Questions from a Wolfman

It might seem ironic that a man named after a vicious canine would be such a cat-lover, but it's true. The Wolfman loves himself some cats. Thus, it was not surprising to see that he and his lady-friend own two friendly felines in the residence they currently maintain in Charlotte (or "The Chateau of Sin", as I'm fond of calling it).
The Wolfman rises with the sun each day to feed his precious animals. When he comes home from a long day at the office, he's been known to kick back with a bottle of pop and frolic on the floor with his beloved felines, indulging in a game of his own invention called YarnYarn. In this delightful romp, The Wolfman and his cats bat around a ball of yarn with a sense of whimsy not seen since the days of yore. It is at these moments that the love shines through the most.
Boxes of crap lying around the house? No problem. Scratch marks from the kitties trying to use his arm as an itching post? That's why they invented Neosporin. Nothing can sway The Wolfman's love of all things feline.
Me, on the other hand; I'm not too fond of the pests. When I got a new car last year, I walked outside after its first night outside to find paw prints all over the trunk and roof. Apparently, the cat next door had decided it would be fun to walk over my new ride. Since then, we've had a hate-hate relationship and I think the word has gotten around to other cats. They're always hissing at me or scowling as I go by. Maybe they know. Or maybe they're just terrible excuses for a pet. They certainly don't have any real role models. Look at all the famous cats... Garfield: Slob. The Cat in the Hat: Sort of creepy. Lucifer (Cinderella's cat): Well, they didn't name him Lucifer for his winning personality. The Aristocats were pretty cool, but those are, like, five out of a billion cats or something.
Anyway, The Wolfman took some time out of his busy cat-playing schedule to join us for the originally titled Questions from a Wolfman.

1. With the baseball postseason coming up, do you have some predictions for us? Who gets in and who wins the whole thing? Do you feel the format giving teams more days off going to help/hurt certain teams and lead to a team winning it all this year that would not have won in previous years due to the rule change?
I've never enjoyed having the baseball package more than I do right now. Flipping between games involving the Red Sox, Yankees, Cubs, Brewers, Phillies, Mets, Rockies and Padres has been a remote addict's dream. The only problem is that, by the time I eventually memorize all the channels the respective games are being shown on (they go from 771 to 784), the games are just about over. I just flipped from the misery at Shea (channel 771) - where the Mets have turned into the most entertaining train-wreck in years - to hear Harry Kalas describe the sheer elation in Philly (channel 777). Now I'm watching the rain come down at Fenway, where the Sox are trying to tie it up against the Twins. Dammit. Pedroia popped up to end the 8th.
As for my predictions: The Mets have to be done, right? They've blown a historic lead (first time in Major League history to lose a lead of seven or more games this late in the season) and, more importantly, are the Mets. Of course, the Phillies are the Phillies, which makes the karma factor a complete toss-up. (On the karma front, I wrote my buddy Falkow, a Phillies fan, after the Mets loss: "If watching the Mets collapse is this fun for me, I can only imagine what it's like for someone with a vested interest in it." The instant I hit "send", the Phils gave up a leadoff homerun in the ninth. I wrote something back along the lines of "i guess i'll never hear the end of it if they end up losing" to which he responded: I can't blame you for something i'm used to. Philadelphia sports: Gotta love em.
Where was I? Right, who's getting into the playoffs. I think the Diamondbacks will hold onto the West, the Rockies will fade and San Diego will snag tie the Mets for the Wild Card and win in a one-game playoff. (And then subsequently get swept in the first round, as per usual).
Once the playoffs start, it's a complete guessing game. Tom Verducci had a great piece on SI.com this week about the unpredictability of baseball's postseason, busting myths like "hot teams do well in October", "cold teams fail in October" and "home-field advantage matters".
Verducci also suggested that there isn't enough penalty for winning the Wild Card and, perhaps, there should be two Wild Card teams who play a one-game playoff to see who will make the LDS. I couldn't agree more, but people I've discussed this with have been lukewarm to the idea. (Granted, there are many holes in the theory; but I think there should be a reason to want to win the Division. Sure, the Yankees would like to win the A.L. East, but they're not going to go all-out to ensure they do. And that seems wrong to me.)
Anyway, I shudder to say it, but I think the Yankees are the favorites in the A.L. (they have baseball's best record since the All-Star break) followed by Cleveland, Boston and Anaheim. But it's all really close. With C.C. Sabathia and Fausto Carmona leading the Indians rotation, it wouldn't surprise me to see them in the World Series (particularly if they get the longer Divisional Series). The BoSox have flatlined in September, but as Verducci points out, that doesn't seem to matter too much historically. Nobody is pitching too well for Boston outside of Josh Beckett, which is why I'm not high on their chances.
In the N.L., who knows. The Cubs are playing well, so let's go with Lou and Co. to meet the Yanks in a World Series matchup that would make FOX executives weep for joy.

2. What are your thoughts on the NFL's steriod policy? I know that people say it's obvious that players are using and the NFL isn't doing enough, but isn't suspending a guy 4 games a huge penalty? It's like suspending a baseball player 40 games. Granted, there are probably a large number of players using in the NFL, but that seems like a pretty serious penalty to me. Am I missing the mark here on my 4 NFL games/40 MLB game comparison?
You make a good point there. But is it because the NFL's policy is too harsh, or that baseball's is too tame? I'd lean towards baseball being tame, but am of the belief that neither suspension is much of a deterrent to players. I think getting suspended for four games is far down the list when a player is deciding the pros and cons of 'roiding up.
My main gripe with the NFL and steroids is that nobody seems to care when an NFL player is caught using steroids. I mean, Shawne Merriman got caught doping and nobody mentions this ever. He even has his own Nike commercial, something Barry Bonds didn't have even when he was clean. I guess it's probably because football is such a physical game and people expect players to do it, but still... Maybe it's just because I really don't like Shawne Merriman.

3. I've been hearing a lot of complaints about the Broncos, and then Raiders, calling a timeout just before the snap on a field goal. Haven't teams been icing the kicker for years? Does it matter if it's right before the snap? Don't people complain too much about nothing?
Was that a little.... complaining? Yeah, people love to complain. I think that's some people's sole purpose of living. However, I see the point of these complaints. I don't think anyone is saying that opposing teams shouldn't be allowed to call a timeout before the kick, I think the problem was that the refs allowed the play to go off before blowing their whistle. That seemed like bush-league reffing though, not coaching. You can't let Sebastian Janikowski, (who is listed at 455 pounds in the Raiders media guide) kick a FG and then make him re-do it two minutes later. You know how much energy a guy like Janikowski exerts on a 58-yarder? He'll have to take his beloved GHB before ice sessions, so he can forget how tired and sore he was. That's what I found unfair.
Like, I think it's cool to call a timeout when the kicking team has set in their formation, but I don't think it's cool to watch the center's snap and call a timeout at the instant he flinches his hands to snap the ball. And I think it's least cool of all for the refs to give a coach a timeout once the ball has been snapped OR does not do enough to signal to the other team to stop.

