A commenter yesterday got me going. Under the post about the Vikings/Cowboys game the commenter was stating that the left side is nothing special and that the right side is performing just as well. Thus this fan thought that the left side was being overpaid and the money should have been spent elsewhere. But is this true? Is the right side producing as well as the left side of the offensive line when it comes to the running game? I went and looked at the play-by-play for all the games and tracked the production of the halfbacks (Peterson, Taylor, and Moore) here are the reuslts game-by-game and the totals for the season so far.
Atlanta
Peterson
(Left) 7 carries 42 yards
(Middle) 4 carries 21 yards
(Right) 8 carries 40 yards
Taylor
(Left) 1 carry 0 yds
(Middle) 0 carries
(Right) 2 carries 18 yds
Detroit
Peterson
(Left) 11 carries 44 yards
(Middle) 2 carries 9 yards
(Right) 7 carries 13 yards
Moore
(Left) 2 carries 7 yards
(Middle) 3 carries 34 yards
(Right) 1 carry 9 yards
Kansas City
Peterson
(Left) 6 carries 13 yards
(Middle) 11 carries 48 yards
(Right) 8 carries 41 yards 1 TD
Moore
(Left) 1 carry 0 yards
(Middle) 3 carries 21 yards
(Right) 0 Carries
Green Bay
Peterson
(Left) 9 carries 51 yards
(Middle) 1 carry 2 yards
(Right) 2 carries 59 yards
Taylor
(Left) 3 carries 3 yards
(Middle) 4 carries 46 yards
(Right) 1 carry 9 yards
Chicago
Peterson
(Left) 13 carries 193 yards 3 TDs
(Middle) 0 carries
(Right) 7 carries 31 yards
Taylor
(Left) 9 carries 44 yards
(Middle) 0 carries
(Right) 13 carries 39 yards
Dallas
Peterson
(Left) 4 carries 47 yards 1 TD
(Middle) 2 carries 7 yards
(Right) 6 carries 9 yards
Taylor
(Left) 2 carries 3 yards
(Middle) 5 carries 19 yards
(Right) 3 carries 25 yards
Totals
Peterson
(Left) 50 carries 390 yards 4 TDs (7.8 yds/carry)
(Middle) 20 carries 87 yards (4.4 yds/carry)
(Right) 38 carries 193 yards 1 TD (5.1 yds/carry)
Taylor
(Left) 15 carries 50 yards (3.3 yds/carry)
(Middle) 9 carries 65 yards (7.2 yds/carry)
(Right) 19 carries 73 yards (3.8 yds/carry)
Moore
(Left) 3 carries 7 yards (2.3 yds/carry)
(Middle) 6 carries 55 yards (9.2 yds/carry)
(Right) 1 carry 9 yards (9.0 yds/carry)
ALL VIKINGS HALFBACKS
(Left) 68 carries 447 yards 4 TDs (6.6 yds/carry)
(Middle) 35 carries 197 yards (5.6 yds/carry)
(Right) 58 carries 275 yards 1 TD (4.7 yds/carry)
So there you have it. Those are the stats, and my interpretation of the stats is that the LEFT side is superior to the right side in the running game. When over 6 games the halfbacks are averaging 1.9 yds more per carry to the left side that all adds up. Fact is the Vikings have a great running game and perhaps need to stick to it a little more. This team is going to be predicated on getting their RBs a total of 35-45 carries a game. When this happens I predict wins for the Vikings.
(data compiled from Yahoo box scores)
Monday, October 22, 2007
On the Couch: week seven
My initial (and brief) thoughts on the Viking game are below at "Coming off the ledge: Cowboys 24, Vikings 14." "On the Couch is a chance to discuss other football games from the weekend, other issues in the NFL, and further comments on the Vikings.
NFL.com week seven scores
Randy Moss
Patriots-Dolphins Box Score
It likely won't go down as such because it came in a blowout win, but Randy Moss' second touchdown catch on Sunday may have been the greatest catch in NFL history. He appeared to catch the ball with one hand on his side while facing away from the throw. And he made it look easy.
