I’m really excited to write my next annual NFL quarterback rankings, but I have to wait until after the Super Bowl. Peyton Manning and Rex Grossman could each move way up or down depending on that game.
To tide myself over, I present my rankings of the best young quarterbacks in the NFL. What’s young? 26 and under. (Yep, that’s pretty arbitrary, but 27-year-olds like David Carr, Byron Leftwich, and Carson Palmer felt a little too familiar for this list.)
1. Ben Roethlisberger, Pittsburgh Steelers (24). Roethlisberger did not have a good year, and there are so many ways to express that. For one: he had only six games where he threw more touchdowns than interceptions. For two: he managed to throw more than half of his career interceptions this season, even though he missed a game. For three: he went through someone’s windshield.
Considering the injury, it’s not surprising he had such a bad year. Obviously, I’m betting he’ll bounce back. His first two years in the league are so far ahead of what anyone else on this list has accomplished that he’s the obvious No. 1.
2. Vince Young, Tennessee Titans (23). I fear sometimes that there is too much Young-love on this site. Nevertheless, the rookie from Texas put together a statistically-ugly but otherwise amazing first year. He led the Titans to late six-game winning streak, including wins over the Eagles and both Manning brothers, as well as that in-your-face overtime victory over the Texans, who could and should have drafted both rookies of the year.
His numbers really were scary-in seven games, he completed fewer than half his passes. It would be an extreme exaggeration to blame his receivers for all of that. Then again, he did improve over the course of the season. Oh, forget it. I love watching this guy and think he’ll just keep getting better.
3. Mike Vick, Atlanta Falcons (26). Surprised he’s on this list? Me, too. But Vick still meets the definition of young enough, so he’s the pretty clear next choice here.
His passing ability is mocked, and probably with good reason. But Vick also carried the ball 123 times for one thousand thirty-nine yards this year, an 8.4 per-carry average. That is absolutely unbelievable. Besides, his 20 touchdowns to 13 interceptions ratio was way better than Young’s or Roethlisberger’s.
4. Philip Rivers, San Diego Chargers (25). Rivers put up fantastic numbers this year as well as back-to-back seventeen-point road comebacks. That’s good. Rivers did falter a little down the stretch, though, and he clearly won’t play with teammates good enough to go 14-2 every year. So while I’ve liked him since college, I hesitate to move him up too high. (That said, the Chargers appear set for now.)
5. Rex Grossman, Chicago Bears (26). We are no longer in sure-thing territory. I do not think Grossman is a great NFL quarterback or an exceptionally mature young man. I thought he was given way too much credit for being only okay last season. Nevertheless, he’s playing in the Super Bowl (thanks to a patient coach with no other options) and unless he blows that game single-handedly, he’s earned a spot here.
6. Tony Romo, Dallas Cowboys (26). Romo certainly deserves to be ahead of Grossman on this list as a pure passer. Both can throw beautiful deep passes, but Romo has versatility and touch all over the field. It’s just everything else that concerns me. He sure went Hollywood on everyone in a hurry after his early success. And while I barely care about his dropping the ball (a ball that was, after all, intended to make field goal tries harder), I’m not sure it won’t affect him. (I don’t mean to make excuses for Romo, I just think that drop overshadowed what had been a pretty good game for him. Besides, lots of great quarterbacks have had bad playoff games.)
That’s it for the good/interesting ones. I don’t know how to decide from among Alex Smith, Jay Cutler, J.P. Losman, Matt Leinart and Eli Manning, though Smith and Cutler have the best shot to be difference-makers.
For the college guys, I’m intrigued by LSU’s JaMarcus Russell, and really intrigued by Hawaii’s Colt Brennan, neither of whom I’ve seen much of.
Tuesday, January 23, 2007
Monday, January 22, 2007
Do the Nuggets hate me?
They probably do.
No idea why. But what other conclusion can I draw when the team elects to celebrate its biggest game of the year (the return of Carmelo) by starting Steve Blake?
I feel like I was too easy on the Nuggets for the acquistion of Blake or, more appropriately, for the disacquistion of Earl Boykins. Boykins was everything a team would want in a bench player, with all the strut of a superstar.
The team tried to spin Blake's arrival as a positive, as he gave the Nuggets something they'd missed for years-a pass-first, push-the-tempo point guard. Unfortunately, Blake's buzz cut calls to mind an obvious comparison for Nuggets fans-he's Jon Barry, minus the talent. (That is not a compliment.)
(Besides, the need for a little man skilled at passing seemed filled when we traded for that other guard last month.)
Anyway, it's hardly Blake's fault the Nuggets organization only pretends to care about winning. The bigger story tonight was /is (the game's still on), of course, Carmelo.
Marcus Camby tossed an alley-oop to 'Melo for a lay-in and the first two points of the game. Color commentator Scott Hastings said that your first basket is big, because it's nice "to know you're not gonna be held scoreless." Comments like these make you think Hastings was some kind of scrub in the NBA.
Carmelo was pretty solid for missing so much time. What were the other positives from tonight's game?
- Allen Iverson's still fine with deferring to Carmelo, if you're wondering, and almost to a fault. He passed up on an easy early lay-up to dish it to Carmelo for a more difficult shot.
- The Nuggets played with energy and, as of the end of the third quarter, have handled the Grizzlies fairly easily. Ed Najera even annoyed me less than usual-I think I'm finally get used to rooting for him.
The negatives?
- Carmelo's not in game shape anymore, which is hardly surprising. I don't think any amount of running adequately prepares you for the fast pace and constant change of direction of an NBA game. He looked tired only a few minutes in. But that's no big deal because it won't last.
- Iverson has picked up some bad habits over the years-he can be a lazy defender and sometimes loiters on offense on the rare occasion he's not part of the play. But you can tell from some of the plays he tries that he's bored out there. For a January game against Memphis, I'm not sure I really blame him. It's not the ideal attitude to have, but he knows when to turn it on, and besides, it hasn't kept Shaq ringless.