4. I know you were searching for answers as to why Portis was not on the field for the final plays of the game on Sunday. You told me that the Skins consider Betts and Portis to be "equal" backs? Do you agree or do you think Portis is the better back?
Are you intentionally trying to get me all riled up before I go to sleep? Because: Well played. Of course Portis is the better back. That's why he has the big contract, that's why they traded Champ Bailey for him and that's why he's the #1 back. I'm under the impression that Joe Gibbs would sooner give his playbook to the Cowboys than answer a reporter's question about his team, so the "they're both equal" is likely just coach-speak. The problem with having Betts in on the goalline is that he's not a good short yardage runner. Betts thrives when there are holes to hit, not walls to run through. Portis, on the other hand, is as tough a runner as there is in the league. He has a nose for the goalline and, most importantly, can move a pile forward after contact. Portis always falls forward, gaining an extra yard or two before going down. That extra yard could have been helpful last week.

5. How could the NHL possibly be starting already? Is a 9 month season really a good idea for a league with terrible financial problems?
How does Gary Bettman still have a job? The NHL has become completely irrelevant in the United States, yet nobody seems to blame Bettman for this. I'm not saying it's all his fault, but as Kramer said, "when the people get restless, who do you think they come after? El Presidente!"

6. What are your feelings on umpires in baseball? It seems like they feel the need to be part of the game. I understand that you can't argue balls and strikes, but don't umps seem antagonistic? I'm not defending Milton Bradley's tirade, but why do umps feel the need to take these things way too far? They're not playing the game, just call the game and shut up.
Nothing makes me more angry than an official who makes the game all about himself. (OK, plenty of things make me more angry than that, but I'm just saying.) It happens in every sport, but baseball is probably the worst. (I know this might sound blasphemous, but I think Big Guns Hochuli has started doing this in the NFL games he works.)
Making dramatic strike calls, continuing an argument, thinking that they're above the game... And that's just C.B. Bucknor. I can't believe it's not a rule that umpires can't argue back. If somebody argues with a cop, the police usually don't start screaming back. So why can't umpires remain civil as well? It reminds me of this classic Earl Weaver rant. The umpire is intentionally pissing Earl off and keeps the tirade going for far longer than it should. Had he just walked away, maybe it wouldn't have gotten so bad. Thank goodness he didn't though. (Warning: Language not safe for work, unless "work" is in Isiah Thomas' office.)

7. How great of a genius is Charlie Weis? Two offensive touchdowns in four games. Two???? I know the fans like to blame it on Tyrone Willingham's poor recruitng but before Saturday's game the Irish had scored 856 points with Weis as head coach, 19 of them have been scored by players who originally committed to and signed with him (Thanks Pat Forde for that great stat). Are we to believe that the younger players simply aren't ready to play yet even though they are so much more talented than Willingham's recruits? When he started, Weis told his players that they would have a schematic advantage over opponents. Do you think he added that it would unfortunately be offset by an O-line that wouldn't be able to block anyone?
Uncle Leo?

8. Isn't good to see Brett Favre out there having fun again?
I've heard his recent resurgence is due, in large part, to his family's recent purchase of a tabby cat named Mr. Marbles.

Howard Bryant's Pirate Earring Doesn't Pay For Itself

This summer, Howard Bryant left the Redskins beat at The Washington Post (which he shared with Jason La Canfora) to write for ESPN. That I never formed an opinion on Bryant's work indicates that he was, at worst, a competent writer and, at best, a good one.
There were rumblings that Bryant wasn't very well-liked by the Redskins press corps (apparently he thought quite highly of himself), but his stories were always pretty straight-forward and readable. When I heard Bryant had bolted for ESPN, I was curious to see whether he'd be able to make the transition from newsman to columnist. The answer was clear after the first two paragraphs he wrote for ESPN.com. To begin a bizzare criticism of Gene Upshaw's handling of the Michael Vick situation, Bryant wrote:

And so it is done. Michael Vick is finished and likely heading to prison. His battle is now with the federal government and the cold reality that whenever he emerges from his punishment, he will not be the same man he is today.
While the federal government, the NFL and Atlanta Falcons owner Arthur Blank all stand tall today, it is the NFL Players Association and head Gene Upshaw who stand to lose the most.

Wait... What? On the day Michael Vick pleaded guilty to charges that will likely land him in jail, Gene Upshaw and the NFL Player's Association stand to lose the most? And in what possible way were the NFL and Arthur Blank "standing tall"? Blank was humiliated by the whole Vick affair and the NFL took a massive PR hit for almost the entire summer. Nobody was standing tall after this. Except maybe Howard Bryant on his pedestal.
Bryant's next piece was a boilerplate "Vick's road to redemption" story that was about 1/5th as insightful as the stuff being written by Terrance Moore, Michael Wilbon and others. He followed that with an unnecessary defense of David Ortiz, who had been hot at the plate for a full two weeks before the column defending his lack of production appeared. The story made even less sense when you consider that, during Ortiz's "slump", he was mostly immune from criticism since everyone knew he was injured.
Even though the story ideas weren't the most original, Bryant hadn't really embarrassed himself yet. Then came a piece on Terry Francona. It began:

It wasn't so long ago that the Red Sox front office resembled a banana republic, a comparison at the time that insulted every banana republic around the globe.

Alright, seriously? I don't even know what the hell that means. The Boston front office wasn't going to be featured in business school textbooks, but the new owners made the team into one of the most profitable in sports and oversaw the building of a team that would win the franchise's first World Series in over 80 years. I'm sure every banana republic in the world would kill for the kind of inefficiency.
(An aside: It's almost impossible to read an entire column by Bryant, which is why I'm only focusing on the ledes. Plus, they're almost all awesomely bad.)
After a week-long break, Bryant return to the Worldwide Leader with a criticism of Bill Belichick and his cheating, lying ways. The lede paragraph:

His transformation from Cleveland disaster to guru complete, his legacy as a Hall of Fame coach secure, Bill Belichick standing diminished in front of his public would be considered incongruous, but for the times in which he lives.

After sending the excerpt to a friend of mine who writes for a living, he responded, "that sentence right there is why editors invented the term, "kill fee"." Go read it again. It makes even less sense the second time.
There's too much gold in Bryant's subsequent piece on Norv Turner, the Red Sox and the Yankees to get into here. Go read the whole thing. But, if you don't want to subject yourself to that, here's the lede:

On Sunday morning, you will head to Gillette Stadium on a tour bus along Route 1, just a baby step on America's oldest highway, whose expanse stretches from Maine to Miami, and watch the leaves change. That means this is the beginning. In football, fall is just the start. There are no absolutes now.