Moss is playing better than I've ever seen him play. And of course we're seeing Randy Moss help Tom Brady to an historic season. I don't care what defenses he's faced--27 touchdowns to 2 interceptions in seven games is unrealistic. We have the Tecmo Colts, and now we have the Tecmo Patriots.
Last week on ESPN's page two I really believe I saw a brief article by LZ Granderson arguing for Randy Moss as MVP, but now that I can't find it anywhere there I fear I may have dreamed it all. The thrust of the argument (as I remember) is that while Tom Brady is spectacular, he's not the first quarterback that has had a career year playing with Randy Moss, and that Moss finally deserves an MVP for his ability to dictate a defense. Since the Granderson argument disappeared (or was entirely imagined), you can look at this Greg Garber article about Randy Moss' presence on two of the greatest scoring offenses ever.
Moss dictates everything. He's so great he can make spectacular long touchdown passes in double coverage. He's also so great the that a defense must constantly double cover him, leaving other receivers with a lot of openings on the field (on Wes Welker's first touchdown, a safety was lined up at the very back of the end zone and moved along with Moss' pattern, helping to leave a big gap for Welker).
The only thing that frustrates me about this all is how much ridiculous pleasure Boston sports fans are getting. On the same day that Tom Brady and Randy Moss lead a team with three championships this decade to their seventh consecutive blowout win, the Red Sox who have already won a championship this decade advance to the World Series (SI). I'm a sports fan in a state that has seen two pro championships since the Lakers moved (the last in 1991). Philadelphia fans haven't seen a pro championship since 1983. Cleveland fans haven't seen a pro championship since 1964. Do we even need to put a number on Buffalo Bills' fans sufferings? Some of us grow up without the real expectation that our pro teams should be relevant championship contenders; others get to bask in sports fan glory repeatedly. Maybe someday. I still face the temptation to start rooting for the Twins and Wild because the Timberwolves and Vikings (the teams I do care about) seem so far away from championship contention.
The Giants are actually good.
Giants-49ers Box Score
They can run the ball. They can make big plays in the passing game. They can rush the passer. They actually look like a team that could advance in the playoffs. Who is better than them in the NFC? Dallas has already beaten them in Dallas, but the Giants can compete with them. Green Bay has a good record, but the Packers can't run the ball and I suspect Favre will wear down this season. The Giants really could make it to the Super Bowl.
Philadelphia is losing control of its season
Eagles-Bears Box Score
The Eagles have lost a lot of close, winnable games, but in a competitive division, in a combative sports city, with Donovan McNabb and Andy Reid facing a lot of pressure, at 2-4 they're in danger of coming completely apart soon.
The Vikings get the Eagles at the Metrodome next week (I'm excited to attend the game). I fully expect McNabb to throw for 375 yards, and I'm serious. But the Vikings could be facing a team on the brink of implosion. With a good defense, good running game, and the benefits of the Metrodome (I can't even remember the last time the Eagles played here), the Vikes will make this a fun game to watch.
Brad Childress
Even now, I remain insistent that the Vikings' offensive problems right now are a matter of personnel, not coaching strategy, game planning, or decisions. I don't see bad play calling and I don't see (very many) boneheaded coaching decisions. However, Childress is responsible for whatever role he had in leaving this team with the passing game in its current state. And if he is responsible for the team's failure to address the quarterback position or significantly upgrade the wide receiver position in the off-season, that may be a fireable offense. And he's still the coach, so he is responsible for getting the most production possible out of the personnel he has (which, for all we know, he is). The Vikings have been limited to one offensive touchdown in 5 of 6 games. That is poor.
MDS argues Adrian Peterson is overrated; a flaw in his argument suggests Peterson might be underrated.
Last week Michael David Smith wrote a post arguing Adrian Peterson is overrated. However, a few of his arguments might be used to argue Peterson is better than he looks.
Smith notes that Peterson has had a lot of negative plays:
"Peterson gets stopped at or behind the line of scrimmage quite a bit. He got stopped at the line on four of his carries Sunday and behind the line on four other carries. The Vikings' offensive line deserves plenty of the blame for that, but a running back who fails to pick up a single yard on 40 percent of his carries has some work to do."
