans, Lions before the game in Dallas on Thanksgiving.  Will they win all four?  Probably not.  (I think they lose next week in Seattle.)  Can they?  Of course!  Them losing this week would definitely be a surprise.

Browns (2-4) at Ravens (3-3): Baltimore-Once all the dust settles, the AFC North will probably come down to Baltimore and Cincinnati.  So, of course, after the Ravens win the first matchup with the Bengals, they go into MetLife Stadium and lose to the Giants!  But now they're back home and taking on a weaker opponent in Cleveland.  The Browns' early momentum has faded.  Baltimore should win this one pretty handily.

Jets (4-2) at Broncos (2-4): Jets-I'm glad I'm not the only one who's been confused/frustrated about the fact that four of Denver's first six games were in prime time!  (And they've got another one next week, sort of, when they play the Jaguars in London!)  It's not like they've been a team that's worthy of prime time, either, unless you're entertained by a team with a complete inability to score!  Fortunately, most of America (but not those of us in New York!) gets a break from that anemic offense.  Sidebar: I can't believe I'm actually picking the Jets on the road!

Texans (1-3-1) at Raiders (1-4): Las Vegas-Neither one of these teams lost last week!  Unfortunately, one of them will this week.  They both have only one win, but their records are actually very different.  The Raiders have had some bad luck and are probably better than 1-4.  The Texans, meanwhile, are not.  They might be the worst team in the league.

Seahawks (3-3) at Chargers (4-2): Chargers-The Chargers came perilously close to putting their playoff chances in jeopardy last week.  And it really would've been all of their own making.  As it is, they managed to pull out that Broncos game to get to 4-2 and put themselves in a much better position (which would've made losing so much worse, since they knew the Bills beat the Chiefs).  A win this week to make them 5-2 makes that position even better.

Chiefs (4-2) at 49ers (3-3): Kansas City-FOX is really playing up the tight end factor in its promos for America's Game of the Week.  Kelce vs. Kittle with Olsen in the booth.  What I'm curious about with this game is how Christian McCaffrey's 49ers debut will go.  Is he the missing piece that offense needed?  Regardless, I don't see them beating a Chiefs team that's better than them.

Steelers (2-4) at Dolphins (3-3): Pittsburgh-Yes, I'm going out on a bit of a limb by picking Pittsburgh, especially when the Steelers have looked downright awful most of the season.  But let me explain.  It's a pick less about the Steelers than it is about the Dolphins.  Miami started 3-0, but is 0-3 since Tua's concussion.  They haven't shown much of an ability to win without their quarterback.  So, I'm taking the Steelers as a result.

Bears (2-4) at Patriots (3-3): New England-Take everything I said about the Broncos and apply it to the Chicago Bears.  I literally have no idea why this team is on national TV so much (especially in games where they don't play the Packers).  As it is, New England is starting to get back on track.  This would be three straight for the Patriots after a 1-3 start.

This Week: 1-0
Last Week: 7-7
Overall: 52-42-1

Loving the Reverse Retros

Unlike the ridiculous MLB City Connect uniforms or whatever they're calling the latest new NBA uniform sets (which would be what? the fifth different option for each team?), I absolutely love the NHL's Reverse Retro jerseys.  They've, of course, embraced this trend for a while now.  Every Winter Classic features special uniforms for the game that, more often than not, are based on the participating teams' classic look.  These jerseys, for the most part, are universally embraced, and how many teams have we seen revert back to an updated version of that look as their "new" logo shortly thereafter?

It's also given some teams the chance to honor their history, even if it isn't necessarily in the same city (or the same franchise).  The Winnipeg Jets pay homage to the original Winnipeg Jets, even though that team is now the Arizona Coyotes.  The Minnesota Wild's Reverse Retro is the logo of the Minnesota North Stars, who are currently the Dallas Stars.  Likewise, the Hurricanes and Avalanche have outstanding Reverse Retro looks recognizing their past as the Hartford Whalers and Quebec Nordiques!

This season's set of Reverse Retro uniforms includes one for all 32 teams.  Does it make sense for the Kraken or Golden Knights to have a Reverse Retro uniform?  No!  (Although, Seattle could go all the way back to the Seattle Metropolitans and do the S with "Seattle" inside it.)  But I'm willing to overlook that little piece of historical inaccuracy, especially if the entire point was to give every team one.

Obviously some are better than others.  The Red Wings and Blackhawks appear to have not put any effort at all into theirs.  But others are spectacular.  Lists like this are always purely subjective, but here are my 10 favorites...

10. Capitals: Yes, returning to the red, white and blue made complete sense for a team in the nation's capital (and literally named after the nation's capital!).  But there was that era in the late 90s when they strayed and had that blue and black color scheme with the logo they called the "screaming eagle."  Last year's Reverse Retro was the "screaming eagle" in their current color scheme.  This year, he's back with his original colors (although, I think they wore a blue jersey with black trim when this was their regular uniform)!

9. Bruins: Remember when the Bruins had a mustard-colored third jersey with a bear's head on it?  They've had different variations of their stoked B for so long, that it always catches your eye when they do something else.  Is this jersey/logo particularly memorable?  No.  But I do like it, if only because it's nice to see the Bruins do something different.

8. Avalanche: Last year, they hit a home run with their homage to the Nordiques.  This season, it's a sort-of throwback to the Colorado Rockies (the ones who became the Devils, not the baseball team).  The C is also the Colorado state flag.  While not nearly as good as last year's, it's still a solid follow-up.

7. Ducks: If there's any team that should go back to its original logo and color scheme, it's the Ducks.  I get why they changed it.  Disney sold the team, dropped the "Mighty", and changed the colors and logo.  But the angry, duck-billed goalie mask is still one of the great logos in NHL history!  They lose points here because it's in the current colors instead of the original purple and teal.

6. Rangers: The Rangers' original Lady Liberty is one of the great alternate jerseys in NHL history!  It was very sad when they took it out of circulation.  So it makes me very happy to see that it's back!  There are slight variations from the original, but they're so negligible that they've pretty much brought it back exactly the same.

5. Sharks: What I absolutely love about this jersey is how the Sharks' Reverse Retro is a callback to the dearly departed California Golden Seals, the original Bay Area NHL team.  It's almost an exact replica of the Golden Seals' jersey, which is on display at the Hall of Fame.  The Golden Seals were the last team in the four major leagues to fold, but it's nice to see them live on through the Bay Area's current franchise.

4. Penguins: USA Today liked this one the best, and it's definitely up there.  The Penguins switched back to their original logo at the start of the Crosby/Malkin Era, but this one will always make me think of an in-his-prime Jaromir Jagr skating circles around everyone else.  Plus, the robo-penguin is a pretty solid logo in its own right!

