Deja Vu: Jim Souhan makes unfunny jokes about the Vikings

JJ Cooper at Fanhouse wants to give Jim Souhan credit for "for the most-inventive explanation for the Vikings red zone troubles."

What did the uber-creative, inventive Souhan write? In his column "Only one game, but offense already has apparently hit the wall," he writes:

"There is only one possible explanation for the Vikings' offensive futility under Brad Childress: invisible fencing.

You know those collars you put on your dog, so if the mutt wanders beyond the confines of your yard a small shock sends Spot yelping home?

Apparently, Vikings opponents have surreptitiously placed similar sensors into the uniforms of Vikings 'skill' position players. Why else would a pro football team treat the end zone like a minefield?"

Ho ho ho! The last time I laughed this hard was when my parents told me the family dog died. That's really funny. Once again, in place of any analysis, Jim Souhan has taken to making jokes about the Viking performances.

And if you did laugh out loud at his imagery, I want you to do me a favor: go stick your head right down the toilet, push the lever, and scream as the water flushes around you, "I have no sense of humor and no personality and I deserve this flushing toilet water around my head." My seven month old son has an odd sense of humor right now: he laughs like a madman at changing distances. If I'm standing looking at him, and I quickly move my face closer to him, he just busts out in uncontrollable laughter. And he has a better sense of humor than you if you've ever laughed out loud at a Jim Souhan column.

After one preseason game, Souhan is already pulling out his A-material jokes to mock the Viking offense. He calls Childress's offense "paleolithic," and says the offensive performance was "good news, as long as you didn't make the silly mistake of looking at the scoreboard."

Oh no, the first team offense isn't scoring touchdowns in its first preseason game? The season is doomed!

Of course, last night Tom Brady stayed in the game for two series for the Patriots, and they managed no TDs (no points, actually, though last season the Pats were 7th in the league in scoring). Drew Brees played two series for the Saints, and they managed just field goal attempts (they were 5th in scoring last year). Heck, as the Daily Norseman points out, in the very game Souhan is writing about, the Rams' starters didn't manage any points at all (in their two possessions, and they ranked 10th in points last season).

No, I'm not a moron: I don't expect the Viking offense to be as good as the Patriots', Saints', or Rams' offenses. The Viking offense could very well stink this season. My point is that the Vikings' failure to score an offensive touchdown in its first preseason game is exactly ZERO indicator that the offense will struggle this season. And be honest, Souhan: if the Viking first-team offense had scored touchdowns on all three of its possessions, you would be dismissing this performance as pointless because it's merely the preseason (as the Daily Norseman says again, "had the Vikings gone out and put a big number on the scoreboard last night, you'd be telling us not to get our hopes up because the Vikes would have played all their offensive cards in the first pre-season game of the year"). Souhan just wants to make fun of the Vikings, and he'd be doing it today no matter how the team performed last night.

There's reason to be hopeful. Last season, the Viking passing offense was atrocious; if it had been merely mediocre, the strong defense probably would have led the team to 9-10 wins. It's only preseason, but Tarvaris Jackson throwing to Troy Williamson and Bobby Wade looked mildly competent last nigh, netting some solid completions for first downs. And if the defense performs as it did last season, and if running game is as successful as it is possible it could be, then mildly competent is all the Viking passing game will need to be to compete for a playoff spot.

Addendum: Ryan Wilson at the Fanhouse has also commented on Souhan's column.

Ready for the Tarvaris Jackson era

This is fun. I know, it's just preseason, blah blah blah. But Tarvaris Jackson looks like a quarterback. He's made some nice connections to Troy Williamson and Bobby Wade. This could all turn out alright.

Viking Blizzard

Kevin Seifert of the Strib looks at offensive coordinator Darrell Bevell.

Sid Hartman says the Vikes have to start winning fans back, but he's "optimistic that this young team under a good coach in Brad Childress will get off to a very good start. Once the team shows it can compete, the fans will come back."

Sean Jensen of the Ppress reports on the Viking receivers coach working with Troy Williamson.

Alex Marvez of Fox Sports talks about our hero, Tarvaris Jackson.

Viking Update asks some of the questions that need to start getting answered (perhaps tonight, but I really can't recall ever learning anything useful about a team or player from preseason).

