Broncos season in review

49ers kicker Joe Nedney just beat the Broncos in overtime with a Rich Karlis-esque field goal. No playoffs this year for Denver, who lost 26-23 and finished the year at 9-7.

That back-and-forth yet ultimately unsatisfying game was a microcosm of the Broncos' season. Let's take a look back at the year:

Biggest hangover from last season: Loss of home-field. (Jake Plummer, of course, runs a close second.) After squandering the AFC Championship at Invesco last year, the team followed up with a 4-4 mark at home this season. Some of that was scheduling-the Broncos hosted and lost to the Colts, Seahawks, and Chargers this year-but it's pretty weird for a team that plays at such a high elevation to win more games on the road than at home.

Rookie of the year: Elvis Dumervil. I said after last year's loss to Pittsburgh that our biggest need was an improved pass rush. The Broncos made major strides towards solidifying their pass defense for years to come with the fourth-round selection of Dumervil, who exceeded everyone's expectations but my own and finished with eight and a half sacks. (Does the high sack count mean he'll follow Trevor Pryce, Reggie Hayward, and Bert Berry out of town?)

Most missed departure: Gary Kubiak. It's hard to say whether Kubiak really would have made a difference this year-after all, his new team, the Houston Texans, finished 28th overall in offense. (Surprisingly, that's only one spot behind Vince Young's team.)

But for all the things that went wrong with Denver's offense during this frustrating season-poor offensive line play, inconsistent passing, the tragic loss of Rod Smith-one significant though rarely-mentioned failure was play calling. Defenses-even of teams like San Francisco-always seemed one move ahead on the chessboard. Can the Broncos regain the element of surprise next year?

Second-most missed departure: Trevor Pryce. Twelve sacks for the Ravens.

Best new Bronco: Javon Walker. Walker finished the year with 69 catches for 1,084 yards (15.7 yards per catch) and eight touchdowns. He added 123 yards rushing and emerged as Denver's no-doubt go-to guy with the game on the line. He did all of this pretty much on his own. Walker had more than twice as many yards as the next-leading Denver receiver, Rod Smith. Did the Packers really give up on him for just a second-round pick?

Lamest move of the year: Starting Jay Cutler. Nothing against Cutler, who-recent success of Ben Roethlisburger aside-was pretty good for a rookie. Yet he led the Broncos to a worse record in his starts than Jake Plummer, while sharing the Snake's penchant for the unfathomable turnover. I guess the most shocking part of the move was how little Cutler sparked the team. The offense played with the same level of passion after he came off the bench as they did before. That's not all on him, of course, but it still surprised me.

Bell of the Year: Mountain. All right, Mike. Tatum's clearly a more talented player and the Broncos' second-best big play threat (on offense). But Tatum's late-season fumbles allowed Mike to see the field more and more in crunch time. The real lesson, though, is that neither will make for much of a feature back until the offensive line improves.

Player of the year: Champ Bailey. Ten interceptions from the corner who not only deserves defensive player of the year, but who, if the Broncos had made the playoffs, could have earned a spot in the "also receiving votes" section of league MVP balloting. He's got speed, hands, and guts, and he led the defense that carried the team.

(Update: changed post title.)

Taylor v. Merriman

On ESPN today, I saw two analysts debate recent comments made by the Miami Dolphins' Jason Taylor, who suggested that San Diego Chargers linebacker Shawne Merriman perhaps shouldn't go to the Pro Bowl or win the NFL's defensive player of the year award in a year when he served a four-game suspension for steroid use.

"You really shouldn't be able to fail a test like that and play in this league, to begin with," Taylor said Wednesday. "To make the Pro Bowl and all the other awards, I think you're walking a fine line of sending the wrong message."

It's an interesting argument. Wait, no it isn't. Should you really win an award like that if you so blatantly cheated? Probably not. But I don't think Merriman deserves it anyway.

The linked article (by the AP on ESPN.com) suggests that Merriman is Taylor's "chief rival" for the defensive player of the year award. If Taylor's candidacy makes you do a double-take, reconsider. This is not the baffling "The Dolphins are actually good" hype of seasons past. Taylor's play has finally matched his metrosexuality. He's got thirteen and a half sacks and forced nine fumbles. He's even returned a pair of interceptions for touchdowns.