3. Islanders: When the fisherman first arrived in the mid-90s, he was so universally derided that he only lasted one season.  But you missed him, didn't you?  It's OK, you can admit it!  What makes this version of the jersey so much better than the original is that they didn't go nuts with the wavy lines in multiple colors this time.  This one actually looks pretty sharp.

2. Sabres: I'll be honest.  I may be a little biased on this one.  I'll always have an affinity for the Sabres' buffalo head logo.  When I was going to college in Buffalo, it was the Sabres that were good and the Bills who sucked, and I went to many a game wearing my black, red and silver Sabres jersey.  So, it made me sad when they changed to that ridiculous "buffaslug."  And, because of how much it means to me and the memories from that formative time in my life, I'll always prefer the buffalo head to any other Sabres logo, past or present.

1. Kings: They've been so associated with black and silver for so long that so many people don't even know the Kings' original color scheme was purple and gold to match the Lakers.  If you think about it, it actually works, too, since purple is considered a very regal color.  Their Reverse Retro is a modern take on their original uniform from their expansion season.  And it's absolutely superb!  I love the simplicity of it.  It's just a crown, but an incredibly detailed crown.  Simply beautiful.

What A Weekend of Playoff Baseball

We're gonna see the NLCS we all expected--Phillies vs. Padres!  The 5 and 6 seeds, who both beat a 100-win opponent in the Division Series (the Padres also beat the 101-win Mets in the Wild Card Series).  But, you know what the crazy thing is?  They were both the better team in their respective Division Series!  While both series were considered "upsets," you wouldn't have known it by watching the games.  Which is the beautiful thing about baseball!

Right after the Padres-Mets series, I made a point about the Mets-Braves NL East race that I think speaks volumes about San Diego.  Whoever won that division was gonna be the No. 2 seed and get the bye into the Division Series, but, seemingly just as importantly, they would avoid the Dodgers.  What went unsaid was that whoever avoided the Dodgers also avoided the Padres.  And the Padres are a damn good team!  People are only now seeing how good.

A lot has been made about the fact that San Diego finished 22 games out of first place.  Which says more about the Dodgers' ridiculous 111-51 regular season than it does about the Padres.  (In 1998, the Red Sox finished 22 games behind the Yankees and won the AL wild card, BTW.)  The Padres knew they were this good.  That's why they got Juan Soto and Josh Hader.  Plenty of people are surprised by their run.  They're not.

You know who else isn't surprised they're making a run?  The Phillies!  Philadelphia benefitted from this year's new format.  They wouldn't have made the playoffs if six teams didn't qualify.  But, as they're showing too, if you're good, it doesn't matter how many games you won during the regular season.

That's the moral of the story here.  I don't think the Padres and Phillies were necessarily underestimated.  It might've been that the Dodgers and Braves were overestimated!  How could either one of them lose in the Division Series?  Well, as it turns out, very easily.  Because they were both flawed teams.  It just took a hot opponent to expose those flaws.

Maybe I'm oversimplifying it, but you know how they say a hot goalie can win you a series in the Stanley Cup Playoffs?  It's the same thing in baseball.  The Phillies and Padres got hot at the right time.  They both entered the Division Series on a roll, and there was no way of stopping them.  It's too early to say if that five-day break the top two seeds get was a factor, but, frankly, I don't really think it mattered in the NLDS!  Because the better team in each series wasn't the one that won 100 games!

It wasn't just how those two NLDS played out, either.  It was the games themselves.  The entire weekend was tremendous!  The Phillies started hitting and never stopped.  The Padres' rally goose landed on the field at Dodger Stadium and wouldn't leave, then their bullpen completely shut down the Dodgers' lineup!  And the atmosphere in both Philadelphia and San Diego, two cities that have waited a loooonnnng time to see playoff baseball, was electric!

Meanwhile, in the American League, the Astros swept the Mariners in a series that was anything but a sure thing.  Seattle had the lead in Game 1 until Yordan Alvarez decided they didn't.  And Game 3 was a 5 1/2-hour, 18-inning marathon that ended 1-0.  Seattle, another city starved for playoff baseball, got two games for the price of one!  The Mariners' season didn't end the same way as the Phillies' or Padres', but they did their city proud.

Yankees-Guardians, meanwhile, has been a style of contrasts.  The Yankees have been doing what they normally do...hit home runs.  Then hope the bullpen doesn't blow it.  The Guardians have been hitting bloop single after bloop single, then relying on the bullpen to shut the door.  Game 5 was rained out, so the epic conclusion will have to wait, but this series is a great example of how being the "best" team doesn't necessarily mean a damn thing in the postseason!

Throughout the Yankees-Guardians series, Bob Costas has been hammering home a point that really puts what happened to the Dodgers and Braves into perspective.  A playoff series isn't about who you were during the season.  It's about who you are now.  Who's best-equipped to survive the month-long tournament?  And that's not necessarily the team that had the best regular season.

Among the Dodgers-Padres postmortems was an interesting comment made on either the FS1 or MLB Network postgame show.  Everything came easy for the Dodgers all season.  They never faced any adversity.  They knew they had flaws, but they were never exposed, so they didn't do anything to fix them.  The first time their backs were against the wall was Game 4 in San Diego...and their bullpen promptly imploded against a Padres team that might've gone 5-14 against the Dodgers in the regular season, but was the far superior team over the last week.

The Yankees are another great example of that point.  In April and May, they were unbeatable.  Then their entire bullpen got hurt.  That's why they had Clarke Schmidt on the mound in the ninth inning as they blew a two-run lead in Game 3.  A strength has turned into their biggest weakness.  Such a weakness, in fact, that no one would argue the fact that Cleveland has the better bullpen in the series.

Meanwhile, let's bring it back to the Padres.  They knew they weren't gonna catch the Dodgers in the NL West.  They didn't care.  They knew they'd be a dangerous team in the playoffs regardless.  That's why they went out and got Soto and Hader.  They're good enough to win.  And they're good enough to win now.  Which is exactly what they're showing everybody.

So, you can talk about how big of an upset each NLDS was and how much of a disappointment this 111-win Dodger team is, but they ran into a freight train and couldn't get off the tracks.  Are the Dodgers better than the Padres?  Probably.  Just like the Braves are probably better than the Phillies.  You could even make the argument that the Mets are better than the Padres.

None of that matters.  Having the better regular season record doesn't guarantee you a thing (other than home field advantage) in the playoffs.  That's especially true in a best-of-five.  The Padres and Phillies both won a game on the road, then took care of business at home.  That's all they needed to do to pull the upset.  But were they really upsets?