I too have observed a lot of plays for no gain or worse from Peterson; however, in very few of these plays was Peterson dancing around, bringing the loss on himself. Often Peterson would get the ball and be immediately met by defensive players. And this brings us to the next point MDS makes:
"According to the advanced statistic DPAR, which breaks down every single play and adjusts for the situation and the opponent, Peterson was only the fourth most productive running back in the league [last] Sunday..."
And here we can explain the fundamental flaw of the argument. The Football Outsiders' DVOA and DPAR stats do not separate individual players from their team contexts: "DVOA is still far away from the point where we can use it to represent the value of a player separate from the performance of his ten teammates that are also involved in each play."
Why does Peterson have a high number of negative or no gain runs? Because he plays on a team with no real passing threat, and defenses are allowed to load up and prepare for the run. That's why Peterson faces a high percentage of plays when defenders meet him immediately.
Adrian Peterson plays on an historically bad passing offense. Imagine Peterson playing on a regularly bad passing offense. Now imagine him playing on a mediocre passing offense. Now, if you can, try and imagine him playing on a good passing offense. Imagine what he could do in the extra space provided when safeties line up deep. Imagine what he could do when defensive formations are designed to prevent passing plays, too.
Peterson is a brilliant runner: you can tell by looking at his numbers, and you can tell by watching him play. However, he's also facing defenses that have no reason at all to legitimately defend the pass, and thus he faces the proverbial eight men in the box pretty constantly. Defensive linemen, linebackers, and defensive backs can play not only with the priority of stopping the Viking running game, but with very little concern at all for stopping the passing game.
This is why the very argument MDS uses to call Adrian Peterson overrated might be used to argue Peterson is underrated: we can only evaluate him in his team context, and his team context (while providing him with good run blocking from the offensive line) provides him with no help in the passing game.
Colts-Jaguars
NFL.com preview
This is probably the first time this season I really miss ESPN (I don't get it at home, which is why I have time to watch Journeyman); I'd really like to see this game (and going to a bar or friends' home to watch is rather inconvenient, as I teach until 7:30 anyway, plus I'd miss Journeyman. My wife and I have a lot of fun trying to name the year he's "journeyed" to based on the music, and making fun of the show in general. We make fun but we really do like the show, sort of like how we love Nip/Tuck but just shake our heads at each other over the sheer outrageousness).
Anyway, this is going to be good. The Colts have a much tougher division than the Patriots (Titans and Jaguars twice is tough), so they're going to have a harder time keeping pace with New England in the competition for homefield advantage in the playoffs. Jacksonville destroyed Indianapolis last season 44-17 (ESPN box score), and a couple months later the Colts were Super Bowl champs. Jacksonville is a good team (great defense, great running game, and so far Jack Del Rio looks smart for picking David Garrard over Byron Leftwich), but I still believe Peyton Manning is capable of putting up as many points as his team needs at pretty much any time.
Plus my Hazelweird fantasy hero Reggie Wayne and Ghosts' Blogger Invitational fantasy heroes Peyton Manning, Dallas Clark, and Adam Vinatieri are playing. I've said it before: if you don't have Colts on your fantasy team, you're probably not going to win your league. Certainly the Patriots are going bananas as the best offense this season, but the fantasy domination of the Pats has been limited to Tom Brady, Randy Moss, and Wes Welker (and if you've got them, bully for you). The Colts have a deeper fantasy team.
Enjoy that game, everybody.
NFL.com week seven scores
Randy Moss
Patriots-Dolphins Box Score
It likely won't go down as such because it came in a blowout win, but Randy Moss' second touchdown catch on Sunday may have been the greatest catch in NFL history. He appeared to catch the ball with one hand on his side while facing away from the throw. And he made it look easy.
Moss is playing better than I've ever seen him play. And of course we're seeing Randy Moss help Tom Brady to an historic season. I don't care what defenses he's faced--27 touchdowns to 2 interceptions in seven games is unrealistic. We have the Tecmo Colts, and now we have the Tecmo Patriots.
