It's that time of year again. The master needs to come out of hiding and make his picks.
With the risk of being labeled a homer, I must say that I really do like my Tigers chances against the Yankees. New York this year hasn't really impressed as much as they usually do. Are we really gonna fear a .240 hitter that used to play for us? Verlander is the best pitcher in baseball right now and Fister's ground-ball style of pitching should minimize the garbage home runs that Granderson and Co. get (not to mention he's already on a tear). Tigers in 3
Rangers vs. Rays again? With Cliff Lee gone and the way the Rays have been looking, it's only natural to go with Tampa on this one. Don't see it. Rangers in 5
Wow, can't believe Atlanta blew a 9-game lead for the wild card. The good news for St. Louis is that they found a way to get into the postseason despite the fact that the Brewers couldn't stop losing. The bad news is that they have to face the Phillies and their stacked rotation of Lee, Halladay, and Hamels. Phillies in 4
The D-backs and Brewers seemed to both spring into first place out of nowhere. Other than that, there isn't much to be said about this one. I'll go on a hunch. D-backs in 5
Oh yeah, almost forget
My preseason Super Bowl pick was never posted. I went with the Ravens on this one. Joe Flacco went into the season appearing to have a chip on his shoulder. They just had that feel of a charmed team.
Thursday, September 29, 2011
Sunday, September 4, 2011
Roddick looking dangerous
3 rounds into the U.S. Open, our fellow American managed to capture my attention, and I'm sure that's true for many others.
Today it wasn't the fact the Roddick won in straight sets, it was how he won. Since recovering slightly from his fall from grace, Roddick has been using a more er, defensive style of play.
Not today.
The big American showed power that we haven't seen him showcase in, well quite a long time. And make no mistake, that regained aggression could lead to a very good tournament.
Overall outlook: Even with David Ferrer being his next opponent, look for Roddick to potentially slip in under the radar here. However, my pick is still Rafael Nadal to defend his title. Losing Wimbledon and his #1 ranking- both to Djokovic- should have him hungry. I expect him to take down Novak in the title game, but they should both watch out for Roddick, as well as Andy Murray who has been playing beautiful tennis lately. Nadal over Djokovic in five sets.
I'll make no official prediction on the women's side. It's a bummer to see Sharapova out after such a phenomenal comeback year. With that said, if I had to pick someone at this point, it would be Wozniacki. After all, how long can a player be #1 without winning a Grand Slam?
Today it wasn't the fact the Roddick won in straight sets, it was how he won. Since recovering slightly from his fall from grace, Roddick has been using a more er, defensive style of play.
Not today.
The big American showed power that we haven't seen him showcase in, well quite a long time. And make no mistake, that regained aggression could lead to a very good tournament.
Overall outlook: Even with David Ferrer being his next opponent, look for Roddick to potentially slip in under the radar here. However, my pick is still Rafael Nadal to defend his title. Losing Wimbledon and his #1 ranking- both to Djokovic- should have him hungry. I expect him to take down Novak in the title game, but they should both watch out for Roddick, as well as Andy Murray who has been playing beautiful tennis lately. Nadal over Djokovic in five sets.
I'll make no official prediction on the women's side. It's a bummer to see Sharapova out after such a phenomenal comeback year. With that said, if I had to pick someone at this point, it would be Wozniacki. After all, how long can a player be #1 without winning a Grand Slam?
BCS about more than just conference
As we turn the page and begin yet another season of college football, I suppose it's inevitable that the usual number of Boise State lobbyists will start their shouting once more.
These critics of the system have continually complained about an unfair bias toward certain conferences. But does it?
If that was the case, don't you think that last year, an undefeated Big 10 team (our Spartans!) would have been rewarded with a higher rank than those of the lesser, weaker conferences (Boise and TCU)? Yet for the many weeks that Michigan State remained undefeated, they remained constantly behind them.
...Hey, that's funny.
The reasoning behind such an absurdity is fairly simple: the screaming supporters of lower conferences have been looking at this system in the wrong way entirely. Sure, playing in a bigger conference will always boost your credibility, but there's another factor, perhaps equally big, that they are overlooking. And it's a much sillier one.
Reputation.
Before you roll your eyes, and try to tell me that "they're not THAT stupid", stop and think for a minute. If Ohio State had been without a loss last year for as long as MSU, do you really think that they would have been trailing behind small-conference Boise State and TCU? Of course not. An undefeated Buckeyes team would be a shoo-in for the top 3, at least. But the Spartans? Those bums in Michigan who have spent years being the "little brother" in the inter-state rivalry?
Why is it that so many times we see teams like Ohio St., Florida, Alabama, LSU, and etc. easily work their way back into the top 10 not too long after their first, second, and sometimes even third losses?
And make no mistake, the reputation factor doesn't exactly hurt Boise St. or TCU either. Everyone's always complaining that these guys never get a fair shake. But why is it that nobody ever points out that these two teams receive top 10, often top 5, rankings despite playing a garbage schedule?
On Friday we saw TCU fall to Baylor, an underling of the Big 12. Some are labeling it an "off-game" for the Horned Frogs, while others claim that Baylor can now be considered a dangerous team. But off-games are unacceptable when you have a 12-game season, and is anyone really afraid of Baylor?
Of course, I'll be accused of "hating on small conferences", but shouldn't that game say something about the difference between conferences in college football? Unless Baylor goes on to win the Big 12, I don't see how people can continue to claim that the likes of TCU would be equally successful in record should they transfer to a bigger conference.
At least letting conference affect rankings is legitimate. Reputation is pure junk.
These critics of the system have continually complained about an unfair bias toward certain conferences. But does it?
