[2004.11.15 - 12:11 PM] Extreme Coaching Failure
Yesterday's loss to the Ravens was almost too much for this Jets fan
to take, if only because the team came out so strong in the first
half and there was no reason the game had to go down the way it
did. The coaching staff (well, two thirds of them) let both the players
and the fans down. No doubt about it.
Mike Vaccaro of the NY Post nicely captures the
debacle:
The Jets distinguished themselves through most of
this game, wrestling the rugged Ravens for 60 minutes, upping their
collective game to make up for the absence of Chad Pennington.
But they were sabotaged by their sideline. They were
compromised by their coaches. They were set up to fail by Hackett, who
has officially proven that he can coach Chad Pennington how to throw
lots of seven-yard square patterns but hasn't a clue how to adjust on
the fly when he needs to use a quarterback who doesn't fit his
pocket-protector gameplans like a glove.
How Hackett could possibly have thought it would be a
good idea to use the halfback option play with the Jets up 14-0, sitting
on the Baltimore 17-yard-line, primed to pummel the Ravens for good . .
.. well, that's impossible to know. And it isn't just that the play
didn't work. It was an absurdity from the moment it left his microphone.
Edwards should have vetoed that at once.
But Edwards didn't exactly cover himself in glory,
either. He allowed Hackett to crawl under his desk in the second half
and turn the Jets offense more conservative than the 700 Club. His
continuing adventures with clock management - even after bringing in a
coach named Dick Curl whose only job is to help Edwards with clock
management - robbed the Jets of taking every opportunity to win this
game in regulation, and avoid the crapshoot of overtime.
I have been mightily impressed with our defense this year, and I give
a lot of the credit to new defensive coordinator Donnie Henderson. Armed with a bunch of fast,
athletic guys, Henderson managed to stifle his former team's star
running back, Jamal Lewis (imagine that happening last season)
and put the team in a position to win. But Edwards and the Idiot
Hackett made that impossible.
I'm willing to give Edwards a few more chances to get his act
together, because he does bring certain intangibles to the table. He's
a calm, optimistic presence, and the players seem to like him. But he
has to get rid of Hackett. The guy is an abomination. He just
systematically saps the life out of our passing game, no matter who's
behind center. Ugh.
|
[2004.10.16 - 12:00 P.M.] Toast's NFL Picks - Week 6
Well, I went a very respectable 9-5 against the spread in my debut as an NFL Prognosticator last week, so I'm back to try my hand again.
Early Games
Panthers +9 at Eagles: Carolina is not a terrible team, but they've been banged up pretty bad on offense. Just two weeks ago, this team lost by 17 to the impotent Atlanta offense. I don't see any way they hang with Philly. Take the EAGLES who win by at least two scores. WIN
Bengals +3 at Browns: Neither of these teams is very good, but Cleveland just feels like a team with more... Substance? The anti-matchup here is the Browns terrible pass D versus the Bengals terrible run D. With Lee Suggs primed to bust out in his third start, and Carson Palmer still showing me nothing, I'm going with the BROWNS to win by a modest 5-7 point margin. WIN
Packers +2 at Lions: The question on everyone's minds right now is: Are the Packers really this bad? Yes. Yes they are. Their defense is atrocious against pass and rush, and their offense, while it's put up some numbers while struggling to keep up with teams that were in the process of killing them, isn't all that great either. (But, boy is Brett Favre tough. He's such a gunslinger. A real warrior. Have you ever looked into his eyes? ...barf) Look, Detroit is tough at home, especially against rival Green Bay. Take the LIONS who win by a field goal at minimum. LOSE
Texans +6.5 at Titans: These two teams actually remind me a lot of each other. Both have the potential to be explosive, and yet both are prone to getting bogged down. Both teams have excellent running backs facing horrid run defenses. The difference will come through the air, where the Texans' Carr-to-Johnson Machine has a lot to exploit in Tennessee's weak secondary. Take the TEXANS who certainly make a game of this, and may pull off the upset. WIN
Chiefs -2 at Jacksonville: My first thought here was "Who on Earth came up with this line? The Chiefs have one quality win on the season." Then I thought for a minute and remembered who that win was against: The Ravens, who play tough D and have very little offense. Sound like any other team we know? Hate to go this way, but take the CHIEFS. LOSE
Dolphins + 6 at Bills: Two things in this game are certain: 1.) The Bills will win. 2.) It won't be by a TD or more. Look, the Dolphins offense is the laughingstock of the league, but you still have to respect their D, particularly against the pass. In the last two weeks, they've contained Chad Pennington and Tom Brady (look at Brady's numbers, not the final score). Anyone who thinks Bledsoe is going to have success against them is nuts. Take the DOLPHINS who lose close in what will surely be the ugliest game of the week. LOSE
Chargers +4.5 at Falcons: Each week, Michael Vick continues to be exposed as the NFL's most overrated player. All that scrambling and improvising won't get it done against a stout San Diego defense. Take the CHARGERS who keep it close in a low-scoring affair and possibly eke out a win on the road. WIN
Seahawks +4 at Patriots: Everything has been pointing to this being the week that the Patriots' streak ends. And then I saw Tom Brady on the cover of Sports Illustrated. Take the SEAHAWKS. They're the better football team, and even if the Pats win yet another game they deserve to lose, it will only be by 3. LOSE
49ers +10 at Jets: Ten points? Are you kidding me? Look, I love my Jets, and I hate to pick against them, but let's get real: This is one 4-0 team that is not getting quality wins. They are not putting teams away. They started the year by letting the weak-ass Bengals hang with them in a shoot-out. The last two weeks they've let the Dolphins and Bills -- both AFC East bottom feeders -- play them close in games that should have been blowouts. The 'Niners, meanwhile, seem to have found a solution on offense with Rattay at QB. I like the Jets to win, but not by 11, no way. Take the NINERS who trail by a TD throughout a hot-pursuit scoring extravaganza. WIN
Redskins pick 'em at Bears: So it's Washington's solid D (and bad O) against Chicago's decent O (and not-so-great D). In a just world, this game would finish in a 6-6 tie. But I think Chicago pulls it out at home. Barely. Back the BEARS. LOSE
Late Games
Broncos -2 at Raiders: Note to the Raiders: Kerry Collins is not the answer. Take the BRONCOS, who, surprisingly, win a fairly easy one on the road. WIN
Steelers +3 at Cowboys: I'm picking this game based on momentum. Pittsburgh is clearly a team on the way up. Dallas came out of the gate looking tough but has stalled. Parcells is The Man, but he's really got his work cut out for him with this squad, and this isn't the week he turns it around. Take the STEELERS who win outright. WIN
Sunday Night
Vikings -3.5 at Saints: The guys at RotoWire think the Vikings are pretty similar to the Saints. I think the Vikings are more similar to the Eagles. Which is to say: Dominant. Take the VIKINGS who win by a TD or two. WIN
Monday Night
Buccaneers +6.5 at Rams: Last week, in one of my fantasy leagues, I fell into the "Pittman should do well on the road against a terrible run defense" trap. That won't happen again. I think the Rams may have found themselves last week. And despite their upset against the screwball Saints, I don't think the Bucs could find their collective ass with both of their collective hands. Take the RAMS.
