NFL Picks, Week 8

Before I get into this week's picks, I need a minute to talk about this year's newest NFL trend...teams turning into the University of Oregon and having a different uniform for every game!  It's seriously becoming the NBA with the amount of different jerseys and helmets each team is wearing.  Throwbacks are always welcome.  Pat the Patriot and Bucco Bruce will always have a place.  These alternate ones though?  Each new one is worse than the last!

Where do I start?  There are so many bad ones, it's hard to pick.  There's that all-brown monstrosity Cleveland wore.  The Chargers' all-yellow getup.  The Dolphins' homage to the Miami Marlins.  The Lions with that ridiculous blue helmet!  Purdue, I mean the Saints, and whatever that was in Week 1.  They at least make those horrible all-white ensembles some teams have slightly more tolerable.  Anyway, now that I've gotten that off my chest, on to the picks!

Thursday Night: Chargers (Win)

Dolphins (1-6) at Falcons (3-3): Atlanta-Atlanta is turning back to Kirk Cousins this week.  Talk about a quarterback carousel!  That lack of consistency is one of the issues that plagues this team, which looks phenomenal one week, then completely lost the next.  The good news for the Falcons is they're playing a Dolphins team that's as lost in the wilderness as they are.  Expect changes in Miami after (or maybe during) the season.  As for the Falcons, they'll somehow claw their way back over .500 with a win here.

Jets (0-7) at Bengals (3-4): Cincinnati-Trading for Joe Flacco might've saved the Bengals' season.  Because, after that win over Pittsburgh, there's suddenly a real chance.  They don't leave Cincinnati for a month.  They're in the middle of a three-game homestand heading into their bye.  Talk about favorable scheduling!  I was talking with some people this week about when the Jets' first win might come and how many they'll ultimately end up with.  It won't come here.  But, the good news is, they can't lose next week!  (It's their bye.)

Browns (2-5) at Patriots (5-2): New England-Mike Vrabel's really got the Patriots rolling!  They've won four straight and just swept a three-game road trip.  Now, their first home game since Week 4 is against a Cleveland team they should beat easily.  Although, both of New England's losses this season were at Foxboro, including against the Raiders in Week 1.  So, they need to take whatever's been working on the road and translate it into home success if they want to maintain this good start.

Giants (2-5) at Eagles (5-2): Philadelphia-It was just two weeks ago that these two met on a Thursday night and the Giants shocked everyone by blowing out the Eagles.  It looked like that just might be the game where the Giants turned the corner.  Then they went to Denver.  Philadelphia knows all about the Broncos and the fourth quarter.  They rebounded from those back-to-back losses by going into Minnesota and winning last week.  It wasn't pretty, but it got them back on track.  And you know this is a revenge game for them.  Especially since that 34-17 loss at MetLife Stadium is still fresh in their memory.

Bills (4-2) at Panthers (4-3): Buffalo-Did any team need their bye as much as the Bills last week?  They were 4-0 and the last undefeated team in the NFL.  Then they lost two straight and suddenly found themselves in second place.  We'll see if the bye week fixed the problems that New England and Atlanta exploited.  This won't be an easy game, either.  The Panthers have won three straight and are over .500 for the first time in forever.  Sure, two of the wins were over the Dolphins and Jets, but they've been tough at home all season and that seems unlikely to change against Buffalo.

Bears (4-2) at Ravens (1-5): Chicago-I can't believe I'm picking Chicago on the road against Baltimore, but here we are.  It's been that kind of a season for the Ravens.  Everything that can go wrong has.  They have no Lamar Jackson and a porous defense.  The Bears, meanwhile, have won four straight after starting 0-2 and suddenly look like a very legitimate wild card contender.  They haven't exactly played the toughest schedule so far (their schedule is incredibly backloaded), but they should pick up another win here.

49ers (5-2) at Texans (2-4): San Francisco-Like their friends in Baltimore, the Texans are just having one of those seasons.  The 49ers had one of those seasons last year.  But, in true San Francisco form, they've bounced back nicely, and are a surprising 5-2 despite having so many injuries.  The Rams and Seahawks are both off this week, so that three-way tie will be broken with San Francisco either a half-game up or a half-game down and in third place.

Buccaneers (5-2) at Saints (1-6): Tampa Bay-Well, Tampa finally lost.  It took going to Detroit for it to happen, and they were completely outclassed by the Lions.  Their division lead is now down to only one game, but they're still the best team in the NFC South by a wide margin.  They've got a tough stretch coming up after their bye, so it's imperative they take care of business in New Orleans.

Cowboys (3-3-1) at Broncos (5-2): Denver-Suddenly, Denver is the comeback team!  Last week was the Broncos' second crazy fourth quarter comeback to win a game they had absolutely no business winning.  And it's got them at 5-2 when they could (and maybe should) just as easily be 3-4.  Why should we expect that to stop this week?  After all, both of the comebacks came against NFC East opponents.

Titans (1-6) at Colts (6-1): Indianapolis-Daniel Jones and the Colts just keep winning.  And you can't use, "Yeah, but they play in the AFC South" as the reason when they've only played one division game so far.  This is their second, as they complete the season series with the Titans.  The Colts blew them out in Nashville in Week 3.  Why should we expect things to be any different a month later?  Indianapolis is flying high, especially after a dominant road win against a good Chargers team.  Now they get, arguably, the worst team in the league at home.

Packers (4-1-1) at Steelers (4-2): Pittsburgh-Aaron Rodgers is a confusing individual.  He considered Week 1 a "revenge" game even though the Jets really did nothing to him except give him everything he wanted (he also technically wasn't cut since his contract expired).  Meanwhile, he holds no ill will towards the Packers even after whining his way out of Green Bay three years ago.  This is his first time facing the Packers since.  It would certainly be different if this game was in Lambeau, but you know he'll still get all sentimental about it.  And he'll probably have a great performance in a Steelers victory.

Commanders (3-4) at Chiefs (4-3): Kansas City-Don't worry, America!  It was just a one-week break.  The Chiefs are back in a national window!   I kid, of course, but this is the Chiefs' seventh game out of eight either in prime time or the 4:25 doubleheader slot.  It's like the NFL's obsession with putting the Jets in prime time last season.  Anyway, they look like they, just maybe, have finally gotten it going after that shaky start.  As for Washington, I have no idea what's going on, so I won't even venture a guess!

This Week: 1-0
Last Week: 12-3
Overall: 72-36

America vs. Canada

Last year, the Dodgers' starting pitching in the postseason was so thin that they had to do a staff game in the World Series.  They won the series anyway.  This year, their rotation isn't only healthy, it carried them in the NLCS.  So, while last year they went into the World Series hoping their starting pitching would hold up, this year, it's been a strength.  And it's why nobody would be surprised if the Dodgers become the first repeat World Series champion in a quarter century.

They went into the season as the favorites to repeat, but there were definitely times when they didn't look like the Dodgers.  A baseball season is long, though, and the team they've been in October is very much the Dodgers.  They aren't just healthy, they're firing on all cylinders.  Just ask the Reds, Phillies and Brewers about that.  This is the team everyone expected them to be.  And they're playing like it.

As a result, the Dodgers are the first defending champions to get back to the World Series since the 2009 Phillies.  They're looking to do something that hasn't been done by a National League team in 50 years.  Not since the Big Red Machine in 1975-76.  Of the four major men's sports, baseball's the only one that hasn't had a repeat champion this century.  That very well may change within the next 10 days.  Because the Dodgers enter the World Series as favorites.

By "favorites," I, of course, mean the betting favorites.  Since they're the Dodgers and they're here for the sixth time in nine years, most of America has gotten sick of them.  Which means the Blue Jays, who already have all of Canada rooting for them, will be the favorite team for many fans on both sides of the border.  (Just to be clear, I am NOT one of those fans!)

Against the Yankees and Mariners, Toronto did the same thing it's done all season.  The Blue Jays refuse to get out, fouling off pitch after pitch before finally dropping it in for a single.  Then they get the big hit and suddenly they've put up a three-spot.  They're relentless, too.  There are no easy at-bats or easy innings.  And it's 1-9.  The bottom of the order sets the table, then Springer or Guerrero delivers.  And when they get the lead, they just keep adding on.  They're a very frustrating team to play against.

The question mark surrounding the Blue Jays is their bullpen.  In the ALCS, it managed to hold up well enough.  Although, the difference in their bullpen ERA between the four wins and the three losses was pretty staggering!  It shouldn't be a surprise, then, that Toronto relied on starters Chris Bassitt and Kevin Gausman out of the bullpen in Game 7 before turning it over to Jeff Hoffman, who's anything but automatic.  And they rely so much on Louis Vreeland and Mason Fluharty that there's a definite risk of those guys being overexposed...especially against a lineup as stacked as the Dodgers!

