Monday, September 19, 2005

A second chance

At the risk of revealing myself as the idiot I am, I did something stupid this weekend and now wish to brag.

So Saturday I moved in to a new apartment. Nice little setup, comes with a detached garage. I've never parked in a garage before, at least not regularly. Anyway, Saturday night I got my car, grabbed the garage door opener, and pulled in.

There's no clip on the back of the opener, I noticed, but figured I could just leave it in the car somewhere, so I did. On the way out, I pushed the button on the garage itself (not on the opener) to close it up, and carefully avoid tripping that sensor which would have made me start all over. (As long as we're telling dumb garage stories, when I was a kid and before my parents had that safety sensor, I used to push the garage door button, which was located by the door into the house, then race out, touch one of the lines on the driveway, and try to dive or roll back under the door before the thing crushed me. I now realize this course of action was unwise.)

You follow? My garage door opener was now in the car in the closed and detached garage.

Anyway, Sunday morning I wake up and one of my first thoughts about getting to church is: wait a second, how am I going to get back in the garage? I'd noticed the day before that there was no other door to get in there. In my morning stupor, I threw on some clothes, ran out there, and confirmed what I'd already suspected.

Yep, I was locked out.

I frantically tried calling everywhere at the complex, but its offices were closed (curious; what kind of place is closed at 7 a.m. on a Sunday?) Then I tried opening the garage with my apartment key. Surprise! It didn't work.

That was no good. Eventually I caught a ride from my neighbors and showed up about two hours later than I was supposed to, but whatever. (Fortunately, the offices were open by the time I got back, saving me the trouble of having to purchase a new car.)

My point is, everyone makes mistakes. Like the dog in the Bar None commercials says, everyone deserves a second chance.

And I'm willing to write off Denver's loss to Miami last week as a mistake. As I was telling everyone all week, the Broncos could not have played or been coached any worse, and it wasn't going to happen again (or did you forget Marty Schottenheimer was coming to town?)

The Broncos responded with an important win yesterday-or, rather, by avoiding a crushing loss. There were some worrying signs, though, like the too-many-men-on-the-field penalty that nullified a special-teams touchdown, or the offensive line's inability to protect Plummer at the end of the first half, or even Elam's missed kicks (though the announcers' calling his 60-ish percent accuracy from outside of 50 yards "automatic" was pretty comical, too).

There's still one huge change the Broncos need to make to right the ship. That change is huge, and it's obvious. What's Denver been known for over the last ten years? That's right, the anyone-can-be-a-thousand-yard back thing.

The Broncos need to get back to the running game.

I think the Broncos' downfall the last few years has not really been coaching, but personnel blunders. The Broncos have been a good if inconsistent squad. But the coaching staff this year has puzzlingly given up on what Denver offenses do best.

The Broncos have been behind a lot in this young season, but have abandoned their rushing attack much sooner than prudence demands. By the time they were down 6-3 to the Dolphins in the third quarter in the first week, the team had essentially abandoned any attempts at running, even though it was not yet time to panic. And this was a game when we needed to get physical. How do you get physical on offense? By pounding the ball.

Yesterday, the Broncos were down 14-3 at the half, then pulled closer on Bailey's TD to make it a four-point game. Yet until the final drive, the team made only token efforts at running the ball.

On the last drive, the team put the ball in Ron Dayne's hands. If you're a regular at Hole Punch Sports, you know what confidence that gives us. But Dayne responded in a terrific fashion, and Shanahan rediscovered his aggressiveness long enough to make an absolutely brilliant fourth-down call on the pitch to Dayne, who picked up ten yards behind Rod Smith's tremendous block.

But this was just one effective drive in a season of offensive struggles. Plummer has already attempted 85 passes this year against the team's 46 rushing tries. Factor in sacks and scrambles, and the Broncos are calling pass plays more than 65 percent of the time.

To be fair, the Broncos' running as a whole has been shoddy. The team is picking up just 3.7 yards per carry, which is terrible for Denver and not very good for anybody (20th in the league).

Which would almost be relevant if Plummer's passer rating wasn't 59.9. As bad as the Broncos might be running the ball, they're even worse throwing it.

Besides, a rushing attack sometimes takes patience. You don't really find the holes in the defense until the second half. But the best way to start finding them early is to attack early.