In other words, the positives far outweigh the minor negatives. It's just too bad the Earl won't be along for the ride.
(Blake just picked up his tenth assist on a fine pass to Carmelo down low. Maybe it'll be okay after all.)
Sunday, January 21, 2007
Holy crap
1. Everything I thought I knew about football turned out to be wrong.
2. Seriously, I have to give the Colts a lot of credit. More on that in a second.
3. Reggie Bush is an idiot. Not only does he not understand the concept of "scoreboard", he doesn't understand Saints' history. Go back to the the playoffs after the 2000 season. The Saints are hosting the defending champion St. Louis Rams and take a 31-7 lead in the fourth quarter on a touchdown pass to Willie Jackson. But wait! Jackson taunts a defender by waving the ball at him as he crosses the goal line. Immediately the Rams catch fire, scoring three touchdowns to make it 31-28, the eventual final. I'm certain the Rams would have won if the game had been a few minutes longer.
(Why should Bush know this game? It was, before last week, the only playoff win in franchise history.)
4. The Chicago defense was terrific, even if the stats-partially inflated by Bush's 88-yard catch-don't really show it. They should give the Colts all they can handle. But then, so should have Baltimore and New England.
5. Ah, the Colts. Do I really hate them? Yes. Not because Peyton Manning was born with a silver spoon in his mouth, though. No, I hate him because it was a golden spoon, covered in diamonds, and he still gouges his teammates' backs when he can't get it done.
6. That said, the biggest questions surrounding Peyton Manning have always been about his mental toughness. He's made some serious strides this postseason. I'm not saying he'll win the title, but he has made some progress, which he seemed to have gone years without doing.
7. Not to focus on the losers, but when Asante Samuel intercepted that Manning pass for a touchdown to make it 21-3, Phil Simms compared him favorably to Champ Bailey. Bailey's great. But Samuel doesn't deserve that because he's had an absolutely amazing career so far. He's taken three interceptions for touchdowns in the playoffs in his career, tying the NFL record. He started for the Patriots in their last Super Bowl win. And he had ten picks this year, matching Bailey. That's more in four years than some stars will do in their whole careers.
8. Marvin Harrison-well, I'm sick of hearing that guy talked about as the greatest receiver ever who, only for the simple reason that he loves sportsmanship and doesn't talk trash, flies under the radar. Well, Big Game Marvin had his typical performance today-four catches, forty-one yards, and some drops, including one on what would have been a huge gain. It doesn't matter since the Colts won...but geez.
9. For all you Peyton Manning haters, you don't have to give up hope yet. Dan Marino made a Super Bowl. Jim Kelly made four. Shoot, Neil O'Donnell made a Super Bowl. You see what I'm getting at?
Friday, January 19, 2007
Conference championship previews
Two games this weekend, both on Sunday:
New Orleans Saints at Chicago Bears, 1 p.m., FOX
New England Patriots at Indianapolis Colts, 4:30 p.m., CBS
At this point I'm pretty much sick of all teams left in the postseason, so I'll keep this brief.
On the NFC side, you have America's Team heading into Chicago to face the Bears in what could be a very close game. Both teams won 27-24 last weekend, scores indicative of both teams' goodness-but-not-greatness.
I'm going with the Saints for three reasons. For one, it's time I pick a road team. For two, I would love to see the Saints make the Super Bowl. And for three, I like the Saints' offensive depth more than I like Chicago's supposed defensive prowess. It's not that Chicago can't stop anyone, but the defense has been short of dominant for several weeks. With Grossman's Jekyll-and-Hyde tendencies, the Bears will need more than they're getting from the defense.
Do I even need to talk about the AFC title game? Many folks around the blogosphere have complained that they're sick of the Colts and Patriots drama. I understand where they're coming from. But the Colts' pathetic excuse* for many years was that they didn't get to host New England in such a crucial game. Well, now's their chance. And they're going to blow it again. Maybe Peyton Manning will have a good game. Maybe Tom Brady will be as pick-prone as he was last week. Maybe Tony Dungy's pushing all the right buttons now. But definitely the Patriots are going to win.
* = It's not that crazy of a reason–home field advantage does exist. But if you want to host a playoff game, you have to have a better regular-season record than your opponent, or at least win your division. So if you were actually better in the first place, shouldn't you have been at home in the playoffs to begin with? That's what makes this the loser's lament, in my mind.
Sunday, January 14, 2007
Divisional round
1. I think somebody screwed with the date on my computer. One weekend preview said,
[McNair] usually elevates his play under pressure, and not many quarterbacks can say that.
and I must have thought it was 2001 when I wrote that.
2. Seriously, though, what were the Ravens thinking? Brian Billick gave Hole Punch Sports an exclusive look at the secret formula behind his third-down game plan for Saturday's contest. It read:
If it is third down and x yards to go, select and successfully execute a play designed to gain (x-2) yards.
Just in case you were wondering.
3. Adam Vinatieri was one the biggest signings of the offseason. Certainly, he's behind Drew Brees on any serious list, but his clutch kicking is one element the Colts have sorely needed over the years, and he delivered Saturday.
4. From the "Completion Percentage is Overrated" Dept.: Steve McNair was 18/29 Saturday. In John Elway's last game, when he was Super Bowl XXXIII MVP, he went 18-for-29. No one on the planet thinks McNair had a good game yesterday, so why do I still hear people mention a 60-percent completion rate as if it were meaningful?
5. I have to give the Colts a little respect, even if I think their postseason success this year is a result of favorable matchups. They faced a Chiefs team starting the wrong quarterback, and a Ravens team that refused to win. But even if they were lucky...they've won more playoff games in the last nine days than the Broncos have since Elway retired.
6. Saints-Eagles. I was glad to see Deuce McAllister have a huge game in the playoffs, because he goes largely ignored playing ahead of Reggie Bush. Bush is a lot of things, but "a good NFL runner" is not yet one of them. (Y'all saw him try to catch that pitch.)
7. Props to Brian Westbrook for finishing his breakout year with an excellent postseason. Are the Eagles smart enough to keep calling his number when McNabb returns?