[2004.10.12 - 12:55 PM] And So It Begins. Again.
Tonight is Game One of the ALCS between the New York Yankees and the
Boston Red Sox. And I am jacked. Last year's matchup -- in the same
round, between the same teams -- was one of the most exciting sporting
events I have ever witnessed. Given what we've seen so far this year
between these two clubs, I expect this encounter to be no different.
I'm still a baseball newbie, so I'm not going to waste anyone's time with
a serious, detailed discussion of the relative merits of each team. From
what I can see, it all boils down to a few undeniable observations:
- Their starting pitching is better, particularly since Wakefield - an
average pitcher against everyone else - owns the Yankees.
- Our relief pitching and closers are better.
- Their outfield is better.
- Our infield is better.
- Their facial hair is retarded looking.
- Really, really retarded looking.
- We've got a century of mojo on our side.
Picking up on two of the above points, I gotta say that this year's Red
Sox team is a particularly... goofy... group of individuals. Alas,
it seems that the Yankees are partly to blame for their adolescent rebelliousness:
This latest group of Red Sox players is a rebuttal to the
more buttoned-down image of the Yankees. Boston fashions itself as the
anti-Yankees, dressed down and casual and noisy. A year ago, the Red Sox
adopted a "Cowboy Up" rallying cry and shaved their heads. More recently,
they decided to call themselves "The Idiots" and grow facial hair that harks
back to Abraham Lincoln.
"The Idiots". Yeah, that sounds about right to me.
One more thing about the Red Sox, though. When New York is playing them,
I yell, I scream, I curse them, and I find them generally annoying. At
bottom, however, I do not bear them any deep ill will. They do not evoke
the blacker emotions I feel at the sight of the hated Patriots. No, the Sox
have been through a lot over the years, and for that reason they're a
hard team to truly despise. While I do not see them getting by my Yankees
-- there's just something about them losing this that seems pre-ordained --
if they do, I'll be rooting for them in the World Series.
|
[2004.10.08 - 06:30 P.M.] Toast's NFL Picks - Week 5
Since, in addition to being in two fantasy leagues, I also gamble on the NFL every week, I've decided, what the hell, let's start posting my picks online and see how I do. Word to the wise, if you take my advice and lose money, it's your own damned fault. On to the games:
Early Games
Browns +6 at Steelers: My gut initially said that, these being two average-to-lame teams, take the Browns and the points. But I've got a feeling that the Steelers pass D is going to really mess with Jeff Garcia, forcing him into at least two turnovers, one of which may even go for a TD. Take the STEELERS, who win by 10. WIN
Lions +6.5 at Falcons: The Lions give up a ton of yards through the air. Lucky for them, Michael Vick is the one QB in the league who seems allergic to the pass. Take the LIONS and the points in what will probably be a re-run of that ugly Falcons v. Cardinals game. WIN
Dolphins +13 at Patriots: Last week the Miami pass defense made Chad Pennington look awful. Chad Pennington is not awful. It follows logically from that that Tom Brady will have a mediocre game at best. Give him a TD for home field, but that's it. Bottom line: The Pats do not blow teams out, particularly teams with good defenses. Look for the Patriots to extend their infernal winning streak with another ugly three-point victory, but take the DOLPHINS and their boatload of points to cover. (NOTE: I am the founder and president of the Patriot Haters Club, so take this pick extra, extra lightly.) LOSE
Vikings -4 at Texans: The guys at RotoWire are very impressed with the Texans' gutty wins over KC and Oakland, and I am too. But the Vikings are not KC or Oakland. Take the VIKINGS who, behind an explosive performance by Culpepper, obliterate the spread on this one. WIN
Giants +3.5 at Cowboys: An awful lot of people are going to pick the Giants after they went into Green Bay and got a 7-point victory last week. That's a stupid reason to pick the G-Men. Friggin' Chicago beat the Packers at Lambeau the week before that. The Packers stink. Anyhow, I see these teams as more or less even. I think Dallas wins because they have home field and they have the Greatest Coach In The Universe. But I think they win small. Take the GIANTS and the points. WIN
Raiders +9 at Colts: No discussion here. Peyton and his Untouchables will utterly erase the Rai-duhs. Take the COLTS. WIN
Buccaneers +3 at Saints: Given how flaky New Orleans has been, if this were any other team I'd take the 3 points. The Bucs, however, have shown me nothing this year, and they're starting Chris Simms at QB for the first time. I smell a win for the SAINTS. LOSE
Late Games
Bills +7 at Jets: See the graphic at the top of the page? See the Jets logo? Think I'm picking against my guys? Maybe some day, but not against the hapless Bills. Chad bounces back this week, and the Jets D picks off Bledsoe multiple times, including once for a score. Take the JETS who win easily. LOSE
Jaguars -3 at Chargers: On the one hand, San Diego is playing at home, and they've got LT (sorry Simmons). On the other hand they're still starting Drew Brees, who sucks. But on the third hand, Jacksonville's wins have all been by three points or less, so why should this game be any different. Take the CHARGERS who might win, might lose, but won't lose by more than a field goal. WIN
