Four without fear

So it’s not quite Jacksonville-Kansas City-Pittsburgh-Green Bay, but the Broncos are nonetheless coming up on their most exciting four-game stretch in years, and I can’t wait.

This Sunday: Indianapolis at Denver. The Broncos host the Colts in Denver’s first real test of the season. (Unless you count the Rams.)

The Colts’ perfect 6-0 mark does include road wins against both New York squads, but the horseshoe-shorn squad has already played half its home games. The Colts had an easy early schedule? Could the NFL front office be looking to do them some kind of favor?

Indianapolis brings the third-ranked offense (and the fourth in scoring) into the home of the league’s stingiest defenders. But forget the numbers-this matchup is interesting because of certain recent postseason events I’d prefer not to mention. In like fashion, Denver has owned the regular season matchups, but this is the first recent in-season meeting to hold significance for both teams.

Nov. 5: At Pittsburgh. After destroying the Colts, the Broncos move on to Pittsburgh, where they’ll dishonor Heinz Field in much the same way their foes despoiled the sacred grass of Invesco last January.

The Steelers are weird. Their stopgap quarterback, Charlie Batch, has almost twice the quarterback rating of superstar Ben Roethlisberger (136.8 to 74.5). They’re ninth in offensive yardage and twelfth in defensive, and they’ve outscored opponents by nineteen-but the defending champions are just 2-4.

Pittsburgh’s dangerous, but they’ve struggled against good defenses this year-and the Broncos certainly qualify on that count.

Nov. 12: At Oakland. Unfortunately, Oakland failed in their glorious quest for winlessness. Now that they’ve sampled the sweet nectar of victory, are the Raiders a formidable opponent for the Horsemen? No chance! Expect Art Shell, Andrew Walter, and Randy “Never Die Easy” Moss to remain gainfully employed during this contest, and expect Oakland’s season of futility to nadir with a devastating defeat at the hands of their most hated rival.

Oh, I suppose it has all the makings of a “trap” game, but I don’t gamble and don’t intend to get you to start, so why make something out of nothing? On a side note, I did make note of the NFL’s thoughtful nature, scheduling this game two weeks after Halloween so as to allow Bay Area costume shops to restock Darth Vader outfits in anticipation of kickoff.

Nov. 19: San Diego at Denver. The Chargers are perhaps the surprise of the NFL season. (Or, more accurately, Philip Rivers is.) I hope the punishing Denver defense can accelerate Fill-up’s transition into his post-football career as a service station attendant, because I can never remember if it’s Philip or Phillip.

However, with a sparkling 96.3 rating twenty-three days in advance of the AFC West’s showcase showdown, this appears unlikely. It appears LaDainian’s career may yet not be in vain, for San Diego has finally found the passer they’ve sought since running Drew Brees out of town so many seasons past.

With a powerful offense ranked fourth in the NFL, surely San Diego must thirst for improvement on the ball’s opposite side, yes? Nay, for the Chargers are No. 1 in the NFL’s yards-allowed standings, though they give up almost twice as many points as the Broncos.

San Diego is very good-perhaps the most complete team we’ll face this year.

You know what else is good? 9-1.

NFL Goes Global (again)

You’ve probably already heard that the NFL will hold a regular season game in a foreign country next year. (That’s not a first, but the league wants to make it a permanent part of the schedule.) This feels like a big story-for all I know, it led off SportsCenter, which I almost never watch.

(For some reason everyone assumes I love ESPN. I guess that makes sense-I do run a sports blog-but still. I guess I just don’t like NASCAR highlights as much as you’d think I do. Or how they always pull that, “Coming up next…” crap when they have an interesting story that won’t air for another forty minutes. A few months back a friend of mine tried to invite herself over to watch some non-World Cup soccer game, because of course I get the Ocho and would have it on. No dice. I’m curious-do any of you guys watch SportsCenter regularly?)

Anyway, I don’t much care for the idea, though it wouldn’t have much impact on any one team.

The plan would be set up so that teams would rotate over a 16-year period, with each team playing outside the country twice over that span, once as a visitor, the other as a home team. That means a team would lose one game team during that span.