As John Sterling likes to say to his broadcast partner, "That's baseball, Suzyn."  And that's what we've seen over the course of the past week-and-a-half.  Not just baseball.  Playoff baseball.  Playoff baseball that's been tremendous!  And these were just the first two rounds!  I can't wait to see what the LCSes and World Series have in store!

My 2022 NFL Picks (Week 6)

Baseball is depressing.  It's a good thing hockey season started.  And it's a good thing that football season is really heating up, too.  We've gotten to the point in the season where we start having byes, although I'd still like to know how the NFL decides whose bye is when.  It's so completely random!  It feels like they just pull four teams out of a hat each week!  And coming back from London doesn't automatically get you one anymore, since the Saints and Vikings both played last week and the Packers and Giants are both playing this week.

Thursday Night: Chicago (Loss)

49ers (3-2) at Falcons (2-3): San Francisco-Last season, the NFC West put three teams in the playoffs, and there was every reason that would happen again this year.  Instead, they're all mired in mediocrity, with the 49ers in first place at 3-2.  Is San Francisco the best team in that division?  I don't think so.  But they'll get another chance to add to their win stockpile by beating another not good NFC South team on the road.

Patriots (2-3) at Browns (2-3): New England-Calling this a "must-win" game for the Patriots might be a little premature, but a loss certainly wouldn't be good.  New England, believe it or not, is currently in sole possession of last place in the AFC East!  They're still looking for an identity and playing a Cleveland team that has been competitive in every game.  Logic dictates the Browns should probably be the pick here.  But, as you know, I just have a problem picking the Cleveland Browns in any game, regardless of whether or not I probably should.

Jets (3-2) at Packers (3-2): Green Bay-Who would've figured that the Packers and Jets would both come into this game with the same record?  Or that the Jets would be sitting in a playoff position when they met?!  I certainly wouldn't have fallen into either category!  Last week was a wake-up call for the Packers, though.  They can't take any teams lightly, which I think they did with the Giants.  They won't make the same mistake against the other New York team.

Jaguars (2-3) at Colts (2-2-1): Jacksonville-Jacksonville always beats Indianapolis.  I don't know why.  It's just one of those things that happens in the NFL.  They've already played once this season, and the Jaguars shut out the Colts 24-0 in Week 2.  So, even though the Colts will probably at least score this time, there's no reason to think the Jaguars won't beat them again.

Vikings (4-1) at Dolphins (3-2): Minnesota-Tua's cleared but won't play.  Which he shouldn't.  Because he still probably has a concussion!  Anyway, we saw last week what the Dolphins look like without him and it wasn't pretty!  And that was against the Jets!  Is there any reason to think they'll fare any better against the Vikings?  Sure, the game is in Miami, but that's not enough of a factor to make a difference.

Bengals (2-3) at Saints (2-3): Cincinnati-It's Who Dat vs. Who Dey in N'awlins.  It's also a chance to see Andy Dalton against his former team, who obviously made the right call in going with Joe Burrow.  The AFC champs find themselves needing a win after last week's 19-17 loss in Baltimore.  This'll be another tough road game for them, but the result should be different.

Ravens (3-2) at Giants (4-1): Giants-Can all of the haters please acknowledge that the Giants just might be for real?  They hit a home run in Brian Daboll, who has to be the early favorite for Coach of the Year.  Beating the Packers in London sent a real message to take this team seriously.  And Saquon Barkley is an MVP candidate if he stays healthy.  I can't believe I'm actually excited about the Giants for the first time in years!

Buccaneers (3-2) at Steelers (1-4): Tampa Bay-OK, it's official.  The Steelers aren't good.  They've lost four straight and looked progressively worse in each game.  As if losing to the Jets wasn't bad enough, they go and manage just a field goal against the Bills.  Unfortunately, things probably won't go much better against Tom Brady and the Bucs.

Panthers (1-4) at Rams (2-3): Rams-The Rams are below .500 this late in the season for the first time under Sean McVay.  Which isn't really an indictment of them as much as a commentary on how difficult their early schedule has been.  Their losses are to Buffalo, San Francisco (who they always lose to for some reason) and Dallas, who have a combined four losses between them.  Against Carolina, they'll look like the Super Bowl champions again.

Cardinals (2-3) at Seahawks (2-3): Arizona-Had the Mariners won Game 3, this one would've been moved from a 1:00 Pacific start to the incredibly odd start time of 2:30 Pacific.  But, since the Astros won, it'll start at its regularly scheduled time.  Which prevents the awkwardness of the finish running into the start of the Sunday night game.

Bills (4-1) at Chiefs (4-1): Kansas City-We all know what happened the last time these two played.  It was an instant classic that pissed so many people off the NFL (unnecessarily) changed the rules because of it!  The NFL knew the rematch would be a must-see, which is why they made it a full national broadcast on CBS (I'm assuming this was a game CBS requested for a doubleheader instead of in prime time).  The Chiefs have beaten the Bills in the playoffs the last two years, with both games taking place in Kansas City.  This one's in Kansas City, too, thus, they're the pick.

Cowboys (4-1) at Eagles (5-0): Philadelphia-Suddenly, the NFC East is the NFC East again!  The Eagles, Cowboys and Giants are a combined 13-2, and the Giants' loss is to Dallas!  Whether it stays like this all season is a different question, but there's no denying that this is a huge one on Sunday night.  Either Philly will have a two-game lead or Dallas will have the tiebreaker.  It's been a good week for Philadelphia sports, so go with Option A.

Broncos (2-3) at Chargers (3-2): Chargers-Once again, Denver is playing a national game!  Why are the Broncos in prime time every week?!  Seriously, this is their sixth game and it's already the fourth time they've been on Thursday/Sunday/Monday night!  I know they have Russell Wilson now, but that's a little excessive for a team that hasn't made the playoffs in six years.  Especially since they'll be 1-3 in prime time after this one!

This Week: 0-1
Last Week: 9-7
Overall: 44-36-1 

Best Countries By Goalie

As I was watching the Rangers-Lightning season opener on Tuesday night, something dawned on me.  The next time we actually get an international hockey tournament with NHL players, how is anyone beating Russia (provided they're allowed to participate)?  Andrei Vasilevskiy and Igor Shesterkin are arguably the two best goalies in the league...and they're both Russian!  Seriously, how do you score against them?  And which one is the starter?  Does that even matter?

Of course, "Russia" (or whatever name they're forced to play under) is currently banned from international hockey, so those might be moot questions.  If they're back by the 2024 World Cup of Hockey, however, they'll be among the favorites simply because of those two goalies.