The Vikes have a preseason game on KSTP tonight. Though I detest preseason football, I still love the Vikings, and I miss them, and I want to see our hero, Tarvaris Jackson. So I'll probably be sucking down gin and watching the game. Maybe I'll have something interesting to say about it afterward, but probably not. But I hope you all enjoy the game, with our without the juniper berry's sweet nectar.

Michael Vick murdered Barbaro

When Barbaro the horse was hospitalized and then died, and there were a lot of human supporters and then human mourners, the sports blogosphere was generally cynical, snarky, irreverent, and a bit iconoclastic.

"Just a horse," was the rallying cry as the horse and anybody who cared about him at all got mocked incessantly.

Now, Michael Vick is accused of making dogs fight each other to death.

Is the general tone of the blogosphere something akin to "Just a dog"? No, generally, the sports blogosphere has both mocked and vilified Vick. Rather than dismissing the charges with the same "Just an animal" tone that Barbaro was dismissed, sports bloggers used the opportunity to make fun of Vick. It gave sports bloggers a chance to be cynical, snarky, irreverent, and a bit iconoclastic at the expense of Vick.

Why are we not supposed to care about Barbaro because it's "just a horse," but we're supposed to think Michael Vick is a bad person because of the way he treats dogs?

So are there principles in the sports blogosphere? Or are you all just looking for a chance to mock anything?

Blizzard: bloggenshault

If you think this blog has sucked lately, keep a couple things in mind:

I haven't watched a sporting event in about two months.
I don't follow baseball. The only thing pro golf means to me is that TNT might not be showing Law & Order in the afternoon. But things will pick up: I might watch the Viking preseason games (though I utterly detest preseason, a little gin can make it watchable). And soon real football will start and there will be lots to say.

The Hazelweird Fantasy Draft is next Friday.
I spend much of the day obsessed over paranoid fantasies about all the bad things that could happen to me. With obsessive-compulsive tendencies and a lot of free time, I can imagine all sorts of ways all sorts of mysterious entities could screw me. So there's no way I'm going to give away vital fantasy football information when I know people are trying to screw me. I've buried at least two good blog topics because they revealed too much about my fantasy football strategies (and I've avoided a lot of interesting links for the same reason). Right now you might be saying, "You're a moron, PV. You wrote fantasy previews for every team, and created a separate section in a visible place for people to access them. You are an ignorant fool." But all my fantasy previews were written to be interesting and insightful, but not to give away anything too specific to my plans (I can write about viable fantasy starters without revealing who I want to be my fantasy starters). So while I live as an obsessive paranoid wreck...well, that's most of the time...While I'm specifically paranoid about the upcoming fantasy draft, this blog suffers.

But here are just a few links you can follow to read things more interesting than this sucky blog.

Adrian Peterson is getting ready for his first pro preseason game: read about it at the Pioneer Press and Viking Update.

Also at the Pioneer Press you can read about how Tarvaris Jackson is approaching the preseason.

Mostly Minnesota Blizzard

Peter King provides his Training Camp Postcard for the Vikings. One highlight: "I think Chad Greenway is one of the fastest linebackers I've seen this summer." Don't give me the chills, Mr. King. He also talks about our hero, Tarvaris Jackson.

The Star Tribune looks at the work the Vikes are doing to improve their kick and punt coverage.

The Pioneer Press suggests Visanthe Shiancoe might be capable of big plays from the tight end position (at least, he's been showing it in practice).

Daily Norseman looks at the Vikings' Madden 08 ratings.

Hashmarks says the Vikes are the third worst team in the league. We have to expect national commentators to think little of the Vikes primarily because of our hero, Tarvaris Jackson. Admittedly, if I were looking at a team I didn't follow closely, and its QB was a second-year second-round Division I-AA QB, I'd have my doubts too. But I will be shocked if the Vikings end the season as one of the three worst teams in the league. QB is the most important position in football, no doubt; however, the Vikings have enough strengths in other areas to at least compete.

Wages of Wins looks at the Kevin Garnett trade, particularly how it could affect the Wolves (with reference to my fictional hero, George Costanza).

Stop Mike Lupica, I appreciate anybody that can whip out Wordsworth when talking about sports.

Oh, Priest, keep making me believe; I'm willing to suspend all disbelief when it comes to you (Sports Illustrated).