Cardinals +1 at 49ers: These teams both suck so much ass you could use them to clean out your colon. Given that parity and a negligible line, I'm going with the team that has the superior run defense and home field. Take the NINERS. WIN
Panthers +6 at Broncos: The Denver running game - for the first time in my football-watching life - ain't all that. Carolina's defense should therefore have no problem keeping this a low-scoring affair. As such, take the PANTHERS, who certainly keep this close and may even score the upset. WIN
Rams +7 at Seahawks: My feeling about Saint Louis this year is that, while they may fool you into thinking they're the Explosive Rams of recent years when they face bad teams, any reasonably good D will put them in their place. The Seattle defense is considerably beyond "reasonably good". Take the SEAHAWKS who cover without breaking a sweat. LOSE
Sunday Night
Ravens pick 'em at Redskins: My working theory has been that these are actually the Same Team. Instability at the QB position. Stud running backs. Second-tier wideouts who never get the opportunity to improve. Old School coaches. Solid defenses. I'll actually be surprised if we don't see players running in and out of the locker rooms between series, switching uniforms. Given all that, take REDSKINS who are, after all, playing at home. LOSE
Monday Night
Titans +3 at Packers: Assuming McNair plays, the Titans win this. Why? Because, as I said above, the Packers suck. As of this writing, McNair is probable, so take the TITANS. WIN
[2004.10.03 - 10:50 A.M.] Brady
Bill Simmons (AKA "The Sports Guy" on ESPN.com) is not dumb. At least, I don't think so. He is, however, the world's biggest Professional Homer. Not a column goes by where he doesn't find a way to mention his friggin' Patriots and their friggin' Superbowl wins. He could be writing about the international chess championship, and he'd figure out a way to work the Patriots into the discussion. And you know what? I can live with that. I enjoy his writing enough that I can find it in my heart to let that pass.
But there's annoying and then there's annoying.
In Simmons' column on the NFL this week, he wrote this:
On "Inside the NFL" this week, Collinsworth asked Marino, Carter and Carter's eyebrows the following question: "If you could take one QB in a game for all the marbles, who would you take: Manning, Brady, McNabb or Favre?" Carter quickly said Brady, and rightly so -- the guy already won two Super Bowls and he's 12-1 in games decided by three points or less. Marino thinks about it, then takes Manning, and rightly so -- famous QBs who can't win anything when it matters always stick together.
But here's what I couldn't believe: Collinsworth agreed with Marino. Are you KIDDING me??? How could anyone take Manning over Brady in a big game at this point? How? What else needs to happen? You know what, the last three times they went against each other, Brady's team won every time ... I'm gonna have to go with Peyton Manning. Unbelievable.
Um, hey, Bill? Quarterbacks do not play against each other. They play against the other team's defense. You're a professional fucking sports writer, so you're damn sure aware of that fact.
To take the fact that the Patriots pretty much own the Colts and infer that Tom Brady is a better quarterback than Peyton Manning is the height of idiocy. The Colts have been a horrible defensive team for years now, and the Patriots have not only had one of the league's best defenses, but they've been particularly deadly against the pass.
Last week Manning threw - what - 15 TD's against Green Bay in the first quarter? And he has games like that fairly often. But against the Pats, those TD's turn into INT's. That's Belichek's defense for you. It makes great quarterbacks look awful.
Can you imagine if Brady had to face the Patriots' pass defense? Give me a break. He'd be lucky to see his QB rating clear the 50 mark. For christ's sake, the guy's the most average quarterback to ever wear a ring. He'd get killed by that D.
But Simmons, being the WORLD'S BIGGEST HOMER, tries to pretend that Tom fucking Brady -- basically Trent Dilfer with good hair -- is a better quarterback than Peyton Manning, who is without a doubt the best QB playing football today. And -- Simmons, take note -- I say that as a Jets fan. See? I absolutely think the world of Chad Pennington (who is also a far better QB than Tom Brady). But Chad is not at the Peyton Manning level of greatness, and despite being, myself, a pretty egregious homer, I would never, ever claim that he is. In trying to make the point that Brady is a better quarterback than Manning, Simmons crosses the line from Homerdom to mental retardation.
[2004.06.24 - 08:10 P.M.] NBA Draft
Make no mistake. Emeka Okafor was the best player in this draft and he deserved to be drafted number one. Instead, the Magic drafted Dwight Howard, just one of the "high school phenoms" that are all the rage these days. Nothing in sports is a certainty (witness the Patriots winning two Superbowls), but here are two good bets:
1. Dwight Howard will not be another LeBron James.
2. Emeka Okafor will be the Rookie of the Year.
I'm pissed about this. Emeka was the best player in the country. He has an ungodly work ethic. He's an unbelievable defender with rock-solid fundamentals and an NBA-Ready game. Not giving him the #1 pick just disrespects all of that. Going with some unproven kid... Man, that pisses me off.