8. Rex Grossman's touchdown bomb to Bernard Berrian was sweet. No, the degree of difficulty wasn't there, but how often do you see a pass that deep where the receiver has to make no adjustment whatsoever?
9. Grossman's good, then, for this week. But the Bears barely squeaked it out over an overmatched Seattle team-it'll be interesting to see how they fare against the Saints, who played a nail-biter of their own.
10. The Chargers and Marty Schottenheimer did lose, but I don't think they lost because their coach was too conservative. I just think they got beat by a tremendous team. (I know I picked the Patriots to lose, but I said and still think that Chargers-Patriots was the real Super Bowl.) That said, some Chargers could have played a lot better, like Eric Parker and Shawne Merriman.
11. The Patriots really couldn't run the ball today, but that's never been their strength. I do think they do as a good a job as anyone of mixing up runs and passes, though, and giving you one when you expect the other.
12. I used to feel kind of bad for LaDainian Tomlinson, who seemed destined to spend his career on .500-and-under squads. Now he had his chance, and they lost. How will the Chargers respond? Can they get back to this spot next year? I think they might be the most intriguing team going in to next season. They're too young and too talented to write off forever, of course, but things were really lined up for them this year (sort of like Denver last year), and they couldn't capitalize. You never know how that will affect a team-look how the Broncos bounced back in '97 versus how they "bounced back" this year.
13. I was a little bummed I went 0-2 in the AFC this week, but Patriots at Colts? Oh, yes, I'll take that.Friday, January 12, 2007
Patriots at Chargers preview
The real Super Bowl is probably the last playoff game of the weekend, New England Patriots at San Diego Chargers. (2:30 p.m., CBS).
They’re the top two teams in the AFC, which is the top conference, and whoever wins this game should eventually win it all. I can not wait.
On one hand, you’ve got the up-and-coming Chargers, owners of a sparkling 14-2 record this year and, like so many great teams, a flawless home mark.
Their other statistics are equally impressive. The Chargers fell just shy of scoring five hundred points this season, averaging a league-best 30.8 points per game. And they didn’t do it like some Rams and Colts teams of recent vintage. They had balance. San Diego’s defense, spearheaded by the ethically-flexible Shawne Merriman, gave up only 18.4 points, seventh in the league.
Running back LaDainian Tomlinson, this year’s NFL MVP, ran for 1,815 yards and 28 touchdowns. He added just over five hundred yards and three more touchdowns through the air on his way to setting the single-season scoring record. Quarterback Philip Rivers, in his first season as a starter, threw for 3,388 yards and 22 touchdowns, with an even more impressive total of just nine interceptions. The aforementioned Merriman had 17 sacks. That’s three golden seasons, and I haven’t even mentioned standouts like Antonio Gates or Donnie Edwards. Bottom line, the Chargers are a fantastic and talented squad.
In the challenger’s corner, you have a team well-accustomed to the role, the Patriots, fresh off a 37-16 dismantling of the New York Jets.
The Patriots, winners of three of the last five Super Bowls, still have Tom Brady, the best quarterback in the world. The defense is still world-class, successful against the pass and the run and giving up just 14.8 points per contest this year, second only to Baltimore.
The Patriots’ real advantage (other than Brady) is, of course, head coach Bill Belichick, who will doubtless have some success limiting San Diego’s offensive fireworks. Chargers coach Marty Schottenheimer is as conservative as they come, which can be death in the playoffs, but he’s never had a team this good, either.
In the end, I have to go with San Diego. New England will be facing an offense that is historically good-a type of team they’ve certainly defeated before. But I’m more impressed with Tomlinson than I ever was with Peyton Manning or Kurt Warner. And San Diego is the most well-rounded team New England has faced since the Brady/Belichick ran began. And to be fair, the Patriots are pretty amazing in their own right. If you can only watch one football game this year, make it this one.
They’re the top two teams in the AFC, which is the top conference, and whoever wins this game should eventually win it all. I can not wait.
On one hand, you’ve got the up-and-coming Chargers, owners of a sparkling 14-2 record this year and, like so many great teams, a flawless home mark.
Their other statistics are equally impressive. The Chargers fell just shy of scoring five hundred points this season, averaging a league-best 30.8 points per game. And they didn’t do it like some Rams and Colts teams of recent vintage. They had balance. San Diego’s defense, spearheaded by the ethically-flexible Shawne Merriman, gave up only 18.4 points, seventh in the league.
Running back LaDainian Tomlinson, this year’s NFL MVP, ran for 1,815 yards and 28 touchdowns. He added just over five hundred yards and three more touchdowns through the air on his way to setting the single-season scoring record. Quarterback Philip Rivers, in his first season as a starter, threw for 3,388 yards and 22 touchdowns, with an even more impressive total of just nine interceptions. The aforementioned Merriman had 17 sacks. That’s three golden seasons, and I haven’t even mentioned standouts like Antonio Gates or Donnie Edwards. Bottom line, the Chargers are a fantastic and talented squad.
In the challenger’s corner, you have a team well-accustomed to the role, the Patriots, fresh off a 37-16 dismantling of the New York Jets.
The Patriots, winners of three of the last five Super Bowls, still have Tom Brady, the best quarterback in the world. The defense is still world-class, successful against the pass and the run and giving up just 14.8 points per contest this year, second only to Baltimore.
The Patriots’ real advantage (other than Brady) is, of course, head coach Bill Belichick, who will doubtless have some success limiting San Diego’s offensive fireworks. Chargers coach Marty Schottenheimer is as conservative as they come, which can be death in the playoffs, but he’s never had a team this good, either.
In the end, I have to go with San Diego. New England will be facing an offense that is historically good-a type of team they’ve certainly defeated before. But I’m more impressed with Tomlinson than I ever was with Peyton Manning or Kurt Warner. And San Diego is the most well-rounded team New England has faced since the Brady/Belichick ran began. And to be fair, the Patriots are pretty amazing in their own right. If you can only watch one football game this year, make it this one.