Merriman, on the other hand, has sixteen sacks to his name, but is behind with four forced fumbles and one interception. Of course, he also missed four games to the aforementioned suspension, which is the main knock against him. That's a lot of time to miss. (Then again, it also means he's been more dominant when he's on the field. For example, he's had three games of at least three sacks.)

I think it's clear that Taylor has had the better season end-to-end. (And to me, missing four games is significant enough regardless of the reason.) But who says it comes down to those two anyway?

What about Champ Bailey? No, he's not really as invincible as people say, but his nine interceptions lead the league and his twenty passes defensed tie for the best in football. (And he's clutch-six of the picks happened no more than three yards from Denver's end zone.) And, even though he's just a corner, Bailey's 81 tackles-69 solo-far outpace the totals of either Taylor or Merriman, both of whom probably play alongside superior teammates. Bailey's having the best season of any cornerback I've ever seen, and he deserves this year's NFL defensive player of the year award.

Schadenfreude

Sometimes, I don't know how to feel. And this is one of those times.

As you either have heard or should have heard by now, you lazy know-nothing ingrate, a court of appeals recently ruled that...well, to be on the safe side, let's just quote the story:

With Barry Bonds still in their sights, federal investigators probing steroids in sports can now use the names and urine samples of about 100 Major League Baseball players who tested positive for performance enhancing drugs, following a ruling Wednesday from a federal appeals court.

The 2-1 decision by the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals overturned three lower court decisions and could help authorities pinpoint the source of steroids in baseball.

I don't know about this. If you don't remember, the first year of steroid testing was supposed to, according to reports at the time, be completely confidential-intended more as a survey to see how prevalent steroid use was in baseball before real testing-and punishment-began.

Obviously, that's not how it played out. Someone was keeping track of who took what test, otherwise the feds wouldn't waste their time trying to get the records.

To be honest, I just don't know enough about the case. It could be the union lawyers who were responsible for the negotiations made some mistake and inadvertently allowed Major League Baseball to keep all the information. Then MLB, since it has surrendered all semblance of leverage to the players' union, then let the feds do what they do best-clean up baseball's messes so they don't have to. But what it looks like right now is that players could end up being punished for tests they took-testing they only agreed to because they thought it would be anonymous. And if that's really all it is, I don't like the precedent this sets.

On the other hand, while my general distaste for unions has cooled over the years, my absolute hatred for the MLBPA knows nearly no limits. It'd be great to see them screwed over for ignoring players' health and delaying beyond any reasonable expectation the implementation of steroid testing.

What do y'all think? More specifically, Cap'n, would you like to explain this all to us?

Iverson's impact

Have I bragged enough about the Nuggets' new guard? Allen Iverson has, not particularly surprisingly, been even better than advertised with his new team. He's been aggressively setting up his teammates and providing the team his infectious energy.

The real question for the Nuggets now is: how good can they be when everyone is back in the lineup?

Now, far be it from me to put limits on one of my favorite teams. If the Nuggets win the championship this season, no one will be happier than I'll be. But for all the talk of the team's newly-claimed elite status, there's one reason I don't think the Nuggets will win this year's title.

That reason? The San Antonio Spurs.

That's right, the Spurs. The team that's only in second place in the Southwest division behind the Dallas Mavericks-the very team that sent them home from the playoffs last year. The Spurs' winning percentage matches Utah's for merely the third-best in the conference (no longer true-see below). So why do I worry?

Because you should forget the records-the Spurs are the best team in the NBA so far. And they're the worst matchup for the Nuggets, but more on that in a second.

Why are the Spurs the best? Let's look at the competition:

The Eastern Conference. Good one! Yes, find me a contender from the Eastern Conference, where a team like the Celtics, with a 10-17 record, is only two games out of first place. (To be fair, in the Central division, everyone has a winning record.)