I thought ESPN had a useful analysis of context for different reactions to the Michael Vick story in "A History of Mistrust;" Leave the Man Alone, however, wasn't impressed, and the HCIC offers her own useful analysis. By the way, it's interesting that there are federal laws that can be used to prosecute people for fighting animals (not directly: crossing state lines, conspiracy, all that jazz), but according to wikipedia, "There is no federal law that regulates the humane treatment of chickens." In U.S. law, not all animals are created equal. Chickens can be mutilated and be made to spend their entire lives in tiny cages. Outrage over this state of affairs is primarily limited to the animal rights crowd. If Michael Vick wanted to raise chickens instead of (allegedly) fight dogs, he could cut off their beaks himself and put them in tiny cages (even making them share the tiny cages), never letting them out and letting them get ornery with each other. This is common practice. Actually, with no laws regulated humane treatment of chickens, when it is time to slaughter them he could probably tie a chicken up upside down and make a chicken pinata, whacking it with a stick. I'm not sure there's any law to punish him if he wanted to poke the chickens' eyes out with a hot poker. PETA turns up some pretty sadistic treatment of chickens in its investigations of chicken suppliers, so it's not that far off: "throwing live birds against walls, kicking them like soccer balls, and spitting tobacco juice into their eyes [...] Birds impaled by transport cages, kicked and thrown around by workers, and crushed to death in dumping machines." Hey, just think about your outrage over the torture of dogs, and consider why there isn't outrage over routine torture of chickens.

Little Viking Blizzard

The Viking offensive line is set at three positions; we can be confident in the play of left tackle Bryant McKinnie, left guard Steve Hutchinson, and center Matt Birk. But the right guard and right tackle positions have been a problem for at least two seasons. You can read about the battles for these positions at the Star Tribune and at Viking Update.

Access Vikings has the current Viking depth chart.

Larry Weisman of USA Today asks, "Is Peterson a home run hitter for Vikings?" (and I like how Weisman picks up on the "home run" cliche).

Fantasy Strategy: Demeanor

In a fantasy auction, your draft demeanor makes a big difference. As the Hazelweird League auction takes place in ten days, however, I can't tell you any draft demeanor strategies (because as I've said repeatedly, all the rat-bastards in my league would love to screw with me).

However, pre-draft demeanor is important too; your attitude going into the draft can have an impact on the goings on of the draft. If you're hanging out with your competitors part of the day before your draft, you have to know: the game is already started. And I'll share my pre-draft strategy with you.

My pre-draft strategy is what I call the Response Rave.

It has two parts.

1. Don't bring up any players yourself. Let other people mention players (and pay close attention), but don't initiate conversation on any player.

2. Rave about whatever players are brought up. I mean, rave. Talk about how excited you are about the player. Talk about how great you think that player will be. And don't just rave generally, but individualize each discussion.

"Ladanian Tomlinson? I actually expect him to do better now that Norv Turner is the coach. He always feeds it to his feature back."

"Marvin Harrison? He's so reliable, and it doesn't matter to me how old he is: I'm really excited about him."

And don't just rave about the good players; rave about any bad players that come up, too. And don't be afraid to just make up statistics about each player.

"Bobby Wade? You know he actually has a really good catch percentage in his career; now that he's a starter, he should put up good numbers."

Ideally, you should play Madden video games with your competitors before the game. This naturally brings up conversations about the players on the screen, and you can spout about how great that player is.

This strategy has multiple uses.

1. At first, people will think they're learning your attitudes about different players. As you continue to rave about any and every player, they will realize that nothing you say means anything, and they can get confused.

2. If they are excited about said player, they might get nervous hearing somebody else rave about that player, expecting they'll have to pay a lot. Even if they eventually think you're lying, they'll still be slightly edgy about those particular players.

3. Multiple people will hear these conversations, and might get confused about what people actually think.

4. You might actually plant some seeds, getting others more excited for some players, and possibly altering their draft strategy. If some of the reasons you state for why said player will be great sound plausible, you might actually convince others to think that.

5. You might plant some reverse seeds: if you rave about Charlie Frye immediately after raving about Tom Brady, people might think you don't value Brady much.

6. Or none of these things could happen, but you might be able to entertain or irritate your competitors on draft day.

Big Blizzard

More and more commentators are complaining about the lack of defensive players in the Hall of Fame, including CHFF, Peter King, and Jason Cole (via Fanhouse).

Dr. Z comments on the new HOF class (I've always liked that there are a few of the selectors that are very candid about the process).