Last week on ESPN's page two I really believe I saw a brief article by LZ Granderson arguing for Randy Moss as MVP, but now that I can't find it anywhere there I fear I may have dreamed it all. The thrust of the argument (as I remember) is that while Tom Brady is spectacular, he's not the first quarterback that has had a career year playing with Randy Moss, and that Moss finally deserves an MVP for his ability to dictate a defense. Since the Granderson argument disappeared (or was entirely imagined), you can look at this Greg Garber article about Randy Moss' presence on two of the greatest scoring offenses ever.
Moss dictates everything. He's so great he can make spectacular long touchdown passes in double coverage. He's also so great the that a defense must constantly double cover him, leaving other receivers with a lot of openings on the field (on Wes Welker's first touchdown, a safety was lined up at the very back of the end zone and moved along with Moss' pattern, helping to leave a big gap for Welker).
The only thing that frustrates me about this all is how much ridiculous pleasure Boston sports fans are getting. On the same day that Tom Brady and Randy Moss lead a team with three championships this decade to their seventh consecutive blowout win, the Red Sox who have already won a championship this decade advance to the World Series (SI). I'm a sports fan in a state that has seen two pro championships since the Lakers moved (the last in 1991). Philadelphia fans haven't seen a pro championship since 1983. Cleveland fans haven't seen a pro championship since 1964. Do we even need to put a number on Buffalo Bills' fans sufferings? Some of us grow up without the real expectation that our pro teams should be relevant championship contenders; others get to bask in sports fan glory repeatedly. Maybe someday. I still face the temptation to start rooting for the Twins and Wild because the Timberwolves and Vikings (the teams I do care about) seem so far away from championship contention.
The Giants are actually good.
Giants-49ers Box Score
They can run the ball. They can make big plays in the passing game. They can rush the passer. They actually look like a team that could advance in the playoffs. Who is better than them in the NFC? Dallas has already beaten them in Dallas, but the Giants can compete with them. Green Bay has a good record, but the Packers can't run the ball and I suspect Favre will wear down this season. The Giants really could make it to the Super Bowl.
Philadelphia is losing control of its season
Eagles-Bears Box Score
The Eagles have lost a lot of close, winnable games, but in a competitive division, in a combative sports city, with Donovan McNabb and Andy Reid facing a lot of pressure, at 2-4 they're in danger of coming completely apart soon.
The Vikings get the Eagles at the Metrodome next week (I'm excited to attend the game). I fully expect McNabb to throw for 375 yards, and I'm serious. But the Vikings could be facing a team on the brink of implosion. With a good defense, good running game, and the benefits of the Metrodome (I can't even remember the last time the Eagles played here), the Vikes will make this a fun game to watch.
Brad Childress
Even now, I remain insistent that the Vikings' offensive problems right now are a matter of personnel, not coaching strategy, game planning, or decisions. I don't see bad play calling and I don't see (very many) boneheaded coaching decisions. However, Childress is responsible for whatever role he had in leaving this team with the passing game in its current state. And if he is responsible for the team's failure to address the quarterback position or significantly upgrade the wide receiver position in the off-season, that may be a fireable offense. And he's still the coach, so he is responsible for getting the most production possible out of the personnel he has (which, for all we know, he is). The Vikings have been limited to one offensive touchdown in 5 of 6 games. That is poor.
MDS argues Adrian Peterson is overrated; a flaw in his argument suggests Peterson might be underrated.
Last week Michael David Smith wrote a post arguing Adrian Peterson is overrated. However, a few of his arguments might be used to argue Peterson is better than he looks.
Smith notes that Peterson has had a lot of negative plays:
"Peterson gets stopped at or behind the line of scrimmage quite a bit. He got stopped at the line on four of his carries Sunday and behind the line on four other carries. The Vikings' offensive line deserves plenty of the blame for that, but a running back who fails to pick up a single yard on 40 percent of his carries has some work to do."