If that was the case, don't you think that last year, an undefeated Big 10 team (our Spartans!) would have been rewarded with a higher rank than those of the lesser, weaker conferences (Boise and TCU)? Yet for the many weeks that Michigan State remained undefeated, they remained constantly behind them.
...Hey, that's funny.
The reasoning behind such an absurdity is fairly simple: the screaming supporters of lower conferences have been looking at this system in the wrong way entirely. Sure, playing in a bigger conference will always boost your credibility, but there's another factor, perhaps equally big, that they are overlooking. And it's a much sillier one.
Reputation.
Before you roll your eyes, and try to tell me that "they're not THAT stupid", stop and think for a minute. If Ohio State had been without a loss last year for as long as MSU, do you really think that they would have been trailing behind small-conference Boise State and TCU? Of course not. An undefeated Buckeyes team would be a shoo-in for the top 3, at least. But the Spartans? Those bums in Michigan who have spent years being the "little brother" in the inter-state rivalry?
Why is it that so many times we see teams like Ohio St., Florida, Alabama, LSU, and etc. easily work their way back into the top 10 not too long after their first, second, and sometimes even third losses?
And make no mistake, the reputation factor doesn't exactly hurt Boise St. or TCU either. Everyone's always complaining that these guys never get a fair shake. But why is it that nobody ever points out that these two teams receive top 10, often top 5, rankings despite playing a garbage schedule?
On Friday we saw TCU fall to Baylor, an underling of the Big 12. Some are labeling it an "off-game" for the Horned Frogs, while others claim that Baylor can now be considered a dangerous team. But off-games are unacceptable when you have a 12-game season, and is anyone really afraid of Baylor?
Of course, I'll be accused of "hating on small conferences", but shouldn't that game say something about the difference between conferences in college football? Unless Baylor goes on to win the Big 12, I don't see how people can continue to claim that the likes of TCU would be equally successful in record should they transfer to a bigger conference.
At least letting conference affect rankings is legitimate. Reputation is pure junk.
Wednesday, July 27, 2011
Time for Mayhew to show a little Dombrowski
Apparently, even ending the season on a 4-game winning streak didn't make a difference. That is, "Lions suck" jokes are evidently still fair game. Following the NFL lockout TBS's Conan O'Brien jeered that Lions fans responded to the news with "Yeah, we were afraid this might happen."
Of course, progress has been gradually made. With the draft pick of Nick Fairley, the Lions now have a strength in their defensive line; made up of Fairley, Kyle Vanden Bosch, Cliff Avril, and, of course, Ndamukong Suh.
And, wait a minute, the Lions potentially have another (gasp) strength in their passing attack, which was further affirmed by the drafting of a strong wide receiver. Not to mention that their special teams have added a superstar kick and punt returner in Stefan Logan, and still have one of the most reliable kickers in the NFL in Jason Hansen.
ESPN's Mark Schlereth claimed that with a healthy Matthew Stafford, the Lions had the potential to be the "best team in the NFL". Nope, no typos there. The best. Perhaps (more like probably) that is a bit of a stretch of the imagination, but then again, the Lions do have most pieces in place.
And that's when the smart aleck lets out a fake cough that sounds an awful lot like, "Cornerback!"
Actually, I think a lot of people are unaware that, though mediocre, the Lions secondary is not quite as bad as it seems. Louis Delmas has been by all means a solid safety for them, and Cici Brown has done a nice job as well. Corner Alphonso Smith even emerged as a breakout player last year, nabbing five interceptions in a span of six games, before being lost to injury.
Of course, the situation could still REALLY use some improvement, and that brings me to my main point.
Irregardless of complications, risk, and being labeled as reckless or desperate, Martin Mayhew needs to throw everything and the kitchen sink at signing free agent Nnamdi Asomugha.
Don't preach to me about the virtues of saving cap room, avoiding overspending, and putting too many eggs in one basket. The Lions have a chance to elevate their status from potential playoff contenders and longshot Super Bowl contenders to LIKELY playoff contenders and potential Super Bowl contenders.
Mayhew needs to take a leaf out of Detroit Tigers general manager Dave Dombrowski's book and start playing aggressive. For years, Dombrowski has gone after players in a fearless, almost reckless fashion. And for years it has mostly paid off.
Sure, there was the failed Renteria trade, and the bonehead idea to give out so much cash to pitchers Nate Robertson, Jeremy Bonderman, and Dontrelle Willis. But Dombrowski has more than compensated for that, by locking up Miguel Cabrera for what proved to be mostly useless prospects. By signing Ivan Rodriguez and Carlos Guillen to begin a turnaround. By shipping away that soon-to-be convict Urbina for Placido Polanco. By trading away Curtis Granderson for four players that have now all become key pieces on our team. By plucking Johnny Damon, and this year Victor Martinez from free agency. And by trading for Johnny Peralta.
Not bad, huh? Professional sports is a crazy world. You rarely win by constantly sitting around, only making the "safe" moves. The reality is that the right dose of recklessness is usually what it takes to turn your franchise into a winner.
By adding Asomugha, the Lions would manage to add yet another star on defense, but more importantly, the secondary could possibly become another strength. And if it doesn't, well at least it won't be a liability anymore. Add that to the monster line, strong special teams, and above-average offense and we have ourselves true contenders. And just think, maybe Conan won't even make fun of us anymore.
Isn't that worth the possibility of committing the oh-so-horrible "mortal sin" of overspending?
Of course, progress has been gradually made. With the draft pick of Nick Fairley, the Lions now have a strength in their defensive line; made up of Fairley, Kyle Vanden Bosch, Cliff Avril, and, of course, Ndamukong Suh.
And, wait a minute, the Lions potentially have another (gasp) strength in their passing attack, which was further affirmed by the drafting of a strong wide receiver. Not to mention that their special teams have added a superstar kick and punt returner in Stefan Logan, and still have one of the most reliable kickers in the NFL in Jason Hansen.