Which means that, much like it will be for the Dodgers, starting pitching will be a key for Toronto.  Since the bullpen is their biggest weakness, they need to get length from the starters.  It's no coincidence that when they got it in the ALCS, they won.  After seeing what the Dodgers did against Milwaukee, the Blue Jays' starters know they'll need to match that (assuming the Dodgers rotation does it again).  If they can't, this might be a short series.

One of the craziest stats about this World Series is how the Dodgers played an extra round, but have actually played fewer games during the postseason.  The Dodgers are 9-1 in the playoffs and have been just as dominant as their record indicates.  The Blue Jays, meanwhile, are 7-4 and coming off an intense seven-game ALCS where they never actually led in the series (they were down 2-0 and 3-2).  Although, they did win four out of the last five against Seattle and may have history on their side.  Every time one LCS was a sweep and the other went the distance, the team that went seven games won the World Series.

I wonder if part of that is the whole rest vs. rust factor that's always talked about while the No. 1 and 2 seeds are sitting around for a week waiting for the Division Series to start.  (Remember when that discussion was a whole thing the first few years of the current format?  Yeah, the No. 1 seed has won the AL pennant the last two years.)  Still, though, seven intense games with coast-to-coast travel has to take something out of you.  Fortunately for the Blue Jays, they didn't have to travel again and got to stay in Toronto after Game 7.

This World Series will be one dominated by stars.  People's biggest problem with the Dodgers is how they've built such a high-priced team, but the reason they're spending the money on those guys is for moments like this.  And Ohtani certainly delivered in Game 4 of the NLCS!  That was a performance unlike anything anyone has ever seen before.  Then there was Freddie Freeman with his home run-per-game in the World Series last year.  And Mookie Betts looking for his fourth World Series ring.  It's also funny how half of the Dodgers' postseason rotation pitched against them for Tampa Bay in the 2020 World Series.

Toronto, meanwhile, has George Springer, a proven postseason performer and the 2017 World Series MVP.  You just knew he'd do something when he came up in the seventh inning of Game 7, and he ended up hitting the Blue Jays' biggest home run since Joe Carter.  As well as their own superstar, Vladimir Guerrero Jr.  They came into the season with his pending free agency hanging over the organization.  His decision to sign a 15-year extension is what set this entire season in motion.  And he's been on the same otherworldly level as the Dodgers' stars during the month of October.

When the stars play like stars, it really can be a joy to watch (except when you really dislike one of the teams and badly want them to lose).  And with so many stars on both teams, all of whom have been doing their thing and then some, we could see something really special in this World Series!  After all, the best player in the game is literally leading off the World Series!

For all the stars on both teams, it could be the depth that makes a difference.  We've seen this with the Blue Jays throughout the playoffs.  It's impossible to get Ernie Clement or Addison Barger out, and every rally is started by Andres Gimenez!  Don't count out the Dodgers' role players, either, though.  Yes, they have Ohtani and Betts and Freddie, but how many times has Kike Hernandez authored a postseason moment during this run they've been on?

While the strength of each team is its lineup, I have a feeling it'll be the pitching that decides the series.  When Toronto's bats get going, it's a blowout.  When they don't, the Blue Jays are completely shut down.  That's what the Dodgers did to the Brewers.  The Blue Jays have much more thump and are deeper 1-9 than Milwaukee.  But the Dodgers' 1-9 is also deeper than Seattle's (the bottom half of the Mariners order did absolutely nothing in the ALCS).  That's why, ultimately, it'll come down to the pitching staff.

And the pitching is why I give the edge to the Dodgers.  The rotation's postseason ERA is microscopic!  The Brewers scored exactly one run in each game of the NLCS.  Will they hold the Blue Jays to one run per game?  Probably not.  But, as long as they can avoid those crooked numbers that Toronto loves to put up, they have the advantage.  Especially because the Dodgers have a better bullpen than the Blue Jays.  Toronto only uses the same handful of relievers.  The Dodgers' hitters will figure them out.  That's why their starters need to go deep into the game.

Having home field advantage is huge for the Blue Jays, who play so well at home.  I'd say stealing one of the first two games in Toronto is a key for the Dodgers, but the Mariners won both of the first two games and still lost the series!  Ultimately, it may be the Dodgers holding serve at home in the middle games that matters more.  If they can do that, they'll head back to Canada and finish off the series in Game 6.

Best Available Jobs

After making what looks like it was a serious pursuit of Albert Pujols as their next manager, the Angels have instead hired former catcher Kurt Suzuki, who has no previous managerial experience.  The Angels are the second team to officially fill their managerial opening this offseason.  The first was their AL West rivals the Rangers, who pounced early and locked up former Marlins manager Skip Schumaker a few days after the season ended.

And, while it isn't official let, the Giants also appear close to hiring their new manager.  San Francisco is also closing in on someone with no previous professional managerial experience--University of Tennessee Head Coach Tony Vitello.  We've seen it work in the other three men's major sports, but nobody has successfully made the jump right from college baseball to Major League manager before.  It's a bold move by Buster Posey, who's definitely trying to make his mark as GM.  Whether it'll actually work remains to be seen.

Even though the Angels have moved in a different direction, there's still a chance we could see future Hall of Famer Albert Pujols back in a Major League dugout--this time as a manager--in the 2026 season.  He's set to manage the Dominican Republic in the World Baseball Classic, but he obviously won't be able to do that if he gets a Major League job.  And that seems to be a real possibility.  Pujols is interviewing with the Padres.  And that San Diego job is one of the most attractive managerial openings remaining.

Not counting the Giants, there are six openings that are yet to be filled.  Some are definitely better than others, both the situation and the ability to be competitive.  None of the interim managers who completed the 2025 season are in the running for the permanent job with their current team, either.  Those teams are obviously looking for a fresh approach from somebody new.  But those are the jobs that won't exactly be easy.  In fact, they might be the four hardest jobs out there.

Only 30 men have the job of "Major League manager."  So, it's not like they're in a position to be picky.  If they were, though, which job would be the one you wanted if you did have the choice.  Here's how I rate the nine managerial jobs that will be occupied by someone who didn't end the 2025 season in the position with that team.  (For the sake of the rankings, I'm including the 2.5 that have already been filled since they do still represent managerial changes.)

9. Rockies: Bud Black was sacrificed in May, but he wasn't responsible for Colorado's historically bad season, nor was there anything he could do about it.  Whoever takes the Rockies job will be in a similar boat.  They aren't going to be any good next season, so their new manager better be prepared to lose a lot of games.  The front office needs to be prepared for that, too.  Let the new manager build something.  Don't expect success right away.

8. Angels: Suzuki will be the Angels' fifth manager since Mike Scoscia's 19-year tenure.  Frankly, Albert Pujols caught a break here.  Because you don't want this to be your first managerial job.  The Angels have been a mess ever since Arte Moreno bought the team, and it seems like he's very Jim Dolan-esque (which isn't a compliment).  No matter who the manager is, this team consistently fails to meet its own high expectations.  Angels managers are seemingly set up to fail.  Is it just so their inevitable firings can be justified?

7. Nationals: This can be a good job when the Nationals are invested and trying to win.  Right now, they aren't.  It could still be a good opportunity for a young manager, who can develop the talent and still be there when they get good, assuming the organization has the patience for that.  Problem is, with the exception of the Marlins, the rest of the NL East is really good.  And it doesn't seem like that'll be changing anytime soon.  So, there will probably be a lot more losing in Washington for a little while.

6. Twins: Rocco Baldelli had a decent run in Minnesota, but it was definitely time for a change.  This was a tough one for me.  Because the AL Central is such a crapshoot and the Twins have so much talent that it isn't crazy to envision their new manager finding success right away.  After all, we usually see a first-year manager take his team to the playoffs.  Or, they could have a season like this one.  Either way, though, the Twins organization generally shows patience, so whoever it is won't have to worry about immediately being shown the door if they don't win right away.

5. Orioles: Another tough one.  In one respect, Baltimore is a very attractive job.  They were the No. 1 seed in the playoffs in 2023 and have the type of young talent that would make anybody jealous.  It's not crazy to think they can turn it around.  But, they're in the AL East, a division in which each of the other four teams has faced the Dodgers in the World Series since 2018.  Three of those division rivals are big market teams that will always be willing to invest financially in their team, and the fourth is Tampa Bay and miracle-worker Kevin Cash.  Still, though, the Orioles have shown they can win this division, so there's no reason to believe they can't do it again.

4. Rangers: In a lot of ways, Texas is like Baltimore.  The Rangers aren't too far removed from winning the World Series, and they have very talented core group.  Winning in a division that also includes Houston and Seattle won't necessarily be easy, though.  And this does seem like one of the jobs where results will be expected immediately.  Schumaker was the NL Manager of the Year in 2023, when he took Miami to the playoffs.  If he can take the Marlins to the playoffs, that will be the bare minimum the Rangers front office and fans expect.

3. Giants: Beating the Dodgers will continue to be a tall order for the next few years.  The rest of the NL West needs to understand that and adjust their expectations accordingly.  Still, though, this is a great job.  The Giants have shown that they aren't afraid to spend money and go after stars (of which they already have a few).  They'll go all-in.  That also means there'll be pressure to win right away.  Which means Vitello (assuming it's him) will have his work cut out for him.