I too have observed a lot of plays for no gain or worse from Peterson; however, in very few of these plays was Peterson dancing around, bringing the loss on himself. Often Peterson would get the ball and be immediately met by defensive players. And this brings us to the next point MDS makes:
"According to the advanced statistic DPAR, which breaks down every single play and adjusts for the situation and the opponent, Peterson was only the fourth most productive running back in the league [last] Sunday..."
And here we can explain the fundamental flaw of the argument. The Football Outsiders' DVOA and DPAR stats do not separate individual players from their team contexts: "DVOA is still far away from the point where we can use it to represent the value of a player separate from the performance of his ten teammates that are also involved in each play."
Why does Peterson have a high number of negative or no gain runs? Because he plays on a team with no real passing threat, and defenses are allowed to load up and prepare for the run. That's why Peterson faces a high percentage of plays when defenders meet him immediately.
Adrian Peterson plays on an historically bad passing offense. Imagine Peterson playing on a regularly bad passing offense. Now imagine him playing on a mediocre passing offense. Now, if you can, try and imagine him playing on a good passing offense. Imagine what he could do in the extra space provided when safeties line up deep. Imagine what he could do when defensive formations are designed to prevent passing plays, too.
Peterson is a brilliant runner: you can tell by looking at his numbers, and you can tell by watching him play. However, he's also facing defenses that have no reason at all to legitimately defend the pass, and thus he faces the proverbial eight men in the box pretty constantly. Defensive linemen, linebackers, and defensive backs can play not only with the priority of stopping the Viking running game, but with very little concern at all for stopping the passing game.
This is why the very argument MDS uses to call Adrian Peterson overrated might be used to argue Peterson is underrated: we can only evaluate him in his team context, and his team context (while providing him with good run blocking from the offensive line) provides him with no help in the passing game.
Colts-Jaguars
NFL.com preview
This is probably the first time this season I really miss ESPN (I don't get it at home, which is why I have time to watch Journeyman); I'd really like to see this game (and going to a bar or friends' home to watch is rather inconvenient, as I teach until 7:30 anyway, plus I'd miss Journeyman. My wife and I have a lot of fun trying to name the year he's "journeyed" to based on the music, and making fun of the show in general. We make fun but we really do like the show, sort of like how we love Nip/Tuck but just shake our heads at each other over the sheer outrageousness).
Anyway, this is going to be good. The Colts have a much tougher division than the Patriots (Titans and Jaguars twice is tough), so they're going to have a harder time keeping pace with New England in the competition for homefield advantage in the playoffs. Jacksonville destroyed Indianapolis last season 44-17 (ESPN box score), and a couple months later the Colts were Super Bowl champs. Jacksonville is a good team (great defense, great running game, and so far Jack Del Rio looks smart for picking David Garrard over Byron Leftwich), but I still believe Peyton Manning is capable of putting up as many points as his team needs at pretty much any time.
Plus my Hazelweird fantasy hero Reggie Wayne and Ghosts' Blogger Invitational fantasy heroes Peyton Manning, Dallas Clark, and Adam Vinatieri are playing. I've said it before: if you don't have Colts on your fantasy team, you're probably not going to win your league. Certainly the Patriots are going bananas as the best offense this season, but the fantasy domination of the Pats has been limited to Tom Brady, Randy Moss, and Wes Welker (and if you've got them, bully for you). The Colts have a deeper fantasy team.
Enjoy that game, everybody.
Sunday, October 21, 2007
Coming off the ledge: Cowboys 24, Vikings 14
Vikings-Cowboys Box Score at NFL.com
Tarvaris Jackson
It all looks OK. Jackson is tall, mobile, and strong-armed. When he drops back, when he moves around, when he rifles a throw...it all looks like a potentially good NFL quarterback playing football.
Then you see where the ball ends up.