A lot of people have been raving about Michael Irvin's HOF speech (such as Jeff Pearlman, the HCIC, and even PFT), and I'm glad. Irvin was one of my favorite players growing up, and I hope people can look to Irvin and see that a human being is always multi-dimensional. There's a lot about Irvin to admire, as a man and as a football player, and I hope people can see that.

The Pioneer Press looks at Adrian Peterson's practice performance thus far.

And the Pioneer Press looks at the Vikings' attempt to improve the pass rush this season (a huge need).

Pro-football-reference.com looks at some fun QB stats.

An excellent Viking blog took much of the summer off (and why not?), but The Ragnarok is back with posts on Tarvaris Jackson and the Viking offensive line.

Football Outsiders takes a look at screen plays.

FreeDarko takes a look at the Timberwolves.

I Heart KG is still all over any Garnett or T-Wolves news.

Ballers, Gamers, and Scoundrels comments on Nike suspending Michael Vick, and I'd like to add my own comment. The companies that hired Vick to endorse their products/services are not wrong to release him now. Nor are they right. Advertising works entirely on perception and image. Some companies hired Vick to endorse their products/services because perception of his image was good; now that perception of his image is bad, these companies no longer wish Vick to endorse their products/services. It has nothing to do with substance (such as, is Vick actually innocent or guilty, or whether he should be considered innocent until proven guilty, which of course legally he should); it has only to do with image. Such is the world of advertising (If you're interested in analysis of the ways advertising often uses negative and harmful imagery, particularly in its gender representations, check out GenderAds.com, which I'm planning on incorporating into my classes this fall. Oh, and remember to spay or neuter your pets, which controls the pet population, which helps prevent animal suffering).

Viking TEs

In Kevin Seifert's recent article "Leaving the past far behind," focusing on new Viking TE Visanthe Shiancoe (fun name), Seifert points out the problem the Vikings had at the tight end position last season:

"Vikings tight ends caught 59 passes last season, but they averaged 8 yards per reception and none went for longer than 24 yards."

The Vikings had no playmakers at the TE position, and make no mistake, that includes Jermaine Wiggins. It doesn't take that much for a TE to get 8 yards a catch; it's far below what other competent TEs can do (and don't blame Childress's offense: Wiggins yards per reception were negligibly different from '05 to '06).

Production doesn't mean a lot of catches; it means making plays that help the team. A tight end averaging 8 yards per catch really isn't doing a lot to help the offense move the ball downfield.

Can we expect more plays downfield from Viking TEs in 2007? Looking at the numbers, it doesn't appear so. Just look at the TEs currently listed on the Viking roster: Jeff Dugan, Braden Jones, Jim Kleinsasser, Visanthe Shiancoe, and Stephen Spach. Combined, these five tight ends have 204 career receptions for 1,631 yards--about 8 yards per catch. There's nothing in the previous performances of these players to suggest the Vikes now have a downfield threat at TE.

But Seifert quotes head coach Brad Childress, offensive coordinator Darrell Bevell, and Shiancoe himself talking about the high expectations for Shiancoe this season.

The Vikings are good in almost every aspect of football; they have good offensive linemen, running backs, defensive linemen, linebackers, defensive backs, and special teamers. The players involved in the passing game, however, have no record to give us confidence. The quarterbacks, wide receivers, and tight ends may be productive this season, but it's a prospect based much more on hope than on reason.

Shiancoe is like every other player involved in the passing game: thin resume but signs of potential. Let's hope that he can start a productive resume in 2007.

distracted blizzard

Cold Hard Football Facts looks at Thurman Thomas and, unfortunately, focuses on what he didn't do (didn't win a rushing title, didn't win a Super Bowl). But while we're speaking of Thurman Thomas, tell me how many players have led the league in yards from scrimmage four straight seasons? CHFF also looks at Marc Bulger, Daunte Culpepper, and Vince Young.

I thought we had escaped Irrelevant Controversy season, but ESPN examines what current NFL players are HOF-worthy.

Training camp fights are amusing, unless your star quarterback takes a swing at somebody's helmeted head. Centuries ago, people figured out that if they're going to go out and try kill each other, then others are going to try kill you too, so you should put something hard over your head. Mere fists mean nothing. And we've always loved Jerry Seinfeld's bit about helmets: people are engaging in behavior that crushes their heads, and instead of abstaining from such behavior, they put on a helmet so that they can continue to engage in such behavior. And you still shouldn't punch at these helmets.

Footballguys lists the players with the most 30+ yard plays in 2006.