2. Padres: San Diego rates one spot higher simply because the Padres' recent success with a core that'll remain mostly intact makes this an extremely desirable opening.  This has been a playoff team, and there's no reason to believe they won't be again.  Just making the playoffs might not be enough, though.  Not for a team that's consistently there, but has only one NLCS appearance to show for it.  Whoever comes in will be expected to do something about that.  Which actually sounds like a pretty fun challenge.

1. Braves: It was an easy choice for the most appealing managerial opening.  Everything is set up for Atlanta's new manager to be successful.  The Braves' 2025 season was one of those where everything that could go wrong did, and Brian Snitker paid the price.  His was a mutual parting, though, and he'll remain with the organization in a front office capacity.  Snitker's successor is well-positioned to get the Braves to the playoffs, assuming they have just a little bit better luck in 2026. 

NFL Picks, Week 7

The NFL's crazy start to the season continues.  The Eagles and Bills were the last two undefeated teams in the league.  Now they've both lost two straight.  And the teams with the best record in each conference are Tampa Bay and Indianapolis.  Who could've seen that coming in Week 7?  (The Bucs maybe, but certainly not the Colts.)

And the craziness has already carried over into Week 7.  Joe Flacco beat Aaron Rodgers in the Ben-Gay Bowl, which suddenly has Cincinnati back in the mix.  The Bengals aren't the only random team that's in it, either.  And with how nuts this season has already been, I wouldn't be surprised to see the wackiness continue well past this week.

Thursday Night: Pittsburgh (Loss)

Rams (4-2) vs Jaguars (4-2): Rams-Who would've figured that the final London game would be such a big matchup?  But that's exactly what we've got.  The Rams are in a three-way tie for first, and the second-place Jaguars have wins over San Francisco and Kansas City.  Can they add the Rams to the list?  I don't think so.  The Rams' defense is too good, and staying in Baltimore all week after playing the Ravens was such a smart move.

Saints (1-5) at Bears (3-2): Chicago-Everybody in the NFC North is above .500.  That's how things have been for the Bears in recent years.  They're 3-2, and they're still in last place!  That win over Washington (their second straight 25-24 victory) is really encouraging, though.  They started 0-2 and have now won three straight.  Make it four straight.  With Baltimore, Cincinnati and the Giants coming up, will we actually be talking about the Bears as contenders in the second half of the season?

Dolphins (1-5) at Browns (1-5): Miami-Two teams that badly need a win take on each other.  Miami has at least been competitive outside of its Week 1 loss to Indianapolis.  The Browns, meanwhile, are the Browns (who somehow randomly beat the Packers).  With the game being played in Cleveland, that's the one thing that might give the Browns an advantage.  The Dolphins are the better team, though, and they know this is their chance to get their season back on track.

Patriots (4-2) at Titans (1-5): New England-Their win over the Bills has the Patriots sitting in first place.  With Buffalo on its bye week, New England has a chance to make that a half-game lead.  And you know Mike Vrabel has extra motivation to get the win in his return to Tennessee.  The Titans have actually gotten worse since he left and are so bad that they just fired his replacement.  Meanwhile, Vrabel moved into a much better situation with a Patriots team that's on the rise.

Raiders (2-4) at Chiefs (3-3): Kansas City-It took until Week 7, but the Chiefs are finally playing a 1:00 game!  Yes, that's right, Kansa City's first six games were in national windows!  You've gotta think they might be relieved to be out of the spotlight and be just another Sunday afternoon game.  They haven't been above .500 all season.  That's certainly not what they expected.  Here's their chance to do something about that.

Eagles (4-2) at Vikings (3-2): Philadelphia-After giving up 18 fourth-quarter points against Denver, the Eagles allowed 34 to the Giants in that Thursday night upset.  They've had 10 days off since then to hopefully right the ship.  As for the Vikings, welcome back!  This is their first game in the United States in almost a month!  They haven't played in this country since Week 3!  They at least got a well-deserved bye after back-to-back games in Ireland and England.  I'm sure they were hoping for a better welcome home present than the Eagles, though.

Panthers (3-3) at Jets (0-6): Jets-Can the Jets finally get that first win?  They thought they had it last week in London, but the Broncos kicked that late field goal to drop them to 0-6.  I actually think they have a decent chance of pulling this one out, though.  Sure, Carolina is a surprising 3-3.  But, let's look further into it.  The Panthers are 3-0 at home and 0-3 on the road.  In their last road game, they got their butts kicked by the Patriots.  Clearly they aren't the same team away from Charlotte.

Giants (2-4) at Broncos (4-2): Denver-What is it about the Jets-Broncos matchup that makes for absolutely terrible football games?  And will traveling from London to Denver without a bye week affect them at all?  I don't see how it can't!  Meanwhile, New York's other team has had 10 days to bask in that upset of the Eagles.  The Giants are suddenly relevant and exciting again.  If they can pull this one out and get to 3-4, they'll also be worth paying attention to.  That might be a tall order, however.  The Broncos are 4-2 for a reason.  They know how to win ugly if they have to.  Case in point: last week.

Colts (5-1) at Chargers (4-2): Indianapolis-I bet CBS wishes they had the doubleheader this week so that they could've made this the national game.  As it is, the matchup between the top two teams in the AFC will have a very limited regional audience.  Which is a shame.  Because it deserves a bigger stage than it's getting.  This is the Colts' biggest test to date.  And they can show us that they really are as good as their record indicates if they go into SoFi and beat the Chargers.  Which, just as importantly, would give them the head-to-head tiebreaker should it come into play.

Commanders (3-3) at Cowboys (2-3-1): Dallas-Washington losing to Chicago suddenly has Jerry Jones feeling all optimistic.  The Cowboys are still an incredibly flawed football team, but the Eagles and Commanders are letting them hang around in the NFC East, which is all Jerry wants with the trade deadline approaching.  As bad as Dallas has been on the road, they've been just as good at home.  They've scored 40 points twice in their two games at Jerry World this season.  If they make it three, they'll move ahead of Washington in the division.  So, Jerry's right.  It is right there for the taking.  As long as they win this week.  (And don't forget how the tie essentially takes them out of any tiebreakers with anybody except the Packers.)

Packers (3-1-1) at Cardinals (2-4): Green Bay-Will the plane issue that delayed the Packers' travel to Arizona have any impact?  I can certainly see them getting off to a sluggish start if nothing else.  And this game does have "trap" written all over it.  So, a Cardinals win wouldn't totally surprise me.  I think the Packers will do what they've done all season, though, and find a way to pull it out in the end.

Falcons (3-2) at 49ers (4-2): San Francisco-Atlanta continues to be the most confusing team in the NFL!  The Falcons crushed the Vikings in Minnesota, so naturally they lost 30-0 to Carolina the following week, only to follow that up with back-to-back wins over playoff teams from last season.  On Sunday night, they head to San Francisco, where the 49ers lost to Jacksonville the last time they were at home.  They've picked up two good road wins since then and sit in a three-way tie in the NFC West.  Whoever wins here will make a statement that they're a team we need to watch out for the rest of the season.

Buccaneers (5-1) at Lions (4-2): Detroit-People started to question/worry about the Lions after they lost to the Packers in Week 1.  As it turns out, it was nothing more than a road loss against another good team.  Detroit is fine.  They reeled off four straight wins after that before their loss in Kansas City last Sunday night.  See where I'm going with this?  The Lions have no reason to panic after losing to the Chiefs.  Tampa Bay might, though.  Because Detroit may take it out on them.

Texans (2-3) at Seahawks (4-2): Seattle-Game 2 of the Monday night doubleheader is a 10:00 Eastern time start in Seattle.  And you can bet Seahawks fans are hoping the Mariners get it done in Game 6.  Because otherwise the start of the Seahawks-Texans game will be going right up against Game 7.  The NFL obviously couldn't have anticipated that when they made the schedule, but what would've happened if the Mariners were scheduled to potentially be at home?  Anyway, the Monday night doubleheaders are done after this week.  This is the game that got moved from ESPN+ to regular ESPN when ESPN bought NFL Network.  That streaming exclusive is, fortunately, a thing of the past.  Just like these Monday night doubleheaders will be next season.

This Week: 0-1
Last Week: 9-6
Overall: 59-34-1

The Most Important Position

One of the easy reasons to hate/make fun of the Dodgers is because of their overabundance of starting pitching.  I like to joke that they have 15 starting pitchers on the roster.  But during the playoffs, and especially during the NLCS, they showed us why they're so invested in their rotation.  Because it's the most important position on the field!  As the old cliche goes, "You can never have too much starting pitching."  The Dodgers are Exhibit A of that.

The Brewers had the best record in baseball and went 6-0 against the Dodgers this season.  In the NLCS, they did absolutely nothing.  Dodgers pitching is the reason for that.  More specifically, Dodgers starting pitching.  They didn't give Milwaukee a chance.  And it's carried them back to the World Series for the second straight season and the fifth time in nine years.