But you know what? Dick Vitale came on afterward and put things in perspective:
Orlando let Shaq go.
Orlando is about to let Tracy McGrady go.
And Orlando just passed up a Sure Thing.
OK? So, they're idiots. Fuck 'Em.
As for Emeka, he now gets to play the cornerstone role on the NBA's newest franchise. Not exactly a fun job, at least for the first few years. Frankly, I've been dreading the idea of him being sent there all day. But maybe, just maybe, Emeka is good enough to drag a crew of cast-offs up to respectability. If anyone can do it, Emeka can. Because Emeka can do anything.
In other news... Ben Gordon at Number Three!!! Let's Go Huskies!
I did not see this coming. Honestly, I harbored dreams that Gordon might be available when Portland's pick came around. So much for that theory. Good luck to Ben in Chicago. Maybe he's the guy they finally need to make all that raw talent gel into an actual team.
(...waiting for Portland's pick...)
Aw, shit. Just what I feared. Portland pulled an Orlando.
The thirteenth pick rolls around. Portland's looking for a guard. Jameer Nelson -- Player of the Year 1-A behind Emeka -- is still on the board. He's a great ball handler, a guy who lifted lowly St. Joe's to a national title contender. Do the Blazers pick him? Nah. Of course not. They go with Sebastian Telfair, a point guard out of... a New York City high school!
Yay! Yay! Portland drafted another fucking long-term project! Yay! Yay! Portland drafted an unproven high-school player! Yay!
Nash, you were a great regular season GM. Your drafting skills, however, need work.
[2004.06.18 - 10:30 P.M.] If A Coach Quits In The Forest...
Zen Boy is gone for now. Wow, loses one lousy Finals and he decides to call it quits. How's that for staying power? I guess that gives us a few years off from Big Chief Triangle. He'll be back, though. Just wait until LeBron matures a bit. Phil won't be able to resist the chance to ride the next once-in-a-decade Superstar to another ego massage...
If you're one of the other 18 hard-core NBA fans out there, by all means read the Sports Guy's Finals Wrap-Up. His comments on ex-Blazer Rasheed Wallace are, um, particularly amusing:
Speaking of 'Sheed ...
Q: How did 'Sheed keep it together for the entire duration of the playoffs? Isn't he completely insane? Did something change? Was Larry Brown electro-shocking him before games?
A: This was the biggest mystery of the playoffs. How did 'Sheed go from "Creator of CTC" to "Good Soldier On A Title Team" in eight months? It's inexplicable. What about the never-ending barrage of temper tantrums, those SI pictures of his unhappy cell phone calls at charity events, all the comical incidents with referees? How many key Blazers games did he sabotage over the years? Thirty? Forty? And suddenly he was fine? This was like watching Courtney Love fill in for Kelly Ripa, then tape Regis' show for four months without a single incident. I'm still reeling from the whole thing. I can only imagine how Blazers fans feel.
(One of my favorite subplots of the playoffs was anyone saying that Rasheed is "misunderstood." Let's say you're working on Wall Street. Every two weeks, you flip out on someone and get escorted out of the building. This happens for 10 straight years. You can't help yourself. They keep fining you, you're costing the company money ... doesn't matter. You're a lunatic. Then you change firms and keep it together for four months, just long enough for the new firm to consider signing you to an extension. Well, does that make you "misunderstood," or are you just a lunatic with a convenient on-off switch? I'm going with the latter. I'm cynical that way.)
Well, since you asked, oddly enough, Bill, I don't feel the least bit bitter. 'Sheed was a perfect fit for the Pistons. They didn't need him to be The Man. When he randomly decided to take the night off, their system allowed them to absorb it. As for the attitude change? Who knows. All I know is, as a Blazers fan, I'm just glad to see him gone. No residual animosity. No regrets. Best of luck to him. P-Town can now move on.
Speaking of, rumors abound that Portland is about to move Adbur-Rahim to New Jersey for Kittles, Williams (no, Alvin, not the murderer) and picks. Further speculation has them packaging picks to move up in the draft.
Two words, Nash: Ben Gordon. You will not be dissapointed.
Meanwhile, here I sit watching the Yanks play the Dodgers. You know, I miss the exciting days of months past when there was actually a race in the AL East...
[2004.03.28 - 04:20 P.M.] Final Four. (yawn.) Baby.
The Huskies advanced to the Final Four last night. I did not run out on my deck and scream their glory to the world. I did not jump around the house pumping my fist. I did not break down and cry like a girl (the way I did when they beat Gonzaga to go to the Final Four in 1999). Nope. My only indulgence was a confident, satisfied smile as I looked forward to next week. That's the way I'm feeling about this team. Let's recap:
No one expected 15 seed Vermont to be a threat. And, after a frenetic first five minutes, they weren't. The Huskies methodically built up a lead of around 20 and then coasted to an easy win.
DePaul, a 7 seed, figured to be tougher. Dave Leitao, who graduated magna cum laude from CCU (Calhoun Coaching University), surely wouldn't let his guys go down without a fierce fight. Or that's what I was thinking before UConn broke out to a 20 point lead and then put it in cruise control for the next thirty minutes.