But the defending champion Heat are floundering without Shaq, the Pistons are good but past their championship prime, and the Wizards and Cavaliers, for all intents and purposes, are one-man teams.

Phoenix. The Suns are on a tear. Steve Nash is overrated, but what else is new? Certainly not the Suns' ability to give up 110 points to any team on any night.

Utah. I hate to break it to Jazz fans, but-who am I kidding, I love breaking it to Jazz fans-their team's success, while nice, is ultimately a house of cards. Yes, they're 21-8 and, for a while, had the best record in the league. But their average scoring differential (3.9 points) is more befitting of a team with a much worse record. Don't tell me that's coaching, either-that's luck. Expect Utah to slide back to the real world as the season goes on.

Dallas. The defending West champs are on a seven-game winning streak and currently sit just ahead of San Antonio. (Since I started writing this, the Spurs finished a thorough beating of the Jazz and are now considered 0 games back of the Mavs, though the Spurs' record is slightly worse by percentage.) But as good as the Mavericks have been, I still question their rebounding and crunch-time competence.

The Spurs, on the other hand, currently lead the league in scoring differential at 9.4 points per game. That's fantastic, and that's why, barring injuries, they'll finish with the NBA's best record. But the real reason they worry me is how they match up with the Nuggets come the playoffs.

Almost everything a Nuggets does well, the Spurs have an answer for. Marcus Camby's a great shot-blocker and terrific rebounder, but Tim Duncan can easily match him board-for-board while more than occupying his attention on the defensive end. Carmelo Anthony is an unstoppable machine this year except in fights, but he's yet to have a breakout series and gets frustrated, just like everyone else, when matched against Bruce Bowen. (Michael Finley's wearing down after years of ridiculous minutes, but he's not a bad spare against Anthony, either.) J.R. Smith has given the Nuggets a desperately-needed boost on the perimeter, but Manu Ginobili does it even better. Allen Iverson has the clearest edge on the Spurs' Tony Parker, but Parker's at least close to him in speed and is capable of excellent team defense.

Of course, Iverson-Carmelo could be the next Jordan-Pippen (without any of the defense), but that's a lot to count on, especially in one season.

I really think the Nuggets'll take a playoff series or two, and if things go well, they can be at least as good as the Suns and Mavs. But if I have to guess now, they're still not quite championship material.

Nuggets land Iverson

All right, I can't wait any longer. I've been trying not to jinx it, but here you are:

As ESPN reported, the Denver Nuggets have finally wrapped up trade talks with the Philadelphia 76ers and acquired superstar guard Allen Iverson.

Early verdict: it's a good move. No, it's a great move. Not even that. It's a tremendous move. In the short term, Iverson can pick up the scoring slack while Carmelo is out. In the long term-when Anthony comes back-the Nuggets will have two absolutely unstoppable scorers. It may cost both players a shot at the scoring title, but it'll cost opposing playoff teams so much more.

Iverson is only:

1. Hands down, no question, the toughest player since Michael Jordan. (Notice I didn't include any of that "pound-for-pound" garbage, either.)

2. One of the best scorers in NBA history. You knew that, but did you really? Michael Jordan has a higher per-game scoring average than the Answer. So does Wilt. But that's it. He's ahead of West, Shaq, Bird, and everybody else.

3. One of the top passers in the league, and a perfect fit for a high-altitude, open-court game. Everyone says he's selfish, and this year he's been selfish to the tune of more than seven assists per game.

This is so awesome, it almost doesn't matter who we gave up. Yet I've already seen people slam the Nuggets for giving up to much, given Philadelphia's bargaining position. Please. What, exactly, are we going to miss?

Two first-round draft picks? We're giving up ours, and one that originally belonged to Dallas. Both picks, then, will probably come at the end of the first round. The NBA draft is consistently so Jared Jeffries-thin, it's a wonder any team wants those picks or their guaranteed contracts. (That said, rookies drafted that late don't get paid much by NBA standards.)

Joe Smith? Well, the only thing he brings to the table is an expiring contract. Why would you want that? Cap space. Why do you want cap space? So you can get a superstar. I think we just cut out the middleman.