It isn't just the Dodgers, either.  The Yankees beat the Red Sox in the Wild Card Series because of Cam Schlittler's dominant performance in the decisive Game 3.  The Blue Jays got back into the ALCS because of the starts they got from Shane Bieber and Max Scherzer in Games 3 & 4 in Seattle.  So, multiple teams in this postseason have proven true another old baseball adage.  "You're only as good as the next day's starting pitcher."

That's part of what makes the modern approach to baseball so infuriating to watch.  The value of quality starting pitching has been proven time and again.  Especially in October (the only month that actually matters).  So why is it so devalued?  So many teams can't wait to get to their bullpens and their parade of guys throwing 100 mph that they pull their starter at the first opportunity.  What will all those teams be doing next week?  Watching the Dodgers and all of their starting pitchers in another World Series.

This isn't a new phenomenon, of course.  Baseball's been trending this way for quite a while.  The complete game is a relic.  That's why it was so refreshing to see Yoshinobu Yamamoto throw one in Game 2 of the NLCS.  Normally, as soon as the starter hits 100 pitches or the leadoff hitter comes up for the third time, it's time to get him no matter how well he's pitching and go to the bullpen, hoping that they don't blow it.

Meanwhile, who are the guys making the most money?  Your frontline starters or your middle relievers?  That's the part of this whole obsession with bullpens that has never made any sense.  With the exception of closers and some setup guys, relievers are generally the weakest pitchers on the team.  The starters are the best.  That's why they're starters.  So, why are you taking out the better guy for somebody who's worse?

I know that analogy doesn't quite hold true as much anymore with how bullpens are deployed and how some pitchers are groomed specifically to be dominant relievers.  The basic point remains, though.  The money is invested in the rotation.  Starting pitchers only pitch once every five days and will make roughly 33-34 starts a season if they stay healthy all season, yet they make the most money.  Meanwhile, they're expected to do less and less (which, it should be noted, usually isn't by choice).  The logic makes no sense!

Another telling sign is how pitchers are deployed during the postseason.  Granted, the postseason is a completely different animal where you can and will do different things than you would in the regular season.  But who are managers trusting to get key outs in late game situations?  I'll give you a hint--it's not the relievers.  They're willing to go to starters in the unfamiliar position of coming out of the bullpen because they trust them more.  What does that tell you?

We've seen plenty of situations when leaving the starter in too long has backfired.  (Pedro Martinez in Game 7 of the 2003 ALCS, which is really how all of this got started.)  We've seen the reverse way too often, too.  A questionable pulling of the starter early when he still had plenty left and the bullpen proceeded to blow the game.  (Blake Snell in the 2020 World Series, anyone?)  It's obviously not an exact science.  These decisions are the toughest ones for managers to make, and they often determine who's hoisting the trophy at the end.

My main point remains, though.  A dominant starting pitcher is the most valuable weapon in baseball.  If you're able to get multiple dominant performances out of your starting rotation in the same series, that's a recipe for success.  And it's not just the 2025 Dodgers.  How many teams have reached the World Series on the strength of their starting pitching?  How many teams load up on starters either in the offseason or at the trade deadline because they know its importance?  How often is the team with the perceived best starting pitching deemed the World Series favorite either before the season or before the playoffs?

Even with the way the game has evolved and bullpen usage has become more prevalent, the importance of good starting pitching hasn't changed.  If anything, it's become even more important.  As the Dodgers have shown us.  Last season, they won the World Series despite only having three healthy starters.  This season, all of their starters are healthy, and what a difference it's made!  They're back in the World Series on the strength of their starting pitching.  

Granted, most teams can't stockpile starting pitchers the way the Dodgers have.  So, yes, in that regard, their financial might gives them an unfair advantage.  But their emphasis on starting pitching displays a greater point.  The starting pitcher is the most important guy on the field, and the best teams generally have the best starting pitching.  And, if you have good starting pitching, you should want to use it.  You shouldn't be so eager to pull them to get to a parade of relievers.  Especially since you're counting on all of those relievers being on.

Will the Dodgers' postseason dominance result in a change in how starting pitchers are utilized and bullpens are deployed?  Most likely not.  But maybe it should.  Because starting pitchers are among the most valuable players on the team in terms of salary.  Shouldn't they see that value reflected in how they're used, as well?  Make them earn all that money they're being paid!

Quality starting pitching has never been more important.  Yet, at the same time, so many teams act as if it's so unimportant...and those teams are the ones that will be sitting home watching the Dodgers in another World Series.  It's quite the paradox, isn't it?

Finally Coming Together

Five years ago, during the COVID pause, men's and women's tennis players were separately negotiating about how the tours would safely resume competition.  They negotiated separately--with the same parties--because the men's and women's tours are two distinct entities.  If that sounds silly, that's because it is.  At the time, Roger Federer suggested that the two tours should combine forces.  And I wholeheartedly agreed!

Now it looks like that may finally be happening.  According to Stacey Allaster, the CEO of professional tennis at the USTA, the two tours are "on the doorstep" of combining their commercial assets.  They'll remain two separate tours, but operating as one single business (think American League and National League).  It's not a done deal yet, so there's still a chance that it won't actually happen.  But the fact that they're close enough for somebody to be making it public is a very encouraging sign that it will.  And, frankly, it's a win-win for everyone.

These negotiations between the tours have apparently been taking place on and off for a few years now.  Evidently, the hang-up was always that the ATP thought there was more value in standalone men's events than standalone women's events, so they wanted a greater revenue split.  Whether the ATP backed off that demand and agreed to 50-50 probably won't be known until the full deal becomes public, but it's clearly a split that both sides are comfortable with.  (And 50-50 would obviously make the most sense.)

Frankly, the men's and women's tennis tours merging into a single commercial entity was a long time coming.  And it makes too much sense to not do it!  They're playing in the same tournaments, attracting the same sponsors and same broadcast partners, appealing to essentially the same fan base.  There really isn't a reason for them not to join forces and look out for each other's best interest (while possibly getting a better deal for themselves in the process).

While the men's and women's tours will continue to be separate organizations that play different schedules (at least to start), combining into a single business entity seems to be about generating wider coverage for both.  If they negotiate together, that means they can sell one media rights package, which might be more attractive to broadcast/streaming partners.  Perhaps just as significantly, it could lead to cross-promotion if the same media rights partner is showing both the men's and women's tournaments in a weekend.  Ditto with sponsorships, data deals, etc.  If everything's combined, it guarantees equal coverage for the men and women.

This is already the case for the Grand Slams and the handful of other combined tournaments played throughout the year.  The only thing that's different at any of those tournaments is the sponsor logo on the net (the men and women have different ones).  Everything else is the same.  The same broadcaster covers both the men and women, ticket buyers will generally get both men's and women's matches in a given session, and the prize money is usually the same.  So, the idea of selling men's and women's tennis rights together isn't a foreign concept.

When they play a combined event, it's obviously easier to market/sell as a single event.  Where it becomes more difficult is when the men and women are playing different events that not only aren't in the same city, they're in different countries or even different continents.  And that's assuming they both only have one tournament that weekend.  There are plenty of weekends where there will be multiple smaller tournaments on both tours.  How would this combined coverage work there?  (Although, I'd imagine those smaller events are less of a concern for the ATP and WTA.)

Nobody is suggesting that either tour get rid of those smaller events, either.  Those small tournaments are important for the players, from the chance to earn experience to the prize money to, most importantly, the ranking points.  They're important for the cities that host them, too.  The revenue that a tennis tournament brings in wouldn't be easy to replace.  But some of these cities simply aren't big enough to host a combined event (or might not have the interest in hosting one).  And holding separate men's and women's tournaments on different weeks might be too much of a financial burden for the city to take on.

Would the tours becoming a combined legal entity result in more combined tournaments?  Probably.  There are already several, and it's easy to see tournaments like the Canadian Open merging (one year, the men play in Toronto and the women play in Montreal, then it flips).  Ditto about the Australian Open tune-ups at the end/beginning of the year (when they start usually depends on when during the week New Year's falls).  That may be one of the purposes for this, as well.  Because those combined tournaments are easier for all involved.

Which isn't to say they can't (or shouldn't) continue to have standalone events.  Tournaments such as the ATP and WTA Finals are certainly strong enough to stand on their own, and they would lose something if they weren't separate.  (It's like the asinine suggestion of combining the Men's and Women's Final Fours, which wouldn't accomplish anything positive for the Women's Final Four.)  Ditto about Davis Cup and Billie Jean Cup.  But, by and large, the tennis tournaments that draw the most attention are the combined ones.

From a business perspective, it makes sense for both the ATP and WTA Tours.  They have identical interests and would mutually benefit.  The tours already have a close relationship.  They have to.  It's in both of their best interest.  So, if they're already working together, why not just make it official?