Who else would be, though?  Well, there's the usual suspects (Canada, United States, Finland) that have plenty of options to choose from, but they're far from the only countries with NHL-caliber goalies.  In fact, there are nine nations represented among the 64 starting and backup goaltenders that started the season on NHL rosters.  How do those nine nations rank?  Let's see...

9. Slovakia (Jaroslav Halak)
Believe it or not, Halak is the only Slovakian-born goalie on an NHL roster to begin the season.  And he's a 37-year-old backup!  If this was a few years ago and Halak was still the Islanders' starter, Slovakia would be a little higher.  But, as it is, I see their goalie coming from their bronze medal-winning Olympic team.

8. Denmark (Fredrik Andersen)
Denmark ranks ahead of Slovakia simply because Andersen is better than Halak.  He's one of the biggest reasons why the Hurricanes are as good as they are.  With him in net, the Danes would possibly be able to pull the upset against an opponent like Sweden or the Czech Republic (or is it Czechia?).

7. Germany (Thomas Greiss, Philipp Grubauer)
There are only two German goalies currently in the NHL, but they're both quality.  The "starter" would also be pretty clear.  Seattle gave Grubauer a massive free agent contract to be the face of the franchise in its expansion season.  Greiss is the backup in St. Louis and would be Grubauer's backup on the German team, but he's a good guy to have as a backup.

6. Czech(ia) Republic (Pavel Francouz, Petr Mrazek, Vitek Vanecek)
I'd have the Czechs (Czechians?) ranked much higher if the options behind Francouz were better.  As it is, his backups aren't the best.  Still, Francouz was part of a Cup winner last season, so he's not a bad guy to have as the starter.  It's just that there are five starters better than him (who have better backups, too).

5. Sweden (Magnus Hellberg, Jacob Markstrom, Linus Ullmark)
If you wanted to swap Sweden and the Czech Republic, I'd have no problem with that.  I just happen to think Markstrom is slightly better than Francouz, which is why I give the Swedes the nod.  Of course, we're well past the days of Sweden having the best goalie in the world on its side.  None of these guys are Henrik Lundqvist.

4. United States (John Gibson, Connor Hellebuyck, Jonathan Quick)
Beyond Hellebuyck, the clear starter, there are plenty of options for backups.  There's Thatcher Demko of the Canucks, Jeremy Swayman of the Bruins and Spencer Knight of the Panthers to name just a few.  But I'm going with Jonathan Quick of the Kings, who was the U.S. starter before Hellebuyck, and Anaheim's John Gibson as an insurance policy since he could probably handle being a No. 3 better than the others.  Still, Hellebuyck is a clear No. 1.

3. Finland (Ville Husso, Antti Raanta, Juuse Saros)
Finland's had some great goalies over the years.  There was Miika Kiprusoff, then Tuukka Rask, then, of course, the great Pekka Rinne.  Rinne's successor in Nashville was Juuse Saros, who'll also be his successor as the No. 1 for the Finnish National Team.  I like Raanta and Husso better than the second and third American goalies (whoever they may be), which is why I have Finland ranked a spot higher.

2. Canada (Jordan Binnington, Tristan Jarry, Darcy Kuemper)
Once we finally do have another international tournament with NHL players, I'm curious to see who the Canadian No. 1 will be.  Because they don't have a Martin Brodeur or Carey Price or even a Marc-Andre Fleury anymore.  My guess is that it would be Darcy Kuemper, who's in Washington now after winning the Cup last year in Colorado, but I wouldn't be surprised if it's either Binnington or Jarry.  Regardless, the Canadian depth is enough to put them in the 2-spot.

1. Russia (Sergei Bobrovsky, Igor Shesterkin, Andrei Vasilevskiy)
You know a team has ridiculous goalie depth when Sergei Bobrovsky is the third goalie!  Frankly, all three of them would be clear starters if they were all from different nations.  As it is, you can flip a coin between Shesterkin and Vasilevskiy.  You can't go wrong either way.  The crop of Russian goalies in the NHL is so strong, in fact, that there's a pretty good group who wouldn't even make the team.  And that doesn't even include the guys playing in the KHL!

Goalie is obviously just one position.  But it's the most important position.  As we've seen plenty of times in the Stanley Cup Playoffs, a hot goalie can win you a series.  Especially in a short tournament like a World Cup or an Olympics, a hot goalie can really make the difference. 

Which is why, regardless of what skaters the other teams put on the ice, Russia would have to be a favorite just on the strength of its goaltending alone.  Hopefully we'll get the chance to see one of those best-on-best international tournaments again soon.  Whether Russia should/will participate is a separate issue that I'm staying out of.  But if they do play, they'd arguably be the team to beat.

Hockey's Back On A Normal Schedule

Believe it or not, it's been four years since the NHL played a "normal" season.  The 2019-20 season had the COVID break and summer "bubbles," the 2020-21 season was just 56 games and ended in July, and last season had an Olympic break that turned into a COVID-makeup break.  But this season, at last, will start and end at the normal times.

Of course, one team was very successful in the pandemic-affected seasons.  The Tampa Bay Lightning went to the Stanley Cup Final in all three of those years, winning back-to-back Cups before losing to the Avalanche in June.  There's no reason to think that the Lightning are going anywhere, either.  But even they know the window is closing.  It's just a matter of who in the East can/will take it from them.

It also doesn't even matter how good the Lightning's regular season is.  As long as they make the playoffs, they're the team to beat in the Eastern Conference.  And there aren't eight teams in the East that are better than them.  In fact, it very well could be all of the usual players in the East once again.

Atlantic Division: Frankly, I don't see anyone breaking that triumvirate of Tampa Bay, Toronto and Boston atop the Atlantic Division.  Although, it was Florida that won the President's Trophy last season, so thinking the Panthers won't also be in the mix is just silly.  Of the four, I'm most confident in the Lightning and Maple Leafs to reach the postseason.  As for winning in the playoffs, that's not exactly Toronto's specialty.  But that's a topic for April!

I'm also curious to see what the Montreal Canadiens have in store for us.  They went from playing in the Stanley Cup Final to the worst team in the entire NHL!  So, which is it?  My guess is somewhere in between.  I've got a feeling the Sabres might make some noise, too.  Not enough to end their playoff drought, but enough to give their fans some hope.  Certainly more hope than fans of the Red Wings and Senators should have.

Metropolitan Division: In the Metropolitan Division, there are five teams I can see making the playoffs.  And, frankly, it wouldn't surprise me if both Eastern Conference wild cards come out of the Met.  The only three I see definitely missing out are the Blue Jackets, Devils and Flyers.  As for the Hurricanes, Rangers, Islanders, Penguins and Capitals, though, the order of finish is anybody's guess.