And yes, Mike Anderson has battled injuries. While I've never believed the Broncos can plug in anyone, Dayne's clutch performance almost has me believing it. In any event, if the backups can't go, why are they on the team? (Of course, my commitment to the running game would have extended to retaining the services of Clinton Portis, but that's a topic for a different day.) If the backup du jour can't be trusted to pound away, it's time to find a new backup. Injuries have never stopped the Broncos' running game before.

The Broncos have to re-emphasize their rushing attack to re-establish themselves as playoff contenders. Run early, run hard, and run often.

Anything else would be a mistake.

Wednesday, September 14, 2005

Good ol' college sports

With so much going on in the world, it's refreshing to see college sports have retained their unique mixture of discipline and fair-mindedness.

First up is Adrian Peterson, star tailback for the Oklahoma Sooners. A devastating runner with breakaway ability, Peterson should have won the Heisman last year over the weak-armed Matt Leinart-except we all know million-dollar talent that translates to the pro level automatically excludes one from Hesiman consideration.

Anyway, Peterson up and got himself suspended from practice Monday and Tuesday for skipping class. According to university policy, Peterson would have had to have racked up four unexcused absences to get that kind of suspension.

Now I know the guy's a football player and academics are clearly in the backseat of his automobile of priorities (yes, thank you, thank you), but being an athlete means he also knows the policy. It seems a little early in the semester to be ditching that often, but what do I know?

What I absolutely love is the punishment. Like the article says, Peterson is still allowed to attend team meetings. In other words, this punishment is completely in the school's best interest-sure, practice is important, but considering the heavy workload he'll have this year, it's probably better at this point to limit his wear-and-tear by sitting him out. And by attending meetings and learning the game plan, he'll still be part of the team.

At least the punishment fits the crime almost perfectly. Picture Peterson sauntering in to coach Bob Stoops' office. I can see Stoops trying to keep a straight face as he reads him the riot act. "So, you like taking days off, do you? How about you take some days off from practice, too!"

"Coach, no!"

Now his start Saturday is in jeopardy. I wonder if he'll show a great attitude all week and attend his classes the next three days? Even if he doesn't, we've all seen enough college football to know a star back can be benched at kickoff and still wind up with 35 carries.

(It hasn't been a good week for players I once supported for the Heisman. Or did you not hear about Larry Johnson?)

Honestly, though, who cares about Peterson? Puzzling enforcement of academic standards is nothing new. Then again, neither is the NCAA acting in the absolute worst interest of student-athletes.

As you may have heard, NCAA president Myles Brand recently announced that the organization will enforce its rule about Division I transfer-athletes in some major sports sitting out a year if their former university does not grant them a release. Not that notable, maybe, except that he was talking about Hurricane Katrina victims who might try to attend other schools now.

That's fair. The last thing we want for young people whose lives have been enormously disrupted is a chance to move on.

Of course, there's another side to this, that of the schools. Obviously, no university wants its athletic department decimated by wholesale departures, especially if big groups of players from the same sport switch to the same new school. Or as Brand so eloquently put it, "Let me call that athletic looting, to be provocative, and we won't stand for that."

I am glad he is comparing the hurricane tragedy to the hurricane tragedy while remaining so blissfully unaware of the whole human tragedy part. First of all, just about every sensible person I've heard is okay with the looting to the extent that people are grabbing food, water, and other needed supplies. Second though, the problem with looting in general is that it's stealing someone else's possesions. Last I checked, the athletes made a commitment, but they are not anyone's property. I'm as white as the iMac I'm typing this on, but it's plain even to me how this could be seen as racist, conisdering it'll mostly affect African-American athletes. (That's definitely not to say I believe Brand actually hates minorities in his heart or anything like that.)

Of course, players can still get around sitting out a year if their coaches will release them. Considering it was coaches who urged the NCAA to be stringent here, it's tough to see that happening on a large scale. No, I expect to see the universities function the way they always have.

In an uncertain world, it's nice to know we'll always have college sports as our beacon of stability.

Friday, September 9, 2005

It's on

Some fans are crazy. I mean, I thought I was excited for the NFL to come back.

My roommate shattered this illusion yesterday night. You may recall him from previous posts as a big-time Nets, Angels, and Raiders fan.