It isn't just in the ATP and WTA's best interest as businesses, it's in the players' best interest as individuals, too.  It puts them on equal footing with equal negotiating power.  You can't offer the men a better deal than the women or to cover one and not the other.  Any agreement would apply equally to both.  And that means equally in all respects. 

Yes, there would still be gender-specific tournaments.  But, otherwise, the tours would be the same legal entity.  And that would only serve to benefit everyone.  Men's and women's tennis have always had and always will have a symbiotic relationship.  They're stronger together.  And they can be stronger together while also maintaining separate but equal identities.

Should this come to fruition, it would be a seismic change for both the ATP and the WTA.  A seismic change that would be overwhelmingly positive.  Both tours are incredibly successful on their own.  So, just imagine how much of a force they can become when and if they combine forces!  It'll be great for the tours (as businesses).  It'll be great for the players.  And, most importantly, it'll be great for tennis fans around the world. 

Time For a New Approach

This season marked the 16th year in a row that the Yankees didn't win the World Series.  That's the second-longest drought in franchise history since they won their first in 1923, trailing only the 18-year drought from 1978-96.  Their last championship was in 2009.  George Steinbrenner died in 2010.  So, obviously, they haven't won since his death.

When the Boss died, ownership of the team was transferred to his sons, Hank and Hal.  Hank has since passed, as well, leaving Hal as the sole managing general partner.  Hal's approach is vastly different than his father's.  And the 16-year championship drought (with only one World Series appearance in that time) is evidence of that.  Because George never would've stood for what Hal has allowed to happen to the franchise.

Hal isn't the only one to blame, of course.  Brian Cashman deserves plenty, and so does Aaron Boone to an extent.  But, ultimately, their failures fall on ownership, as well.  Because Hal is the exact opposite of his dad in a pretty major way.  George was quick to fire people.  Hal is reluctant to let anyone in the front office go, even if they've worn out their welcome or their performance (or lack thereof) warrants it.  Or both.  As a result, the Yankees are stuck in the same pattern.  

Albert Einstein defined "insanity" as "doing the same thing and expecting different results."  Yet that's exactly what the Yankees have been doing for a decade and a half!  What they've been doing hasn't worked yet.  Why do they think that will suddenly change?  Sure, you're a playoff team every year.  But that's not the goal.  Winning the World Series is.  And they've fallen short of that goal 16 years in a row!

The approach that the Yankees' front office has taken over the past decade or so is analytics-based.  Other teams found success using analytics and the "Moneyball" style of play that the Yankees were slower to adopt.  When Joe Girardi was fired as manager and replaced by Boone, one of the prevailing thoughts was that the organization felt they were falling behind and wanted to follow that trend.  As such, they wanted a manager who was more open-minded about analytics than Girardi.  Boone was Cashman's guy.  And he's stuck with him ever since.

Boone has been the Yankees' manager since 2018.  He's their longest-tenured manager without a World Series title.  He was their longest-tenured without a World Series appearance until finally getting there last season.  Consistently making the playoffs would be enough to justify such a long tenure with any other team and any other fan base.  Apparently, that works for Brian Cashman and Hal Steinbrenner too, no matter what their fans want.

If this were any other team, Boone's eight years in the Bronx would be considered a success.  They've won at least 92 games in six of the seven full seasons (not counting 2020) and made the playoffs in seven of the eight.  The playoff appearances have all ended the same way, though.  Outside of the one World Series loss to the Dodgers, the other six have ended with a loss to a division rival or Houston.  And, including the 2024 World Series, the reason for those postseason series losses has been basically the same.  Fundamentally flawed and outplayed by a team that was better constructed.

That's the biggest issue with the Yankees' current approach.  They're trying to do the same thing as other teams, but they aren't as good at it.  And that gets exposed when they play those teams at the most important time of the year.  You can get away with it in the regular season.  In the playoffs, you can't.  As the Yankees have found out time and again over the past 16 years.  Yet, the next season, instead of changing their approach, they do the same thing again...and have the same results.  (What did Einstein say about insanity again?)

Analytics and a computer-driven model first gained popularity with the success of Billy Beane's "Moneyball" teams in Oakland (who, it must be noted never reached the World Series).  Since baseball is a copycat sport, other teams started utilizing analytics more and more.  That mindset has since taken over the game.  You can't find a front office that doesn't use analytics in one way or another, to varying degrees.  Some are all-in on analytics.  Others utilize them as a tool, but don't use them as a source for their decision-making.

I'm not saying analytics are all bad.  But there needs to be a balance.  There's nothing wrong with taking advantage of all the data you get from analytics.  There's definitely some value in it.  But it's also information overload.  You shouldn't be using analytics exclusively and making decisions based on what the analytics say.  You also need to have a feel for the game and let that dictate what you do sometimes, even if the analytics tell you something different.  That's where Aaron Boone's Yankees have struggled.

Some have suggested that the front office is responsible for some of his in-game decisions, especially with regards to pitching--when to take guys out and who to use when.  I have no idea if that's true or not.  The organization has denied it, which you would expect.  But the fact that it's even a question is a problem.  Because it doesn't do anything to dispel the notion that Boone is nothing more than the front office's puppet.  His non-answers in press conferences don't help matters, either.

There's obviously a disconnect.  These are the New York Yankees.  One of the reasons people hate them is because of their financial might.  So why are you doing things on the cheap (which has definitely been the case at times, with Hal openly admitting he wanted to stay under the luxury tax threshold)?  Beyond that, you're trying to build your team the same way as your rivals.  Only you're not doing it as well.  So, it's clearly not working!  At least not the way you want/expect it to!

Simply put, a change is in order.  I'd like to see a new GM and/or a new manager who'll bring a fresh approach, but if you're committed to Cashman and Boone, then you need to change your approach.  I'm not saying you need to go away from analytics entirely.  But you also shouldn't rely on them so heavily.  It's the overreliance on analytics that has led to the poor roster construction and bullpen management as much as anything else.

Whether that change will actually happen, I have no idea.  But if it doesn't, I have a suspicion that the Yankees' 2026 season will end in a similar way as every other season from 2010-25.  If they're serious about ending their 16-season championship drought, though, a change needs to be in order.  Otherwise, another 90-win season will end with another playoff defeat.

NFL Picks, Week 6

There have been so many upsets early in the season that I've already been eliminated from my survival pick 'em.  My third strike came on Thursday night, when the Giants beat the Eagles.  Needless to say, I didn't see that one coming.  Especially with how the Giants started the season.  I doubt the upsets and surprising results will stop there, either.  After all, it's only mid-October.

That was actually Philadelphia's second loss in five days.  The Eagles' loss to Denver left the Bills as the only remaining undefeated team...for a few hours until they lost to New England.  And the remaining '72 Dolphins once again broke open the champagne.  Meanwhile, the Jets are the only team that's still winless.  Can they get their first win in London?

Thursday Night: Philadelphia (Loss)

Broncos (3-2) vs Jets (0-5): Denver-It looks like the NFL is starting to make the London travel a little easier for the teams that are based further west.  The Broncos played the Eagles in Philadelphia, making for a shorter trip across the pond.  Next week, the Rams head over there after playing in Baltimore this week.  So, they're being smart about it, even if that means a longer road trip in the other sense.  Anyway, Denver's a scary good team.  Everyone knows this.  They'll pick up their third straight win and the Jets will have to keep looking for their first.

Cardinals (2-3) at Colts (4-1): Indianapolis-Just when I start saying nice things about the Cardinals, they go and lose at home to the Titans.  If you want to be taken seriously as a contender, especially in a division like the NFC West, things like that can't happen.  That's a lesson the Colts know all too well, considering some of their costly bad losses in recent years.  Being in an actual division race with Jacksonville I think is going to help them stay focused and keep their eyes on the prize.

Chargers (3-2) at Dolphins (1-4): Chargers-The Chargers started 3-0 with three division wins.  Then they stopped playing AFC West opponents and forgot they need to beat the other teams on their schedule, too.  Maybe this week they'll remember that and regain their standing atop the AFC West.  After all, they're playing a Dolphins team that seems rudderless without its best offensive player, Tyreek Hill.

Patriots (3-2) at Saints (1-4): New England-New Orleans finally picking up its first win of the season last week wasn't entirely surprising.  They knew that the Giants were one of the few opponents they can beat.  The Patriots, meanwhile, delivered a clear message with their victory in Buffalo.  Mike Vrabel's team will be a problem in the AFC.  They're not the dominant Bradicheck Patriots.  But they're kind of like Denver was last season, lurking in the shadows and hanging around enough to make a playoff push.

Browns (1-4) at Steelers (3-1): Pittsburgh-With everybody else losing around them and dealing with some serious issues, the Steelers suddenly find themselves in control of the AFC North.  First-place Pittsburgh has a game-and-a-half lead in the division, and it seems like that lead will only grow as the season progresses.  Because, frankly, I don't see any of the other three passing them.  You can start planning on a playoff game in the Steel City.