Seahawks at Bears preview
The NFL has thoughtfully given me two fantastic playoff games Sunday to snap me out of my Earl of Boykins funk.
The first is Seahawks at Bears (Sunday, 11 a.m., FOX). Seattle, of course, barely squeaked by Dallas last week after that botched hold by Dallas QB Tony Romo. Some have asserted that Romo dropped the ball because it was one of the special untouched “kicking” footballs. To which I say: no kidding. The whole point of the kicking footballs was to make field goals more difficult. The slick ball didn’t make a successful try impossible, but it had the effect it was designed to have.
Anyway, who cares about the losers? The Seahawks did some good things last week but, frankly, were unimpressive. Shaun Alexander was back to his playoff ways with a 2.9 yards-per-carry average, though he made some key conversions. It’s clear that Matt Hasselbeck has to carry this offense, and he connected on a mere fifty percent of his passes last week.
The Bears, though, are hardly better at quarterback. They’re just better everywhere else. There are some stats I bring up all the time, and this will be no exception: the Bears outscored Seattle and gave up fewer points. With Devin Hester fielding punts and kicks, you have to give them the edge on special teams, too.
So really, the only way the Bears can lose is with one of those 1.3 or 0.0 rating games out of quarterback Rex Grossman. The real disaster, though, would be bringing in backup Brian Griese, which would immediately seal Chicago’s fate. Griese’s lack of playing time is a huge reason Bears coach Lovie Smith has impressed me so much this year. He knows Grossman’s not a great option, but he also knows that the Bears have no other choice. When the backup has come in this year, he’s played like, well, Brian Griese. If you like a passing game that advances the ball in two- and three-yard chunks, then gives it up with spectacular 79-yard interception returns, Griese’s your man. Otherwise, you have to go with Grossman.
But Chicago really won’t need much from its offense considering how well the defense has played and considering how shaky Hasselbeck still is. (Hasselbeck’s got guts, no question, but he looks like he came back too soon.) And the Seahawks will have to be a pass-first, second, and third team. Chicago’s defense, though not quite Baltimore-quality, excels against the pass. Grossman may eventually cost them rings, but not this week. Chicago wins.
The first is Seahawks at Bears (Sunday, 11 a.m., FOX). Seattle, of course, barely squeaked by Dallas last week after that botched hold by Dallas QB Tony Romo. Some have asserted that Romo dropped the ball because it was one of the special untouched “kicking” footballs. To which I say: no kidding. The whole point of the kicking footballs was to make field goals more difficult. The slick ball didn’t make a successful try impossible, but it had the effect it was designed to have.
Anyway, who cares about the losers? The Seahawks did some good things last week but, frankly, were unimpressive. Shaun Alexander was back to his playoff ways with a 2.9 yards-per-carry average, though he made some key conversions. It’s clear that Matt Hasselbeck has to carry this offense, and he connected on a mere fifty percent of his passes last week.
The Bears, though, are hardly better at quarterback. They’re just better everywhere else. There are some stats I bring up all the time, and this will be no exception: the Bears outscored Seattle and gave up fewer points. With Devin Hester fielding punts and kicks, you have to give them the edge on special teams, too.
So really, the only way the Bears can lose is with one of those 1.3 or 0.0 rating games out of quarterback Rex Grossman. The real disaster, though, would be bringing in backup Brian Griese, which would immediately seal Chicago’s fate. Griese’s lack of playing time is a huge reason Bears coach Lovie Smith has impressed me so much this year. He knows Grossman’s not a great option, but he also knows that the Bears have no other choice. When the backup has come in this year, he’s played like, well, Brian Griese. If you like a passing game that advances the ball in two- and three-yard chunks, then gives it up with spectacular 79-yard interception returns, Griese’s your man. Otherwise, you have to go with Grossman.
But Chicago really won’t need much from its offense considering how well the defense has played and considering how shaky Hasselbeck still is. (Hasselbeck’s got guts, no question, but he looks like he came back too soon.) And the Seahawks will have to be a pass-first, second, and third team. Chicago’s defense, though not quite Baltimore-quality, excels against the pass. Grossman may eventually cost them rings, but not this week. Chicago wins.
Thursday, January 11, 2007
Boykins traded
Boooooooooo!
The Nuggets traded Earl Boykins and Julius Hodge to the Bucks for former Maryland point guard Steve Blake in a move to avoid making luxury tax payments.
This sucks. Hodge is an up-and-comer and a...okay, I’m kidding about that. Obviously, the big loss is Boykins, who is only everyone in Denver’s favorite player. He’s five-foot-five with the guts of a much larger man. Boykins seemed a little threatened by the Allen Iverson trade, almost refusing to pass to his little-man counterpart in the Answer’s first game in Denver. But that’s really his only mistake I remember. He’s clutch, he’s aggressive, he’s instant offense off the bench, and the Nuggets are going to miss him more than they realize.
Goodbye, backcourt depth. Hello, first-round playoff loss? I hope not, but suddenly the Nuggets don’t have anyone scary coming off the bench. And doesn’t that hurt an up-tempo team the most?
Being a sports fan sucks sometimes, but being a Nuggets fan hasn’t sucked this bad in years.
The Nuggets traded Earl Boykins and Julius Hodge to the Bucks for former Maryland point guard Steve Blake in a move to avoid making luxury tax payments.
This sucks. Hodge is an up-and-comer and a...okay, I’m kidding about that. Obviously, the big loss is Boykins, who is only everyone in Denver’s favorite player. He’s five-foot-five with the guts of a much larger man. Boykins seemed a little threatened by the Allen Iverson trade, almost refusing to pass to his little-man counterpart in the Answer’s first game in Denver. But that’s really his only mistake I remember. He’s clutch, he’s aggressive, he’s instant offense off the bench, and the Nuggets are going to miss him more than they realize.
Goodbye, backcourt depth. Hello, first-round playoff loss? I hope not, but suddenly the Nuggets don’t have anyone scary coming off the bench. And doesn’t that hurt an up-tempo team the most?