Tarvaris Jackson is not accurate. After today's awful 6-19 performance he's completing 45.9% of his passes this season. That's Mike McMahon bad. During today's broadcast, Troy Aikman said accuracy is the most important ability for a pro quarterback. He would say that, since accuracy was probably his greatest asset (he completed 61.5% of his passes in an offense that featured aggressive downfield passing), but I think he's probably right. Because pro football players are so fast and so quick, a quarterback needs to put the ball in a narrow spot; there's not a lot of space, and a quarterback is going to be required to make tight throws in coverage.
So far, Tarvaris Jackson hasn't shown that ability.
I don't know whether accuracy is an improvable skill at this level or not. It makes sense that practice would improve one's accuracy, and many quarterbacks have had lousy completion percentage early in their careers and improve greatly as their careers progressed (for example, see the early completion percentages for John Elway and Steve Young). However, I suspect that once players have reached the pro level, there's a certain natural ability to throw the ball accurately that practice isn't going to change very much.
And if Tarvaris Jackson doesn't improve his accuracy, it is glaringly obvious he cannot be the quarterback of the Minnesota Vikings.
On draft day, I was really desperate for the Vikings to draft Brady Quinn; I believe Quinn could be a 15 year franchise quarterback. I'm glad they drafted Adrian Peterson; I think there are between one and three running backs a decade with his ability. Since I've been watching football, Barry Sanders, Emmitt Smith, Terrell Davis, Marshall Faulk, and Ladanian Tomlinson are the elite RBs a class above everybody else. Peterson could be in that class, and I'm glad the Vikings took him.
But if Tarvaris Jackson doesn't show major improvement in his ability to throw the ball accurately this season, the Vikings are going to need to draft a quarterback early next season. That's fine: if they can hit on a good quarterback to pair with Peterson, they're going to be wickedly good very soon. But they need to know that. In 2006, Jackson was the Vikings' fourth draft pick, the last player selected in the second round; they don't have as much invested in him as a lot of people think. If he sucks this bad (and "sucks" is an accurate word to describe a 45.9 completion percentage), he cannot be the Viking quarterback of the present or future.
But 2007 is not lost
OK, the Vikes are 2-4--after playing 4 of 6 games on the road. That means that 6 of the next 10 games are in the Metrodome. The Viking defense is good enough and the pass offense bad enough that every game the Vikings play will be close, and I suspect they'll end up with between 6 and 9 wins. To get to 9 (and compete for a playoff spot), they have to go 7-3 the rest of the way. That's a long shot, and frankly, it will be surprising if they're able to do that; a lot of luck has to fall the Vikings' way. But with 6 more home games, it's possible, right? Right? Oh. I see I'm alone in this chamber, demanding to be treated as the King of Spain.
Tarvaris Jackson
It all looks OK. Jackson is tall, mobile, and strong-armed. When he drops back, when he moves around, when he rifles a throw...it all looks like a potentially good NFL quarterback playing football.
Then you see where the ball ends up.
Tarvaris Jackson is not accurate. After today's awful 6-19 performance he's completing 45.9% of his passes this season. That's Mike McMahon bad. During today's broadcast, Troy Aikman said accuracy is the most important ability for a pro quarterback. He would say that, since accuracy was probably his greatest asset (he completed 61.5% of his passes in an offense that featured aggressive downfield passing), but I think he's probably right. Because pro football players are so fast and so quick, a quarterback needs to put the ball in a narrow spot; there's not a lot of space, and a quarterback is going to be required to make tight throws in coverage.
So far, Tarvaris Jackson hasn't shown that ability.
I don't know whether accuracy is an improvable skill at this level or not. It makes sense that practice would improve one's accuracy, and many quarterbacks have had lousy completion percentage early in their careers and improve greatly as their careers progressed (for example, see the early completion percentages for John Elway and Steve Young). However, I suspect that once players have reached the pro level, there's a certain natural ability to throw the ball accurately that practice isn't going to change very much.
And if Tarvaris Jackson doesn't improve his accuracy, it is glaringly obvious he cannot be the quarterback of the Minnesota Vikings.