ESPN's Mark Schlereth claimed that with a healthy Matthew Stafford, the Lions had the potential to be the "best team in the NFL". Nope, no typos there. The best. Perhaps (more like probably) that is a bit of a stretch of the imagination, but then again, the Lions do have most pieces in place.
And that's when the smart aleck lets out a fake cough that sounds an awful lot like, "Cornerback!"
Actually, I think a lot of people are unaware that, though mediocre, the Lions secondary is not quite as bad as it seems. Louis Delmas has been by all means a solid safety for them, and Cici Brown has done a nice job as well. Corner Alphonso Smith even emerged as a breakout player last year, nabbing five interceptions in a span of six games, before being lost to injury.
Of course, the situation could still REALLY use some improvement, and that brings me to my main point.
Irregardless of complications, risk, and being labeled as reckless or desperate, Martin Mayhew needs to throw everything and the kitchen sink at signing free agent Nnamdi Asomugha.
Don't preach to me about the virtues of saving cap room, avoiding overspending, and putting too many eggs in one basket. The Lions have a chance to elevate their status from potential playoff contenders and longshot Super Bowl contenders to LIKELY playoff contenders and potential Super Bowl contenders.
Mayhew needs to take a leaf out of Detroit Tigers general manager Dave Dombrowski's book and start playing aggressive. For years, Dombrowski has gone after players in a fearless, almost reckless fashion. And for years it has mostly paid off.
Sure, there was the failed Renteria trade, and the bonehead idea to give out so much cash to pitchers Nate Robertson, Jeremy Bonderman, and Dontrelle Willis. But Dombrowski has more than compensated for that, by locking up Miguel Cabrera for what proved to be mostly useless prospects. By signing Ivan Rodriguez and Carlos Guillen to begin a turnaround. By shipping away that soon-to-be convict Urbina for Placido Polanco. By trading away Curtis Granderson for four players that have now all become key pieces on our team. By plucking Johnny Damon, and this year Victor Martinez from free agency. And by trading for Johnny Peralta.
Not bad, huh? Professional sports is a crazy world. You rarely win by constantly sitting around, only making the "safe" moves. The reality is that the right dose of recklessness is usually what it takes to turn your franchise into a winner.
By adding Asomugha, the Lions would manage to add yet another star on defense, but more importantly, the secondary could possibly become another strength. And if it doesn't, well at least it won't be a liability anymore. Add that to the monster line, strong special teams, and above-average offense and we have ourselves true contenders. And just think, maybe Conan won't even make fun of us anymore.
Isn't that worth the possibility of committing the oh-so-horrible "mortal sin" of overspending?
Tuesday, May 17, 2011
Looks to be a special year for Tigers ace
Recently, I published an article on positive things in Detroit sports. On that very list, Detroit Tigers pitcher Justin Verlander was highlighted, oh, I don't know, about six times in a 17-item list.
Couldn't help it.
The way the season has gone so far, it's hard not to love Verlander. For one thing, the Tigers ace has always been a fan favorite. From the moment he made his debut in 2006 and hurled a 100 mph (102 at its best) fastball, Verlander was the symbol of awe for this team.
Now, from a statistical and psychological standpoint, the franchise player for the Tigers at the time was probably either Pudge Rodriguez or Magglio Ordonez. Now one can make the case that it is Miguel Cabrera. After all, he's the slugger, the top bat, the guy who gets it done. And it is certainly fair to argue that Cabrera is Detroit's most valuable player right now.
But Verlander is the exclamation point.
Verlander is capable of creating more hype than Cabrera. I think it would also be correct to say that Cabrera has, at this point, lost some approval. Granted, fans are starting to grow accustomed to player misbehavior. Getting pulled over while sipping whiskey, after already being drunk before and beating one's wife isn't something everyone just magically forgets. Respect was certainly lost.
How's that for a stat?
Ah, the quality start. In an age of statistical jargon (what's OPS again?), this stat sounds surprisingly, well, simple.
A quality start entails that a starter pitch for six innings or more and allow three runs or less. Pretty good, right? Well, if you are Verlander, that's your everyday stuff this year.
I'm not kidding. And neither is the stat. In Verlander's 9 starts this year, he has 9 quality starts. That was not a typo. 9 for 9. Perfect.
And it doesn't stop there. Verlander's also averaging less than 4 1/2 hits per game. In fact, one's odds of striking out against Verlander are much better than getting a hit. In only two games did he surrender more hits than strikeouts, and he's averaging nearly a strikeout an inning (62 in 65).
Really, it's the quality starts that get you. Consistency in baseball isn't very common. And consistency for pitchers in baseball is even less common. But for Verlander, it's no problem. Really, he set the tone on Opening Day. On a cold day, facing a tough Yankee lineup, and, as he admitted later, being fairly unprepared, disaster struck and Verlander allowed a unthinkable THREE RUNS. As columnist Michael Rosenberg would reason, if that's as bad as it gets for Verlander this year, the rest of the American League is in serious trouble.
Now his theory is starting to appear correct.
Oh, that too
And, oh yeah, Justin also threw the second no-hitter of his career this year.
The no-no just goes to show that, as I said earlier, Verlander is this team's exclamation point. Home runs are nice. Big home runs are nicer. But even big home runs are rarely remembered as long as a no-hitter. That may seem unfair to the hitters, but since when is being a pitcher easy? Hit a walk-off and the crowd loves you for maybe the rest of the week. Throw a no-hitter and the crowd is with you the whole game, goes berserk when you finish, and keeps talking about it long after it happens.