Andre Miller? A solid point guard, to be sure, who can pass, rebound, and miss more wide-open 15-footers than anyone in the league. Since he's the only thing of value we give up for, you know, Allen-freaking-Iverson, I think it's a good move. Wait, no-it's the most exciting trade of my life.*

And so we return to the Answer, who has certainly been dying to play with a team this talented ever since he dragged Dikembe's rotting carcass to the 2001 Finals. He'll love playing alongside Marcus Camby, who allows him to gamble defensively (something Iverson is going to do anyway) and grabs enough boards to keep the fast breaks coming. Guys like Reggie Evans and Eduardo Najera will provide more of the same. Now picture the offense. Iverson might have too many options running the break alongside Carmelo Anthony and J.R. Smith, and Anthony in particular gives him a terrific complement in the halfcourt offense. Oh, and if we're really lucky, we'll see Iverson play in short stretches with the Earl of Boykins.

There are only two potential downsides, which are hardly worth mentioning. First, Carmelo and AI could fight over shots and primacy. I think both players will recognize the opportunity they have and act accordingly-Iverson because he's 31, and Anthony because of the fallout from the fight. Second, AI could bristle at playing point guard. But in a lot of ways, that's been his role in Philadelphia for years. He'll be fine.

* = Yes, the Elway trade happened in my lifetime, but I was 1 at the time. And I didn't know we had a hockey team when the Avs traded for Patrick Roy.

Hi!

I still don't want to say anything until it's really official, but if you're bored, you might enjoy this article on ESPN.com.

Suspensions handed out

All right, I’m listening to David Stern’s press conference right now on NBA.com. (That website did something right!)

Both teams were fined five hundred thousand dollars. Carmelo Anthony was suspended for 15 games, Nate Robinson and J.R. Smith got 10 games, Mardy Collins got six, and Jared Jeffries is out for four games. Jerome James and Nene were suspended one game each for leaving the bench.

“I’m going to start holding the teams accountable for the actions of their players,” Stern said of the fine to the teams.

Personally, I don’t much care about the Knicks and Nuggets having to pay $500,000. The suspensions are almost uniformly too steep, which is too bad for the players, but not surprising. They had to know the NBA was going to come down hard on the next team that fights.

Will Isiah Thomas be fined or suspended?

"No, we have completed our fines and they're all set forth in this announcement," Stern said. He also suggested there wasn't enough evidence that Isiah deserved punishment. Man, I feel like I have enough evidence to suspend Thomas, but I guess Stern doesn't have access to the same kind of info I do.

Nuggets-Knicks fight

The Nuggets and Knicks got in a fight. (If you haven’t seen it yet, you can click on the links in the sidebar of this story, and you can find it a million other places.)

1. Thank you, Nate Robinson’s little-man complex, for escalating everything and, more importantly in my view, starting a fight that will get the league’s leading scorer suspended. I’m sure the Jazz are grateful.

2. Forget Darrent Williams. The Broncos should sign Carmelo to play cornerback, because he’s the only guy who can backpedal faster than Champ Bailey.

3. Supposedly George Karl was running up the score in honor of his friend, Larry Brown. Wait, why does Larry Brown hate the Knicks? If I was Larry Brown, I would sit front row at every Knicks game with a gigantic smile. Thanks for the eighteen million! Anyway, I’m sure the Knicks love the idea of teams using their games to show their true feelings about Brown. Sure, George Karl will run up the score from time to time, but a lot of other teams will show gratitude. I mean, the Pistons would probably shoot at their own basket just to let New York win, right?

4. Isiah Thomas calling you out for bad sportsmanship is like Allen Iverson saying you don't practice hard enough.

The NFC Contenders

Time for part 2. Right now the NFC has seven teams with winning records, and even though only six make the playoffs, I’ll rank all of them.

7. Atlanta Falcons (7-6)

Key stat: The Falcons lead the league with videogame numbers in rushing (197.7 yards per game) and yards-per-carry (5.6).

Positives: Mike Vick is the best quarterback among the 7-6 teams, and Atlanta has won a few playoff games in recent years.