Sweet Moses, that's bad. As is today's opening to an mind-numbing 3,500 word dissection of the racial divide in America as seen through the nation's reaction to Michael Vick's stupidity:

The letters sit heavy for weeks. They do not yellow, for in the paperless society people do not write the way they once did. They use e-mail, and it is now impossible not to be aware of the exact number of people who want to talk to you about him: from 255, when the federal government closed in on Michael Vick, to 974 later when it became clear he would plead guilty, to 2,208 on Sept. 20. That many from his first comments 'til today, 11 weeks of fresh air left before his Dec. 10 sentencing.

In Bryant's defense, his opinions in the piece are pretty well-grounded and he makes decent points during his rambling epic. But using emails from idiots (both white and black) is hardly the way to go about beginning a serious discussion on race. We can all agree that, at both ends of the racial spectrum, there are ignorant people. Why advertise them?
Back to that paragraph though: "11 weeks of fresh air"? What the hell does that mean? Whose air is fresh? Why will it become unfresh when Vick gets sentenced? It works on absolutely no levels. I mean, maybe Bryant's trying to say that his "air" (or e-mail inbox) will be fresh, but doesn't that go against the fact that he has received 2,208 emails over the past four months, some of which doubtlessly were sent on days where there was no Vick news? And, if that is indeed the case (believe me, it took multiple readings to come to that conclusion), why did Bryant stop counting on emails on September 20 when the piece was published today? It's not like he had to get his story in before a magazine went to press, he could have updated those numbers this morning. It doesn't make any sense. Plus, what's with the use of "'til". Is it supposed to be folksy? And why are the non-yellow, paperless letters heavy? Is Bryant bench pressing his computer?
My buddy supposes that Bryant's editors love him and let him post as he pleases. But that still wouldn't explain why the editors at ESPN.com have given almost all of Bryant's stories top billing on the site. It's nearly impossible to find Rob Neyer or Buster Olney, yet Bryant gets the main page?
I guess this shouldn't be surprising from a company that has turned what used to be a wonderful television station into a borderline-unwatchable network that thrives on self-promotion, self-congratulations and Chris Berman. I suppose it's only a matter of time before Bryant gets a plumb gig on SportsCenter. That might make my ESPN-xodus complete.

I'm Too Upset to Make Up a Title For This Post

Today, the Redskins blew both a 17-3 halftime lead at home and a 1st-and-goal from the two to tie the game in the final minute. Needless to say, I'm not in a happy mood. The team's play in the second half was as abysmal as an NFL team can get. It appeared that Gregg Williams' halftime adjustment was to put the 2006 Redskins defense on the field, the better to give up a handful of third-and-longs. Because I'm working on 90 minutes sleep from last night, I'm not going to get into the inexplicable spikes that Jason Campbell threw to stop the clock on the 'Skins final possession. Nor will I rant about how the offense hurried to run the 4th-and-goal play, despite the fact that there were still 21 seconds left on the game clock. And I certainly won't ask why Ladell Betts was on the field for said fourth down play whilst Clinton Portis fiddled.
On the way home from FedEx Field, my friends and I complained about those things for pretty much the whole trip. By the end, we resigned ourselves to the fact that 2-1 at the bye week is all we could have asked for three weeks ago. But, still... Losing to the Giants is a bitter pill to swallow considering the early lead. The fact that the taste will linger for two weeks is even worse.
Dammit.

NFL Picks: Week 3

Baltimore, San Diego, St. Louis, Pittsburgh, Philadelphia, New York Jets, New England, Kansas City, Indianapolis, Seattle, Oakland, Denver, Washington, Chicago

Good Night, Sweet Prince

RFK Stadium will host it's last (?) major sporting event this Sunday, when the Washington Nationals take the field against the Philadelphia Phillies. I've been going to RFK for 20 years and while I'm eagerly anticipating the opening of the new Nationals ballpark down at the Navy Yard, it will be sad to see RFK go. I have so many fond memories of the stadium. Every time I walk in, it feels like a gift.
Thomas Boswell wrote a wonderful tribute yesterday to the stadium that is a must-read for any Washingtonian. In a few minutes, I'm off to pay my last respects to the venerable arena. Here are some of my favorite moments from our 20+ year relationship.

Vikings vs. Redskins (preseason) - August 14, 1981
My mom was in labor with me during this game but, naturally, waited until after the game was over. I was born at 12:14 a.m. on August 15, an hour after the 'Skins completed a 27-14 victory.

Steelers vs. Redskins (preseason) - August 14, 1987
Six years, to the day, later, I made my first actual visit to Robert F. Kennedy Memorial Stadium with my parents, sister and cousins. I remember four things:
1) How big the stadium was.
2) How white the Redskins jerseys looked under the lights.
3) My uncle jokingly yelling at one of his cousins not to charge me tax since my birthday was the next day (I would turn six in a couple hours).
4) How it would be so cool it would be if my Hi-C dropped off the top ledge (we sat in the highest row of the stadium).

Oilers vs. Redskins - November 3, 1991
The undefeated Redskins welcomed the 6-1 Oilers to RFK. The march to Minneapolis continued after an overtime win, which followed a missed Houston kick as time expired in regulation. I detailed this one last year following another classic Redskins finish.

Cardinals vs. Redskins - November 29, 1992
The 6-5 Redskins cruised in this game which would become most remembered for Joe Bugel's anger at Joe Gibbs for throwing up 34-3. In Gibbs' defense, he had pulled Mark Rypien and was letting backup Cary Conklin get some work. Conklin's first NFL TD pass in the middle of the fourth was the object of Bugel's ire, but it delighted me, as it was caught by the man whose poster had adorned my wall for the previous five years: Ark Monk.

The Promise Keepers - May 25, 1995
My uncle operated stands 53 and 54 at RFK for the better part of 25 years. Located in the upper deck near section 538, the conjoined stands served hot dogs, beer, popcorn, nachos and overpriced soda. After years of anticipation, I finally became "of age" and began working in the middle of 1995. My inaugural event: 55,000 Christian men singing the praises of the Lord. It was tradition to sign the back wall of the stand during your first time working; tonight I hope to get inside to catch a final glimpse of what I wrote 12 years ago: "Philip Banks, come heal me! Chris Chase 5-25-95". (One of the preachers looked exactly like Will Smith's uncle from Fresh Prince, you see.)