What's happened in a year? Daunte Culpepper goes to a new team, and I don't bother writing about it for a few days? And when I do write about it, it gets four sentences in a different post? And these sentences are all questions providing no meaningful insight?

Hashmarks looks at the RBs on the Viking roster.

I want to follow my own rule on training camp injuries, but Adrian Peterson, Adrian Peterson! (Star Tribune, Pioneer Press).

And finally, we know that a bridge in Minneapolis has collapsed. While we spend time talking about sports, let us remember how we're talking about fun and games, and that random chance still controls our lives. These sort of random accidents remind us of Hazard, that indifferent force that uncaring guides so many events. While we make our way through this unstable, dangerous world, let us at least try have peace with each other. And enjoy our games, for in them we both give in to and resist the power of Hazard.

Look upon Marshall Faulk, and despair

Sometimes I just surf around pro-football-reference.com, find things that amaze me, and then feel like sharing.

From 1999 to 2001, Marshall Faulk may have been the best football player ever.

Let's look at his numbers:

1999: 16 games, 1,381 yards rushing (5.5 average), 87 catches, 1,048 yards receiving (12.0 average), 2429 total yards and 12 total TDs

2000: 14 games, 1,359 yards rushing (5.4 average), 81 catches, 830 yards receiving (10.2 average), 2189 total yards and 26 total TDs

2001: 14 games, 1,382 yards rushing (5.3 average), 83 catches, 765 yards (9.2 average), 2147 total yards and 21 total TDs

Let's just try to define how impressive this three year period was by marking off some of the specific feats Faulk accomplished.

1. three consecutive seasons with 1,300+ rushing yards and 80 receptions.
2. three consecutive seasons averaging significantly over 5 yards per rush (5.5, 5.4, and 5.3 is outstanding)
3. 1,000 yards rushing and 1,000 yards receiving in 1999
4. NFL record 2,429 yards from scrimmage in 1999
5. Then NFL record 26 TDs in 2000.
6. Average of 5.5 yards per rush and 12.0 yards per reception in 1999
7. three consecutive seasons with 2,100+ yards from scrimmage.

During this time, the Faulk's Rams were 37-11 in the regular season, 5-2 in the postseason (including two Super Bowl appearances and one Super Bowl win).

Faulk's 1999 season may be the best season ever for a RB, and his three year stretch of dynamic productivity alone should put him in the Hall of Fame. Let's just take this moment to stand back and appreciate the body of work.

Viking WRs

Which is the more dire situation: Minnesota wide receivers or Minnesota quarterbacks?

Judd Zulgad examines the wide receivers in "Vikings are in good hands," focusing on receivers coach George Stewart and the inexperience of the players at that position. Writes Zulgad:

"Stewart, entering his first season as the Vikings' receivers coach but his 20th year in the NFL, has been assigned the task of overseeing a group of 11 players that have a combined 245 catches in 179 games. Four of the receivers are rookies, including draft picks Rice (second round), Aundrae Allison (fifth round) and Williams (seventh round)."

Indeed, the Vikings should have a lot of young talent at the position, but it's a difficult position to learn, and so the inexperience is scary. It's obvious reading the article how critical Stewart is going to be if these Viking WRs are going to be above average.

Fantasy Football: from disinformation to stealth

Imagine George Costanza in a fantasy league, and you've got my attitude: paranoid, neurotic, obsessive, selfish, insecure.

It's time to move beyond disinformation, where everything I say could be a lie or a truth disguised as a lie and everybody should adhere to Fox Mulder's advice to trust no one.

Now we move to the part when I read all sorts of news stories that get me excited or leery about players' fantasy prospects, but keep these thoughts hidden. I still talk about fantasy football, but I do it without revealing anything important in my strategy or assessments.

But then the day of the draft, when we crawl off the floor in the morning and the rum and gin starts getting poured, everybody starts the disinformation again.

While subterfuge is useful in a snake draft, it is utterly necessary in an auction draft. You simply must not allow people to know how you really value players, or you will get screwed.

Am I childish, or are any of you doing the same sort of thing?

Was Deion really wrong about Vick?

In Don Banks' recent Snap Judgments column, here's what he had to say about Deion Sanders' comments on Michael Vick:

"Whoever I have to thank for pulling the plug on those Deion Sanders columns on the Michael Vick saga, much obliged.