"Obviously the league's going to work out the economics and if we lose a home game, we'll get compensated," said Pat Bowlen, owner of the Denver Broncos. "We're comfortable with it. Obviously we'd like to play in Mexico or Canada and not have to travel to Europe and that's probably the way it would be set up because of our location. But as far as the league's concerned, I think it's a great idea."

Right now I’m supposed to say insightful like, “Oh, I guess this is all about the money”-but instead I’ll settle for having no clue what this “one game team” is that everyone's losing.

Sure, if the Broncos play in Germany in 2012 and then in Mexico in 2020, I’ll live. Not a huge disruption, especially if the league time-zones it properly for TV here, which they certainly will. I thought other countries didn't like football, but obviously the league thinks they’ll come around. I don’t really care whether other countries start liking football, but whatever. (Is the Champions League coming to Miami anytime soon?)

What happens when there’s a Broncos-Raiders game in the United Kingdom? You’re right-that will probably never happen. I'd guess that teams won’t play division or even conference rivals overseas. Some year, though, a couple of teams will exceed preseason expectations, and the biggest game of the year will be in Canada. (I can’t think of any good examples this year because no one’s really gone from awful to good, but last year you could have had, say, an incredible Bears-Bengals game outside the U.S.) Is that going to be a big deal to you?

Monday Night Thoughts

Some thoughts from Monday Night Football...

1. I wish T.O. hadn’t been playing last night-sometimes, you just need a break from the guy. That said, he wasn’t the most loathsome player on the field Monday night-I’d take him over Jeremy Shockey, certainly, and probably Eli Manning. And yet, Eli and Shockey were playing the Cowboys. Can you root for both teams to lose?

2. Tiki Barber’s played for New York his whole career, but he’s still underrated. You should watch him while you still can. I’m serious. I can’t quite say why, but I got a feeling watching the game last night that this could be Barber’s last season in the NFL. I haven’t spoken to any Giants, but it just seems right. Call it a hunch.

3. Eli Manning’s first-quarter bomb to Plexiglass Burress was both a wonderful throw and a fantastic catch. When the younger Manning is making smart decisions with the ball, it can be a thing of beauty. When he’s rifling it at a triple-covered Amani Toomer, as he did later in the quarter, then not so much. Manning also got so claustrophobic under one first-half rush that he put his head down and ran over to a defensive linemen, who promptly sacked him. I’m not even kidding-on the replay, he puts his head down like he’s about to get hit, but realizes he sort of quit on the play early, so he steps forward into the guy’s arms. You don’t believe me, do you? It happened!

4. I sort of feel for Drew Bledsoe, who’s obviously good enough to start in the NFL but is just as clearly not a great passer. I was happy for him when he ran in that QB sneak in the second quarter. That said...I could not have been less surprised than I was when he threw the pick on second-and-goal near the end of the half. I’d hate to be average at a job like NFL quarterback. Yeah, the money’s great, but the American public has (fairly or not) equated Drew Bledsoe with sucking pretty much for the last decade or so.

5. All the fans in Dallas rooting for Tony Romo, well, they got what you wanted. Romo was pretty solid, by the numbers anyway-more than two hundred yards in a half and two scores. Except he threw three picks, including one that went ninety-six yards for a score. (So, in other words, he ended up making the same throw that got Bledsoe benched.) Not to beat this into the ground, but I bring this up amidst reports that the Broncos are considering a change at QB. (Mike Shanahan said Jake Plummer will start this week.)

If the team does bench Plummer, what happens if Cutler isn’t any better? Plummer has experience, and I’d feel better watching a struggling Plummer than a struggling Cutler, if that makes any sense. But our offense has been inconsistent all year long. I don’t feel like they’ve been truly terrible, though, and I keep expecting us to break it open. Maybe I’m blind. But once Cutler takes the field, all his potential disappears, and it comes down to what he can do right now. If we do make a change, I just hope we're sure.

And continuing highlights from our series, Proud Moments in Cleveland Browns History. Today’s episode: Sunday, October 22, 2006:

1. The Browns, just barely in Broncos territory, have a fourth-and-short in the first quarter and elect to go for it. Charlie Frye takes the snap, rolls to the left, and gets sacked. Now, the play call was stupid, and he didn’t have a ton of time, but he could have gotten rid of the ball. What are you going to do, throw a pick? Granted, you don’t want to give up a long return, but considering all the Broncos were in his face, they couldn’t have blocked for the interceptor or anything. Just chuck it, man.