Lions vs. Redskins - October 22, 1995
Working in the stand didn't allow us to see much live game-action. We'd run out for big plays when it wasn't busy, but mainly we watched on the TVs in the concourse. But once we began cleaning up, we usually snuck out onto the ramp to catch the end of the games. Overtimes were the best, since we would already be relatively cleaned up (at least that's what my cousins and I would think; I'm sure my Uncle Chris would disagree) we could usually watch most of those. This was the first of those games for me. I still remember jumping up and down as Darrell Green dove into the endzone after intercepting a Scott Mitchell pass early in OT.

Cowboys vs. Redskins - December 22, 1996
The final Redskins game at RFK should be a great memory for me, but I wouldn't know 'cause I wasn't there. I tore my calf muscle in the fall and had to use crutches and a cane for the better part of three months. Despite my uncle's generous proposal to allow me to sit in the back of the stand to box popcorn and fill nacho trays, my mom put her foot down. I have never let her forget it. (At least the game wasn't as big as it could have been: The 'Skins began 7-1 in 1996 and, for most of the season, it looked like the final game against Dallas would be for the NFC East. But Washington six of their next seven and by the time RFK's swansong came, Dallas had clinched the division and the Redskins were out of contention for a playoff spot.)

Tibetan Freedom Concert - June 14, 1998
Pearl Jam, Sonic Youth, A Tribe Called Quest, Wyclef and the Red Hot Chili Peppers, but Herbie Hancock's lightning-shortened set was an instant classic (because of the rain, I managed to sneak into the front row for that), as was my first introduction to Radiohead's live act. Most people in the crowd were waiting around for the bigger acts when Thom Yorke and company stole the show in the middle of the afternoon.

Diamonbacks vs. Nationals - Opening Day 2005
Baseball's return to Washington was supposed to be a family affair, but some unforseen cicumstances had my cousins and I scrambling to fill our two sets of seats. I was on crutches after a recent foot surgery, which made the climb to section 538 even more fun than usual. But when a baseball team representing DC took the field for the first time in my life, nothing else mattered. Baseball had returned to the Nation's Capital.

Blue Jays vs. Nationals - June 24, 2005
After a rousing west coast swing, the Nationals returned to RFK improbably atop the NL East. The stands were shaking early, as the Nats cruised to a 3-0 win and would enjoy a few more days atop the division until reality finally set in.

Clinton Portis: Interviewee Hall of Famer

Skip ahead to the 2:40 mark to see the greatest interview entrance I've ever seen. (Thanks to Mr. Irrelevant for the link. My buddy Horo and I watched this live and couldn't stop laughing. It was good to see that it made it onto YouTube. Now somebody needs to post the episode of BET's Madd Sports that featured a BBQ with alumni of The U and I'll be content.)

Under This Theory, Donovan's Knee Must Be Racist Too

Not content with overthrowing every receiver in a tri-state area, Donovan McNabb gave an interview with Jim Brown on HBO's Real Sports in which he said that black quarterbacks are under more pressure than white quarterbacks. Yeah, Donners, that's the reason Philly fans booed you on Monday. Because of your skin color. Not because you played a game that Ryan Leaf would have been ashamed of.
Some thoughts about Donovan's curios statement:

* McNabb says that [white] guys like Peyton Manning and Carson Palmer don't get criticized as much as he does. Ignoring the fact that both Peyton and Carson are way better than Donovan could ever hope to be, McNabb is delusional if he actually believes this.
Up until last February, Peyton was dogged by the (deserved) question of whether he would ever lead his team to the Super Bowl. Had the Colts lost in the AFC Playoffs or to the Bears, the chorus would have been deafening. Peyton won, so those cries are quiet now. But imagine what we'd be saying about him this year if the Colts hadn't prevailed?
McNabb, on the other hand, had been closer to winning it all than Peyton (four NFC Championship games and one Super Bowl) and still gets criticized by nobody in the national media for coming up short in big games. Peyton, in all his Caucasian glory, played decently in past playoff losses yet got ripped. Donovan vomited in the huddle of the Super Bowl and gets a pass. Is it for racial reasons? Maybe. If so, Donovan would be getting the benefit of the doubt, not the other way around as he believes.

* Steve McNair kind of throws a wrench into Donovan's statement. McNair is a former NFL MVP, has made multiple Pro Bowls and is generally regarded as one of the toughest men to ever play quarterback. For a number of reasons (injuries, bad line, etc.), McNair's play has slipped considerably in recent years. Again, McNair is a 13-year vet with myriad injuries, so his decline is understandable. I'm just saying, you never really hear about it. He seem to get Favre-ian protection from the media, despite what Donovan says about black quarterbacks.

* Another important note: Jason Campbell, a black quarterback, is one good game away from becoming the most popular athlete in D.C. since John Riggins.

* Even though Donovan's assertion is completely wrong, I have no problem with it being made. It's not a racist comment, it's a racial comment. There's a big difference. So, while I disagree with Donovan's assertion, I'm glad he's able to say it without getting crucified for it unlike, say, Rush Limbaugh. More on that gasbag in a second.
In this country (and probably in most others) people tip-toe around the race issue because they fear an unwarranted backlash (hello, Don Imus). As a result, every time race gets mentioned by a member of a different race, everyone automatically assumes racism. It'd be great if there could be serious discourse on the issue, but with a trigger-happy media ready to crucify anyone who makes a statement that could possible be perceived by one person (probably Al Sharpton) as a racist, that day seems far away.
The Limbaugh/McNabb controversy from five years ago is a perfect example of this phenomenon. In his statements, Limbaugh gave an opinion that wasn't the least bit racist. For those whose memory of the incident was clouded by the mainstream media's overreaction, Limbaugh said of McNabb:

"I think what we've had here is a little social concern in the NFL. The media has been very desirous that a black quarterback do well. There is a little hope invested in McNabb, and he got a lot of credit for the performance of this team that he didn't deserve. The defense carried this team."

That's not racist. Just because someone invokes race into a discussion doesn't make that statement racist. All Limbaugh said was that, for a number of reasons, the media wants to see black quarterbacks do well. You can agree or disagree with that statement, but it was clearly Limbaugh's opinion and a fairly tame one at that. (Remember, Chris Berman, who practically wept on NFL Countdown the following week when discussing the "horrific incident", didn't object to Limbaugh's comment when it was made.)
Nobody mentioned that Limbaugh's comment applies to white skill players like Mike Alstott, John Lynch and Adam Archuleta as well. Because they play positions dominated by black athletes, the media hypes them up too much also. Since quarterbacking was (and still is) predominantly a white man's world, the media likes to see black guys succeed there. It's different than the norm, which is what the media is always looking for. Unlike political reporters, I don't see sports writers having much of an agenda other than to get easy story ideas. My guess is that most beat writers want a black quarterback to succeed moreso because it's a story they can write, not because of any social considerations. I think this is why we still get the played-out "black quarterback" or "black coach" stories, even though the NFL has reached the point where a black man succeeding in either of these venues is the norm, not the exception.
My main gripe with the Donovan thing is, he said almost the exact same thing as Limbaugh. They both made gross generalizations about the perceptions of black quarterbacks. The only difference is, Limbaugh's comments created a national firestorm and got him fired from a job, while McNabb's was buried in the 4th segment of SportsCenter.
In a perfect world, neither comment would be a story. Think of it this way, if the roles were switched and Limbaugh had made McNabb's statement and McNabb Limbaugh's, would there have been any controversy?
It'd be great if McNabb's comment could lead to a discussion about what role race plays in the perception of NFL players. But because white people are gun-shy about talking about this, for fear of being labeled as a racist, it doesn't look like it will happen. The only way that will change is if the media stops applying a double-standard to what constitutes a racist statement. Oh well.
Oh well.