Cowboys (2-2-1) at Panthers (2-3): Dallas-FOX's slate of games this week is so bad that this is actually one of their featured matchups in the early window.  Anyway, Dallas finally got a road win last week, running all over the Jets.  Carolina also picked up a win, knocking off Miami.  So, neither team really beat the cream of the crop.  But you can only play who's on your schedule.  And the Cowboys know that after being gifted an Eagles loss, a win here suddenly has them right back in the thick of the NFC East race.

Seahawks (3-2) at Jaguars (4-1): Seattle-Both of these teams looked absolutely glorious in their throwback uniforms last week--and the Jaguars beat the Chiefs while wearing theirs!  The NFL is doing that whole ridiculous thing where teams where special uniforms for division games.  What they should really do is have everybody wear a throwback.  It would be glorious!  Meanwhile, it's back to the regular uniforms this week for two surprise contenders.  Jacksonville has beaten San Francisco and Kansas City in the last two weeks.  I'm not sure they can keep it up, so I'm taking Seattle.

Rams (3-2) at Ravens (1-4): Rams-When the schedule came out, this looked like it would be a good, early-season matchup between two playoff contenders.  What's actually happened is that the wheels have fallen off in Baltimore.  You have to wonder how things might've been different if they hadn't blown that lead in Buffalo in Week 1.  Because it's been all downhill since then for that defense who can't stop anybody.  Look for the Rams to put up a ton of points before they stick around Baltimore all week until heading to London.

Titans (1-4) at Raiders (1-4): Tennessee-Games between two bad teams are a fact of life in the NFL, but they're also an opportunity.  A chance for both of those teams to get a win and feel good about themselves, even if it's only for a week.  And the Titans are actually feeling OK after being gifted their first win of the Cam Ward Era last week in Arizona.  The Raiders, meanwhile, are coming off getting their butts kicked in Indianapolis.  So, it's clearly Tennessee who enters this one with positive momentum.

Bengals (2-3) at Packers (2-1-1): Green Bay-Cincinnati finally gave in and got an actual quarterback.  No offense to Jake Browning, but with the frequency at which Joe Burrow gets hurt, you'd think they'd have some sort of backup plan in place for when he does.  Getting desperate and realizing after three weeks that they need somebody better than Browning isn't it.  And, hey, now Joe Flacco is 3/4 of the way through the AFC North!  (He has to play just one game for the Steelers now, right?)  Even with Flacco instead of Browning, things likely won't get much better for them in Green Bay.

49ers (4-1) at Buccaneers (4-1): San Francisco-This one got flexed into the national window, and it's easy to see why.  It's two division leaders, and the winner will own the head-to-head tiebreaker.  Depending on what happens in Kansas City on Sunday night, whoever wins this game could be sitting on the NFC's No. 1 seed at the end of the week.  Tampa Bay went cross country and beat the Seahawks last week.  On the short week against a 49ers team that hasn't played since last Thursday, I don't see them winning again here.

Lions (4-1) at Chiefs (2-3): Kansas City-Remember two years ago, when these two played in the opener and the Lions won to basically announce their arrival?  The Chiefs sure do.  Kansas City is dealing with some adversity it hasn't felt in a while.  They already have three losses and are under .500.  They've played good teams, so it's not cause for alarm, but it's still odd not to see them be their dominant selves.  Detroit, meanwhile, has clearly recovered from that loss to Green Bay in Week 1, reeling off four straight and scoring a lot of points in all of them.  Look for that streak to end here, though.  When their backs are against the wall, the Chiefs play some of their best football.

Bills (4-1) at Falcons (2-2): Buffalo-Atlanta made some changes on its coaching staff after that shutout loss in Carolina.  They clearly paid off with a win over the Commanders before their bye week.  Did the bye do anything to mess with that momentum or did it help since it gave them more time to implement new things offensively?  I guess we'll find out against the Bills, who look to recover after taking one on the teeth against New England.  Will it ultimately matter in the long run?  Probably not.  But you know they don't want to make it two straight losses heading into their bye, either.

Bears (2-2) at Commanders (3-2): Washington-Once again, the Chicago Bears are in primetime.  I seriously don't understand the NFL's obsession with putting a mediocre team in so many marquee games!  Anyway, they're returning to the scene of the crime.  It was against the Bears a year ago that Washington had that incredible Hail Mary to absolutely steal a win and start that run that took them to the NFC Championship Game.  This year's matchup shouldn't come down to that.  The Commanders will have it in hand well before the last play.

This Week: 0-1
Last Week: 5-9
Overall: 50-28-1

Hello There, We're On the Air, It's Hockey Night Tonight

It feels like hockey season just ended, yet here we are with the 2025-26 campaign already underway.  Next year, the season will actually start earlier, too.  With the season going from 82 games to 84, they've added a week, but they also moved up the start so that the Stanley Cup can be awarded in mid-June.  Of course, that'll feel really early, but I think we can all welcome the earlier finish.  That's not until next season, though.  This season is still 82 games with a late June finish, but there's also an Olympic break!

I give Gary Bettman credit for actually acknowledging the elephant in the room during his season-opening press conference.  He admitted that he and the owners hate taking a break in the middle of the season so that the players can go to the Olympics.  However, he also conceded that they're going because the players want to...and that it's good for the league!  Just like how the Four Nations Face-Off last season was great for the league!

Anyway, we go into the 2025-26 season with the State of Florida having officially turned into the State of Hockey.  The Panthers are looking for their third straight Cup, and it definitely feel like they've become one of those teams that just needs to make the playoffs.  Their seed doesn't matter.  As long as they get in, they're one of the favorites.  And, with Matthew Tkachuk out until at least the New Year and Aleksandar Barkov likely out for the season, they won't win the division...which won't matter come playoff time.

There actually isn't a clear-cut Stanley Cup favorite.  A lot of people are big on Florida.  For good reason.  Edmonton's the team that's lost to the Panthers in both of those Stanley Cup Finals, and the Oilers aren't going anywhere.  The Avalanche are getting a lot of support.  So are the Golden Knights.  Carolina is also a popular pick, and that one I can really see.

Atlantic Division: While the Atlantic Division has its Big Three (Florida, Tampa Bay, Toronto), there were actually five playoff teams out of this division last season, with Ottawa and Montreal also making it.  Detroit was in the mix until the very end, too.  And, let's not forget, Boston was still hanging around until collapsing down the stretch and mailing in the rest of the season.  So, really, everybody but the Sabres really has realistic playoff hopes.

The Lightning may have been overtaken by the Panthers as the best team in Florida, but let's not pretend Tampa Bay isn't still among the five best teams in the league.  I actually have them winning the division and the Panthers finishing second.  Toronto's not as top heavy with Mitch Marner now in Vegas, but they're still well-positioned for their annual seven-game first round loss.  And I like the Red Wings to finish fourth and grab a wild card spot.  I just don't see the Senators and Canadiens being able to repeat what they did last season.

Metropolitan Division: Last season, Washington nearly won the President's Trophy out of nowhere.  The Capitals weren't the best team in the league or even in the division.  It'll be nice to see them make the playoffs in Ovechkin's final season, but they're nowhere near the same level as Carolina.  The Hurricanes are the best team in the Met Division by a mile.  Can they finally overcome the hump that is the Eastern Conference Final?

Everyone else is mired in the same level of mediocrity that I really have no idea who'll get that third (and potentially fourth) playoff spot.  The Devils made it last year, but their goaltending situation isn't great.  Columbus almost joined them, but I'm as skeptical about the Blue Jackets repeating their 2024-25 effort as I am about the Senators and Canadiens.  I have absolutely no expectations from the Rangers after what Chris Drury has done to the franchise.  Does Pittsburgh have enough to give Sidney Crosby one last playoff run?  Will a healthy Mathew Barzal make a difference for the Islanders?  Is the Flyers' rebuild complete?

Central Division: In the Central Division, everyone is always quick to pick Colorado while completely discounting Dallas.  I have no idea why.  It's the Stars who've been to three straight Conference Finals.  And making it four straight wouldn't be that surprising.  I get the hype behind the Avalanche.  With MacKinnon, Makar, Landeskog and Co., there's good reason to think Colorado can make a deep playoff run.  They're just not the only ones in the division who can.  That's all I'm saying.

Ditto about Winnipeg.  The Jets are the defending President's Trophy winners, yet nobody is talking about them.  Which, in their case, might be a good thing.  Minnesota's also in a great position to make the playoffs if everybody stays healthy.  St. Louis and Nashville should fight for that second wild card spot, and I'm curious to see what the Mammoth will look like this season.  Chicago has Conor Bedard and that's about it.

Pacific Division: You know a team has made an impact when the league makes a rule change specifically directed towards them.  In this case, it's the Golden Knights' taking advantage of the now-closed loophole regarding long-term IR and the playoffs.  No more stockpiling talent only for your "injured" players to magically be healed in the postseason.  Not that it'll matter much.  The Knights not making the playoffs would be the shocking development.