With Cabrera, good hitting is a nice thing. But overall, it's hard to get behind the guy. Too many harsh thoughts. Fans support him, but most support him while feeling somewhat reluctant to do so. Cabrera gave us something to worry about, but Verlander gave us something to get behind, something to feel good about. He gave us a good conflict; he gave us good things to wonder about.
Like, how many more no-nos does this kid have in him?
Silly me, though, I almost forgot the disclaimer. It is after all, still early in the season, so things are unclear a lot can change, blah, blah, blah.
Glad that's out of the way.
Now I can get back to enjoying the season that #35 is having.
Couldn't help it.
The way the season has gone so far, it's hard not to love Verlander. For one thing, the Tigers ace has always been a fan favorite. From the moment he made his debut in 2006 and hurled a 100 mph (102 at its best) fastball, Verlander was the symbol of awe for this team.
Now, from a statistical and psychological standpoint, the franchise player for the Tigers at the time was probably either Pudge Rodriguez or Magglio Ordonez. Now one can make the case that it is Miguel Cabrera. After all, he's the slugger, the top bat, the guy who gets it done. And it is certainly fair to argue that Cabrera is Detroit's most valuable player right now.
But Verlander is the exclamation point.
Verlander is capable of creating more hype than Cabrera. I think it would also be correct to say that Cabrera has, at this point, lost some approval. Granted, fans are starting to grow accustomed to player misbehavior. Getting pulled over while sipping whiskey, after already being drunk before and beating one's wife isn't something everyone just magically forgets. Respect was certainly lost.
How's that for a stat?
Ah, the quality start. In an age of statistical jargon (what's OPS again?), this stat sounds surprisingly, well, simple.
A quality start entails that a starter pitch for six innings or more and allow three runs or less. Pretty good, right? Well, if you are Verlander, that's your everyday stuff this year.
I'm not kidding. And neither is the stat. In Verlander's 9 starts this year, he has 9 quality starts. That was not a typo. 9 for 9. Perfect.
And it doesn't stop there. Verlander's also averaging less than 4 1/2 hits per game. In fact, one's odds of striking out against Verlander are much better than getting a hit. In only two games did he surrender more hits than strikeouts, and he's averaging nearly a strikeout an inning (62 in 65).
Really, it's the quality starts that get you. Consistency in baseball isn't very common. And consistency for pitchers in baseball is even less common. But for Verlander, it's no problem. Really, he set the tone on Opening Day. On a cold day, facing a tough Yankee lineup, and, as he admitted later, being fairly unprepared, disaster struck and Verlander allowed a unthinkable THREE RUNS. As columnist Michael Rosenberg would reason, if that's as bad as it gets for Verlander this year, the rest of the American League is in serious trouble.
Now his theory is starting to appear correct.
Oh, that too
And, oh yeah, Justin also threw the second no-hitter of his career this year.
The no-no just goes to show that, as I said earlier, Verlander is this team's exclamation point. Home runs are nice. Big home runs are nicer. But even big home runs are rarely remembered as long as a no-hitter. That may seem unfair to the hitters, but since when is being a pitcher easy? Hit a walk-off and the crowd loves you for maybe the rest of the week. Throw a no-hitter and the crowd is with you the whole game, goes berserk when you finish, and keeps talking about it long after it happens.
With Cabrera, good hitting is a nice thing. But overall, it's hard to get behind the guy. Too many harsh thoughts. Fans support him, but most support him while feeling somewhat reluctant to do so. Cabrera gave us something to worry about, but Verlander gave us something to get behind, something to feel good about. He gave us a good conflict; he gave us good things to wonder about.
Like, how many more no-nos does this kid have in him?
Silly me, though, I almost forgot the disclaimer. It is after all, still early in the season, so things are unclear a lot can change, blah, blah, blah.
Glad that's out of the way.
Now I can get back to enjoying the season that #35 is having.
Friday, May 13, 2011
Look out Sports! There's a New Sherrif in Town!
Well, they voted and... wow. All of a sudden I am in charge of pro sports. And my first action as universal commissioner is a reform in rules. Here goes:
- Playoff beards must be REAL beards (sorry, Sidney Crosby)
- If after 6 innings, a pitcher has a perfect game, or even a no-hitter intact, replay is fair game for ALL plays.
- If you knock down Joe Thornton, you get a cherry pie and a pat on the back.
- NFL players who whine about safety rules will be blindfolded and placed in a junkyard with at least ten angry dogs with no exit, then asked for their opinion on safety.
- If a manger leaves the pitcher in after he lets up 6 runs or more, the fans get to storm the field and take him out themselves.
- Good-bye Lebron James.
- When ESPN talks about baseball they MUST spend at least half of the time talking about something other than the Yankees.
- If a soccer player takes a fall, you get to hang him from the net by his shorts.
- Every athlete must take a large dose of truth serum, then appear before the press and admit to whether or not they used steroids.
- Slam dunks cannot be part of ESPN's top 10.
- And there goes Michael Vick
- If a hockey ref gives a team three power plays in a row, all on blown, easy calls, he has to fight with one of the players he put in the box for 20 seconds.
- All closers have to be as cool as Jose Valverde. Or at least almost as cool.
- If an analyst calls a certain athlete the "best player in the world" and that athlete hasn't won MVP or a championship within the past four years, it's a $500 fine.
- If a player takes a cheap shot while the ref's back is turned, he must tap the ref on the shoulder, admit what he did, and finish every sentence with, "And I'm a stinking coward" for the rest of the week.
- No sport can allow more than three timeouts (no more marathon college basketball games)
- If Rex Ryan talks smack before a game, then fails to back it up, he must spend five hours explaining to a press conference why his team is so much worse than the other team and how he is a terrible coach.
- SportsCenter must spend at least 10 minutes a day talking about the NHL during hockey season, 20 during the playoffs.