Hmmmm. Vandy was going to be a competitive game. Had to be. Couple of big guys to test Connecticut's interior. On a bit of a roll themselves. This was the Sweet Sixteen. This was when the basketball got serious. Being the pessimistic sports fan that I am, I steeled myself for an upset. My tension was relieved when the Huskies started the game with a 17-1 run. Vandy made a little push back right after halftime, until UConn noticed they had gotten close and loped back out to a comfortable distance of, surprise, around 20 points. Notice a pattern?
Coming into the 'Bama game last night, I figured this leisurely joy ride had to end. These guys had knocked out the number one seed which, even though it was Stanford, has to count for something. They'd also convincingly beaten a Syracuse team that had ended their regular season with a win over Connecticut. They were fast and they could shoot from outside. A bad matchup for a Husky team that seems to fall asleep on perimeter D at times.
Yeah, well, you saw the game last night, right? Twenty four point lead at the half. Another laugher.
My cousin-in-law e-mailed me this morning to ask if UConn was ever going to play a good team in this tournament. My response was "Are they ever going to play a team they can't make look bad?"
So it's on to San Antonio, where Duke will most likely be waiting.
Surely the vaunted Blue Devils will put up a fight... Right?
[2004.03.21 - 12:45 P.M.] Tournament Notes
Despite the fact that I've just completed my annual opening-weekend self-destruction routine in both my NCCA Tournament Pools -- I had Arizona and Gonzaga in the Final Four -- I have to say that this has been a most enjoyable stretch of games to kick off the 2004 tournament.
UConn has rolled to two easy victories. Okafor is healthy again, showing no signs of his ongoing back issues. Villanueva looks healed up from his ankle injury. Boone has continued his remarkably solid play. And guess what? Taliek Brown - the point guard who has given me fits for three and a half seasons - is playing the best ball of his career. Understand: I am Taliek's biggest critic. So when I say he's playing with awareness, smoothness and, above all, control for the first time since he donned a UConn uniform, it's no small thing. Right now, there is absolutely no reason to think anyone but the Huskies will come out of the Phoenix West Bracket. (Sorry, I think this renaming the regions business is plain goofy, and I look forward to returning to the traditional naming scheme next year.)
In other news, college basketball teams from Western conferences suck. Really, they do. They should try competing in the Women's bracket, they might have better luck over there. Skimming ESPN.com this morning, I ran across a quote from Stanford assistant coach Tony Fuller:
"Today, in a one-game tournament, the No. 1 and No. 2 team lost. Does it say that the West Coast is [crappy]. No? Does it say we can't play ball or we're overrated? No. It doesn't make a blanket statement about West Coast basketball."
Uh, Tony? Yes. Yes it does. The Pac 10, in particular, has been exposed as a weak-ass bunch of posers, with Arizona and Washington joining the ranks of the homeward bound. I'd say this weekend reveals quite a lot about college basketball on your side of the continent. Hey, who knows? Maybe college hoops needs to suck in the West in order to balance out the NBA's complete dominance out there.
As for the Stanford Cardinals, what can one possibly say? No amount of twisting the knife could make it worse for them, could it? Let's try anyway:
In the history of college athletics, there has never been a more consistently overrated program than Stanford Basketball.
Year after year they haunt the AP Top Ten. Tournament after Tournament they are given the gift of a one or two seed. Time after time they piss themselves when they meet up with a team from a real conference, and they head home on the first weekend. This year, remember, we heard it would be different. The hoops punditocracy all warned us that this was a different Stanford team. Tougher. More resilient. Doesn't look that way today, does it guys? Pussies.
Ah... I feel much better now. OK, I'm off to catch the second half of the second round. Can't wait to see what bizarre twists today's action holds.
[2004.02.01 - 06:00 P.M.] SuperBowl XXXVIII
OK, here we go.
GO PANTHERS!!!!!.
(Nice tribute to the Columbia crew. Appropriate, the game being in Houston and all... Um, the thing with the fake Moon was pretty corny, but still...)
Great shot of Brady stretching his groin during the national anthem. Hope he pulls it.
(Does Ford think they're going to sell a whole bunch of $100,000.00+ cars because people see it on the SuperBowl?)
WOO HOO! TAILS!!! GOOD GUYS WIN ONE EARLY!!!!!
Three and out for Carolina. Patriots driving. Could someone explain to me why New England always has a receiver open? I mean, their wideouts aren't particularly good. Cover these guys, for chrissakes.
Excellent. Hold 'em to three... WIDE! FUCKIN' WIDE! WOOOOOOO-HOOO!!!!! Bite me, Vinatieri.
Three and out again. Great.... And for fuck-sakes does Carolina have any Special Teams coverage out there on punts?
Ladies and gentlemen, the Carolina defense has arrived at the stadium. One thing I like so far: The Pats pathetic running game has got nothing on this Panthers D. That means the game is all on Brady.
Man, there's nothing more annoying than Patriots defenders in your backfield. Friggin' three and out again. This sucks. Yo, Cats: Throw the FUCKING ball down the FUCKING field.
OH, that had to hurt. Nice, nice play. Take 'em out of FG range. The Football Gods are smiling on Carolina right now, because the Pats have had two possessions where they should have scored. Now if the damn Carolina offense could, oh, I don't know, CONVERT A FIRST DOWN, we'd be all set.
You know, the Panthers have a real chance here: Bill Belichek's strength is figuring out opposing offenses. The Panthers have no offense. That's a huge advantage!.
(Baseball could use Levitra? Damn, that is harsh. So harsh that my fiance just said "Fuck you, Ditka.")
Yeah, that's right, Belichoke. Don't try any of that 4th and 1 shit on a real defense, do ya, tough guy?
(sigh)
You know, I hate the Patriots offense because they're so bad, but everyone tries to claim they're good.