If I had to venture a guess, though, I'll say Rangers, Islanders and Hurricanes will be the three definite playoff teams.  The Rangers arrived ahead of schedule, and they went all the way to the Eastern Conference Final last season, replacing the Islanders, who had been to the last two as the New York participant.  The Islanders' 2021-22 season was a bit of a surprise, and I fully expect them to be back in the playoffs.  They'll duke it out for the division title, with Carolina finishing third.  Pittsburgh and Washington both make the playoffs as wild cards.

Central Division: Every time I saw the Avalanche play last season, I sat there thinking, "this is the best team in the league."  So their winning the Cup was not a surprise.  And there's no reason to think they can't start a Lightning-like dynasty of their own in Denver.  Especially because the rest of the Central Division isn't particularly strong.

St. Louis is good.  I see the Blues finishing second.  And I see Winnipeg bouncing back after a rough 2021-22 season.  Someone out of the Minnesota/Nashville/Dallas group will manage to make the playoffs, too.  I'm just not sure which one it'll be.  There are reasons why I can see it being each of them, and there are just as many reasons why I think it won't be each of them.  The two teams in the Central I am certain won't make the playoffs are Chicago and Arizona.

Pacific Division: Last season was a good one for our friends in Western Canada.  The Flames won the division with 111 points and the Oilers finally played like that team we all knew they could be.  They were no match for the Avalanche in the Western Conference Final, but if we get a rematch this season, it could be a different story.  We're just scratching the surface in Edmonton.  The Oilers have loads of potential.

The 2021-22 season also marked the first time in franchise history that the Golden Knights missed the playoffs, which led to almost a complete overhaul in Vegas.  There's so much talent on that team to think their postseason absence will be an extended one, though.  The Kings may have something to say about that, and you know the Kraken will want to make an impact after their inaugural season was something more typical of what you'd see from an expansion team (not that insanely-good first year the Knights had!).  Vancouver surprised me last season and has some young talent, but I'm not sure they can follow it up.  The California teams not named the Kings stink.

There's always that one random team that comes out of nowhere and is good.  Just like there's always that one team that's supposed to be good, but has injuries, etc., and ends up firing its coach and trading away all of its best players.  There's also no way to predict who those teams might be.  (Although, I think Boston is a candidate for the one that's bad because of injuries.)

But, there's obviously no way of knowing that.  All we can do is assess the teams based on how they look right now, as the 2022-23 season is set to begin.  And I feel confident in saying that there's probably about 25 teams that have a legitimate belief they could be a playoff team this season.

When all the dust settles, though, I think we see our second straight repeat champion.  The Avalanche may be better than they were last season, so they're obviously the team to beat.  And, call me crazy, but I think they face the New York Rangers for the Cup.  Which would add an entirely different storyline to the mix because Igor Shesterkin's backup last season was Alexander Georgiev, who's now the starting goalie for...the Colorado Avalanche!

My 2022 NFL Picks (Week 5)

It's a good thing I don't have Amazon Prime and I refuse to get it just to watch Thursday Night Football (and the Yankee games that YES insists on making their fans pay extra to watch).  Because that Colts-Broncos game must've been brutal!  A game that goes to overtime with the only scoring coming on seven field goals.  Thrilling stuff!

Thursday Night: Denver (Loss)

Giants (3-1) vs Packers (3-1): Green Bay-Green Bay becomes the 32nd and final team to play in London.  Although, if you think about it, it makes sense that the Packers have never played there before.  Every home game they play is sold out, so they wouldn't want to give one up, and their fans travel, so their opponents would always want to make sure that game was played in their stadium.  But, now that teams don't have a choice about going to London, the Brits will be exposed to Aaron Rodgers for the first time.  Hopefully this game is as good as Vikings-Saints was.  Either way, I see the NFC North moving to 2-0 across the pond this season.

Steelers (1-3) at Bills (3-1): Buffalo-So, it turns out it wasn't just Chicago.  Mitchell Trubisky might just be a bad quarterback.  So the Steelers made the drastic move and benched him.  Which they had to do if they have any chance of saving their season.  Unfortunately, it doesn't matter who their quarterback is against the Bills.  Make it four straight losses for Pittsburgh.

Chargers (2-2) at Browns (2-2): Chargers-Is this gonna be another one of those seasons where completely different Chargers teams show up every week?  So, which Chargers will it be?  The ones that lost (badly) at home to Jacksonville?  Or the ones that went to Houston last week and put 34 points on the board (albeit against the Texans' defense)?  I'll go with the latter, mainly because I just can't bring myself to pick the Cleveland Browns in any game.

Bears (2-2) at Vikings (3-1): Minnesota-As I've said numerous times, it doesn't matter who the coach or the quarterback is.  The Bears, as a team, simply aren't that good.  The Vikings, meanwhile, are.  It is odd, though, that they'll have played all five of their division home games by Week 5.  I'm also a little concerned about jetlag, coming back from London without a bye week in between.  Not enough to pick Chicago, but concerned that it'll make the game closer than it should be.

Lions (1-3) at Patriots (1-3): New England-When was the last time New England was in sole possession of last place?  I'm not talking about being in last place because they started 0-1 either!  All is not lost for the Patriots, though.  The Packers needed overtime to beat them at Lambeau last week, and their schedule is about to become a lot easier.  Starting with this week's win over the Lions.

Seahawks (2-2) at Saints (1-3): New Orleans-That was crazy in London!  A 61-yarder to tie the game, then losing because he missed a 62-yarder from pretty much the same exact spot.  The Saints actually looked really good in that game, too.  And Andy Dalton looked great!  Not the Cincinnati Andy Dalton, but certainly good enough for the Saints to feel comfortable not rushing Jamies Winston back.

Dolphins (3-1) at Jets (2-2): Miami-Tua won't play.  Just like he shouldn't have against Cincinnati, but did anyway until he got concussed again!  The good news is that, since they played on Thursday night last week, the Dolphins have had 10 days to figure out a game plan without him.  After the Jets won in Pittsburgh last week, teams know not to take them lightly.  But I still think the Dolphins go into MetLife and win.

Falcons (2-2) at Buccaneers (2-2): Tampa Bay-Tom Brady's had a rough week.  The Bucs have lost two straight, and now we find out that he and Giselle are getting divorced!  Tampa Bay is also somehow tied with Atlanta for first place even though the Falcons aren't good.  That should change this week, as Tampa will once again assert itself as the best team in the NFC South.

Titans (2-2) at Commanders (1-3): Washington-Call me crazy, but I like the Commanders in this one.  I can't put a reason on why.  I just think they'll win.  Maybe it's because they're playing the Titans, who don't exactly exude confidence.  Yes, they've won two in a row, but it would be hard to say either of those efforts was particularly inspiring.  It's not like Washington has been too inspiring, either.  I still think they'll win, though.