- If you get sucker punched by another player, you get to toss him in the bleachers, allowing the fans to discipline him.
- BOTH guys on PTI have to be at the studio for the same show at least three times a week.
- In baseball: ONE cup adjustment/glove tightening/digging of cleats per inning.
- Referees can no longer try to eliminate the Red Wings from the playoffs.
- The Norris trophy is now the Lidstrom trophy.
- 9 goals in a game really is an Ovechtrick
- NBA and NFL players must spend more time playing and practicing than shooting commercials.
- If a player or players hit/spray the goalie, the goalie can stuff him in an equipment back, zip it shut (with air holes), and drive around for four hours with the bag in the back of his pickup truck.
Not all is lost
So the Wings are out. But, hey, there's still plenty to be happy about.
Like:
1. The Chicago Blackhawks are out.
2. The Pittsburgh Penguins are out.
3. The Yzerman-led Lightning are still in.
4. The Sharks were forced into by far the shortest amount of rest time heading into the upcoming round.
5. Someone other than Niklas Kronwall was called "gutless" (Patrick Marleau)
6. We got to see Kris Draper's beard again.
7. Justin Verlander is incredible.
8. Justin Verlander's fastball is incredible.
9. Justin Verlander's other pitches are incredible.
10. Justin Verlander's beard is incredible.
11. Sidney Crosby is NOT an MVP finalist.
12. Neither are any Penguins, Blackhawks, or Sharks.
13. Pavel Datsyuk was actually talked about on Versus.
14. The Lions (hopefully) drafted very well.
15. Nicklas Lidstrom is a Norris Trophy finalist.
16. Red Wings players other than Datsyuk were actually talked about on Versus.
17. Justin Verlander's cleats are incredi... never mind.
Like:
1. The Chicago Blackhawks are out.
2. The Pittsburgh Penguins are out.
3. The Yzerman-led Lightning are still in.
4. The Sharks were forced into by far the shortest amount of rest time heading into the upcoming round.
5. Someone other than Niklas Kronwall was called "gutless" (Patrick Marleau)
6. We got to see Kris Draper's beard again.
7. Justin Verlander is incredible.
8. Justin Verlander's fastball is incredible.
9. Justin Verlander's other pitches are incredible.
10. Justin Verlander's beard is incredible.
11. Sidney Crosby is NOT an MVP finalist.
12. Neither are any Penguins, Blackhawks, or Sharks.
13. Pavel Datsyuk was actually talked about on Versus.
14. The Lions (hopefully) drafted very well.
15. Nicklas Lidstrom is a Norris Trophy finalist.
16. Red Wings players other than Datsyuk were actually talked about on Versus.
17. Justin Verlander's cleats are incredi... never mind.
And the Winner is.... (not who you thought)
Soooo, after all that riffraff, the Wings prolonging the series and losing anyway, who really won?
Was it the Wings, because they still made a statement and made it hard for the Sharks? Nope.
Was it the Sharks, since they pulled it off despite almost giving up the comeback? Nope.
The correct answer is the Boston Bruins. Yep, that's right, the Boston Bruins. Thanks to the extension of the series, their series against the Lightning will now be starting much later than was originally expected. And that means extra rest time for ailing defenseman Patrice Berrgeron.
Funny how sports works sometimes.
Was it the Wings, because they still made a statement and made it hard for the Sharks? Nope.
Was it the Sharks, since they pulled it off despite almost giving up the comeback? Nope.
The correct answer is the Boston Bruins. Yep, that's right, the Boston Bruins. Thanks to the extension of the series, their series against the Lightning will now be starting much later than was originally expected. And that means extra rest time for ailing defenseman Patrice Berrgeron.
Funny how sports works sometimes.
Big Bert was the Difference
Emotion.
Good or bad, that's what Todd Bertuzzi has always been about. Love him, hate him, you can't ignore the guy's presence. Whether he's impressing you with a fantastic goal or disgusting you with a gutless play, he can't be overlooked. Such was the case in the Detroit-San Jose series.
Bertuzzi's level of play has always been a big factor in games. The only thing Bertuzzi does more than work harder than anybody is slack off more than anybody.
So, in Game 4, with the Wings trailing 3-0 in the series and looking as if they were about to go quietly, Devin Setoguchi did the dumbest thing he could possibly do: ticked off Big Bert. And as they would later say during the intermission, you don't wanna make Todd Bertuzzi mad. After a hit, a broken up scrum, and an exchange while on benches, Bertuzzi responded with a spin-o-rama goal that, had the Red Wings pulled off a game 7 victory, would have likely been remembered as the turning point in the series.
Granted, it's not all that easy to see exactly where Bertuzzi helped from there. But we do know some things. Bertuzzi certainly showed a physical presence in the series from that point forward. His big hits changed a lot. In fact, the Red Wings suddenly appeared to shockingly be the physically dominant team. Clearly, Bertuzzi was fired up. And there's a funny thing about that kind of attitude.
It spreads really quickly.
All of a sudden, bang! It went from a Sharks series to a Red Wings series in the blink of an eye. The Red Wing Invincibility seemed to have returned. The Wings rallied back for three in a row, showing themselves to clearly be the better team. Heading into game 7, it looked like it was Detroit who had a stranglehold on the series.
And then came game 7. And in the first period, Big Bert was taken out of the game due to injury. All of sudden, bang! The Sharks came roaring back. Poor officiating and 1st period miscues by the Red Wings had their effect on the outcome. But consider: if Bertuzzi were in, he would've minimized the cheap shots taken by the Sharks in the first place. And it's likely that his departure was a big reason that the miscues occurred.