Being a sports fan sucks sometimes, but being a Nuggets fan hasn’t sucked this bad in years.
Eagles at Saints
Wow. Did you know the Philadelphia Eagles and New Orleans Saints had the same record this year (10-6)? I’m a little surprised by this-the teams didn’t get nearly the same amount of coverage. Of course, as Rush Limbaugh would wisely point out, you’d have heard a lot about the Eagles if McNabb had stayed healthy. I’m kidding! (Besides, if any of you think that was legit, think about how many Saints highlights you saw with Drew Brees at the helm compared to when Aaron Brooks was the quarterback. It’s winning that leads to overexposure, not race.)
The Saints, of course, were the story of the season, and their postseason begins with a home game against the Eagles Saturday night (6 p.m., FOX).
Last week the Eagles looked fine, if you ask me. Yes, they only beat the Giants by three and yes, Jeff Garcia’s statistics were pedestrian. But this is a team that is well-accustomed to the crucible of the postseason. At no point did they lose confidence, and they even provided the most entertaining moment of the postseason. (That was coach Andy Reid trying to look intimidating while upset at Garcia for a timeout called right before the two-minute warning.)
The Saints, on the other hand-well, this is all new to them. You can’t say for sure how they’ll respond. (Will Reggie Bush try the lateral again this year?) They’ve been on fire, though, and it wasn’t long ago that they made a huge statement with that twenty-five point road victory over Dallas. They’re probably fine. But you know the Eagles will come to play, whereas the Saints are just a little bit iffy.
Anyway, it’s not just the records. I would have said New Orleans has a much more explosive offense, but in reality, the teams ranked 1-2 in offensive yardage in the regular season. (It’s true.) And defensively, the Saints were 11th and the Eagles were 15th, so that was pretty close, too.
Personality-wise, the teams do show some differences-the Saints go down the field a lot, whereas the Eagles’ Brian Westbrook is more effective on the ground than Deuce McAllister or Bush. But I’m surprised the teams are this close in so many ways.
What I’m saying is, the Eagles could pull off the upset. I don’t think they will. With homefield and what should be an unbelievable crowd, the Saints should roll to victory. But this ought to be a heck of a game.
The Saints, of course, were the story of the season, and their postseason begins with a home game against the Eagles Saturday night (6 p.m., FOX).
Last week the Eagles looked fine, if you ask me. Yes, they only beat the Giants by three and yes, Jeff Garcia’s statistics were pedestrian. But this is a team that is well-accustomed to the crucible of the postseason. At no point did they lose confidence, and they even provided the most entertaining moment of the postseason. (That was coach Andy Reid trying to look intimidating while upset at Garcia for a timeout called right before the two-minute warning.)
The Saints, on the other hand-well, this is all new to them. You can’t say for sure how they’ll respond. (Will Reggie Bush try the lateral again this year?) They’ve been on fire, though, and it wasn’t long ago that they made a huge statement with that twenty-five point road victory over Dallas. They’re probably fine. But you know the Eagles will come to play, whereas the Saints are just a little bit iffy.
Anyway, it’s not just the records. I would have said New Orleans has a much more explosive offense, but in reality, the teams ranked 1-2 in offensive yardage in the regular season. (It’s true.) And defensively, the Saints were 11th and the Eagles were 15th, so that was pretty close, too.
Personality-wise, the teams do show some differences-the Saints go down the field a lot, whereas the Eagles’ Brian Westbrook is more effective on the ground than Deuce McAllister or Bush. But I’m surprised the teams are this close in so many ways.
What I’m saying is, the Eagles could pull off the upset. I don’t think they will. With homefield and what should be an unbelievable crowd, the Saints should roll to victory. But this ought to be a heck of a game.
Colts at Ravens
I don’t like the NFL. Wait, don’t go! I love the sport, the games, and, often, even the spectacle. I just don’t like the league itself.
I know that the NFL is really a business. But they’re more in-your-face about it than other sports leagues and, frankly, most other businesses. And every few months, whether it’s a Madden exclusivity deal or something else, they remind me. Now it’s games on the NFL Network. Who else would have the gall to ask you to call your cable company and request a rate hike? Hey, Comcast, my money is burning a hole in my pocket.
Anyway, it’s not only that. It’s that the NFL isn’t very good at giving its consumers what they want. There are two NFL products I really want to spend my money on right now, but can’t, because they don’t exist. The first is an NFL 2K7 videogame, which some sore losers bought out of existence. The second is NFL games on DVD.
You can download the BCS bowls from iTunes now. To me, that’s not as good as a DVD, but it’s close, and the games are cheap. So why can’t you buy the unedited broadcasts of Super Bowls?
Think about it. I know I would buy Super Bowls XXXII and XXXIII almost whatever the price. Plus, it’s the Super Bowl, so I wouldn’t even mind-shoot, I’d prefer-if they kept in the commercials. And I’d get the Drive, if they made it available, and maybe even the Super Bowls Denver had lost.
The NFL likes money. I like Super Bowls. Why hasn’t this happened? Perhaps there are some serious rights issues to hammer out with the networks, but these things would print money. I don’t get it.
Anyway. That’s a long NFL rant to introduce Saturday’s first game: Colts at Ravens (2:30 p.m. Mountain, CBS).
I’ve already told you I don’t trust the Colts, so let’s talk about the Ravens for a second. In case you forgot, the Ravens led the NFL in scoring defense this year. How’d they do it? Well, they did it by stockpiling defenders for the last decade or so. Look at the linebackers-Ray Lewis and Bart Scott both got more than one hundred tackles. Look at the pass rush-Terrell Suggs had 9.5 sacks, Adalius Thomas had 11, and the much-missed Trevor Pryce had 13. Look at the defensive backfield-safeties Dawan Landry and Ed Reed each picked off five passes, and cornerback Chris McAlister intercepted six of his own. In other words, this defense redefines terms like “loaded”.