Negatives: Possibly too many to list. They had a four-game losing streak. They’ve been outscored this year. The defensive statistics are pretty unimpressive, and even worse if you consider that teams with good ground games typically inflate their defensive statistics by controlling the ball. The passing attack is 32nd in the league. (Wait, why do I like Vick?)

Outlook: Could be the odd man out, but if they’re in, it’s one-and-done.

6. Philadelphia Eagles (7-6)

Key stat: Even with an unwanted quarterback change, the Eagles are third in offense.

Good: Jeff Garcia has no picks in 134 attempts, and his quarterback rating is slightly higher than Donovan McNabb’s. Brian Westbrook has already had, by far, his best year as a runner.

Bad: Garcia’s been a heck of an insurance policy, but he’s still a downgrade from McNabb. Defense is hopeless against the run. Team lost five of six at one point.

Outlook: Not really going anywhere, but a nice bounce-back season. Could they have done more with McNabb? Probably not.

5. New York Giants (7-6)

Key stat: The Giants’ six losses came against teams with a combined 51-27 record (Colts, Seahawks, Bears, Jaguars, Titans, and Cowboys).

Plusses: They beat most of the teams they should have, including Atlanta on the road by thirteen. Tiki Barber is still getting it done-2nd in the NFC in rushing in his final season.

Minuses: Tom Coughlin. Inability to find any rhythm thanks to a difficult schedule.

Outlook: This team is decidedly average-they win the games they should and lose the games they should. I guess they might upset the Cowboys, but the Seahawks and Saints appear out of their league.

4. Dallas Cowboys (8-5)

Key stat: Tony Romo’s 8.75 yards per attempt, a nearly two-yard improvement over Drew Bledsoe.

Good: Have won five of seven with Romo as starter. Offense good for 26.8 points per game, fourth in the league. Bill Parcells.

Bad: Obliterated by New Orleans last week. Most of their wins have come against bad teams. And there’s always a chance the young quarterback could come crashing down.

Outlook: The Cowboys can put up points, but so can other NFC teams. They should win the division and possibly a first-round game at home.

3. Seattle Seahawks (8-5)

Key stat: Thanks to injury, Shaun Alexander has just 591 rushing yards, more than a third of which came in one game.

In their favor: They won the NFC last year. Matt Hasselbeck and Alexander are back from injuries. Tremendous home-field advantage.

Bad signs: They’ve been outscored on the season. Hasselbeck and Alexander still show signs of rust. The Seahawks have lost to both the 49ers and Cardinals-and that’s just in the last four games.

Outlook: So why am I so high on Seattle? Mostly because the rest of the NFC is so mediocre. (Dallas is the only other team I could even consider for third in the conference.) And, considering the obstacles this year, their record is amazing.

2. New Orleans Saints (9-4)

Key stat: Drew Brees is already over 4,000 yards passing.

I like: the unstoppable deep passing attack, watching Reggie Bush highlights, and the attitude and production of Deuce McAllister.

I don’t like: the run defense that gives up more than five yards a carry. I don’t like their convincing home losses to two good-but-not-great AFC teams, the Bengals and the Ravens. And I’m already getting a little sick of the President.

Outlook: Clearly one of the top two teams in the NFC, and the best bet to upset Chicago. It probably won’t happen, but I’d love to see Brees beat the Chargers in the Super Bowl.

1. Chicago Bears (11-2)

Key stat: Chicago has scored 27.1 points per game, tops in the NFC. Yes, more than New Orleans.

Good: The defense, especially against the pass. Devin Hester. Lovie Smith not turning it over to Brian Griese.

The question mark is Rex Grossman, naturally. He’s up, he’s down-six games with a rating higher than 100, and three games where he was below the 39.6 “all incompletions” mark.

Outlook: With games against Tampa Bay, Detroit, and Green Bay, the Bears should cruise to home-field advantage. I don’t expect much from Grossman-inconsistent passers usually become consistently awful when the playoffs roll around. But Chicago’s defense and special-teams let the Bears ask less of their quarterback than any other squad. And while the Saints are pretty legit by NFC standards, I don’t think New Orleans has the right team to win in Chicago in January.