Texans (0-3-1) at Jaguars (2-2): Jacksonville-With the Raiders getting their first win last week, Houston is now the only winless team in the league.  But the Texans had that tie in Week 1, so we already know they won't be challenging the 0-16 Lions and Browns.  The Jaguars, meanwhile, are tied for first place with the Titans.  Bet you didn't see that one coming!  After this week, we'll be staring at a 3-2 Jacksonville team.

49ers (2-2) at Panthers (1-3): San Francisco-The 49ers' regular season dominance of the Rams continues!  Now they head to Charlotte looking for their first road win of the season.  It's not exactly like they've played a who's who of the NFL on the road either!  Chicago and Denver.  And that Broncos game was a thrilling 11-10 barnburner!  They'll probably beat the Panthers, but it likely won't be pretty.

Cowboys (3-1) at Rams (2-2): Dallas-I understand that they front-loaded the good teams' schedules with other good teams so that they could have good TV matchups in the beginning of the season, but the Rams' schedule so far has been ridiculous!  Bills, Falcons, Cardinals, 49ers, Cowboys.  That's four playoff teams in the first five weeks.  Yes, two of them are conference game, and, yes, they won the Super Bowl last year.  But still, that's brutal.  It'll get better for them after this week, but they'll be 2-3 by then.

Eagles (4-0) at Cardinals (2-2): Arizona-Well, that Philadelphia vs. Cardinals doubleheader won't happen after all!  And this looks like the one that'll have the '72 Dolphins cracking the champagne.  Are the Eagles the best team in the NFC, maybe even the entire NFL?  Probably.  But winning in Arizona is not an easy task.  They'll be reminded of that this week.

Bengals (2-2) at Ravens (2-2): Cincinnati-Is it too early to say this is a big one in the AFC North?  The Ravens and Bengals are tied for first place with the Browns, and they figure to be the two at the top of the division in January, too.  Cincinnati has finally started looking like last year's Bengals after that 0-2 start, while the Ravens finally get to test themselves against a team that's not in the AFC East!  I like the momentum the Bengals have right now.  Enough to pick them on the road.

Raiders (1-3) at Chiefs (3-1): Kansas City-We all know that the Chiefs are good, but they made a big statement last week.  It wasn't just that they went into Tampa and won.  It's how they won.  They hung 41 points on a defense that many people think is the best in the league!  Which goes to show that really, the only team that's beating the Chiefs is themselves.  Certainly not the Raiders.

This Week: 0-1
Last Week: 11-5
Overall: 35-29-1

12 Teams, 1 World Series Champion

So, after a season that started late and was extended a few days because of the lockout, we've reached the postseason.  The first postseason using the new format, with six teams making it in each league and the wild card round being best-of-three.  Yet, unlike the NBA and NHL's seemingly endless playoffs, they'll still be over in a reasonable amount of time.  Game 7 of the World Series is scheduled for Nov. 5, so the entire postseason will take less than a month!

I, for one, am very curious to see how the new format will work out.  There are some things that I definitely like about it.  The best-of-three certainly beats the winner-take-all Wild Card Game.  I also like that there's now a distinct advantage to finishing with one of the two best records in your league.  It means your opponent has used at least its top two pitchers just to get to the Division Series while you get to set your rotation. 

However, I'm not crazy about the amount of rest the top two seeds get.  Yes, they can set up their rotation any way they want, but that means the back-end starters will go a long time between starts.  And, obviously, so will the position players.  It's definitely a delicate balance between getting rest and getting too much rest.

The season being extended a few days pushing the start of the postseason back also resulted in a very interesting schedule.  There's no off day between Games 4 & 5 of the Division Series or between Games 5 & 6 of the LCS.  If the LCS goes seven, they'll play five consecutive days.  And the World Series is starting on a Friday, with Sunday and Thursday as the off days. 

This schedule was obviously a direct result of the lockout.  They took away off days and adjusted accordingly so they could still end the season relatively "on schedule," but I wonder, if this schedule works out ratings-wise, could the Friday World Series start potentially become permanent?  (They started the World Series on a Saturday for years until switching to the midweek start in 2007.)  Anyway, you know, at the very least, the Wild Card Series will move to midweek next year.

As for this year's Wild Card Series, I think the four home teams should all win.  They're the higher seeds for a reason.  I'd like to say the Padres have a chance against the Mets, but that just doesn't seem likely.  I do think Seattle will push Toronto and Tampa Bay will push Cleveland, though.  Will both AL series go to a Game 3?

Guardians-Rays: When Tampa Bay was just 5 1/2 games out in early September, that was before the Rays' brutal stretch run that included a three-game series in Cleveland just last week.  The Guardians took two out of three in that series.  And, frankly, I don't think this one will be much different.  Not when Cleveland can start Bieber and Civale (with Quantrill ready for Game 3), then go to Clase to close.

Blue Jays-Mariners: Seattle's 21-year playoff drought finally comes to an end!  If you're looking for somebody to blame for the Mariners' fortunes over the past two decades, look no further than Sue Bird.  She played her entire 21-year career in Seattle and the Mariners didn't make the playoffs once.  She retires and Bam!  I kid, of course, and I'm actually excited to see the Mariners on the postseason stage.  I don't think they'll last very long, however.  The Blue Jays are simply a better team.  And they're looking for some playoff redemption after their performance in Tampa two years ago.

Mets-Padres: Obviously the 101-win Mets would've preferred to win the NL East and get the first-round bye, but the Braves clinching the division when they did certainly worked to their advantage.  Jacob deGrom was lined up to start the final regular season game on normal rest of the division was still in play.  It wasn't, so they were able to set up their 1-2 punch for Games 1 & 2.  Although, the Padres have Yu Darvish and Blake Snell lined up to face Scherzer and deGrom, so they actually match up pretty well with the Mets' dual aces.  These are the most evenly-matched teams facing each other in the Wild Card Series.  I can see it going three, I can see the Padres sweeping, and I can see the Mets sweeping.  Ultimately, I think it does go to a Game 3, which the Mets win.

Cardinals-Phillies: It took there being a third wild card in each league, but the Phillies finally snapped their postseason drought!  Unfortunately, their stay probably won't be that long.  The Cardinals aren't just a great story.  They're also a very good team that I think is being somewhat overlooked.  The National League has three 100-win teams, but I really think St. Louis can go far.  Kinda like Atlanta last year.

That would give us Division Series matchups of Astros-Blue Jays, Yankees-Guardians, Dodgers-Mets and Braves-Cardinals.  And, frankly, those two NLDS both sound outstanding! 