I'm not sure if any man in the NHL has ever attracted a larger combined amount of hate, liking, frustration (from both supporters and opponents), and awe than #44 of the Red Wings. In this series, Bert was the Red Wing hero, and his departure left them too crushed to carry on. Of course, with the series over, it's obvious that we are now going to hear more about whether "this is it" for the older Red Wing players. Bertuzzi is, in fact among that group in discussion.
Bertuzzi gone? Really? Well, I'm sure the only group of NHL fans larger than those who love him and want to see him continue are those who despise him and hope that he leaves.
Good or bad, that's what Todd Bertuzzi has always been about. Love him, hate him, you can't ignore the guy's presence. Whether he's impressing you with a fantastic goal or disgusting you with a gutless play, he can't be overlooked. Such was the case in the Detroit-San Jose series.
Bertuzzi's level of play has always been a big factor in games. The only thing Bertuzzi does more than work harder than anybody is slack off more than anybody.
So, in Game 4, with the Wings trailing 3-0 in the series and looking as if they were about to go quietly, Devin Setoguchi did the dumbest thing he could possibly do: ticked off Big Bert. And as they would later say during the intermission, you don't wanna make Todd Bertuzzi mad. After a hit, a broken up scrum, and an exchange while on benches, Bertuzzi responded with a spin-o-rama goal that, had the Red Wings pulled off a game 7 victory, would have likely been remembered as the turning point in the series.
Granted, it's not all that easy to see exactly where Bertuzzi helped from there. But we do know some things. Bertuzzi certainly showed a physical presence in the series from that point forward. His big hits changed a lot. In fact, the Red Wings suddenly appeared to shockingly be the physically dominant team. Clearly, Bertuzzi was fired up. And there's a funny thing about that kind of attitude.
It spreads really quickly.
All of a sudden, bang! It went from a Sharks series to a Red Wings series in the blink of an eye. The Red Wing Invincibility seemed to have returned. The Wings rallied back for three in a row, showing themselves to clearly be the better team. Heading into game 7, it looked like it was Detroit who had a stranglehold on the series.
And then came game 7. And in the first period, Big Bert was taken out of the game due to injury. All of sudden, bang! The Sharks came roaring back. Poor officiating and 1st period miscues by the Red Wings had their effect on the outcome. But consider: if Bertuzzi were in, he would've minimized the cheap shots taken by the Sharks in the first place. And it's likely that his departure was a big reason that the miscues occurred.
I'm not sure if any man in the NHL has ever attracted a larger combined amount of hate, liking, frustration (from both supporters and opponents), and awe than #44 of the Red Wings. In this series, Bert was the Red Wing hero, and his departure left them too crushed to carry on. Of course, with the series over, it's obvious that we are now going to hear more about whether "this is it" for the older Red Wing players. Bertuzzi is, in fact among that group in discussion.
Bertuzzi gone? Really? Well, I'm sure the only group of NHL fans larger than those who love him and want to see him continue are those who despise him and hope that he leaves.
Back In
As usual, my busy schedule has been getting in the way of my blogging. However, a recently pulled back has opened a lot of time up. Hope to blog a lot more as a result.
Sunday, February 6, 2011
Super Bowl Forecast
Well it's time for that final pick.
Though the Steelers possess an advantage in Super Bowl experience and superior defense, I'll stick by my original pick at the beginning of the season. I trust Aaron Rodgers and the Packers to pull this off.
Though the Steelers possess an advantage in Super Bowl experience and superior defense, I'll stick by my original pick at the beginning of the season. I trust Aaron Rodgers and the Packers to pull this off.
Last week: 2-0
Playoffs Overall: 5-5
Tuesday, February 1, 2011
Super Bowl offers great matchup (again)
Let's be honest here. 2010 was a disappointing Super Bowl.
Yes, it did have the nice story of a city once hit by a devastating hurricane winning it all. But it just wasn't that interesting. The game was short and not all that special, other than its circumstances.
It certainly didn't lead up to those which came before it.
Let's examine, if we will, why it did not work as well.
A key element to a successful Super Bowl is contrast between teams. In 2007 it was the offensive Colts against the defense-first Bears. In 2008 it was the unstoppable New England Patriots against the underdog New York Giants. And in 2009, perhaps the best Super Bowl of all, it was the powerhouse Pittsburgh Steelers and their all-powerful defense against the mega-surprise Arizona Cardinals and their formidable passing attack. All 3, with the possible exception of the first, were classics.
But last year, the Saints faced the Colts, basically playing their reflection. Two highly likeable teams whose main attractions were their big quarterbacks.
Now it's the humble, quiet, Aaron Rodgers against the stained reputation of Ben Roethlisberger. It doesn't matter that both teams have great, comparable talent on both sides of the ball, the contrast in quarterbacks does enough. The two are different not only in their off-the-field personas, but also in style. Rodgers is the guy who wins by putting up pinball numbers. Big Ben is less the type to show up loud in statistics, and more the type to make intangible plays like keeping plays and drives alive and delivering under the clutch.
Now, if we see a blowout, then all this writing will be dismissed and confirmed as a waste of time. But I don't expect that to happen. The teams are evenly matched on both sides of the ball, and let's remember, we haven't really seen a Super Bowl blowout since 2003, when the Tampa Bay Buccaneers laid a thrashing on the Oakland Raiders.
Their contrast in quarterbacks and tightness in abilities make these two teams a great match for the biggest game of the year.
And maybe we'll see some better commercials this year too.
Yes, it did have the nice story of a city once hit by a devastating hurricane winning it all. But it just wasn't that interesting. The game was short and not all that special, other than its circumstances.
It certainly didn't lead up to those which came before it.
Let's examine, if we will, why it did not work as well.