The AFC Contenders

If the season ended today, the Broncos would miss the playoffs, which is exactly what will happen when the season does end.

Despite what every player on a bubble team says-“if Pittsburgh did it last year, so could we”-a No. 6 seed is most assuredly not winning this year’s Super Bowl. Two reasons. First, Pittsburgh was remarkable precisely because they were rare-no other team ever accomplished what they did. And two, Pittsburgh would have had a much better record had Ben Roethlisberger stayed healthy. None of this year’s sixth-seed contenders match that profile. So even if a surprise team sneaks in (like, say, the Broncos), don’t expect much from them.

In any event, the six AFC teams that would make the playoffs today are, in fact, the six best teams in the conference. So how do I rank the AFC’s true contenders? Like this, from worst to best:

6. Cincinnati (8-5)

Key stat: They rank 32nd in passing defense.

I like: The passing attack, of course, that has the Bengals sixth in the league in scoring.

I don’t like: Anything else. They can’t wear the clock down with Rudi Johnson’s 3.8 yards per carry average. The defense is eighth in points allowed, but there are a lot of reasons that number is misleading. The defense is average-at best.

Outlook: Not good. First-round losers, probably, though that’ll depend on the matchup. (Check it out, no arrest jokes!)

5. Indianapolis (10-3)

Key stat: The Colts have been held to seventeen or fewer points in four of their last five games, a stretch that includes all three of their losses.

This looks good: And yet they’re still fifth in scoring and second in yards per game. This sounds weird, but they’re probably at the nadir of the season, and they’re still in good shape.

This does not: Does their free-fall after a 9-0 start signify a hangover from last year’s disappointment? It sure does. Besides, teams like Cleveland and Oakland give up fewer points per game, so the Colts’ offense has no margin for error.

Outlook: Maybe they should be higher than the fifth-best team in the conference. I just think the Colts have too much mental baggage to advance far in the playoffs.

4. Jacksonville (8-5)

Key stat: The Jaguars average more than one hundred sixty yards per game on the ground, more than anyone but the Falcons.

I like: The team’s resilience. Jacksonville lost to Houston 27-7 on Oct. 22. Despite quarterback turmoil, that’s the only game they lost by more than one score. Plus, they just obliterated the Colts.

I don’t like: this franchise, or its 25th-rated passing attack.

Outlook: The Jags would be set in the NFC, but are lost in the AFC shuffle. They might win their first game, though, especially if they face Indy again.

3. Baltimore Ravens (10-3)

Key stat: It’s Baltimore...what do you think their key stat is? They’re tops in the league in points allowed, giving up just over a baker’s dozen per game.

I like: The star-studded roster, and quarterback Steve McNair who, while no longer a superstar, has been incredibly accurate the last several weeks. Not only that, he’s got a track record of clutch performance.

I don’t like: the team’s personality, a combination of stout defense and short passing to control the clock. Yes, it worked for New England in years past. But I don’t think the Ravens can establish any kind of ground game in the playoffs, and being one-dimensional will hurt them.

Outlook: With Indy fading, they could be the No. 2 seed, which means an easy road to the AFC Championship. I don’t think they're much of a threat to win it, though.

2. New England Patriots (9-4)

Key stat: The Patriots were shut out by Miami last week. Wait, that’s bad! Let’s try: the Patriots have outscored opponents by 95 points, more than anyone but Chicago, San Diego, and Baltimore.

Good vibes: Tom Brady and Bill Belichick. Third in points allowed.

Bad news: Brady’s been a bit inconsistent this year as he’s struggled to adjust to an overhauled receiving corps. The offense can be good, but it doesn’t scare anyone.

Outlook: With some teams, you throw the stats out the window. Actually, no, I don’t agree with that. But the Patriots are better than their record shows, and I still trust Tom Brady more in a close game than anyone this side of Vince Young. (That’s a joke; Brady is still king.) I might be giving them too much credit for experience, I guess, but it hardly matters. The Patriots, like everyone in the AFC, clearly look up to the...