The offense is a different story. The Ravens have no running game, which is unfortunate when you’re playing the Colts. Jamal Lewis, who’s still suffering the aftereffects of, you know, prison, still gets the bulk of the carries, but doesn’t do anything with them. Backup and much-missed runner Mike Anderson puts up a healthy per-carry average, but only touches the ball a couple times each game.
The passing game is supposedly much more threatening, but not really. Steve McNair is not the guy who won the MVP anymore. Well, yeah, he literally is, but the Ravens have asked him to be more conservative, and he’s done a solid job of that. What I wonder, and don’t know yet, is whether the team will give him more leeway in the playoffs. He’s sort of a Jake Delhomme type-you wouldn’t put him up with John Elway or Tom Brady or anything, but he usually elevates his play under pressure, and not many quarterbacks can say that.
Peyton Manning certainly can’t, and I think the Colts will have their hands full and then some with the Baltimore defense. I think the Ravens will play ball-control like they always do, so this game could be closer than it should be. But I still pick the Ravens to win.
I know that the NFL is really a business. But they’re more in-your-face about it than other sports leagues and, frankly, most other businesses. And every few months, whether it’s a Madden exclusivity deal or something else, they remind me. Now it’s games on the NFL Network. Who else would have the gall to ask you to call your cable company and request a rate hike? Hey, Comcast, my money is burning a hole in my pocket.
Anyway, it’s not only that. It’s that the NFL isn’t very good at giving its consumers what they want. There are two NFL products I really want to spend my money on right now, but can’t, because they don’t exist. The first is an NFL 2K7 videogame, which some sore losers bought out of existence. The second is NFL games on DVD.
You can download the BCS bowls from iTunes now. To me, that’s not as good as a DVD, but it’s close, and the games are cheap. So why can’t you buy the unedited broadcasts of Super Bowls?
Think about it. I know I would buy Super Bowls XXXII and XXXIII almost whatever the price. Plus, it’s the Super Bowl, so I wouldn’t even mind-shoot, I’d prefer-if they kept in the commercials. And I’d get the Drive, if they made it available, and maybe even the Super Bowls Denver had lost.
The NFL likes money. I like Super Bowls. Why hasn’t this happened? Perhaps there are some serious rights issues to hammer out with the networks, but these things would print money. I don’t get it.
Anyway. That’s a long NFL rant to introduce Saturday’s first game: Colts at Ravens (2:30 p.m. Mountain, CBS).
I’ve already told you I don’t trust the Colts, so let’s talk about the Ravens for a second. In case you forgot, the Ravens led the NFL in scoring defense this year. How’d they do it? Well, they did it by stockpiling defenders for the last decade or so. Look at the linebackers-Ray Lewis and Bart Scott both got more than one hundred tackles. Look at the pass rush-Terrell Suggs had 9.5 sacks, Adalius Thomas had 11, and the much-missed Trevor Pryce had 13. Look at the defensive backfield-safeties Dawan Landry and Ed Reed each picked off five passes, and cornerback Chris McAlister intercepted six of his own. In other words, this defense redefines terms like “loaded”.
The offense is a different story. The Ravens have no running game, which is unfortunate when you’re playing the Colts. Jamal Lewis, who’s still suffering the aftereffects of, you know, prison, still gets the bulk of the carries, but doesn’t do anything with them. Backup and much-missed runner Mike Anderson puts up a healthy per-carry average, but only touches the ball a couple times each game.
The passing game is supposedly much more threatening, but not really. Steve McNair is not the guy who won the MVP anymore. Well, yeah, he literally is, but the Ravens have asked him to be more conservative, and he’s done a solid job of that. What I wonder, and don’t know yet, is whether the team will give him more leeway in the playoffs. He’s sort of a Jake Delhomme type-you wouldn’t put him up with John Elway or Tom Brady or anything, but he usually elevates his play under pressure, and not many quarterbacks can say that.
Peyton Manning certainly can’t, and I think the Colts will have their hands full and then some with the Baltimore defense. I think the Ravens will play ball-control like they always do, so this game could be closer than it should be. But I still pick the Ravens to win.
Saturday, January 6, 2007
Thoughts on the playoffs' first day
1. Tony Romo just ended the game with the worst body language I've ever seen from a quarterback. Check that-I've seen Peyton hang his head just as low before. That's bad company. Well, I don't know if it's fair to read too much into something in the heat of the moment. But did Romo think they were going to win the Super Bowl this year or something?
It's not today's game, but the offseason that will make or break Romo. The fumble on the field goal snap-it's no good for the Cowboys, sure, but it happens. How will Romo respond? I don't know. He's seemed a little too eager to embrace his newfound celebrity status, but this could be a wake-up call, and he could be even better next season. Personally, I'm not betting on it, but I'm very intrigued to see what's up.
2. That was a manly, heads-up play on the tackle by Lofa Tatupu. Made up for that bizarre prevent "defense" Seattle was playing. I have never seen a team try to give up a playoff game faster.
3. I like Matt Hasselbeck's chances in any playoff game, even though he was hardly on fire today.
4. Shaun Alexander made some nice runs in key situations, and was clutch to a degree I hadn't seen before.
5. On to the AFC. Nice work on Ty Law's part. I bet he misses Tom Brady. And Damon Huard.
6. The blocking wasn't hot, but Larry Johnson looked less eager than usual to run aggresively today. Was that because he's worn down, or did he just relax and count on getting 30-plus carries? It's worth pointing out that Johnson had his worst games in college against good teams, too (though I still think he should have a Heisman).
7. Peyton Manning is a freaking weirdo. Three picks, but 30 of 35 on his other passes? I don't think I've ever seen anything like it.
8. The Colts looked only okay today even with a nearly 2:1 time of possession edge. They're done next week.
Friday, January 5, 2007
Giants at Eagles
The weekend's final playoff matchup: the Philadelphia Eagles beat the New York Giants (2:30 p.m., FOX). (Sorry, I had to spoil one of them.)