2. On first-and-goal early in the third, Plummer lofts a pass to rookie receiver Brandon Marshall in the end zone. The pass falls incomplete. On the way back to the huddle, Cleveland defensive back Ralph Brown glares at Marshall and appears to be jawing at him, as well. Fun fact about Brown: he attended the University of Nebraska. How do I know? On the next play, Brown gave up a touchdown pass to Brandon Marshall.

Rant

How many bloggers have ever written the words, “I love Microsoft”? I can only think of one. But sometimes love fades.

Why? Because Microsoft came out with a new version of Internet Explorer last week, and it doesn’t show Hole Punch Sports properly. It’s not a big thing-the top search bar just overlaps the “Hole Punch Sports” box-but considering I’ve been nothing but a shill for that company, it’s a little weird. (Plus this website doesn’t even have pictures-I don’t know how you screw that up, but I guess they found the one possible way.)

There may be an easy fix, but I didn’t find it in several seconds of Googling, so I gave up, especially considering there’s a decent chance Blogger will fix it for me.

In the meantime, like my link-mate, I will point you in the direction of some alternatives. (Though I read and recommend the site, I’m not the Mike who commented on that particular post.) I tested this site with Firefox, Opera, Safari, Camino, Mozilla, and Konqueror, and each worked. I would have tried more, but those were really the only ones I could think of. In fact, I’m quite confident that Internet Explorer is the only browser on the entire planet that will have problems with this website. (Strictly speaking, that’s not true-AOL Explorer has the same problem, but it’s just IE with AOL’s name on it.)

You should probably update your computer anyway-I did-but don’t be surprised when the best site on the whole Internet ain’t so pretty anymore.

Baseball fans...?

Game 7 of the NLCS, a do-or-don’t-go-to-the-World-Series game for both the Mets and Cardinals, will start any minute now. (It probably did start by the time this is up, but never underestimate a Fox pre-game show.)

Me? I'm watching The Office tonight. I’m not alone. That show rocks. No, that’s not right. I mean I’m not alone in ignoring baseball. (I don't hate the game, but this matchup does nothing for me.)

From an AP article:

An AP-AOL Sports poll released Thursday shows that only one-third of Americans call themselves fans of professional baseball -- about the level of support for the last decade, but lower than 1990.

Remember how boring baseball was in 1990? Me neither. Glad they pointed it out anyway.

Some players don’t understand it.

Brandon Inge of the World Series-bound Detroit Tigers was surprised to hear that only 32 percent of Americans consider themselves fans.

"That sounds a little low to me," the third baseman said. "It's America's pastime."

Mister Inge, Oxford on line two. That’s it, I’m rooting for the N.L. What kind of argument is that?

To be fair, his confusion is completely understandable. He obviously sees a lot of baseball fans. And those people are completely nuts.

That’s right, you can finally-what, you didn’t click? As “they” say:

[F]ans of the New York Yankees, Boston Red Sox, Detroit Tigers, Philadelphia Phillies, Chicago Cubs and Los Angeles Dodgers will be able to have their ashes put in an urn or be lowered six feet under in a casket emblazoned with their team colors and insignia.

That’s a little...that’s just ridiculous. As if fans of any of those six teams aren’t obnoxious enough in life, now they can torture the rest of us in death. (If you think that's unfair to Tigers fans, give 'em a week.) It gets better:

Each urn will feature recognition of the deceased's passionate support, stamped with a message that says "Major League Baseball officially recognizes [person's name] as a lifelong fan of [team]."

Oh, good, as long as it’s official. Now when your friends come over, and dad’s in the Dodgers cup over the fireplace, they can’t just go ahead and call him a bandwagon kind of guy. I just realized, when I die, I’m not going to have that seal of approval. What have I done with my life?

In case any of you have no idea how the free market works, this isn’t something the company just dreamed up on a whim.

Farmington Hills, Mich.-based Eternal Image, which also makes a line of Vatican-themed products, "wanted to break into a sports venue of some kind," said Clint Mytych, the company's CEO. "It is the all-American sport."

He said he has gotten at least 1,000 inquiries since June.

A thousand grieving people wanted this badly enough to look up a company in Michigan and request it? Eternal Image could be the Microsoft of urn design for all I know, but still.