Redskins 20 - Eagles 12 (Part II)

And, by the way, the ESPN broadcast was borderline unwatchable tonight. For the entire 3rd quarter they talked to Charles Barkley and completely ignored the game, and Jaws was on Donovan's nuts the entire game, despite the fact that Donovan played one of the worst games at QB I've ever seen. I love me some Jaws, but he was making excuses for Donovan on each of his 15 terrible throws. On some of those, Jaws actually praised Donners for "reading the blitz" despite the fact that he overthrew his receiver by five yards. Seriously, had Donovan been even competent tonight, the Redskins would have lost.
Jason Campbell was solid, the offensive line held up after Randy Thomas' injury (a major event in the game that was mentioned exactly once by ESPN) and Gregg Williams' defense conducted themselves well. There is still no pass-rush to speak of, but the linebackers and secondary performed admirably. My love of London Fletcher is nothing new (ask my Efird dorm-mates from Wake), but I have to say: It's awesome to see him in the middle calling plays for the defense.
Winning a road game at Philly in a game where almost every idiot on ESPN thought the Eagles would prevail in a blowout is fantastic. (I was very, very worried about the game until Mark Schlereth said the Eagles would win comfortably. At that point, I knew the 'Skins had a chance.) Two and oh. Hail to the Redskins. Hell yes. OK, I'm going to bed.

Redskins 20 - Eagles 12

Whooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo!

The King of All Player Haters

When it comes to player hating, I could give Silky Johnson a run for his money. Whether it's J.J. Redick, Derek Jeter, Eli Manning, Norwegians, people who wait to get their wallets out at a fast-food restaurant until after the cashier gives them the total, Kobe Bryant, Mike Rumph or Jim Bowden, I serve heaping doses of hate quite frequently on this web site. However, I'm but a mere amateur when compared to one Virginia man whose hatred of the Redskins is so profound, that I actually respect him. First, though, the back-story...
Virginia drivers are terrible. When I had to commute to Northern Virginia for a class this summer, I'd text my buddy Jaf every morning with ruminations on just how crappy they were. A normal one went something like, "you know, if virginia had joined the union, i'm pretty sure we would have lost the civil war". On a recent trip to Charlotte, I did a little seat-dance when I crossed the border from VA into NC to celebrate getting through the only state that based their driving laws on those of the Gestapo. (This has little to do with the story, I just thought it appropriate, since the state's motorists are one of the things I hate on the most.) To increase revenue streams in the commonwealth, the MVA issues specialized license plates to various groups. For $35 a month, you can get a plate that celebrates your alma mater, the military, your ownership of Harley Davidsons, a past-life as a POW or a love of fox hunting. There are over 180 specialized plates to choose from. One of the more popular ones is a Redskins plate that looks like this.

You see these frequently on the road, often on a car that is driving in two lanes or making a left-turn into oncoming traffic. (At least they're driving. Car owners with these plates are frequently pulled over the side of the road performing sobriety tests.) Usually, the 'Skins tags will have a 'Skins-related message like "SBChmp" or "ILuvJoe" or "Lavar4Eva". The vanity tags are always pro-Skins because, obviously, nobody would buy a Redskins plate if they didn't love the Redskins. Right?
My old buddy Matt thought so too, until he was driving last week in Alexandria and saw a BMW with the Redskins plate.


At first, Matt couldn't figure out what the tag meant. Was the guy chiding other teams for being loserz? Was he a self-hating 'Skins fan? It wasn't until Matt looked at a decal above the left brake light that he understood what Mr. BMW was trying to say.
The guy was repping the city of brotherly love with his lame PHI sticker. The only logical explanation is that Mr. BMW was an Eagles fan who hated the Redskins so much, he went and bought a Redskins plate to advertise just how loser-like he thought they were.
Forgetting the irony of an Eagles fan calling anybody a loser, numerous questions come to mind. First, why did he go with "LOSERZ"? Was "LOSERS" taken? If so, does the guy who has that plate have a DAL sticker on his trunk? Or is Mr. BMW from the Backstreetz? (Of course, I'm taking the rather large leap of faith that Mr. BMW actually knows to spell which, in itself, is far from a guarantee.)
Secondly, does the driver throw up and/or blow out his knee every time he gets near the end of a long road trip? And, finally, why would anyone pay $35 per year to advertise his hate for a team that has three Super Bowl championships to his team's zero?
So many questions, so little time. Redskins/Eagles kicks off in 270 minutes (not that I've been keeping track of that since I got up at 7:30 this morning - it was 780 minutes then) and I need to start preparing.
I think it will be a close game, decided upon by which secondary can make more plays. The Redskins didn't give up anything long to Miami, but left themselves vulnerable to the Dolphins' short passing attack as a result. If they can keep Donovan from hitting homeruns with his receivers, the Eagles offense could have a tough go at it.
Offensively, the Redskins need to pound the ball with Clinton Portis and Ladell Betts, thus setting up deep balls against the Eagles' Lito Sheppard-less secondary. If Reche Caldwell plays and can be an effective #3 receiver, that could open up Al Saunders' offense a bit, thus giving Chris Cooley some room to roam.
Since the 'Skins never do well on Monday Night, I'm picking against them. But you know I'm fully expecting them to win and make it a long commute for Mr. BMW tomorrow.
Thanks to Matt for sending in the pictures.

The Goggles Do Nothing

In light of the Patriots' blowout victory over San Diego, I'm guessing New England supporters will break out the "see, the videotaping really didn't matter" defense. Don't buy it. Nobody ever said that the spying is what turned the Patriots into a good football team. Instead, they were a good football team who gained a distinct edge due to cheating.
The Pats were always capable of putting together dominant performances (like last night) without the aid of subversive tactics. But they clearly didn't feel comfortable enough to try and do so. Just because the Pats can win without cheating doesn't mean that they didn't cheat.
It's sort of like comparing the steroid use of Barry Bonds and Mark McGwire. Without 'roids, McGwire would have been remembered for his Bash Brother days in Oakland and little else. Bonds, on the other hand, was a Hall of Famer before he took steroids - the drugs helped him hit Ruthian numbers. The Pats are like Bonds. They would have been good without cheating. Because they did, however, they were ever better.
Had, say, Detroit employed the same tactics, they still would have been living in the cellar of the NFC North. The spying wasn't a magical cure-all; it was a tool that the Pats used. Obviously, it was effective, as Bill Belichick continued to have his assistants spy even after repeated warnings.