Whether it's Vegas or Edmonton that wins the division almost doesn't even matter.  Especially because if the Oilers don't finish second, they can't play their annual playoff series against the Kings!  I'm also expecting a bounce back from the Canucks, who dealt with a lot of injuries last season.  The rest of the Pacific Division's playoff chances aren't great.  Calgary and Seattle?  Maybe have a chance to compete.  Anaheim and San Jose?  In the lottery.

My playoff field in the East is Tampa Bay, Toronto and Florida out of the Atlantic, Carolina, Washington and New Jersey out of the Metropolitan, with Detroit and Columbus earning the wild cards.  In the West, meanwhile, it's a lot more straightforward.  Colorado, Dallas and Winnipeg out of the Central, Vegas, Edmonton and LA out of the Pacific, with Minnesota and Vancouver joining them in the playoffs.

Call me crazy, but I'm going with Carolina vs. Dallas in the Stanley Cup Final.  I know they both lose in the Conference Finals every year, so it's a bit bold to say they both get past the hump in the same season.  I just have a feeling about both of them, though.  Just like how I have a feeling that this run of success that the Hurricanes have been on will finally result in lifting the Stanley Cup.

Embattled and Embittered

To say WNBA Commissioner Cathy Engelbert is "embattled" would be a tremendous understatement.  Because she's far more than just embattled.  She's under fire.  From multiple angles.  And, frankly, I don't see a way out of it for her.

After the Lynx were eliminated from the playoffs, Naphessa Collier, one of the best and most influential players in the league, aired all her dirty laundry.  And when I say she aired her dirty laundry, I mean she aired all of her dirty laundry!  Collier eviscerated Engelbert during her press conference, highlighting multiple problems that players have with the league's leadership.  Specifically, a "lack of accountability from the league office" about inconsistent officiating, which has been an issue league-wide for a while.  (Collier was injured and Minnesota Head Coach Cheryl Reeve was ejected from a playoff game that became overly physical.)

Perhaps even more telling were the details Collier shared about a conversation she had with Engelbert in February.  Collier, who holds a leadership position in the WNBA Player's Association, mentioned the union's frustration about how young stars like Caitlin Clark, Angel Reese and Paige Bueckers won't make very much salary-wise for their first few years in the league (Bueckers signed with Unrivaled before she was drafted and figures to make significantly more playing there in the WNBA offseason).  Engelbert's response was dismissive to say the least.  She said, according to Collier, that "Caitlin should be grateful" and the players should be "thanking their lucky stars for the media rights deal that I got them."

While Collier was the one to say something publicly, she's far from alone in her feelings about WNBA leadership.  In fact, other players were quick to line up in agreement.  Clark acknowledged that Collier "made a lot of very valid points" and said how much she respects her.  That was the common sentiment around the league.  They don't just support Collier.  They're happy to have someone speak up for them.  So, it's pretty clear that they're all on the same page.

Simply put, WNBA players don't feel valued.  They're the ones responsible for the league's success and WNBA leadership either can't or doesn't want to see it.  In their eyes, the WNBA office doesn't give the players any credit at all.  The league thinks that it's successful despite the players, not because of them.  Which, if you think about it, is an asinine argument.  Because there would be no league without the players!

In her pre-WNBA Finals news conference, Engelbert addressed the controversy.  And, let's just say, she didn't exactly endear herself to anyone.  In response to Collier's comments, Engelbert said that there were "a lot of inaccuracies."  She also denied saying that about Clark.  To her credit, Engelbert vowed to "do better."  But the damage has already been done.  Can that relationship be repaired?

Above all else, sports leagues are relationship-based.  They're a business.  Obviously.  Everyone understands that.  But that business can't thrive without cultivating those relationships (between the players and owners, between the teams and the fans, etc.).  And that's an area where Engelbert has clearly failed.  She has the business sense.  But her relationship with the players is strained at best.  It doesn't seem likely to recover, either.

Engelbert has done a lot of good things as WNBA Commissioner.  There's no denying that.  She guided the W through the COVID-19 pandemic and the 2020 "wubble" season.  She oversaw the WNBA's first expansion in more than a decade, with Golden State joining the league this year, Portland and Toronto next season, and three more on the way.  And, yes, Engelbert secured a new 11-year media rights deal worth $200 million a year.  The bottom line, though, is that the players don't trust her.  And that's a huge problem.

It's also an extremely relevant point since the WNBA is set to begin negotiating a new CBA.  The current CBA expires on October 31, and the sides are far apart on several key issues.  While everyone is hopeful there won't be a lockout (I wish I could say I was this optimistic about baseball avoiding a lockout), Engelbert has acknowledged there's still "a long way to go."  And those negotiations will only become further complicated by the fact that Engelbert doesn't have a good relationship with the players.  If they don't trust her, how can they trust that the league is coming to them in good faith and trying to make a deal that's in the best interest of everyone?

The common belief is that Engelbert's days as commissioner are numbered and that she'll be out of office once the new CBA is signed.  According to a report in Sports Business Journal, her ouster appears likely.  A WNBA source called the report "categorically false," but it was clear the groundswell for a change at the top was growing even before Collier's comments.  Whether Collier's comments exacerbated that timeline or not, they certainly didn't help.  Especially since the court of public opinion overwhelmingly supports the players, not Engelbert.

Collier's news conference received mainstream media attention.  While the WNBA has become bigger and more popular than ever, it's still mostly ignored by mainstream sports talk shows (although, that's probably better than those talking heads only having a passing knowledge of the WNBA and making uninformed opinions while not actually knowing what they're talking about).  So, when the WNBA is being discussed on one of those shows, it's either for something really good or something really bad.  This was the latter.  And, when you've got renowned WNBA expert Stephen A. Smith saying you should resign, that's saying something.

Resigning might be the cleanest way out for Engelbert.  It would certainly be the clearest path forward.  However, that doesn't seem likely to happen.  In her press conference, Engelbert was asked if she'd consider it and her response was "I've never been a quitter."  In fact, she expressed confidence that she can repair her relationship with the players and rebuild that trust.  I'm not sure why she thinks that's a possibility.

Among the criticisms leveled at Engelbert by other WNBA players after Collier publicly aired her grievances, one really stood out.  Sophie Cunningham, Clark's teammate on the Indiana Fever, called the Commissioner "delusional" and said that she always makes it about herself.  Cunningham went on, voicing similar complaints as Collier with detailed reasoning, but her main point was that Engelbert is tone deaf on many of the key issues that concern the players.  The Commissioner's statement about "not being a quitter" is evidence of that.  This isn't about you!  It's about what's best for the league!

Maybe Engelbert thinks she's doing the right thing by negotiating the CBA so that it doesn't become the first thing on somebody new's to-do list.  And maybe she will graciously step aside (voluntarily) once it's signed, sealed and delivered.  One thing is clear, though, Cathy Engelbert can't continue as WNBA Commissioner.  Whether she leaves voluntarily or is forced out, the only way forward for the WNBA is a new person at the top.  That's the only way to rebuild the relationship with the players.  The people who the WNBA wouldn't exist without.

NFL Picks, Week 5

We saw the new overtime rule in effect on Sunday night in Dallas and Thursday night in LA, and we learned something about the rule that's worth keeping an eye on.  The discussion about whether it's better to play defense first under the new overtime format.  With the previous rules, you obviously wanted the ball.  There's definitely a strategic element to kicking off, especially since you know you'll get the ball and know exactly what you need to do.  It'll be worth seeing what teams decide over the remainder of the season.

Thursday Night: Rams (Loss)

Vikings (2-2) vs. Browns (1-3): Minnesota-After playing in Dublin, the Vikings make the short trip to London, where they'll become the first team ever to play back-to-back international games in different countries.  They actually played well against the Steelers, only losing by a field goal.  The Browns, meanwhile, followed up their upset of the Packers by getting their butts kicked in Detroit.  How will they fare in their third straight NFC North game?  I think the fact that Minnesota has been over there all week, which is a huge advantage, will end up making a big difference in this one.

Raiders (1-3) at Colts (3-1): Indianapolis-Well, the Mark Sanchez news sure added a layer of intrigue to this game, didn't it?  Honestly, did anyone even care about Raiders-Colts or know that he was originally scheduled to broadcast the game (or that it's on FOX) until the news broke?  Anyway, the Raiders are better than their record.  They've just run into some bad luck.  Unfortunately for them, I think it'll be more of the same and another close loss.

Giants (1-3) at Saints (0-4): Giants-With that gauntlet of a schedule, this originally looked like it would be the Giants' only chance to avoid an 0-9 start.  Then they went and upset the Chargers in Jaxson Dart's first start.  Now they've got a chance at being on a two-game winning streak.  The Saints, meanwhile, are also looking at this game as one of their few chances to win.  They'll have more opportunities, though.  The Giants don't have many more and need to take advantage of this one.