Whatever you do tonight, have fun. If it's your thing, enjoy the game. But take care of yourself-these urns won’t be available until next season.

Can they lose them all?

If Johnny Unitas, Joe Montana, and John Elway got together to mentor a quarterback, and he ended up like Ryan Leaf...

If Ted Williams, Babe Ruth, and Hank Aaron took over as hitting coaches, and their best student couldn’t out-hit Neifi Perez...

If Magic Johnson and Jason Kidd schooled a student in the art of pinpoint passing, but ended up with Kobe Bryant...

...would any of those be any more pathetic than Jackie Slater and Art Shell coaching Chad Slaughter today?

Yes, two of the finest tackles of anyone’s lifetime are the men in charge of motivating and molding the Human False Start. John Madden, a former Raiders coach himself, pointed out late in tonight’s Broncos-Raiders game that Slaughter was actually doing a decent job blocking when he was punctual. I’m pretty sure my man Elvis Dumervil would disagree, but even if it was true, the Raiders still aren’t going to beat anybody anytime soon.

Yes, the Chicago Bears are absolutely explosive and it appears, for the time being, that I grossly underestimated quarterback Rex Grossman. (I want to see him play at least once before I take it all back, though.) But the only perfect season I want to see this year is Oakland’s tour of unmatched ineptitude, now at 0-5 and counting.

Sadly, it could all end next week when Oakland hosts the Arizona Cardinals. In Andrew Walter and Matt Leinart, we’ll get to watch two young quarterbacks whose youth, interestingly enough, is their only asset. But if Oakland can sneak out of McAfee Coliseum (fine virus scanner, by the way, if heart-breakingly slow) with the “L”, they’re well on their way to a defeated season.

Consider the following opponents: home game against the Steelers, at Seattle, another Broncos game, at Kansas City, at San Diego...then it’s December, and the clock is ticking.

That December 3 home game against Houston looks almost as inviting as next week’s Cardinals game. But I’ve watched a lot of terrible Nuggets teams, and if there’s one thing I’ve learned, it’s how much bad teams relish annihilating the truly awful ones.

Maybe you think it can’t be done. A blocked kick here, a broken tackle there-surely the Raiders can upset somebody. Even the stacked Broncos prevailed by only ten points. The Raiders should win at least a couple. I think.

I hope they don’t. A winless season speaks to a certain sense of...humiliation, of desperation, and of knowing when to quit. If C.U. has given up on the quest, there’s no team I’d rather see take their place than the Oakland Raiders.

My thoughts on the baseball playoffs

1. The Yankees almost made my year.

I recently told a friend that Yankees manager Joe Torre was the best manager of the last 20 years. I'm not sure if that's really true, but he's clearly one of the very best in the game. Yes, like the chart on the link shows, he was under .500 at two of his first three jobs. Yes, it's much easier to manage when Mariano Rivera's in the bullpen than when your options don't hold all-time records. And most definitely yes, a monkey could learn the complex system of single-switches required to manage in the American League.

So Torre is human. But he's also a great manager and a great fit for New York. Playing for or coaching the Yankees is often treated as some kind of special situation, and there is pressure there, but I'm not sure it's all that tougher than managing in, say, Boston. That said, Torre's done a tremendous job managing the egos of the game's best-known and most-pampered players, while avoiding disastrous on-field moves that plague almost everyone else. The bottom line is, if the Yankees fired him, 28 teams would call his agent within five minutes. (In a cost-saving move, the Royals would mail him an offer, second-class.)

And I was really hoping the Yankees would fire him and that the Red Sox would immediately pick him up. That'd spice things up. I think that rivalry has flown under the radar for far too long.

2. The ALCS is a matchup everyone should like.

Parity-I'm not sure what that means, what it's supposed to mean, or why people want it so badly. Well, if you had thirty major-league teams, and all of them had an equal shot at the title, wouldn't you expect each team to win it all every thirty years or so? (Not that anyone associates baseball with parity, but bear with me.)

My point? The Tigers won the World Series in 1984-twenty-two years ago. There haven't been thirty teams that whole time, but it's still a little sensationalistic to categorize Tigers fans as long-suffering, since so many teams have waited much longer. But I am happy for Tigers fans, especially after recent seasons. (That is, unless those fans also support their local hockey team...)