"'What a dog means to Vick might be a lot different than what he means to you or I,' Sanders wrote in the Fort Myers (Fla.) News-Press. That's some twisted logic that Sanders employs to explain Vick's alleged off-field hobby."

My first reaction was, what twisted logic? If Michael Vick was involved in dog fighting, then isn't the statement "What a dog means to Vick might be a lot different than what he means to you or I" pretty indisputable? The only dispute is the grammatical error of using "I" instead of "me"; certainly what a dog means to Vick is very different from what a dog means to you or me!

Let's alter this statement. In some cultures, if I'm not mistaken, dogs are eaten. Would I be incorrect to say "What a dog means to a person who eats dogs might be a lot different than what he means to you or I"? No, such a statement is factually accurate. Let's make one more turn of the screw: in Hindu tradition, cows are sacred. Would it be incorrect to say "What a cow means to a Hindu might be a lot different than what he means to you or I"? Of course not! The statement doesn't contain "twisted logic": it is logically indisputable!

Was there something else in Deion Sanders' column that featured "twisted logic"? To find out, I went to Ballhype and found Sanders' column "Don't be too quick to judge" in the The News-Press. Let's look closely at this column, since this column has been criticized by more sportswriters than Banks.

Sanders begins by talking about the potential effects of the Vick indictment. All the things he says are pretty indisputable. Sanders then transitions with "This is all the result of perspective," and talks about how different people treat their dogs. When he describes how Vick might feel about his dogs, Sanders writes:

"You can still choose to condemn him, but I’m trying to take you inside his mind so you can understand where he might be coming from."

Sanders isn't trying to justify dog fighting or exonerate Vick from the alleged actions: he's merely trying to "take you inside [Vick's] mind," doing some long-distance psychoanalysis. He's not excusing, but trying to understand. That sounds good to me: even if you are going to condemn a person/group for any action or idea, it is worthwhile to try understand how that person/group thinks.

Sanders then says of the accusations, "All of that is enough to make me cringe," with a diversion story about his own dogs. He then asks why Vick particularly is being targeted:

"Are we using Vick to get to the ringleader? Are we using him to bring an end to dogfighting in the United States?"

These are reasonable questions. Law enforcement officers are targeting Vick because they believe he committed a crime. But why is the media giving it so much coverage? Why are animal rights groups devoting such energy to it? Sanders isn't wrong to ask these questions.

Sanders then calls Vick's alleged involvement "wrong," "stupid," and "immature." It doesn't appear to me that he's trying to justify Vick's actions.

Then he comes with a statement that a lot of people have picked up on to criticize:

"I believe Vick had a passion for dogfighting. I know many athletes who share his passion. The allure is the intensity and the challenge of a dog fighting to the death. It’s like ultimate fighting, but the dog doesn’t tap out when he knows he can’t win."

Let me ask you this: can you dispute this statement? Remember, Sanders isn't trying to justify Vick's alleged participation in dog fighting; all he's trying to do is "take you inside his mind so you can understand where he might be coming from." If you take "Vick had a passion for dogfighting" out of the context of the column, then you might criticize it. But Sanders is not trying to justify Vick's actions; he's merely saying he believes "Vick had a passion for dogfighting," which is, after all, probably true!

Sanders then makes the comparison between the status that comes with dog fighting to the status of wearing expensive jewelry or driving expensive cars. An odd comparison, perhaps, but again, Sanders is just trying to help people understand why Vick (or anybody) might be involved in dog fighting.

Sanders then uses the "Humans before animals" argument, suggesting we should focus more attention on the bad things that happen to people (like Darrent Williams or Antoine Walker) than to animals (a viewpoint that I know is shared by many in the mainstream). Next he suggests the dog fighting indictment is getting so much attention because it's a dull period of the sports year (which is partly true), and that Falcon fans should hope Vick comes back or they have to watch Joey Harrington (which is true).

After reading Sanders' column, I can't see what the controversy is about. What did Sanders say? From the reaction of some reporters, you'd think Sanders said Vick was right to murder dogs and we all should murder our dogs, too. What Deion Sanders said was fairly reasonable, and most of it can't be disputed too strongly (unless you pick and choose which quotes to use to imply that Sanders is justifying Vick's alleged actions).

But Banks isn't alone.

Peter King responded to Sanders' statement (particularly the quote about "passion for dog fighting") thusly:

"All I can say is this: These players, and player-sympathizers who write about the quasi-justification of NFL players being involved in this detestable bloodsport, need to start understanding what the rest of us in the United States think. Dogfighting is sick, and whoever participates in it is equally sick."