Tomorrow: Redskins/Eagles preview & the biggest Redskins-hater you've ever seen

NFL Picks: Week 2

Dallas at Miami
The ghost of Leon Lett will try to make up for his ill-advised Thanksgiving fumble recovery in the snow, but he'll probably just get high with the ghost of Nate Newton and watch Aqua Teen Hunger Force instead.
Pick: Miami

Green Bay at New York Giants
Good thing Michael Strahan isn't trying to break the sack record this year. Brett Favre would have to fall twice in order to hand the gap-toothed one the mark as, these days, Strahan's ex-wife is getting half of everything.
Pick: New York Giants

Cincinnati and Cleveland
The Wolfman was supposed to contribute a rant about Charlie Weis and Brady Quinn here, but apparently he couldn't... handle... THIS.
Pick: Cincinnati

New Orleans at Tampa Bay
This is a tough game to pick, so I'm looking towards the proven "Mascot Fight" method. (As in, if the teams' two mascots brawled, who would win?)
The early lead would be taken by Blackbeard, Jack Sparrow and the Dread Pirate Roberts, who would plunder and pillage St. Peter's crew with multiple tactics including swordfighting, plank-walking and scurvy-giving. However, Santa Barbara, the patron saint of the sea, would tag-team with Santa Barbara's A Martinez and begin beating a score of pirates with a wooden leg stolen from Long John Silver. A rough battle would ensue, with the action waging back-and-forth, until Mother Teresa climbed the top rope and, imitating Jimmy SuperFly Snuka, threw down the Samoan Special on an unsuspecting Willie Stargell.
Pick: New Orleans

Houston at Carolina
I saw an interview with N.D. Kalu this week where he was asked, "after three years together, how will it feel to line up against David Carr this weekend." Kalu then gestured towards Matt Schaub and said, "wait... That's not David Carr?"
Pick: Carolina

San Francisco at St. Louis
I'm just kidding, of course. Nobody would ever interview N.D. Kalu.
Pick: St. Louis

Indianapolis at Tennessee
Peyton Manning will be certainly be looking foward to playing in Kenny Chesney's backyard. And against the Titans on Sunday too.
Pick: Indianapolis

Buffalo at Pittsburgh
Are we supposed to ignore the "coincidence" that Omar Epps announced he would have a diminished role on season four of House around the same time that "Mike Tomlin" was hired as Steelers head coach? Shouldn't Charlie Sheen have a crazy conspiracy theory about this?












Pick: Pittsburgh

Atlanta at Jacksonville
You know who the forgotten victim is in this whole Michael Vick saga? Me, that's who. Because without Vick under center in Atlanta, I have to think of new things to write about the Falcons every week instead of using my standard fall-back joke about Vick having herpes. Where's the outpouring of grief for me? Where are the protests on my behalf? I'm hurting here, people! I feel like I've lost my best friend, albeit one that I rarely talk to, what, with the herpes and all.
Pick: Jacksonville

Minnesota at Detroit
This week, hip-hop superstars Kanye West and 50 Cent square-off in a battle to see who will have higher opening week sales of their much-anticipated third albums. This game is like that in absolutely no way.
Pick: Detroit

Seattle at Arizona
By the by, the 50 CD is, predictably, quite terrible. Kanye's Graduation is his weakest effort yet, but that's more of a testament to the excellence of his first two albums rather than an indictment of this one.
Standout tracks: Good Life, Can't Tell Me Nothing, Barry Bonds, The Glory, Homecoming
Pick: Seattle

New York Jets at Baltimore
In honor of Eric Mangini's cameo earlier this year on The Sopranos, I'm going to watch a blank TV screen instead of this game.
Pick: Baltimore

Kansas City at Chicago
In defense of Rex Grossman's play last week - The guy does get pretty excited in games taking place before a New Year. (A שָׁנָה טוֹבָה to all the site's Jewish friends. I celebrated the New Year by playing golf and sinking a 65-foot chip for birdie on the 5th hole. I'd been wondering how I was going to work that in since I started writing. The answer: Smoothly.)
Pick: Chicago

Oakland at Denver
Jay Cutler and Jake Plummer sound very-much alike. One-syllable first names with a long "A" sound, and two-syllable last names that start with a consonant/short "u" combo and end in "er". Now all Cutler needs to do is develop a meaningless reputation as a comeback kid, grow an awesome mustache and practice throwing balls backwards and the transformation will be complete.
Pick: Denver

New England at San Diego
This is the best matchup between cheaters since Rosie Ruiz played a game of checkers against the 1988 East German women's swim team. Except I'm pretty sure neither Ruiz nor those strapping German lasses ever fathered a child out of wedlock, TOM BRADY.
Pick: New England

Last Week: 11-5

It's Official: Roger Goodell is a Spineless Hypocrite

Ooooh, a $500,000 fine for Bill Belichick? That'll show him! Way to lay down the law, Roger Goodell. Why not just send Belichick a stern note and call it a day.
The Commish has proven himself to be nothing more than a management shill. He gave Belichick a pass for disgracing himself, his team and the NFL. Players get four-game suspensions for using steroids, but Belichick gets a small fine (that he won't even pay) for manipulating the game in an illegal way. In the NFL, it seems, everyone isn't equal under the law.