The A's, on the other hand, I can wholeheartedly support. Why do we demand such manliness from athletes and settle for such whiny skirtiness from fans and management? An example: I saw an interview with a football player a couple weeks ago-wish I could remember who it was, but all non-Mannings would have said the same thing-and he was injured. Despite that, he vehemently denied that his injury had anything to do with any struggles on the field. I sat there thinking it was just ridiculous-I don't want to hear the guy whine, but how could an injury not affect his play?

The A's are sort of like that anonymous football player. Yes, they play in a relatively small market, or at least they share a good-sized market with the more-popular Giants. And they barely spend any money, and they barely earn any money, and it's obvious that they don't play the same game the Red Sox or Yankees do. But unlike management in some cities I could think of (Denver?), they don't just accept their lot, cry about it, and give up. Instead the A's take whatever washed-up veterans and underrated prospects they can get and go toe-to-toe with the big boys every year.

Of course, establishment baseball men point out the team's struggles in the playoffs-which is fair-but come to the erroneous conclusion that it's simply impossible for the team to compete. I admit that their style, especially in years past, wasn't perfectly suited for a short series, but it wasn't condemning them to a hopeless future, either.

Anyway, I've been a fan of the A's and their Moneyball style since well before the book, and I'm happy to see them advancing in the playoffs, even if they did lose last night.

3. The National League could surprise everyone.

All year, it's been nothing but, "The N.L. sucks, and all the good teams are in the A.L." Now I don't necessarily think the Cardinals or Mets will win it all-the A's are the only team I really care for-but it wouldn't be impossible for either to do so. Partly because they're good teams, and more because anything can happen in a seven-game series.

It just irks me whenever leagues or divisions are compared and people extrapolate these grand conclusions about the individual teams therein. Remember the 2004 Detroit Pistons, from the pathetic Eastern Conference? Can you recall the Texas Longhorns of earlier this year, whose Big XII was clearly the Pac-10's inferior? (Clearly to everyone but me, at least.) My favorite example, of course, is the 1997 Broncos, who hailed from the eternal runner-up AFC. These teams, and many more in similar situations, won it all. I couldn't care less which league is better, but you can, if you want. Just don't fall into this common "logical" trap.

Just my luck, they're right on time

How about them Broncos!

It wasn’t very long into yesterday’s 13-3 win over the Baltimore Ravens that I realized the Broncos, still scoreless, were really in no trouble whatsoever. They’ve been playing slow, defensive-minded games and pulling them out their last two games, so why couldn’t they do it again?

It’s easy to call Denver’s new keep-it-close style conservative, but that misses at least half the point. Compared to the offensive firepower the team showcased in recent years, the current gameplan is, in fact, far more risky. What happens when the other team gets the interception before halftime and kills one of our only scoring chances? (I know it's incredible that I could even suggest Jake Plummer messing up like that, but he is only human.)

What I can’t tell is whether the grind-it-out style was only an adjustment to the teams we’ve faced or if it’s fast becoming a permanent fixture in the offense. Against Baltimore, it makes sense to take time off the clock, since the only way they’re scoring is if you give them plenty of opportunities. (I love Steve McNair, but despite his resurgence, that is not a potent offense.) Of course, it makes sense to control the ball against anyone if you can, but Baltimore’s defense is more likely than most to make you pay for mistakes in the passing game.

This brings us to the most shocking on-screen graphic I’ve seen in years, and which many of you saw last night. I can’t remember if there was a time period restriction on it (those infamous baseball-style “Since Nov. 22, 1987,”-type stats), but it had a list of the top quarterbacks in terms of wins by three or fewer points, and the list went, from first to third, Dan Marino, John Elway, and Jake Plummer.

My question: is that a sign of actual ability, or have those guys just played in a lot of close games? In Arizona, Plummer was known for winning games in the fourth quarter. While he hasn’t really had any memorable comeback wins for the Broncos, he has spearheaded a number of late drives for wins or crucial insurance points. This year, he’s done it three times in four games. I’d say that’s pretty good.

Can we count on it to continue? Maybe. Personally, I think the fact that Mike Shanahan is even considering trying to win games this way is a huge vote of confidence in Plummer. Do you realize how much the Broncos are relying on him now?