Sanders wasn't giving a "quasi-justification," at least not in my reading: he was explicitly trying to help people understand Vick's perspective, not trying to justify any actions. He called Vick "wrong" and said we could still condemn him, but that we should try to understand him first. And for some reason what matters to King is consensus: King lumps Sanders with those that "need to start understanding what the rest of us in the United States think." Mr. King, I happen to think meat eating is sick (though I don't consider "whoever participates in it" to be "equally sick"). But of course my views are not "what the rest of [...] the United States think[s]," so clearly my views don't matter. With King's use of the word "us" here, he seems to imply that if you don't follow the consensus (which he belongs to), you better realize what everybody else thinks and shut up.

Jennifer Floyd Engel of the Star-Telegram used the sub-heading "Idiot alert" to tell us that Deion Sanders tried to "defend" Vick (which he didn't), and picks quotes to criticize without recognizing the larger point of the column, which wasn't to justify dog fighting but to explore why Vick might enjoy dog fighting and why Vick is getting so much attention.

Don't just read the passages some sportswriters have selected for criticism, and believe their (flawed) interpretation that Sanders is trying to defend Vick or justify dog fighting. Go read the column yourself and tell me which parts you would actually dispute (and you indeed might find parts to dispute).

Of course, "When Sanders submitted his follow-up column responding to the criticism to the NFL Network, the network refused to let The News-Press publish it on Sunday" (USA Today). That's too bad, because I would like to hear some further thoughts (and perhaps clarifications) from Sanders.

(And there are other ways for us to protect dogs from suffering: Simon Cowell reminds us never to leave a dog in a hot car. Keep your dog cool this summer!).

Reacting to Training Camp Injuries

During this time of year, we hear a lot of stories about football players being withheld from practice or leaving practice early with injury. But I have a basic rule for responding to these stories:

Don't panic unless you hear some form of the word "break," the word "weeks," or the letters "CL" together.

If you hear the words "break," "broke," or "broken" regarding a player, then you are allowed to panic (though you might not have to).

If you hear the word "weeks" in relation to a player (especially when combined with the word "to," as in "___ to ___ weeks," or "up to ___ weeks"), then you are allowed to panic (though you might not have to).

If you hear "ACL," "MCL," or any other "CL" out there in relation to a player, then you are allowed to panic (and most assuredly should).

Any other stories about injuries you can monitor or ignore at your leisure.

Are there any other words I'm missing?

very random blizzard

Football innovator Bill Walsh has died: see Dr. Z and Cold, Hard Football Facts for comments.

Signal to Noise comments on the Denver offensive line finding its voice.

Cold, Hard Football Facts does not think Curtis Martin is a Hall of Famer.

Suspension of Disbelief indeed: Priest Holmes talks about returning to football (SI).

Troy Williamson's....bravado? So sayeth the Star Tribune.

The Pioneer Press reports that Brad Childress sees progress in our hero, Tarvaris Jackson. Such reports are of course predictable, but still fun.

Minnesota: farm club for Boston sports stars

They got Randy Moss. Now they're getting Kevin Garnett.

The two superstars I've grown up cheering for (but failed to see bring Minnesota a championship) are now playing in a city with 16 NBA championships, as well as three Super Bowl wins and one World Series win in this decade.

Screw you, Boston.

But seriously (wait, but I was serious) Moving on...

The Timberwolves are right to trade Kevin Garnett. They are not built to compete for a championship in the next 2-3 years; why not bring in as many young talented players as they can, and perhaps build toward a championship in 4-6 years? Despite having one of the best players in the league (look at the Wages of Wins comparison between KG and Tim Duncan), the Timberwolves have been unable to make the playoffs for the past three seasons. If you're going to lose anyway, why not trade this tremendous asset now in the hopes that you can win in the future? It is the right move.

Quick comments on the Vick dog fighting story

1. It's getting rather wearisome: everybody is chiming in with comments, and news about Vick is usually the top story on football pages of news sites. Training camps have begun--real football teams are practicing real football. I wish more attention could be devoted to that than to Michael Vick's legal situation. Still, among all the chatter, it's good to look at primary source documents. The Smoking Gun (via Hashmarks) has the plea agreement between the U.S. and Tony Taylor.