Chris Answers PTI's Questions

What should the Patriots punishment be for being the dirty, dirty cheaters they are?
Bill Belichick should be suspended for four games - the same penalty steroid users receive when they test positive. Before you say I'm overreacting, ask yourself how this is different from doping. Both drug-users and high-tech cheaters are using banned substances to better themselves. They both gain a clear competitive advantage. (And don't use the "everyone steals signs" argument either. There's a big gap between trying to decipher which sign means what over the course of a game and syncing up video and audio to find out exactly what happens on the field after a specific play is called. It's like comparing taking a legal supplement and doping with HGH. It's very cut and dry: One is legal, the other is illegal. Just because they're similar doesn't make them the same.)
Plenty of people in the media are saying that the sign-stealing isn't a big deal because the Pats couldn't have gained that much from it. But let me ask them this: If the Patriots didn't get any advantage from cheating, then why did they bother to cheat? I mean, if the sign-stealing via camera wasn't helping the Pats gain a competitive edge on their opponents, as has been claimed, what the hell was the point of doing it in the first place? You don't put yourself at risk spending time and considerable effort for something that has a negligible effect. Nobody would do that.
How absurd would it sound if a baseball player implicated in a steroid scandal said, "yeah, I used for two years, but it didn't have any effect on my game."? He'd be mocked on every sports website in America. Bill Belichick said essentially that today, but his comments are being reported as an "apology".
The only reason this Patriots scandal isn't getting more ink (although it's getting more than I ever thought it would; see the above Wednesday night headline on NYTimes.com) is because there's no way to tell how much the cheating helped the team. Opinions are split on whether the spying provided a great advantage to the staff. I find it hard to believe it's not, seeing as how if the Pats successfully stole, deciphered, relayed and made a play based on one sign per game, this would be a tremendous advantage. NFL games so often hinge on a crucial play, and the Pats could have swung one or two based on their knowledge of signs. But since there's no way to tell if, or when, this type of thing occurred, the true depth of the Pats' crime will never be known.
However, the fact that Belichick and his coaches continued to do this after being warned by the NFL indicated that it was beneficial. And nothing that cheating liar says will convince me otherwise.

Is Bill Belichick's legacy tainted?
Vince Lombardi, Don Shula, Chuck Noll, Tom Landry, Joe Gibbs and Bill Parcells never got caught cheating during their careers. Bill Belichick has. In public, I don't think Belichick will lose his "genius" label. But I'll bring up his cheating and lying any time some obnoxious d-bag from Back Bay tries to tell me how great the Pats coach is.

Everett may walk again?
That's fantastic news. After these terrible incidents happen, I'm always amazed that they don't happen more often. The play Kevin Everett was injured on was as routine as you'll ever see. Thankfully, his injury is the exception. It's wonderful that it looks like he won't be confined to a wheelchair.

Ron Rivera ripping Rex Grossman?
As The Wolfman pointed out this weekend, Ron Rivera went from defensive coordinator of the Chicago Bears to being a positions coach in San Diego, despite having aspirations to become a head coach in the NFL. I think this says all you need to know about Ron Rivera.

Rory Sabbatini thinks Tiger and Phil should be ineligible for FedEx Cup for not playing all events?
Tiger and Phil earned the right to a skip a FedEx Cup tournament because they finished so highly in the FedEx Cup point rankings during the "regular season". Think of it like a playoff bye. Just because Rory Sabbatini isn't good enough to beat Tiger and Phil despite playing an extra tournament, doesn't mean those guys should be penalized.
Granted, I think there is still much tweaking that needs to occur in order to make the FedEx Cup more interesting to the common fan, but anybody that says the playoff's first year was a failure is missing the point: The PGA Championship happened one month ago and we're currently awaiting week 2 of the NFL season... Yet people are still talking about golf.

Role Play
Blazers GM Kevin Pritchard. How nervous is he?
With Greg Oden's knee surgery scheduled for today, I imagine Pritchard has become a regular at his local liquor store. But if Oden does have a balky knee, it will be important for all those instant-history revisionists to remember that Pritchard made the correct pick at the time he made it.

Romeo Crennel: He said Charlie Frye was his guy, then traded him to make way for Brady Quinn. Then he doesn't start Brady Quinn. What is he thinking?
Romeo Crennel doesn't seem to be the sharpest knife in the drawer, if you catch my drift. And if you don't, then neither are you. Doesn't he realize that the only way to keep his job is to put Quinn in there to build towards 2008? When Quinn inevitably struggles, Crennel can just say he's going through the same growing pains that all great quarterbacks go through. But playing Derek Anderson, who sounds like he sound be a backup point guard on the Knicks, is just insane. For what?

Ozzie Guillen: Surprised he got extended?
The man won a World Series just 23 months ago and skippered a team that won 90 in 2006. He might be crazy, but that's no reason to fire him after one bad season. An extension to 2012 though... Alright, that's a little surprising. At least he didn't need to cheat to win his title though.

My Pet, Peeves

One of my major sports pet peeves is the importance placed on early-season rankings in college sports. These polls are exercises in guesswork, at best, yet they are regarded as gospel even as they're proven worthless. Look at our current situation with Michigan. When Appalachian State upset them in the Big House, the Wolverines were ranked #5 in the country and that loss was looked at as one of the most surprising of all-time. Now, Michigan is in shambles following a blowout home loss to Oregon and it's looking like the App State win should really have been much less surprising. Granted, it will always be a shock when a team like Michigan loses to a team like App State, but the reason it was such big news is because a bunch of pollsters who know nearly nothing about the ins-and-outs of Michigan football thought they'd be really good.
At least voters had the good sense to drop Michigan out of the poll following their loss. Other highly rated teams that have put up dismal performances early in the season are still lingering in the polls, while others that have scored impressive wins are still looking to get in.
Virginia Tech might be better than South Florida, but there's no way the cHokies should be ranked ahead of the team that just knocked off Auburn in Auburn. But because Va. Tech is supposed to be good, they were barely penalized for a lackluster home effort against East Carolina and just dropped nine spots following an embarrassing loss at LSU. The Hokies could very well be the 19th best team in the country, but they've done nothing to deserve that ranking this year other than being highly touted in the preseason.
This is why I'd feel like a hypocrite for publishing the Week1 NFL Chaz Rankings today. One week is not nearly a large enough sample size to determine which teams are good and which are bad. Teams like New Orleans, Baltimore and Buffalo would be impossible to rank, as each lost games to good teams. On the other hand, Washington, Detroit and Houston earned week one victories, but against teams that will likely be the dregs of the league.
So, I'm holding off until after week 3. At that point, The Chaz Rankings will commence. Until then, here's hoping the early season action fills you to bursting.

NFL: Week 1 Thoughts

Like Christmas, Thanksgiving and Virginia Tech football soiling itself on a national stage, making sweeping generalizations after week one of the NFL season is one of my favorite annual events. Though providing no more insight into a football season as taking a snapshot of, say, the results of week nine would be, football analysts love to make definitive statements about teams, players and coaches based on just 60 minutes of play. Some of these being made today include:

*** The Randy Moss experiment will be a resounding success! ***
Nobody ever said Moss wasn't one of the most talented receivers in the game. It's just that he's a me-first prima-donna that has never valued team success over his own statistics. There was never any doubt Brady-to-Moss would be successful at times. The real question is, what happens when the Pats lose (yes, Bill Simmons, it will happen at some point) and Moss gets less looks than Wes Welker.

*** Romo-to-Owens is the new Aikman-to-Irvin! ***
See above.

*** The Saints were a fluke last season! ***
Sean Salisbury essentially said this very thing on Friday. While I'm of the belief that the Saints will come back down to earth in 2007, a blowout loss at the hands of the defending Super Bowl champs isn't exactly reason to fret. New Orleans laid an egg on Thursday night, but that doesn't mean they still won't contend for the NFC South.