But I hate the Patriots defense because they're... good. Really, really good.
Fourth and inches... typical Patriots call. Look at that spot. Give me a break. Panthers just challenged the call. Let's see what happens...Horrid. Just horrid. A blind man could look at that replay and see the ball didn't get there. Oh, well. That's the Pats for you. Calls don't go against them. Ever.
WOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO HOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! You SUCK Adam!
You know, as a fan of offense, I have to say: This is a pretty exciting zero-zero game.
Now, if that had been Tom Brady and not Jake DelHomme, you know that would have been ruled an incomplete pass...
Touchdown, Bad Guys. Not good. The way Carolina has been playing, that could be the winning score.
(Anyone else notice that the Pats logo looks like John Kerry in profile?)
YES!!! That is what I'm TALKIN' about!!!!
Where the hell have these guys been for the last 28 minutes??? Could someone tell me that? OK, this is a game. Great series by Carolina. Going into the half tied against these bastards is a small victory in itself. Jake DelHomme, you are the man.
Posted that a little early. Gawd, I HATE the fucking Patriots... Touchdown. Oh, I hate these pricks so much. Despicable posers. This sucks.
Nice recovery. Damn, I wish Davis had broken that last tackle. But I'll settle for three. And you have to like the Carolina O right now. They finally showed up. Gives me a little hope for the second half.
(Half Time: I don't like medleys. If you're going to play a song, play the whole damned song. Nonetheless, it's pretty amusing to see the shit sandwich that is Nelly (great), P-Diddy (heinous poseur), and Kid Rock (the fucking King). Now what the christ is this... Oh, dear. Janet's back. Shamelessly ripping off her freak brother's moves these days, apparently... aw, shit. Here he is: Justa Talentlessfake. What the fuck, CBS? In what world is this ludicrous imbecile the NFL's headliner? Ugh... Glad that's over. On the whole? Lame.)
(Naked guy would've been the most entertaining part of the half-time show if he'd come out a few minutes earlier.)
Three and out for the Bad Guys to start. Augurs well...
Panthers dodged a bullet there. That was clearly a complete pass and then a fumble recovered by the Pats. Amazing. A bad call that went against New England. Somebody pinch me... Thanks, hon.
(That was one uuuuggggggggggly cheerleader.)
Patriots driving. Penalty on Carolina. Incomplete long pass by Brady. 3:03 left in the third. For the record, I'm starting to get a little bit of that sinking Patriots-are-going-to-win feeling. I know this feeling. It's usually right. (sigh) Still there's hope...
Now... not so much. Gettting a real strong "When's Survivor All-Stars Come On" vibe right now.
That's what this game needed. A little DeShaun Foster. TEEEE-DEEEEE PanTHUHssss!!!!
Not sure about that 2-point conversion call. Not sure. The extra wouldn't have got them within 3, but.. Eh, we'll see.
A Word... I'll talk about this now while I've got a second. If the Pats win... Yeah. See, here's the thing. There's nothing worse than when the team you hate the most wins. Nothing. When the Jets were eliminated from playoff contention, I was pissed. Disappointed. Last year, when the Jets lost in the playoffs, I was really pissed. But, you see, when your team loses, you can always look to next year. A loss isn't forever. You can always win the next time. But when the Bad Guys win the Big One? That's forever. If the Patriots win tonight, it's not like I can get up in the morning and hope they lose this Superbowl tomorrow. It's forever. Those fuckers will always be able to say they won this Championship. I think I'd rather see my team lose if I could be guaranteed that some scrub team I didn't give a shit about would win, rather than see my mortal enemy win. That's the worst.
You know, for a so-called "genius", Bill Belichek can't seem to figure out that Kevin Faulk can run and Antowain Smith can't.
INTERCEPTED!!! INTERCEPTED!!! That's SEVEN POINTS you WON'T be getting, Brady! Up yours!!!
Oh. My. Goodness.
What a play. What a toss. What a catch. Good guys are ahead for the first time tonight. Oh, do I dare hope.... ?
I don't believe it. I don't believe it. I just don't believe it. 3rd and 9, and the fuckwads pick it up. I don't believe it. And there's the seven... Oh, I despise this team.
And could someone please pass a law that says only teams I like get to play "Rock n' Roll Part II" when they do something good? Please?
I cannot believe this game. What a game. Jake DelHomme is my freakin' hero right now. I love this guy. Brady wishes he was this good.
Oh, no. Here comes the Worst Case Scenario. Vinatieri for the game-winning field goal with no time left. Can you feel it coming? I can. It's the sound of inevitability...
And it's over. And once again the world's shittiest, most undeserving football team wins the SuperBowl. I'm so disgusted I can barely think straight. Fuck Tom Brady. Fuck Bill Belichek. Fuck all you Patriots fans. Your team blows donkey dick. Go to hell.
Goodnight.
Oh yeah, and...
GO RICHARD!!!
P.S. The best team lost. Assholes.
[2003.11.21 - 07:15 P.M.] Bonzi Sits. And I Might Owe Sheed an Apology...
Interesting times in Blazer Nation. Bonzi Wells will sit on the bench tonight while the team plays a big home
matchup against red-hot Houston. Wells is serving the second game of a two-game suspension which was handed down
by the team after he blew up at coach Maurice Cheeks during the Dallas matchup earlier in the week. The Blazers won
a nailbiter against the Heat on Wednesday - the first game of Wells' suspension. Let's see how they do tonight against a
superior opponent.