A key element to a successful Super Bowl is contrast between teams. In 2007 it was the offensive Colts against the defense-first Bears. In 2008 it was the unstoppable New England Patriots against the underdog New York Giants. And in 2009, perhaps the best Super Bowl of all, it was the powerhouse Pittsburgh Steelers and their all-powerful defense against the mega-surprise Arizona Cardinals and their formidable passing attack. All 3, with the possible exception of the first, were classics.
But last year, the Saints faced the Colts, basically playing their reflection. Two highly likeable teams whose main attractions were their big quarterbacks.
Now it's the humble, quiet, Aaron Rodgers against the stained reputation of Ben Roethlisberger. It doesn't matter that both teams have great, comparable talent on both sides of the ball, the contrast in quarterbacks does enough. The two are different not only in their off-the-field personas, but also in style. Rodgers is the guy who wins by putting up pinball numbers. Big Ben is less the type to show up loud in statistics, and more the type to make intangible plays like keeping plays and drives alive and delivering under the clutch.
Now, if we see a blowout, then all this writing will be dismissed and confirmed as a waste of time. But I don't expect that to happen. The teams are evenly matched on both sides of the ball, and let's remember, we haven't really seen a Super Bowl blowout since 2003, when the Tampa Bay Buccaneers laid a thrashing on the Oakland Raiders.
Their contrast in quarterbacks and tightness in abilities make these two teams a great match for the biggest game of the year.
And maybe we'll see some better commercials this year too.
Super Bowl Forecast Coming Up Soon!
Monday, January 17, 2011
TD Celebrations: Having fun or showing off?
Chad Ochocinco, I hope you're listening.
Two incidents involving touchdown celebrations occurred this weekend. The first involved Packers QB Aaron Rodgers and Falcons defensive lineman John Abraham. The second involved a CBS broadcaster and a lot of New York Jets, particularly Shonn Greene and Rex Ryan.
So, now we examine the difference between having a good time and rubbing it in.
In the case of Aaron Rodgers, Abraham decided that, being down by two touchdowns against one of the league's most talented quarterbacks, a sack entitled him to make fun of Rodgers's championship belt celebration. Rodgers responded by driving down for an eventual rushing touchdown (which he himself ran) and exaggerating the celebration.
As far as the original cele goes, there's really no problem. The guy likes it when his team scores, so he does a cool little move as part of the excitement. It's not like he demands attention or gets in anybody's face.
How do I know? The simplicity of Rodgers's move is the big clue here. If he wanted attention he'd come up with something that got his whole body involved and probably lasted at least a little longer. But this is no different than a fist pump, except that it's much more original.
In the case of the two staging a celebration battle over it, I don't see a problem either. Abraham was foolish to do what he did given the circumstances, there's no doubt about that. But he did it because he was caught up in the moment. When you're as frustrated as the Falcons were, you look for small things to get adrenaline pumping. That's exactly why he did what he did. And as for Rodgers's response, good for him. He was basically showing Abraham what happens when you mock an opponent stronger than you.
But the celebration involving Shonn Greene and many Jets teammates was completely uncalled for.
I didn't have a problem with his Jets teammates running into the end zone. I did have a problem with Rex Ryan joining them. Sorry, but you're the head coach, dude. Celebrate on the sidelines all you want. But running onto the field as a coach is a no-no. Period. You can say Ryan was caught up in the moment. Uh, so? How many coaches do you think have been in the same situation? How many ran onto the field? That's what I thought. Coaches are held to a higher standard than players. They are expected to behave in a way that provides a good example. But Ryan proved once again that he never grew up. Coaches are supposed to be mature, Rex, and you've been anything but.
And Greene's celebration was fine. Until it became a "nap time" celebration. Such a celebration clearly was made so he could get a camera to look at him. Not to mention the disrespect of it. The game wasn't over yet, but Greene was basically saying that given the circumstances, he might as well sleep for the rest of it. Unacceptable. Get excited all you want. Have your players run in, but no coaches and no "nap time". It goes too far.
People seem to be on opposite ends of the coin when it comes to celebrations, but the truth is that some are OK because they are the result of pure excitement and emotion or the desire to have fun, but there comes a point where a player must remember that the game must be treated with respect.
Act like you've been there before.
Two incidents involving touchdown celebrations occurred this weekend. The first involved Packers QB Aaron Rodgers and Falcons defensive lineman John Abraham. The second involved a CBS broadcaster and a lot of New York Jets, particularly Shonn Greene and Rex Ryan.
So, now we examine the difference between having a good time and rubbing it in.
In the case of Aaron Rodgers, Abraham decided that, being down by two touchdowns against one of the league's most talented quarterbacks, a sack entitled him to make fun of Rodgers's championship belt celebration. Rodgers responded by driving down for an eventual rushing touchdown (which he himself ran) and exaggerating the celebration.
As far as the original cele goes, there's really no problem. The guy likes it when his team scores, so he does a cool little move as part of the excitement. It's not like he demands attention or gets in anybody's face.
How do I know? The simplicity of Rodgers's move is the big clue here. If he wanted attention he'd come up with something that got his whole body involved and probably lasted at least a little longer. But this is no different than a fist pump, except that it's much more original.
In the case of the two staging a celebration battle over it, I don't see a problem either. Abraham was foolish to do what he did given the circumstances, there's no doubt about that. But he did it because he was caught up in the moment. When you're as frustrated as the Falcons were, you look for small things to get adrenaline pumping. That's exactly why he did what he did. And as for Rodgers's response, good for him. He was basically showing Abraham what happens when you mock an opponent stronger than you.
But the celebration involving Shonn Greene and many Jets teammates was completely uncalled for.