*** Carolina is back! ***
As someone who always overrates the Panthers, let me say that I think Carolina is going to win the NFC South this year. Until they put together a solid showing in back-to-back games, though, I'm still reserving judgment.

*** Jay Cutler is the new Elway! ***
*** Eli Manning has figured it out! ***
*** Pittsburgh is in Super Bowl form! ***
*** Britney Spears' career is over!***
OK, maybe that last one is true.

Redskins Report
Wins don't have to be pretty, and yesterday's victory over the Miami Dolphins sure wasn't. But, as Thomas Boswell writes today, the only thing that matters is the W.

What I Liked:
1) The demise of Clinton Portis was greatly exaggerated. He ran hard yesterday, made cuts he was unable to make last season and got some tough yards after contact.
2) Jason Campbell made some solid throws and continued to look poised in the pocket.
3) Shaun Suisham appears to be an actual kicker, something the Redskins have lacked for, oh, 15 years.
4) Andre Carter sacked the quarterback.
5) That I was in a loud bar watching the game and could barely hear Dan Dierdorf. I did manage to catch Dierdorf's praise of Cam Cameron after the Dolphin's coach inexplicably butchered the end of the first-half for his team. It ended up working out for the Dolphins, for scored a TD as time expired, but they should have had one more down to do it after Cameron failed to call a timeout with 22 seconds remaining.
6) Eli Manning out for a month. That's just fantastic.

What I Didn't Like
1) Jon Jansen being lost for the season is what sunk Joe Gibbs' first season back. Stephon Heyer played well yesterday in Jansen's stead (it marked the first time Heyer had ever played the position), but he still is an undrafted rookie that struggled in the preseason.
2) Fred Smoot was worse than dreadful. He looked like a cocky Mike Rumph out there. Miami abused Smoot all day, throwing short outs that Smoot was powerless to stop (or even get close to). He also dropped a potentially game-winning interception in overtime. And because the 'Skins won, I won't go on a 500-word tirade about Freddy's celebrations conducted after wide-open Miami receivers dropped easy passes.
3) After getting some early interior pressure on Trent Green, the 'Skins front-four barely penetrated the line for the rest of the game.
4) Derrick Frost is still terrible.
5) Brandon Lloyd solidifies his spot atop the NFL's worst receiver list. The Miami INT in the endzone was caused by Lloyd's laziness. Campbell threw a good ball that Lloyd should have gotten his hands on, but somehow the 'Skins receiver went underneath Miami's defender and allowed him to get the pick. (Note: Joe Bugel called out Lloyd today during his weekly talk with George Michael and Sonny Jurgensen.)
6) Clinton Portis throwing unnecessarily-vicious blocks on defenders with the same shoulder he messed up last preseason.
7) Referees calling a false start penalty on Todd Yoder for "abrupt movement simulating the snap" while the Redskins (successfully) tried to lure the Dolphins off-sides on a 4th-and-short. It's called motion. Players are allowed to go into it, but apparently without any sort of cadence. Yoder did exactly what he was supposed to: Fool the Dolphins into jumping over the line of scrimmage. For this, he was penalized. I've never seen Joe Gibbs more angry than he was after the refs botched that call.

MNF Picks: Cincinnati and San Francisco

Mini-NFL Preview & Week 1 Picks

The best-laid plans of mice and men often go awry; that, or they get washed away in a haze of Bloody Mary's and fried pickles. After beginning the week with a nasty head cold, I finished up with a long weekend in Charlotte for a mini-college reunion that coincided with Wake Forest's home football opener. I'm sitting on the couch now in the apartment of one John Q. Wolfman, eagerly awaiting the kickoff of the NFL season. I plan on writing a mini-NFL preview this week, but until then, here are my season predictions and week one picks.

NFC East
1) Washington Redskins
2) Philadelphia Eagles
3) Dallas Cowboys
4) New York Giants

The Eagles went 5-6 with Donovan McNabb last year. They made no discernable improvements to their team, still have no receivers and are coached by a man who cuts players like he's Bill Belichick, minus all the success. And, for this, Philly is the overwhelming favorite in the East? Poppycock, I say.
Washington's defense can't possibly be as bad as last year (that sentence took about 45 seconds to write, as I was simultaneously knocking on wood with my non-typing hand) and with an allegedley-healthy Clinton Portis mixing it up with Ladell Betts, I think the 'Skins will be back to their 2005 form.
Tony Romo and Eli Manning? Please.

NFC North
1) Chicago Bears
2) Detroit Lions
3) Green Bay Packers
4) Minnesota Vikings

The Bears could wrap up the North by Thanksgiving. But I say Grossman doesn't make it through the season, even though the other option (Brian Griese) isn't too much of an improvement.

NFC South
1) Carolina Panthers
2) New Orleans Saints
3) Atlanta Falcons
4) Tampa Bay Buccaneers

I made these picks during my class Tuesday afternoon, and certainly feel better about slotting the Saints #2 in the South after watching them Thursday. Last season seemed to be the perfect storm of success for New Orleans. They'll still be good in 2007, but I think they'll start to see some breaks go the other way (just like Wake Forest yesterday).

NFC West
1) St. Louis Rams
2) San Francisco 49ers
3) Seattle Seahawks
4) Arizona Cardinals

My buddy Fingers just got out of the shower and looked like a kid on Christmas morning as he rushed to the TV and turned on NFL Countdown. And then he close-talked the TV and said he misses Reggie White tons.

AFC East
1) New England Patriots
2) Buffalo Bills
3) New York Jets
4) Miami Dolphins

AFC North
1) Pittsburgh Steelers
2) Baltimore Ravens
3) Cincinnati Bengals
4) Cleveland Browns

AFC South
1) Indianapolis Colts
2) Tennessee Titans
3) Jacksonville Jaguars
4) Houston Texans

AFC West
1) Denver Broncos
2) San Diego Chargers
3) Kansas City Chiefs
4) Oakland Raiders

No surprises here, other than a return to form for the Steelers. The Rooney's have a pretty awesome track record with hiring coaches, so I'm guessing Mike Tomlin will be the real deal (and NFL Coach of the Year).

NFC Championship: Chicago over St. Louis
AFC Championship: Indianapolis over Baltimore
Super Bowl: Chicago over Indianapolis

Week 1 Picks: Denver, Jacksonville, Washington, St. Louis, New York Jets, Minnesota, Pittsburgh, Philadephia, Houston, Seattle, Chicago, Detroit, Dallas

Last-Set Tiebreaks Are Lame

It's not like the U.S. Open needs matches to go any longer (it's currently 9:43 and Roger Federer and Andy Roddick are still in the locker room), but watching two players battl