Why did I rank the Giants ahead of the Eagles a few weeks ago? I don't know. The Giants had won the head-to-head matchup in overtime. But the Eagles beat them by two touchdowns the next Sunday and haven't looked back, closing the season on a five-game winning streak.
The Giants were ice-cold down the stretch, losing six of seven at one point. They beat the Redskins behind a huge game from Tiki Barber.
Good thing, because Barber is the Giants' only hope. (What, you thought I'd say Eli Manning?) Barber ran for 1,662 yards in his final season and factored in the passing game. Too bad he's such a dweeb. The Eagles aren't the Colts or anything, but run defense is a major weakness for them. If Barber has a huge game, the Giants can come out on top.
Brian Westbrook ain't Barber, but he's not far behind. Westbrook got his first chance to shoulder the load this year, and he responded with a terrific campaign. Like Barber, he's a threat as a runner and a receiver.
Can Jeff Garcia be the difference? I would have doubted it a couple weeks ago, but he's had a special year. As a relief pitcher, he's been less spectacular than Dallas' Tony Romo but far more consistent. Which would you rather have in a playoff game? Garcia will look even better Sunday going against a Manning. And thus, the Eagles will win.
Jets at Patriots
Sunday's festivities kick off when the New York Jets play the New England Patriots (11 a.m., CBS).
It takes a great coaching matchup to steal headlines during the playoffs, and I don't care what ESPN says, it's going to take a lot more than Bill Belichick vs. Eric Mangini to get me excited. (Mangini, of course, was an assistant with the Patriots before taking the Jets job, thus the angle.)
But who cares? If this game really comes down to head coaches, what makes you think the Jets have a prayer?
Chad Pennington and Tom Brady are two weaker-armed "game mangers". One problem: in Brady's case, it's not true. He's still the most dangerous quarterback around.
So the Patriots are ahead after maybe the two biggest matchups: coach and quarterback. Anything else? Yes, New England has a higher-ranked defense. And offense. And they scored more points than the Jets. And they gave up fewer. And they're at home. I'm not getting paid by the word: the Patriots win.
Cowboys at Seahawks
The Seattle Seahawks host the Dallas Cowboys in a first-round NFC playoff game Saturday (6 p.m., NBC).
Both teams struggled in December, each going 2-3 for the month (and finishing with identical 9-7 records). The Cowboys' failures were predictable-two of their losses came to playoff teams, and Tony Romo had to cool down eventually. The Seahawks' slip-ups are a little more puzzling. With stars Matt Hasselbeck and Shaun Alexander back in the lineup, I expected them to build momentum for a playoff run.
They didn't. And I'm not sure why. There's not any one statistic that clearly points to trouble, unless "they're not really that good" is a statistic. (It isn't.)
Tony Romo, on the other hand, has come under fire in the last couple of weeks, partly because he's come down to earth and partly because he can't live up to the suffocating hype. (Being a Cowboy is sort of like being a Yankee in that regard-no one will assess you honestly.) Nevertheless, he's had good games mixed in with the bad, so he's hardly the shakiest QB in the postseason. He may even outplay Hasselbeck, a tremendous talent who's been sort of blah since his return from injury.
Regardless, the Seahawks will win. They still have experience and they still have a terrific home-field advantage. I also think Dallas lost momentum down the stretch, which is huge for a team with a young quarterback.
Chiefs at Colts
The Kansas City Chiefs will travel to Indianapolis to face the Indianapolis Colts this Saturday in an exciting playoff game beginning at 2:30 Mountain time and broadcast on the NBC television network.
The passing games of both teams could shred through the other’s defense. This game should feature the No. 1 and No. 2-rated passers in the league. Yet it won’t.
The Broncos won the Super Bowl after the 1997 season. (And don't you forget it.) In the season opener that year, the Broncos faced Kansas City and veteran quarterback Elvis Grbac, who’d been a backup on some powerful San Francisco teams. The Broncos beat the Chiefs. For the divisional rematch Grbac was injured, so the Chiefs started then-unknown quarterback Rich Gannon, who ran, passed, and rallied the Chiefs to a late victory. In fact, Gannon played so well in Grbac’s absence that many K.C. fans felt the team should stick with Gannon once Grbac was healthy. The Chiefs, though, decided to play Grbac in the playoffs, where they had home-field advantage. The Chiefs faced the Broncos for a third time in Kansas City’s first playoff game. Behind Grbac, they lost again. So, to recap: when the Chiefs went with the better-performing but lesser-known backup, they beat the Super Bowl champs. When they started the inferior but “proven” veteran, they went home early.
This year, Chiefs starter Trent Green, who had been a backup on some powerful St. Louis teams, missed time due to injury. His backup, Damon Huard, threw for eleven touchdowns and one interception in Green’s absence. In fact, only Peyton Manning had a better quarterback rating than Huard this year. Many Chiefs fans feel the team should stick with Huard even though Green is healthy, going as far as booing Green at home Sunday. However, the Chiefs will start Green in Saturday’s game. These two scenarios are in no way related.
Stars: Peyton Manning vs. Larry Johnson. Manning had another consistenly terrific year, but nothing is more consistent than his playoff performance. Larry Johnson set an NFL record for carries this season, but somehow didn’t win the rushing title. In other words, both teams have special offensive talents, but neither quite lives up to that best-in-the-league billing. (Everyone’s a Tomlinson convert at running back now, but before the season people acted like it was a toss-up.) Both are facing defenses ill-suited to stop them. Johnson will have an easier time against the Colts D than Manning will against the Chiefs, though. The Colts gave up more than five yards per carry this year to opposing runners. Of course, Manning is no stranger to preying on the weak himself, but the Chiefs do feature Manning’s old friend at corner, Ty Law.
One advantage for the Colts: the game will be on turf, which we all know magically helps the home team’s skill players outrun opponents, who remain at grass-speed.
I pick the Colts to win a high-scoring game, mostly on the strength of home-field advantage. However, this is the game I’m least certain about. (If Huard was starting, I’d go with Kansas City.) The Colts are due for a letdown, and the Chiefs can run all over them. Man. What do you think?