On draft day, I was really desperate for the Vikings to draft Brady Quinn; I believe Quinn could be a 15 year franchise quarterback. I'm glad they drafted Adrian Peterson; I think there are between one and three running backs a decade with his ability. Since I've been watching football, Barry Sanders, Emmitt Smith, Terrell Davis, Marshall Faulk, and Ladanian Tomlinson are the elite RBs a class above everybody else. Peterson could be in that class, and I'm glad the Vikings took him.
But if Tarvaris Jackson doesn't show major improvement in his ability to throw the ball accurately this season, the Vikings are going to need to draft a quarterback early next season. That's fine: if they can hit on a good quarterback to pair with Peterson, they're going to be wickedly good very soon. But they need to know that. In 2006, Jackson was the Vikings' fourth draft pick, the last player selected in the second round; they don't have as much invested in him as a lot of people think. If he sucks this bad (and "sucks" is an accurate word to describe a 45.9 completion percentage), he cannot be the Viking quarterback of the present or future.
But 2007 is not lost
OK, the Vikes are 2-4--after playing 4 of 6 games on the road. That means that 6 of the next 10 games are in the Metrodome. The Viking defense is good enough and the pass offense bad enough that every game the Vikings play will be close, and I suspect they'll end up with between 6 and 9 wins. To get to 9 (and compete for a playoff spot), they have to go 7-3 the rest of the way. That's a long shot, and frankly, it will be surprising if they're able to do that; a lot of luck has to fall the Vikings' way. But with 6 more home games, it's possible, right? Right? Oh. I see I'm alone in this chamber, demanding to be treated as the King of Spain.
Sports and War
The 2007-08 Upper Deck First Edition basketball set has a rookie insert set called "2007 NBA Rookie Draft Notices."
A picture of the player is on the left of the card. On the right appear the words "ORDER TO REPORT." Below that reads "To: (player's name)." In a small box labeled "SELECTIVE SERVICE INFO.," you can see the date of birth, hometown, position, and team of the player. Below is an image of a red stamped seal. The seal is a circle with an eagle in it; the circle includes the words "SERVICE REQUESTED" and a banner in the seal reads "DRAFT NOTICES."
Let's accept that the word "draft" for conscription into military service and the word "draft" for selection to a professional sports team has the same root. The Oxford English Dictionary (institution subscription required) includes the following noun and verb definitions with usage as early as the 18th century: "The drawing off, detachment, or selection of a party from a larger body for some special (spec. military) duty or purpose; spec. (esp. in U.S.), selective conscription" and "To draw off or out and remove (a party of persons, animals, or things) from a larger body for some special duty or purpose. Chiefly in Mil. use, and in Stock-farming: see quots. Also (chiefly U.S.), to conscript." The word has the meaning of selection for special service, but was usually associated with military service well before pro sports leagues held "drafts" (the OED doesn't even include reference to a sports draft), so I suspect sports leagues borrowed the term from the military usage.
Even if pro sports borrowed the word draft from the military usage, isn't it a little extreme for Upper Deck to make such a clear analogy on a card? "Draft Notices" sent by the "Selective Service" System inform men that they are being required to report for military duty, where they must sacrifice whatever plans they had for their lives, get training in how to kill people, and then possibly risk their lives in warfare. Is it responsible for Upper Deck to draw such a clear parallel between conscripts and basketball players, for whom a draft notice means playing professional basketball for millions of dollars?
A picture of the player is on the left of the card. On the right appear the words "ORDER TO REPORT." Below that reads "To: (player's name)." In a small box labeled "SELECTIVE SERVICE INFO.," you can see the date of birth, hometown, position, and team of the player. Below is an image of a red stamped seal. The seal is a circle with an eagle in it; the circle includes the words "SERVICE REQUESTED" and a banner in the seal reads "DRAFT NOTICES."
Let's accept that the word "draft" for conscription into military service and the word "draft" for selection to a professional sports team has the same root. The Oxford English Dictionary (institution subscription required) includes the following noun and verb definitions with usage as early as the 18th century: "The drawing off, detachment, or selection of a party from a larger body for some special (spec. military) duty or purpose; spec. (esp. in U.S.), selective conscription" and "To draw off or out and remove (a party of persons, animals, or things) from a larger body for some special duty or purpose. Chiefly in Mil. use, and in Stock-farming: see quots. Also (chiefly U.S.), to conscript." The word has the meaning of selection for special service, but was usually associated with military service well before pro sports leagues held "drafts" (the OED doesn't even include reference to a sports draft), so I suspect sports leagues borrowed the term from the military usage.