1. San Diego Chargers (11-2)

Key stat: LaDainian Tomlinson has had seven straight 100-yard games, including three over 170. He may have broken some sort of record last week.

I like: LT for MVP. Those consecutive road comebacks over the Broncos and Bengals. The average score of Chargers 32.7, Opponents 19.8. The fact that both losses came by only three points. Philip Rivers.

I don’t like: um...I like almost everything. The defense could be a little better against the run. It’s possible that someone will keep a playoff game close enough to keep running the ball, but Jacksonville’s the only other AFC team with a frightening ground attack. Oh, and Marty Schottenheimer.

Outlook: Super Bowl.

Coming soon: The NFC.

The NBA basketball

As I mentioned in the comments of the last post, I don’t like how sports and capitalism mix sometimes.

You can’t look for sporting news anywhere right now without stumbling across a mention of the NBA switching back to the leather basketball. Shoot, it was even on the ESPN ticker all last night during Monday Night Football.

Actually, I almost have to take that back. There is one place where it’s practically a non-issue: NBA.com. Take a look-as of right now, there’s only a tiny link to “Leather Ball Reaction Page,” which I thought would be a list of glowing quotes from ecstatic players. Nope, it’s the press release of the announcement. There are no reactions whatsoever on the page, and the title is really misleading. (I almost didn't click on it since ESPN.com had a similar thing yesterday, but I'm glad I did.)

Yes, NBA.com is not the New York Times, but that’s lame. Obviously, the NBA’s ashamed of the switch back for a couple of reasons-for one, the players’ complaints are embarrassing to corporate partner Spalding and two, the whole switch makes commissioner David Stern look like a total jerk.

I like to hear whining even less than most people, and at first, I thought the players’ association’s lawsuit, in particular, was an overreaction. But the more I thought about it, the more I sympathized. The ball is pretty central to what basketball players do at work. Besides, why on Earth would you change the ball without talking to anyone? What’s the point, other than being a control freak?

That’s the problem for the NBA and for Stern-it puts him in a bad light and, with the revisionist history that is modern sports coverage, that colors all his previous actions. Come to think of it, that dress code thing was pretty lame last year too, wasn’t it? Yes, the players make millions and sure, they can afford some suits. But why not work out the details with the players before going public? I don’t get it.

Anyway, back to Econ 101. Like Jake Plummer jerseys, the “new” NBA ball (the one introduced this season) should soon be available at a discount price. So you go to NBA.com and click on the store link. Go to sporting goods. And you’ll see this.

(Go ahead, click it.)

That’s right, a huge picture of the “new” basketball! They’re still selling it and worse, they’re still promoting it. I can understand wanting to unload stock of the new ball, but that's just shady, and the NBA needs to change it. (I couldn't find a link to buy the real leather basketball, though it's available elsewhere.) Maybe that doesn’t bug you as much as it does me, but think of a Santa Claus out there looking to get a gift for a basketball-loving son or daughter. Congratulations, kid, you got the ball that makes Jason Kidd’s hands bleed.

The NBA screwed up, but now they’re doing the right thing. I just wish they weren’t being such twerps about it.

BCS

It's a tired topic at this point, so I'll keep it short. I'm going to argue about the teams, but it's really the system, of course, that's flawed. The real answer for determining a champion is a tournament-you know, like they have for every single other sport. But here's why I don't like the options under the current system.

The problem with Florida is that their promotion to the BCS title game seems a little, how shall I say, artifical. Yes, they played a tough schedule and outside of Michigan, they're the only team left anyone can take seriously as No. 2. (Of course, Boise State is undefeated.) But it's a lovely coincidence that they just happened to cement that No. 2 status this weekend. I don't really see how that win over Arkansas proves they're better than the Wolverines.

The problem with Michigan is that I can't imagine anything more unfair to the undefeated Ohio State Buckeyes. Think about it. If Ohio State had lost to Michigan at home, well, they might have had an argument for being the real second-best team in the nation, but no one would have listened. I think they'd have blown their BCS title game shot right there.