The passing games of both teams could shred through the other’s defense. This game should feature the No. 1 and No. 2-rated passers in the league. Yet it won’t.
The Broncos won the Super Bowl after the 1997 season. (And don't you forget it.) In the season opener that year, the Broncos faced Kansas City and veteran quarterback Elvis Grbac, who’d been a backup on some powerful San Francisco teams. The Broncos beat the Chiefs. For the divisional rematch Grbac was injured, so the Chiefs started then-unknown quarterback Rich Gannon, who ran, passed, and rallied the Chiefs to a late victory. In fact, Gannon played so well in Grbac’s absence that many K.C. fans felt the team should stick with Gannon once Grbac was healthy. The Chiefs, though, decided to play Grbac in the playoffs, where they had home-field advantage. The Chiefs faced the Broncos for a third time in Kansas City’s first playoff game. Behind Grbac, they lost again. So, to recap: when the Chiefs went with the better-performing but lesser-known backup, they beat the Super Bowl champs. When they started the inferior but “proven” veteran, they went home early.
This year, Chiefs starter Trent Green, who had been a backup on some powerful St. Louis teams, missed time due to injury. His backup, Damon Huard, threw for eleven touchdowns and one interception in Green’s absence. In fact, only Peyton Manning had a better quarterback rating than Huard this year. Many Chiefs fans feel the team should stick with Huard even though Green is healthy, going as far as booing Green at home Sunday. However, the Chiefs will start Green in Saturday’s game. These two scenarios are in no way related.
Stars: Peyton Manning vs. Larry Johnson. Manning had another consistenly terrific year, but nothing is more consistent than his playoff performance. Larry Johnson set an NFL record for carries this season, but somehow didn’t win the rushing title. In other words, both teams have special offensive talents, but neither quite lives up to that best-in-the-league billing. (Everyone’s a Tomlinson convert at running back now, but before the season people acted like it was a toss-up.) Both are facing defenses ill-suited to stop them. Johnson will have an easier time against the Colts D than Manning will against the Chiefs, though. The Colts gave up more than five yards per carry this year to opposing runners. Of course, Manning is no stranger to preying on the weak himself, but the Chiefs do feature Manning’s old friend at corner, Ty Law.
One advantage for the Colts: the game will be on turf, which we all know magically helps the home team’s skill players outrun opponents, who remain at grass-speed.
I pick the Colts to win a high-scoring game, mostly on the strength of home-field advantage. However, this is the game I’m least certain about. (If Huard was starting, I’d go with Kansas City.) The Colts are due for a letdown, and the Chiefs can run all over them. Man. What do you think?
This week
A few things.
• If I had to pick a Super Bowl matchup now, before the playoffs start, I’d go with San Diego over New Orleans. The Saints are a total default pick-it’s more that I just don’t trust Chicago or anyone else in the NFC. (Yes, I put the Bears at No. 1 in the NFC a week or two ago. That was before I realized how badly the fans wanted Brian Griese to take the field. I do think, though, that Lovie Smith is doing a better job this year than he did last year, when he won Coach of the Year.)
• It was smart for Alabama to guarantee Nick Saban all that money, because it might motivate him to stick around in the future. That guy’s about as loyal to his employers as Rick Majerus is to the Food Guide Pyramid. Yes, I more or less supported T.O.’s holdout, but I think it’s different for coaches, since being a coach is a lot more like having a regular job than being an athlete is. And I think most people would leave their job for more money, so it’s not like Saban’s a bad human being. But I wouldn’t really want to hire him, either.
• Speaking of coaches, Bill Cowher is supposed to retire today. It’s funny how much his legacy has changed. Before last year, I’d always thought of the Steelers as underachieving, though that probably had a lot to do with their inability to find a steady quarterback. Now Cowher’s considered one of the absolute best coaches in the game. And considering how well he did with guys like Neil O’Donnell and Kordell Stewart behind center, I almost have to agree at this point. Weird.
• Game-by-game playoff previews for this weekend will be coming later today.
• If I had to pick a Super Bowl matchup now, before the playoffs start, I’d go with San Diego over New Orleans. The Saints are a total default pick-it’s more that I just don’t trust Chicago or anyone else in the NFC. (Yes, I put the Bears at No. 1 in the NFC a week or two ago. That was before I realized how badly the fans wanted Brian Griese to take the field. I do think, though, that Lovie Smith is doing a better job this year than he did last year, when he won Coach of the Year.)
• It was smart for Alabama to guarantee Nick Saban all that money, because it might motivate him to stick around in the future. That guy’s about as loyal to his employers as Rick Majerus is to the Food Guide Pyramid. Yes, I more or less supported T.O.’s holdout, but I think it’s different for coaches, since being a coach is a lot more like having a regular job than being an athlete is. And I think most people would leave their job for more money, so it’s not like Saban’s a bad human being. But I wouldn’t really want to hire him, either.
• Speaking of coaches, Bill Cowher is supposed to retire today. It’s funny how much his legacy has changed. Before last year, I’d always thought of the Steelers as underachieving, though that probably had a lot to do with their inability to find a steady quarterback. Now Cowher’s considered one of the absolute best coaches in the game. And considering how well he did with guys like Neil O’Donnell and Kordell Stewart behind center, I almost have to agree at this point. Weird.
• Game-by-game playoff previews for this weekend will be coming later today.
Monday, January 1, 2007
Darrent Williams killed
From the article on ESPN.com:
Denver Broncos cornerback Darrent Williams was shot and killed in a drive-by shooting early Monday, his limousine sprayed with bullets in downtown Denver.
Another man and woman were also shot and injured.
I had made some cracks at Williams' expense in recent weeks. Lining up across from Champ Bailey is a pretty thankless task. Honestly, though, Williams' four picks and place among our leading tacklers show he was actually a heck of a player. That might seem irrelevant today, but I think being almost world-class at your profession is something worth remembering. My heart goes out to his family and friends and the Broncos organization.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)