I'm mostly going to stick to my efforts not to focus a great deal of attention on this story, other than occasional brief comments such as this.

2. It has become very difficult to argue that there was no dog fighting operation at all on Vick's property. It has also become increasingly difficult to argue that Vick had no involvement. Still, it's also hard to argue with the NAACP, which argues for restraint from judgment and vilification of Michael Vick before due process of the law takes its course (Sports Illustrated).

3. Though nobody would call it such, have you noticed the version of "political correctness" that has emerged in this dog fighting story? See if you recognize the following pattern:

a. Current or former athlete says something that sounds tolerant of dog fighting and/or Michael Vick.
b. Many people and media members lambaste the athlete, usually in harsh, derogatory terms.
c. The athlete makes a statement apologizing for or clarifying his previous comments.

That's a pretty familiar pattern, eh?

4. PETA is an organization I have respect for, but it also has two primary activities, in order:

a. efforts toward more ethical treatment of animals by humans.
b. self-promotion.

PETA is globbing onto the Vick dog fighting story because it is guaranteed to get it publicity (and I don't begrudge PETA for it). But PETA is wrong to demand Vick's employers' suspend Vick before he has been convicted. PETA usually uses its relentless tactics toward changes in corporate policies that actually impact treatment of animals. The unrelenting protests to get Vick suspended do not directly impact treatment of animals. PETA should certainly monitor and comment on this situation, but it would be better served showing some restraint, rather than making demands that really don't matter to its cause.

5. This story does, of course, relate to actual football: it seems unlikely that Vick will be playing with the Falcons this year, and that means Joey Harrington is once again an NFL starter. And look at here: the Falcons open the season at the Metrodome against the Vikings.

As Lion QB, Joey Harrington never beat the Vikings (the Lions last beat the Vikings in 2001). As Dolphin QB, he "led" his team to a victory over the Vikings (really, the Dolphins' two defensive touchdowns in the fourth quarter were more responsible).

So the Vikings are now opening the season at home, against a Falcon team that was 21st in team defense last season (29th in yards passing and 32nd in passing yards per attempt). They face a team with a new coach, and a team that might be without (or with a hobbling) Warrick Dunn. And this team will be quarterbacked by Joey Harrington.

The Vikings have a good chance to start the season 1-0, and for Tarvaris Jackson and Adrian Peterson to get a solid start to the season.

6. If you are interested in knowing more about somebody working to help animals, check out The Jane Goodall Institute.

2007's Plea to the Spirit of Fantasy Football (or, evading adulthood and responsibility)

Last summer, in an attempt to discover some mystical power of football knowledge, I grew a ridiculous moustache for the Hazelweird fantasy football draft. Alas, my first two selections were Clinton Portis and Randy Moss; the moustache contained no hidden secrets of fantasy football future (though despite these horrendous picks, I still finished in the top half of the league).

The secrets of fantasy football knowledge are not so easily attained.

But later I discovered I was as a pagan philosopher attempting to describe the true God. The Spirit of Fantasy Football revealed itself to our league, and we now live with a deeper, fuller understanding of the meaning of our fantasy football exploits.

The Spirit of Fantasy Football leaves his home in the Shadow of the Endzone to sit at our draft table.

The Spirit of Fantasy Football cannot, I learned, be won over with a moustache. It takes a deeper sacrifice than looking ridiculous for a month to win his approval and help.

And so in 2007 I come with a pure heart and noble mind to the Spirit of Fantasy Football and plea for aid in this time of need.

I come with a headband.

That is what the Spirit of Fantasy Football asks of us. Not silly moustaches. We don't even have to spend our money on magazines. He asks only that we wear our headbands, our symbols of loyalty, during the draft.

This headband comes with advantages. If you have an infantile compulsion for playing with your hair, the headband aids in preventing such a distraction during the critical period. If for whatever reason you expect to sweat during your draft, the headband will help. And the headband comes with extra intimidation. Cleopatra is often represented with a headband, and if she were in an auction league, she would freeze the blood in your veins, getting whichever players she wished.

This steely gaze and gorgeous headband strike fear into Cleopatra's fantasy football opponents.

And so in 2007, I humbly beseech the aid of the Spirit of Fantasy Football, and come to the draft table with the symbol of my devotion openly displayed.

A preview of PV during the 2007 fantasy draft auction

But the Spirit of Fantasy Football reveals himself to different individuals in different ways. How do you attempt to summon his support during your draft?