What's funny about the potential Dodgers-Mets matchup, of course, is that the Dodgers-Mets NLCS so many people considered "inevitable" for much of the season is now impossible.  Only one of them can make the NLCS.  Although, the one that does could very well win the pennant.  Except, again, don't underestimate the Cardinals.  In fact, I think they're gonna beat the Braves.  And they'll play the 111-win Dodgers, who'll take full advantage of their depth, having the home field, and the fact that the Mets won't be able to start Scherzer and deGrom until the series shifts to Citi Field for Game 3.

Don't get me wrong.  I think all four of my NLDS participants can not only win the pennant, they can all win the whole thing!  As it is, I've got a Dodgers-Cardinals NLCS.  And, as great as it would be to see Albert and Yadi ride into the sunset after one final World Series ride, the Dodgers are simply too good.  They continue their trend of making it to the World Series in even years.

In the American League, the Yankees and Astros have seemed to be on a collision course all season, and there's no reason to believe they won't face each other in the ALCS once again.  Dropping to the 2-seed obviously meant they won't have home field in that series, but it gives the Yankees a much more favorable (for them) matchup against Cleveland, rather than dealing with Toronto, a division rival that always gives them trouble.  The Blue Jays won't give the Astros as much trouble as they would the Yankees.  Houston advances to its sixth consecutive ALCS.  They're turning into the baseball version of the Patriots!

Call me crazy, though.  Because I think the Yankees actually want to play the Astros!  They've got a Texas-sized chip on their shoulder.  And they want to finally beat that team who's consistently gotten the better of them, including this season, when the Yankees' only leads in seven games were the final score in their two walk-off wins.  If the September Yankees show up, they can beat them.  If the August Yankees show up, they've got no chance!

Chalk one up to nostalgia in the 2022 World Series.  Because I've got those two old rivals, the Dodgers and Yankees, meeting in the World Series for a record 12th time, but the first time in 41 years.  And, just like in the strike-shortened 1981 season, the lockout-delayed 2022 season will end with the Dodgers beating the Yankees for the Commissioner's Trophy.

THE Record Is 73, Not 61

Some people don't like Barry Bonds.  Some people think Barry Bonds cheated.  As such, some people don't think any of the numbers Bonds put up are legitimate.  And those same people think that when/if Aaron Judge hits his 62nd home run, it should be considered the "true" Major League record.  Even though it won't be.

Whether you like it or not, whether you personally consider them to be "legitimate" or not, Barry Bonds still hit 73 home runs in 2001.  It actually happened.  He didn't not hit them.  Those 73 baseballs all went over the fence.  Thus, 73 home runs is the single-season record.  And that's not gonna change until somebody hits 74!

I bring all this up, of course, because there's that chorus suggesting that there should be an asterisk next to Judge's 2022 home run total, implying that it's the "real" record.  Count Roger Maris Jr. in that group.  Although, let's be honest with ourselves.  They want the asterisk for one reason and one reason only.  Because they don't like Bonds and consider him a "cheater," but they do like Judge.

That's their opinion, and they're perfectly entitled to it.  But that doesn't mean Major League Baseball should or will give them what they want.  In fact, if MLB were to do that, it would set a very bad precedent.

What sometimes gets lost in all of this is the fact that Barry Bonds never tested positive for anything.  Yes, I know what you're gonna say.  "Just because he didn't test positive doesn't mean he wasn't taking something.  I mean, c'mon!"  To which my response would be, "You're absolutely right."  After which I'd remind you that whether Bonds was on something or not is irrelevant.  Because he wasn't breaking any rules!  And if he wasn't breaking any rules, how exactly was he cheating?

The Steroid Era is called that for a reason.  MLB and the owners knew what was happening and did absolutely nothing to stop it.  And the fans completely ate it up while it was happening!  It's only now, 20 years later, that we want to call them all "cheaters" and declare it all "illegitimate."  As if we didn't see it with our own eyes!

Remember the Summer of 1998?  We couldn't get enough of Mark McGwire and Sammy Sosa!  When they both broke Roger Maris' record, we all celebrated.  Yet now, with the benefit of hindsight, many of us view the Summer of 1998 very differently.  What we once celebrated is suddenly an abomination.  An abomination that was only made worse three years later when Bonds broke McGwire's record.

So now, those Bonds/McGwire/Sosa haters are using this as their opportunity to try and rewrite history.  We've all seen the graphics by now.  The ones that list the all-time single-season home run records where Judge and Maris are only tied for seventh, behind three 60-home run seasons by Sosa (who, incredibly, didn't lead the NL in any of those seasons!), two by McGwire and the record 73 by Bonds.  However, since all three of those guys played during the Steroid Era and many believe their performances were likely "enhanced," we can ignore them and celebrate Judge as the record-holder.

None of this is meant to diminish what Aaron Judge is doing this season!  It's also important to note that there's no asterisk required.  He has set a record.  The AMERICAN LEAGUE record.  Let's not forget the significance of that.  Maris' 61 in 61 has stood as the AL record for 61 years!  Matching it is damn impressive!  But it's still 12 less than the Major League record!

Of course, the irony of all this is that there was an asterisk on the record for a long time.  In 1961, Commissioner Ford Frick, a friend of Babe Ruth's, suggested that there should be some sort of "distinctive mark" in the record book if it took someone more than 154 games, the same total Ruth played in 1927, to break his record.  It took Maris all 162, so Maris and Ruth's names were both listed in the record book as if they were separate records.

Then, as Bonds was chasing the career home run record, it was a similar situation.  Hank Aaron had endured so much hostility and racism as he chased Ruth's record in 1974.  But when it was Aaron's record under assault, he was the hero and Bonds the villain.  And, even though it's been 15 years since Bonds broke the record, those same people who think Judge is the single-season home run record-holder still consider Aaron to be the holder of the career home run record.

But, as I said earlier, some fans being angry about the Steroid Era and not liking Barry Bonds doesn't change anything.  The record is still the record.  Did Pete Rose not break the all-time hits record because he gambled on baseball?  Did the Houston Astros not win the 2017 World Series because they were stealing signs?

Frankly, I don't see the difference in any of those situations.  Yet no one goes, Pete Rose is the all-time hits leader, but not really.  Or says, "yeah, the Astros won the World Series, but..."  It's only the home run record that isn't considered sacred.  Just because of the guy who holds it.

Aaron Judge's season-long pursuit of Roger Maris has been a joy to watch.  The race has been about both of them.  As it should be.  But it's also about someone else.  Whether they want to admit it or not, all the people who are making a big deal about how Judge will hold the "real" record once he gets to 62 are making it about Barry Bonds, too.