Cowboys (1-2-1) at Jets (0-4): Dallas-Dallas has played two home games, scored 40 points in both, went to overtime in both, and went 1-0-1.  In two road games, both losses, the Cowboys have scored a combined 34 points.  So, they're two completely different teams.  Maybe playing the Jets will fix their road woes.

Broncos (2-2) at Eagles (4-0): Philadelphia-Denver could easily be 4-0.  The Broncos' two losses have been by a combined four points.  So, the Eagles know they'll have a game on their hands.  But does anyone expect this to end any differently than any other Eagles game this season?  It'll be close.  They'll find a way to win.  And Denver will have three losses by less than 10 points combined.

Dolphins (1-3) at Panthers (1-3): Carolina-I'm not sure what to make of either of these teams.  The Marlins (sorry, Dolphins) finally put one in the win column last week, but it was against the Jets and they lost Tyreek Hill in the process.  Carolina, meanwhile, shuts out Atlanta, then gets thumped in New England.  I'm not sure how many answers we'll get in this one, but the Panthers are at home and I have no confidence in Miami without Tyreek, so Carolina is the pick.

Texans (1-3) at Ravens (1-3): Baltimore-Neither of these teams thought they'd be 1-4 after the first 1/3 of the season, but one of them will be.  Although, frankly, they're both seriously flawed.  And those flaws have been exposed.  Houston can't score and Baltimore can't stop anybody.  Still, when you consider how difficult the Ravens' schedule has been, it's a little more understandable.  They'll feel better about themselves after they beat the Texans.

Titans (0-4) at Cardinals (2-2): Arizona-Arizona is the best last-place team in football.  Every year, there's one division that's super tight and ultracompetitive, and this season, it looks like that'll be the NFC West.  Which means none of those four teams can afford to lose non-division games.  Especially at home against one of the worst teams in the league.

Buccaneers (3-1) at Seahawks (3-1): Seattle-This is the most fun matchup in the NFL so far this season.  The 1976 expansion teams celebrating their 50th anniversary seasons by wearing throwbacks to their original uniforms while playing each other.  Anytime we can see Bucco Bruce is a win.  Then you throw in the original Seahawks logo on top of that?  Yes please!  And they've got that awesome Seahawks-Mariners doubleheader within like an hour of each other, too!  How can I go against Seattle when they're giving us two really cool things on the same day?

Lions (3-1) at Bengals (2-2): Detroit-Week 1 was clearly just a blip on the radar for the Lions.  Because they've been excellent since.  That offense, especially, has really been clicking.  Cincinnati's offense, meanwhile, has not.  That team is lost without Joe Burrow, who isn't coming back this season.  Which means there will be a lot more performances just as painful as the one they put forward in Denver to look forward to.

Commanders (2-2) at Chargers (3-1): Chargers-Was last week a trap game for the Chargers?  They went into MetLife Stadium the heavy favorites, only to lose to the Giants.  I guess we'll find out as they return home to face Washington.  The Commanders also need to show they can win on the road.  They're 2-0 at home, 0-2 in road games.  Make that 0-3.  I'd like them if the game was in DC, but it's not.

Patriots (2-2) at Bills (4-0): Buffalo-All of those upsets last week left us with just two undefeated teams--Philadelphia and Buffalo.  Not that either one is a surprise.  Can the Bills make it 5-0 and extend their lead in the AFC East to three games after just five weeks?  They already have a win over Baltimore, too.  They could easily spend the second half of the season in cruise control and go after the No. 1 seed.

Chiefs (2-2) at Jaguars (3-1): Kansas City-The Kansas City Chiefs are back.  The game against Baltimore was the best they've played in a while, and that 0-2 start is quickly becoming a distant memory.  Jacksonville's no pushover, though.  The Jaguars really sent a message with that upset of the 49ers in San Francisco.  This may be the year in the cycle when Jacksonville is good.  Still, I think the Chiefs pull this one out.

This Week: 0-1
Last Week: 10-5-1
Overall: 45-19-1 

Keep It Canadian

Canadian football is quirky.  Canadian football has some funky rules.  They're what make Canadian football unique.  They're what make Canadian football great.  More importantly, they're what make it distinctly Canadian.

That's why it was so disappointing when the Canadian Football League announced several significant changes for the 2026 & 2027 seasons that will completely change the way the game is played.  CFL football will no longer be distinct.  It'll essentially be American football with a few differences.  Which isn't improving the product the way they think it is.  In fact, it'll have the opposite effect.  That distinctness is, frankly, the reason to watch Canadian football.  By taking that away, they're taking away the reason to watch.

The biggest change is the most significant.  Instead of a 110-yard field with 20-yard end zones, they're reducing the size to a 100-yard field with 15-yard end zones.  The large field is perhaps the signature feature of Canadian football.  It'll continue to be wider than an American football field and they'll still have 12 players per side.  But the long return that isn't possible in American football will soon become a thing of the past.

When the CFL tried its failed American experiment in the mid-90s, one of the biggest problems was how Canadian football fields were too big to fit in the footprint of the American stadiums.  As a result, their end zones weren't 20 yards (except in Baltimore, the only American city that took being in the CFL seriously), which was obviously not ideal.  Now, it'll be the opposite problem.  Suddenly, there'll be a lot of extra room between the field and the stands.  (They can theoretically add a few extra rows, but that would require facility changes which may or may not be possible.)

They're also moving the goal posts from the front of the end zone to the back.  From a safety perspective, this is long overdue.  The NFL moved the goal posts back 50 years ago for that very reason.  It also eliminates the possibility of a pass falling incomplete because it hit the goal post.  With 20-yard end zones, it would've been nearly impossible to make a field goal if the goal posts were at the back of the end zone.  They'll still be 15 yards back rather than the 10 in the NFL, so a field goal attempt from the 30 will be a 45-yarder.  But, the reason I don't particularly like this rule change is because of how it affects the next one.

One of my favorite parts of Canadian football is the rouge, the single point you get for a touchback.  Every kick in the CFL is a live ball, so any missed field goal, punt or kickoff needs to be returned out of the end zone.  If it's not, the kicking team gets a point.  Teams can choose to return it or take a touchback and concede the point.  It's a huge strategic element of the game that comes into play more often than you'd think.  There are even multiple compilations on YouTube of walk-off rouges (including some deliberate misses because they were just going for the one point)!

Next season, though, the rouge will look very different.  And be much harder to get.  Teams won't be able to get those walk-off rouges anymore since there will be no more rouges when a missed field goal goes wide or a punt/kickoff goes through the end zone untouched.  You can only get one if the returner can't get the ball out of the end zone or takes a knee.  I don't know if that's the entire point, but, again, the rouge is a distinctly Canadian rule.  They should take pride in the unique way to win a Canadian football game.

While the changes to the field size and goal post placement won't take effect until 2027 since they require more time because of the necessary facility adjustments.  The new rouge rule will begin next season.  As will two others that are significantly less controversial.

Team benches will move to opposite sides of the field.  Frankly, I didn't even know that some CFL teams had both benches on the same side, but apparently some do.  It just makes more sense to be consistent and have the benches on opposite sidelines in every stadium.  Likewise with the automatic 35-second play clock, which will become the standard.  The current CFL play clock is 20 seconds, manually initiated by an official, which is obviously inconsistent.  Starting it at 35 as soon as the previous play is blown dead will make it uniform across the board.  So, neither of those is a bad thing.

As for the other changes, the CFL was obviously quick to defend them and gave the rationale behind the decision-making.  Their main thought process was about making the game more exciting and "highlight-worthy."  Specifically, they want more big plays and think it'll increase the number of touchdowns.  There's also an argument that it'll lead to more aggressive play-calling.

I can actually see that point about the play-calling.  Field goal attempts being 15 yards longer and knowing you can't get a single point on a miss could definitely result in deciding to go for it rather than kicking the field goal.  Likewise, the shorter field means you're starting closer to the end zone.  We've seen what a difference that can make in the NFL with the variable touchback starting yard line.

Touchdowns will increase, the thought-process goes, because, without the goal posts in the way, the entire end zone will be wide open.  Although, I must say, the precision CFL quarterbacks needed in order to throw around the goal post is mighty impressive.  They also showed their data breaking down the percentage of where touchdown passes are thrown which proves that most throws are to the side of the end zone.  It also shows how many balls are thrown to the back of the end zone, the area of the field that they're eliminating.

This appears to be a case where they're thinking "evolve or die."  This particular evolution could've been achieved without fundamentally changing the game, however.  They could've moved the goal posts back and made the end zones smaller while keeping the field 110 yards long.  The 110-yard field is as much a part of Canadian football's identity as three downs, 12 players per side and the rouge, which will suddenly become a lot harder to get.

Ultimately, that's my biggest issue with the rule changes.  Canadian football is a different sport than American football.  These rule changes will make the two a lot more similar.  Maybe that's the point.  But it shouldn't be.  Because Canadian football is great and exciting all on its own.  Most significantly, it's unique.  Not anymore.  Pretty soon, people won't even be able to tell the difference.

2025 MLB Playoff Preview

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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