Obviously, the real star last night was the defense, and Champ Bailey’s pick in the end zone the clear play of the game. Is the D good enough to carry us through the regular season, or does the offense have to pick it up? Can the offense pick it up? Is a deep playoff run already out of the question, or are we a 3-1 team that still has room to improve?

---------------------------

Hole Punch Sports has recently come under fire from someone far too cowardly to comment here for excessive Broncos coverage. I kind of agree, though I went ahead with this, obviously...but let me know what y’all think.

Brett Favre and the Hall of Fame

Can you play your way out of the Hall of Fame?

That’s the question that comes to my mind lately whenever someone brings up Brett Favre. Favre, of course, is the longtime Green Bay Packers quarterback who won a record three Associated Press league MVP awards. (He shared his final award, in 1997, with Barry Sanders.) He’s also a member of the most elite class of sports heores in America: franchise quarterbacks who’ve won the Super Bowl.

His talent was and remains off the charts. Unbelieveable arm strength from any of a thousand release points. Accuracy from the pocket, on the run, falling backwards, or over defenders. Great mobility and improvisation, especially in his younger years. And his toughness-oh my, but we’ll get to that later.

Not only that, he’s now considered (if a bit inaccurately) to be the last remaining symbol of loyalty in team sports. He’s certainly had to clout to ask to be traded to a winner for his last few seasons. And, conversely, he’s certainly given his team cause to look in other directions, yet they’ve stood by him.

Last year Favre led the league with room to spare by throwing 29 interceptions. Would he come back? Will the Packers bench the franchise and start building for the future by playing Aaron Rodgers?

(When Aaron Rodgers is your best bet for future success, your franchise has problems outside of just the quarterback position.)

Favre, of course, came back. He’s off to a rocky start-statistically, he’s had two fine games and two abysmal ones. It’s funny-in his first few years, he was immune to criticism. Now he’s become immune to praise. People all over the country can’t wait to say he should have retired-or, more absurdly, that the Packers should cut him.

Any football fan can tell you Favre has been going downhill for several years now. Really? The numbers don’t bear that out in the slightest, except that he was bad last year. That said, his go-for-broke mentality-long his most-admired trait-may backfire the most in the playoffs. He threw six picks against the Rams in the playoffs following the 2001 season, and chucked another four to Vikings defenders after 2004. But even his playoff performances-statistically anyway-haven’t really been all bad. (You have to scroll down that link to see postseason numbers.)

If it’s not obvious yet, I still think Favre’s a first-ballot Hall of Famer, no questions asked. But his legacy will never be the same. By the time he comes up for Hall of Fame consideration, his MVP trophies will be at least fifteen years old, and his historic prime will be but a distant memory. And it taints everything else he’s done-his painkiller addiction, once swept under the rug, is just one more talking point for armchair analysts on the bury-Favre bandwagon. He was the toughest QB ever-now he’s Barry Bonds in shoulder pads.

Of course, it’s not fair to consider decade-and-a-half-old events and not the more recent past, and Favre’s last few years should certainly count against him-I just think his struggles have been blown way out of proportion. What’s interesting, though, is how much Favre’s early fame will count against him in terms of public sentiment. If he hadn’t been so popular when he was young, no one would be so quick to deride him now.

Let’s look at a more borderline candidate: Jerome Bettis. Bettis ran for more than 13,000 yards in his career-good enough for top-five, all-time. But while Bettis was a dangerous young player, his production really tailed off his last few years. Yes, he was injured. Not to be heartless, but so were countless other backs-like the superior Terrell Davis.

Do you remember ever hearing discussion of Bettis’ Hall of Fame chances before his last season? I don’t. But his syrupy-sweet storybook ending overshadowed the obvious: his decline bagan a long, long time ago. While he’d always been more of a power runner than a distance guy (an understatement if there ever was one), he averaged more than four yards a carry only once after 1997. (Check his career stats here for a more complete picture.)

By the end of his career, he morphed into primarily a short-yardage back-a tremendous, tough-to-stop short-yardage back, capable of starring on occasion-but a role player nonetheless. Is that somehow better than having one awful year in a career full of great ones?

While Bettis’ on-field performance should have been, by any reasonable standard, hurting his shot at Hall of Fame glory, his personality, perseverance, and superstar quarterback may have played him right into the Hall. I just think that’s funny.