When he walked in to the house an hour or so before the game, he couldn't hold back a "Woo!" and other random expressions of glee. Amen. The NFL is back! If you weren't a little excited, I'm sure Alex Sudreth would be happy to help you find your way back to your home country.

Anyway, he was bouncing around the house, making phone calls, pacing from room to room, and shouting "Woo!" every few minutes. Not during the game, but for the entire hour leading up to it.

It was odd. And then the game started. He'd had a phone call last through the start of the kickoff, which he then resumed by calling his friend back after the second play from scrimmage. And he only increased in enthusiasm as the game got underway.

I don't know how I could live with a Raiders fan like that all year. I guess that's why I'm moving. And since I just realized this story has no point, let's move on to my thoughts from the game.

- During the pre-game show, the ESPN analysts were talking about how Tom Brady is underrated. Championships are important, they argued, and while Brady doesn't roll off your tongue when you list great quarterbacks the way, say, Donovan McNabb does, he should definitely start being considered in the top two or three of NFL quarterbacks. What?

For the last time, Brady is in the top one of NFL quarterbacks, and has been for years. McNabb is good, fun to watch, seems to be a good guy and all that, but as a quarterback he's nowhere near Brady, who proved it with more than two hundred yards passing and two touchdowns by halftime.

To me, the first drive was a microcosm of how Brady performs. He overthrew his receiver on the first two first downs, but atoned with a pair of perfect passes to Ben Watson to convert on third each time. He's not perfect, and of course no one really is, but as soon as the stakes get high, he produces. Almost every single time.

- Before the game, Oakland's horrific defense was discussed, but to me there is no question the key to their season is Kerry Collins. Collins has a cannon arm, but what he's been blessed with in physical talent he makes up for with inaccuracy and let's-call-it-curious decision making. (Last night in the fourth quarter, he was overthrowing receivers deep downfield while throwing off his back foot. Impressive, but stupid.) Lamont Jordan should deliver a respectable run game, and with Moss and Porter the Raiders could have a terrific aerial attack, but Collins has to get the ball to them. Based on his 153:154 career touchdown to interception ratio, I'm going to go out a limb here and predict that's not going to happen consistently (though he and Moss will make some real highlights).

I can see giving this guy a chance ten years ago. But Collins is not going to get any better. Then again, I guess in 1995 you might have been excited to have Norv Turner as your coach, too.

- As for the Patriots, their biggest problem could be the loss of Tedy Bruschi. Forget the coordinators, he was one of the very best players in the league. The defense was good but not great last night, and against a real quarterback, they could have some problems. Can the Pats win a third Super Bowl in a row? I think they certainly can, but while I do think they're still the best team, at this point I'd take the field, if that makes any sense.

- When your roommates get on your nerves, it is a good idea to pull out brochures from apartment complexes you've been visiting...but you've got to keep the lights on or nobody's going to notice. But for all I know, that light hasn't had a bulb in it for a couple months now.

- Were those commercials terrible or what? In the first half alone, we had a confusing ad about the Patriots signing a Pepsi machine to play for them and a classic UnderArmour spot wherein the homespun squad had to defeat a team called, and I am not making this up, Goliath. I think that was supposed to be symbolic of something but I couldn't quite put my finger on what.

The coup de grace was an ad for "Commander-in-Chief", the new drama starring Geena Davis, who if you couldn't tell from the title, becomes President. As the commercial told us, "For the first time in history, a woman will be President." No, she won't! It's so lame to act like your TV show has actual historical significance. I mean, what a victory for women, who have so often been treated like second-class citizens in this country. Now they have a TV show to celebrate their rise to the Presidency! Too bad the ads almost mock the fact that it's never actually happened.

Also, considering there's not a man in America who's going to watch that show, why was it advertised during the NFL opener anyway?

- Y'all already know I despise John Madden's videogame, but as always, his analysis was killing me last night. An example: as the Pats drove for the touchdown to take the lead at 10-7, we saw a quick replay of a New England pass play. As Madden said, "It all starts with pass protection." And the New England O-line looked like a bunch of All-Pros on that play for sure, perhaps because the Raiders put on the most vanilla three-man pass rush against New England's five blockers. Wow, nice! What a bunch of fighters! They had enough men to double-team only the defensive ends, but somehow still gave Brady enough time to find the open man.

- By the way, my roommate consoled himself after that touchdown with the phrase, "Life is still great." With the NFL back, I have to agree.