Monte Poole of the Oakland Tribune had
this to say about the Cheeks/Wells dustup:
Meanwhile, 3,000 miles away, Portland raged with The Beef between the Blazers, with star guard Bonzi Wells
going after coach Maurice Cheeks. In every imaginable way, this is a ticking bomb. As a player or coach Cheeks is one of the
most respected men in the league. He's old school, class and dignity. If you can't get along with Mo, you don't like a good mattress.
Wells is a stunning talent who leaves home each morning determined to display the stupidest possible behavior. He has hurled
racial taunts. He has spat on opponents. He has invited Blazers' fans to accept the love from his fully extended middle finger. He
has been fined/suspended no fewer than five times over the past two years. In an attempt to reach out, Cheeks this season named
Wells tri-captain. To which Bonzi responded by giving Portland fans the finger after the third game and cussing out his coach after
the 10th game. Cheeks, saying he is "sick of it," slapped Wells with a two-game suspension that ends Sunday when the Blazers
come to Oakland. This fight will continue as long as the two are in Portland, but the coach is routing the player. If Wells isn't
careful, he could wind up with Isaiah Rider, a gifted athlete who coulda been a contendah.
Pretty much sums it all up as far as The Bonz goes.
But here's what's interesting. While Bonzi has been self-destructing, his partner in crime, Rasheed Wallace, has been
stepping things up. Wallace played a phenomenal game at Dallas. He's been much more of a force around the basket
recently, and his outside shooting is still dead-on. Why the sudden resurgence? Well, for one, it seems to me that the presence of Zach
Randolph has inspired Sheed to pick up his game somewhat. Randolph is, quite frankly, a force of nature in the post. He plays
hard, he plays aggressively, and he plays to win. And it seems to be rubbing off on his front-court mate, Wallace.
Which leads me to posit the following surprising hypothetical: Maybe Bonzi has been the problem all along. You see, for
years now, I've lamented Sheed's adverse impact on the young Bonzi. Wells came to the team an unknown at the pro level, and
quickly blossomed into an amazing talent. But then his behavior started to go south. Knowing that he hung out with Wallace - whose,
um, personality issues are legendary - I assumed the older Rasheed was corrupting our budding star. Given recent developments,
however, I'm starting to think I might have had it backwards.
The next few weeks will tell. Given Bonzi's track record, I wouldn't be surprised if Cheeks pulled a Gruden and kicked him to the
curb. I know the contracts work differently in the NBA, but he could bench him, put him on the IR, or trade him for scrubs. If my hunch is right,
it could be one of those addition-by-subtraction deals. And, given what we've seen so far, a rehabilitated Rasheed, playing alongside
the soon-to-be All-Star Randolph, could wind up being the nucleus this team needs to make a surprise run in the West.
[2003.11.12 - 06:15 P.M.] Good Luck, Zach
All Summer long, I waited -- along with untold thousands of other Blazers fans -- for The Word.
The Word of the Big Trade.
The Trade that would send the Underachieving Bad-Character Morons packing. The trade
that would unload Wallace, Stoudamire, Wells, and, with any luck, Patterson from Portland's roster. New GM John Nash
came in last Spring with a lot of big talk about how he was going to clean up this team. Character was the new king
in town. No more Jail Blazers.
Well, The Word never came. And it was pretty damned deflating when the Blazers started camp with virtually
the same roster that took the annual first-round exit last year. Same guys. Same complete lack of a chance to do
anything special. That's been my take, and the early going has done nothing to disprove it. A win. A loss. A win. A
loss. And this during the "easy" part of the schedule, against teams with a third of Portland's payroll. It's enough
to make a guy feel mildy ill.
Of course, I'm not giving up this early in the year. Being a Portland fan, I've got to at least show up and take my obligatory
emotional beating. All I need is a reason, even a flimsy one, to tune in and watch my hopes get dashed. Luckily, John Canzano
of the Oregonian has given me
something to latch onto. The new angle? The Blazers may have the same personnel, but they've got a new leader
in Zach Randolph:
While we were waiting for the Trail Blazers to exhale Tuesday, while we were waiting for Lamond
Murray's last-second three-pointer to come down and for Portland to walk off with an 83-80 victory, something else happened.
A team changed hands.
Blazers forward Zach Randolph finished in double figures in points (18) and rebounds (11), giving
him his fourth double double of the season. He took 18 shots. And the Blazers became his team.
For the record, I think he's right. Zach is The Man on offense now, now doubt. And he's a hard worker at both ends,
just the kind of guy we need to counter the lazy, unprofessional babies that have diluted this team for the last four years. (Pretty
much since that incomparable NBA citizen Brian Grant was sent packing -- coincidence? I think not.) But will one guy be
enough to change the character of the team? I have my doubts.
It would help if Cheeks would recognize the situation for what it is and try to leverage it. Start de-emphasizing more of the
troublemakers. Zach has taken over the reins from Wallace. Why not give some of Bonzi's minutes to the young and incredibly
promising Qyntel Woods? Hell, that would give Z more time to fight with the fans, an opportunity I'm sure he'd appreciate.
That's the way to go. Move the old crew quietly to the side and then either trade 'em or let them go in free agency.
So far, Maurice isn't seeing things my way. He still thinks the Blazers are Wallace's team. But Cheeks' doesn't strike
me as a stupid guy. Maybe he's just saying the right things so he doesn't ruffle Sheed's feathers. These first few months
will tell if the coach "gets it" about the toxic nature of his key personnel and the need to shift the focus to our new guys. Here's
hoping he does, because that'll be the only way this season will be worth watching.