My 2022 NFL Picks (Week 4)

The calendar has flipped to October, which means we're a quarter of the way through the NFL season.  This is usually right around the time when we start figuring out who's actually good and who isn't, but, I'll admit, I've still got no clue!  I think scheduling has had a lot to do with that, though.  Because the good teams have all played each other, and so have all the bad teams!  Then you get the random results like Colts over Chiefs!  Will we see something like that again this week?

Thursday Night: Cincinnati (Win)

Vikings (2-1) vs Saints (1-2): Minnesota-Our first London game of the season, and the first of five international games.  The fans across the pond, unfortunately, won't get to see Jamies Winston, who the Saints have officially declared out.  Without him running the offense, I think New Orleans will struggle to score points.  The Vikings, meanwhile, will have no issue doing that.

Browns (2-1) at Falcons (1-2): Cleveland-Cleveland is a prime example of what I was talking about where a bad team has a good record because of who they've played.  They put forth a good effort against the Steelers last week, but they lost to the Jets and they beat the Panthers, who suck.  The Falcons also suck.  So it's lucky for them they drew the NFC South this year.  Things are about to get a lot tougher for them after this.

Commanders (1-2) at Cowboys (2-1): Dallas-Is Dak Prescott about to get Tony Romoed?  Because the Cowboys aren't just 2-0 without him, the offense has looked mighty good under Cooper Rush.  Of course, it's not that hard to throw to CeeDee Lamb and handoff to Ezekiel Elliott, but still.  And the Dallas defense is one of the best in the league.  Carson Wentz already knows all about it from his time in Philadelphia, but he'll get a reminder in his first start against the Cowboys as a Commander.

Seahawks (1-2) at Lions (1-2): Seattle-Both of these teams have been a pleasant surprise so far.  The Lions actually look halfway decent.  They're 1-2, but their two losses are by a combined seven points to two really good teams (Philadelphia and Minnesota).  And Seattle I fully expected to be one of the worst teams in the league, which certainly hasn't been the case.  In fact, I think the Seahawks will be the one who emerges from this game 2-2.

Titans (1-2) at Colts (1-1-1): Tennessee-Last week, I was ragging on the AFC South for having one combined win through two weeks.  Then three of the four go and beat AFC West teams, including the Colts with that shocking victory over Kansas City!  As a result, Indy's just a half game behind Jacksonville and a half game ahead of Tennessee.  Those positions will flip flop after the Titans beat them on Sunday, and, with the Jaguars playing Philadelphia, Tennessee could find itself tied for first place after that 0-2 start.

Bears (2-1) at Giants (2-1): Giants-Even though the Giants lost last week, I still took a lot of positives out of that Cowboys game.  Most importantly, they aren't overmatched anymore.  They'll be in every game.  And they should be 3-1 after they play the Bears.  Sorry, Bears faithful, but their record is a mirage.  They beat the 49ers and Texans at home.  Meanwhile, their loss was a butt-kicking in Green Bay.  The real Bears team is somewhere in the middle.

Jaguars (2-1) at Eagles (3-0): Philadelphia-With the Dolphins losing on Thursday night, Philadelphia is the last undefeated team in the NFL.  That shouldn't change this week.  They take on another "first place" team in Jacksonville, but that really says much more about the AFC South than it does about the Jaguars.  The Eagles, on the other hand, are legitimately good.  And they'll be 4-0.

Jets (1-2) at Steelers (1-2): Pittsburgh-I may have been a little too high on the Steelers heading into the season.  Because I don't know how this team ever scores!  They're 1-2, but that could very easily be 0-3 if not for that overtime win in Cincinnati.  Fortunately, they play the Jets at home this week, so they don't necessarily need to be "good" to win, though.  And they need to win, too.  Because they've got Buffalo and Tampa Bay coming up, so they could be 1-5 after those two games if they don't.

Bills (2-1) at Ravens (2-1): Buffalo-You can't help but wonder if the Bills would've won last week had their entire defense not been hurt!  As it is, they still almost pulled it out.  Now they head to Baltimore to face a Ravens team that may as well join the AFC East.  This is the fourth straight week they're facing an AFC East team.  So, if the Ravens win, does that technically make them tied for first in the division?

Chargers (1-2) at Texans (0-2-1): Chargers-Not only did the Chargers lose at home to the Jaguars, they got blown out!  To say I didn't see that coming would be an understatement.  And I wouldn't be surprised if that loss ends up costing the Chargers a playoff berth.  It's only Week 4, but they can really kiss that playoff berth goodbye if they lose in Houston.

Cardinals (1-2) at Panthers (1-2): Arizona-Arizona's another one of those teams.  They should be good, but they're only 1-2.  Their losses are to the Chiefs and Rams, though, so is that why they're 1-2?  We should find out a lot about this year's eventual Super Bowl champions this week.  Because they're significantly better than Carolina.

Patriots (1-2) at Packers (2-1): Green Bay-Was last week pretty?  No it was not!  Does that matter?  Not really.  Because the Packers have the tiebreaker over Tampa Bay.  For a team like Green Bay, who you're pretty certain will end up in the postseason, that's what really matters.  Now they've got another marquee matchup against the Patriots, who are unsure of their quarterback situation with Mac Jones hurt.  Which means they need their defense to step up.  And that's a tall order against Aaron Rodgers at Lambeau.

Broncos (2-1) at Raiders (0-3): Denver-Broncos Head Coach Nathaniel Hackett sure looks like he's in over his head.  Yet, despite scoring a total of 43 points in three games, the Broncos are 2-1.  And they really should be 3-0.  The Raiders, meanwhile, are 0-3 mainly because they blew that game against the Cardinals.  But, no matter how they got there, they're the only 0-3 team in the league.  Will they become the only 0-4 team?

Chiefs (2-1) at Buccaneers (2-1): Tampa Bay-Incredibly, they were able to keep this one in Tampa after the city escaped the worst of the hurricane.  It would've been a shame, but understandable, if they had to move it, but I'm glad they didn't.  Although, the Chiefs might've preferred that.  Since the last time these two met in Tampa it wasn't too pretty for Mahomes and Co., as the Bucs defense completely shut them down in the Super Bowl.  This time, of course, it's much different.  It's only Week 4.  But they're both coming off what they would consider a bad loss, so it'll be interesting to see who comes out of this one on a two-game losing streak.

Rams (2-1) at 49ers (1-2): Rams-For some reason, every time the Rams play the 49ers, San Francisco wins.  That is until the NFC Championship Game, at least, when the Rams snapped their six-game losing streak against San Francisco.  So, I really should play the odds and go with the 49ers, especially in San Francisco.  But I think the NFC Championship Game was a turning point and this series is swinging back in the Rams' direction.

This Week: 1-0
Last Week: 9-7
Overall: 25-23-1