So, in other words, Ohio State has already played Michigan with the national championship on the line...and they won. It's kind of messed up to say they have to play the exact same team for the exact same stakes just so we know they really deserve it.

On the other hand, Michigan was undefeated and had to face their rival team, which was also undefeated, on the road. And they barely lost. So there's a decent chance that they're actually the nation's second-best team. Shoot, they might even be just as good as Ohio State, if you think about it. Maybe they do deserve another bite at the apple.

The problem with Ohio State is that their coach is a total wuss. Who did he think the No. 2 team was?

Ohio State coach Jim Tressel has a vote in the coaches' poll but abstained this week.

"After consultation with my director of athletics, Gene Smith, and based upon our unique position in the BCS standings, I believe it is only fair that we not participate the final poll," he said in a statement.

Wait, what? How is that fair? It's dumb that coaches vote on the best teams in their own sport, but they do, so why shouldn't he vote? Tressel is really saying one of three things:

1. He can not be trusted with such a weighty responsibility-he knows which of the two teams is better, and he also knows he will vote for the other team to give himself an easier road, so abstention is the only honorable path;

2. He can make the right choice, but some people may not like it; or, in other words, he has the thinnest skin in America; or

3. He is scared of providing the legendary "bulletin-board material."

Whichever it is, I hope he loses.

NFL thoughts

1. More on the Broncos in a sec, but if you didn't see, Al Wilson left the game on a stretcher with what the Broncos called a strained neck in the fourth quarter. There's probably more news on this somewhere else by the time you read this. Hope he's okay.

2. I caught a bit of the Giants-Cowboys game-I think this was only the second time I've seen the Giants this year, and I'm already completely sick of them. Anyway, I don't know if you can really see his visor color in this picture, but if Giants linebacker Antonio Pierce ever needs to look up Wheeljack's courage level, he can do it with his helmet on.

3. Speaking of Cowboys-Giants, you know that media savvy star who always whines about not getting the ball enough? What's his name? Tiki Barber? Yeah. He had another killer fumble this afternoon. Maybe Giants fans won't be so sad to see him go.

4. I've got no insight on Rob Bironas' 60-yarder to beat the Colts, but he's my hero.

5. All right, Broncos-Seahawks. Shaun Alexander carried it 26 times for 90 yards in a win at altitude, so it's not like he had a bad game. And yes, he's been hurt this year. But I can't think of a big-name player who's more underwhelming to watch. He must be really good the times I don't see him.

6. Champ Bailey, on the other hand, never disappoints, picking off Hasselbeck on an end-zone bomb in the third quarter.

7. It was 13-7 Denver at the start of the fourth quarter. Once Wilson got hurt, Seattle scored ten quick points to make it 17-13. Now we see what Jay can do. His first-down pass is tipped at the line and intercepted. NBC flashes to Jake Plummer on the sidelines and says that since 1997, his 30 fourth-quarter game-winning or game-tying drives lead the NFL. A few things:

a. First, I realize that's a bogus stat. How many guys have even been regular starters since then? Tom Brady, for example, has only played about half that span. There's Favre, Bledsoe, McNair, and that's about it, though Peyton Manning's pretty close.

b. And yes, most of Plummer's comebacks came with Arizona.

c. But still...I really didn't want to see that right then.

d. Just for the record, since his career may be over, 30 is a ton of comebacks. Almost two season's worth. John Elway, the all-time leader, had 47.(According to DenverBroncos.com, 23 of Plummer's drives won the game, rather than merely tying it.)

8. Anyway, Seattle gets a field goal, it's 20-13. Cutler hits Brandon Marshall for a short pass along the sideline, and Marshall breaks tackles all the way to the end zone. I can only remember three of his plays this year, but I'm a Brandon Marshall fan. (Seattle, of course, got the ball back and won it with a field goal. Bastards.)

9. In the end, Game 1 under Jay Cutler looked a lot like games 1-11 under Jake Plummer. The pocket still collapsed in the blink of an eye, passes were inaccurate, the ground game was inconsistent, and an unconscionable desperation heave led to a Seattle touchdown. So far, no good.