[2003.09.21 - 10:48 A.M.] Week 3: Jets @ Patriots
As I was passing an associate of mine at work the other day - who happens to be a Patriots fan - I casually
asked him "Ready for the game this weekend?" To which he responded "Well, I can't wait to see which Patriots
team shows up." He meant, of course, the Good Patriots team that smacked the Eagles around last
weekend or the Bad Patriots team that got embarrassed by the Bills in week one. My response to his
observation? "Hey, at least you've got two teams to choose from."
So far this season, all we've seen is the Bad Jets. The Very, Very Bad Jets.
Yes, it's only week two. Yes, anything can happen in any given game. Yes, there are other factors that go into
this besides the numbers. But really, what are we, Jet Nation, supposed to reach out and grab hold of here? The
thought was that with Pennington out, we'd have to fall back on our defense and our running game. For the results
of that strategy, see last week's Haiku.
The small ray of hope that I see is that, when Hackett let Vinny take the passing game vertical last week,
they actually looked pretty good. (Gee, let Vinny throw the ball up the field. Who'd a come up with that radical
suggestion. Oh, that's right: Me.) It's a risky proposition to rely on as our sole hope
for a win - particularly given Vinny's historical propensity for throwing the ball to the other team - but right
now I see no alternative. Both the Pats pass D and their run D are statistically slightly better than average, so in the
absence of a proven weakness to exploit, and given the absolute futility of the Jets running game right now,
they pretty much have to let Vinny chuck it down field and hope Santana Moss rises to the occasion.
On the defensive side, if the Jets are ever going to have a golden opportunity to bring their run defense
together, this is it. The Pats are averaging only 83 rushing yards a game using a committee approach with
scrubs Antowain Smith and Kevin "I'm-No-Marshall" Faulk. Nevertheless, Belicheck has to try try the run first,
given the Jets generous defense in that area.
Here's hoping the Men in Green wake up this week and stuff those Pat Bastards.
If they don't, I'll be hearing about it from my family up in Boston from here until X-Mas...
[2003.09.08 - 09:15 P.M.] All Roads Lead to Vinny
I suppose it's possible that the Washington Redskins are just a very good defensive team, and that's why my
New York Jets looked like absolute shit on offense Thursday night. Possible, yes. But pretty damned unlikely.
So what was the real problem? There are three answers to that question:
1. Vinny Testaverde: This is the easy one. Vinny looks like he is 39 going on 140. He's slow. He's easily
rattled. And some times, he just doesn't seem to have any idea what's going on around him. The obvious example, of
course, was the blown hand-off to Lamont Jordan. But, really, on all except the opening drive he looked perpetually
flustered. At one point, my fiance - who is new to football - asked me "Why does he keep looking all over the
place like that?" "He's going through his reads, honey," I replied, "It's just not supposed to be so obvious." Right
now, Vinny appears to be at the stage of his career where he is, at best, a Hold-The-Fort-For-A-Quarter-Or-Two QB.
That job I think he could handle. Starting for 10 weeks? Not so much. But I truly, deeply hope that I am wrong about
that.
2. Vinny Testaverde: Vinny is a different type of Quarterback than Chad Pennington. He has always struck
me as a guy who is most comfortable dropping back and chucking it way deep. He is not a QB mastermind. He is not
a quick thinker. He is, in short, horribly suited to running the West Coast Offense. (Caveat: I'll freely admit
I've only been watching him play since he came to the Jets. Didn't see him on Tampa Bay. Didn't see him play in
college. But this is the Vinny I know.) Now, the Jets' coaching staff -- which makes a lot more money coaching the
Jets than I make coaching the Jets -- should maybe, you know, see this. Instead, skimming through Dr. Z's weekly
Sports Illustrated piece, I read this:
"Jets offensive coordinator Paul Hackett says the attack will be different without Chad
Pennington. It'll be tailored to Vinny Testaverde -- short, controlled passing and lots of running..."
Hey, I'm all about the "lots of running" with Vinny behind center. But "short, controlled passing" is exactly
what the guy sucks at. Now, coincidentally, the "short, controlled passing" game is exactly what characterizes
the West Coast Offense. And it happens to be the same game that Chad specialized in last year. Sooooo.. maybe
what Hackett meant to say was "I'm too much of a stubborn bastard to actually tailor my precious offensive
schemes to the talent I have to work with, so screw you, New York. Have fun watching Vinny flounder around out
there." Yeah, maybe that was what he meant.
3. Vinny Testaverde: I can't say as I understand what truly motivates professional athletes. For some,
it's the money. For others, it's also the money, but that doesn't stop them from getting caught up in the thrill
and emotion of the competition. Enter the Leader. Why is it that some guys, in some situations, can "spark" the
offense? Inspire the guys around them to play just a little bit (or, sometimes, a lot) better than they otherwise
would? Beats the hell out of me. But I know one thing: Chad Pennington does that, and Vinny Testaverde does not.
The entire Jets offense looked like they had their hearts surgically removed before the game. Martin - yes, he's
getting old too - didn't have that crazy will of his going, the one that moves the pile an extra yard every time.
Jordan seemed unsure of himself. Moss and Conway were going through the motions. The only guy who was (as always)
locked in was Chrebet. I can't explain it. You think the opposite might have happenned: The team, realizing their
starter was down, would have come out absolutely stoked to rally around the old guy. Nope. Hell, Conway looked
more engaged on the sideline when Chad was talking to him than he did at any point in the game. Pretty sad.
One bright spot: The defense looked promising. There were some spots where they couldn't stop the run
(mostly between the 20s, like last year), and there was that awful breakdown when they let Ramsey get away. By
and large, though, they looked OK. Couple of aggressive moves to force turnovers in there. Some good stops in the
red zone. I think this unit, given a few more weeks, could be first rate.
Here's hoping, because the offense isn't going to win many games for us...