I didn't have a problem with his Jets teammates running into the end zone. I did have a problem with Rex Ryan joining them. Sorry, but you're the head coach, dude. Celebrate on the sidelines all you want. But running onto the field as a coach is a no-no. Period. You can say Ryan was caught up in the moment. Uh, so? How many coaches do you think have been in the same situation? How many ran onto the field? That's what I thought. Coaches are held to a higher standard than players. They are expected to behave in a way that provides a good example. But Ryan proved once again that he never grew up. Coaches are supposed to be mature, Rex, and you've been anything but.
And Greene's celebration was fine. Until it became a "nap time" celebration. Such a celebration clearly was made so he could get a camera to look at him. Not to mention the disrespect of it. The game wasn't over yet, but Greene was basically saying that given the circumstances, he might as well sleep for the rest of it. Unacceptable. Get excited all you want. Have your players run in, but no coaches and no "nap time". It goes too far.
People seem to be on opposite ends of the coin when it comes to celebrations, but the truth is that some are OK because they are the result of pure excitement and emotion or the desire to have fun, but there comes a point where a player must remember that the game must be treated with respect.
Act like you've been there before.
Round 3 picks
Forgot to post last week's picks. I split them. Got both of Saturday's right and both of Sunday's wrong.
Forget that though, time for Round 3.
AFC Championship
I was disappointed and infuriated to see the Jets move on yet again. Now they'll face a tough Steelers team that's been lights-out in the playoffs.
Bottom line: I'm not sure I consider Ben Roethlisberger a future Hall of Famer, but when playoff time comes around, he's one of the best in the business. Two Super Bowl rings at his age is pretty good. Sanchez won't be able to handle the defense that the Steelers bring. He just isn't good enough. Troy and Co. will shut down the New York offense, while Big Ben leads the Pittsburgh offense to a couple of touchdowns, which is all that they'll need.
Steelers 17, Jets 6
NFC Championship
Will somebody pour a bucket of water on Aaron Rodgers? The man has been unbelievably good. Good enough for me to stick by the team I had originally picked to win the Super Bowl. The Pack is dynamic on both sides of the ball, and now they've beaten Philly and CRUSHED a universally-considered powerful Atlanta Falcons team.
Don't get me wrong, the Bears are good too. If any defense can handle Rodgers and Co., it's them. But I don't see them doing it.
Packers 24, Bears 10
Forget that though, time for Round 3.
AFC Championship
I was disappointed and infuriated to see the Jets move on yet again. Now they'll face a tough Steelers team that's been lights-out in the playoffs.
Bottom line: I'm not sure I consider Ben Roethlisberger a future Hall of Famer, but when playoff time comes around, he's one of the best in the business. Two Super Bowl rings at his age is pretty good. Sanchez won't be able to handle the defense that the Steelers bring. He just isn't good enough. Troy and Co. will shut down the New York offense, while Big Ben leads the Pittsburgh offense to a couple of touchdowns, which is all that they'll need.
Steelers 17, Jets 6
NFC Championship
Will somebody pour a bucket of water on Aaron Rodgers? The man has been unbelievably good. Good enough for me to stick by the team I had originally picked to win the Super Bowl. The Pack is dynamic on both sides of the ball, and now they've beaten Philly and CRUSHED a universally-considered powerful Atlanta Falcons team.
Don't get me wrong, the Bears are good too. If any defense can handle Rodgers and Co., it's them. But I don't see them doing it.
Packers 24, Bears 10
Last week: 2-2
Playoffs Overall: 3-5
Saturday, January 8, 2011
NFL Playoffs: Round 1 picks
The playoffs are back, and it's time to start picking again.
Today we have the Seahawks, winners of the "Shortcut Bowl" going up against the defending champion New Orleans Saints. Not exactly hard to match up. One team is 7-9 and lucky to be here, the other 10-6 and arguably one of the best in the league. And as fun as it is to go underdog, I'm taking the Saints in this one.
At night, Peyton Manning leads a wounded offense against I-can't-keep-my-trap-shut-even-when-I-lose Rex Ryan and his Jets. As bad as the Colts have been this year, they closed on a 4-game winning streak, and they are still the Colts. The Jets receive what they deserve for the sidelines incident and get pounded by the Colts in a blowout.
Tomorrow sees the third-seeded Philadelphia Eagles go up against the Aaron Rodgers-led Packers. The Green Bay defense doesn't screw around, so I see Vick getting shut down in this one. On the other side of the ball, the thing that the Eagles do well is what Aaron Rodgers does well against: Blitz. The Packers match up good in this one an get the win.
And last but not least it's Ravens vs Chiefs. As good as Baltimore is, they remain a bad turnover team, and you don't win playoff games when you don't take care of the football. I'm going Chiefs in what should be perhaps the closest of all four games.
Today we have the Seahawks, winners of the "Shortcut Bowl" going up against the defending champion New Orleans Saints. Not exactly hard to match up. One team is 7-9 and lucky to be here, the other 10-6 and arguably one of the best in the league. And as fun as it is to go underdog, I'm taking the Saints in this one.
At night, Peyton Manning leads a wounded offense against I-can't-keep-my-trap-shut-even-when-I-lose Rex Ryan and his Jets. As bad as the Colts have been this year, they closed on a 4-game winning streak, and they are still the Colts. The Jets receive what they deserve for the sidelines incident and get pounded by the Colts in a blowout.
Tomorrow sees the third-seeded Philadelphia Eagles go up against the Aaron Rodgers-led Packers. The Green Bay defense doesn't screw around, so I see Vick getting shut down in this one. On the other side of the ball, the thing that the Eagles do well is what Aaron Rodgers does well against: Blitz. The Packers match up good in this one an get the win.
And last but not least it's Ravens vs Chiefs. As good as Baltimore is, they remain a bad turnover team, and you don't win playoff games when you don't take care of the football. I'm going Chiefs in what should be perhaps the closest of all four games.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)