Even if pro sports borrowed the word draft from the military usage, isn't it a little extreme for Upper Deck to make such a clear analogy on a card? "Draft Notices" sent by the "Selective Service" System inform men that they are being required to report for military duty, where they must sacrifice whatever plans they had for their lives, get training in how to kill people, and then possibly risk their lives in warfare. Is it responsible for Upper Deck to draw such a clear parallel between conscripts and basketball players, for whom a draft notice means playing professional basketball for millions of dollars?
Friday, October 19, 2007
National Friday League, week seven
Dallas-Minnesota
Gosh, things should look bad. Tony Romo, Terrell Owens, and Jason Witten could exploit a questionable Viking pass defense. The good Dallas run defense should force Minnesota to try beat them with Tarvaris Jackson and the passing game. Yet I've got hope.
Romo-erotic does throw some wild passes; the Vikings will have the opportunity for interceptions. The Viking running game (not just Adrian Peterson, but Chester Taylor and a very good run blocking offensive line) should be good enough to deal with eight-man fronts. And last week's Tarvaris Jackson to Troy Williamson 60 yard touchdown connection can give us some hope that the Vikings are capable of some plays downfield.
It appears that two weak pass defenses and two strong run defenses will face off. The Vikes rank 31st in pass completions allowed, 30th in pass yards allowed, 19th in yards per attempt allowed, and 20th in touchdown passes allowed, while ranking 2nd in rushing yards allowed, 1st in rushing yards per attempt allowed, and 1st in touchdown runs allowed (0). The Cowboys rank 30th in pass completions allowed, 29th in pass yards allowed, and 30th in touchdown passes allowed (but a solid 10th in yards per attempt allowed), while ranking 8th in rush yards allowed and 3rd in rush yards per attempt allowed).
I think this game is as simple as the matchups between run offenses and defenses and pass offenses and defenses. The Cowboys and Vikings both have good run offenses: which team will be able to to run effectively against a good run defense? Considering the Vikes currently rank #1 in rush yards and #1 in rush yards per attempt, I think they should be able to move the ball on the ground against even good run defenses. The Vikings and Cowboys each have exploitable pass defenses: which team is going to be able to beat the other team in the passing game? The Cowboys have an obvious advantage, ranking 3rd in passing yards, 2nd in passing yards per attempt, and 2nd in passing touchdowns, so they should be able to move the ball in the air.
It would be overly optimistic to pick the Vikings in a game at Dallas. To win, the Vikings need to run the ball effectively, connect on some big passing plays, and force Romo into turnovers. Those things are possible, of course--the Vikes have a chance in this game. But this will be their toughest game so far this season.
Fox won't reveal starting lineups
Dr. Z complained about it, and Deuce of Davenport (via Ballhype) agrees with Dr. Z: it's a bad thing that Fox is no longer showing starting lineups at the beginning of games.
I agree that a network should at least let viewers know who is starting a game, particularly on offensive line (so many situational personnel changes at offensive skill positions and at just about every defensive position makes some of the actual starters less significant). But I've frequently been bothered with the way networks do the starting lineups anyway, for two reasons:
They're long and bulky. A simple visual of the team's starters is useful. What I don't need to see, NBC, is each player announcing his name and college. This often gets in the way of seeing the offenses and defenses line up, and for some reason I'm in a blind panic that I'll miss a play because they're going through the lineup. It's easy to present the lineups simply and quickly, and there's no need for the drawn out feature.
They appear inaccurate. Doesn't it seem like you've seen the lineup show two running backs, two wide receivers, and a tight end in the starting lineup, and then for the first play the offense comes out with three or four wide receivers? I don't even trust the lineups I see (plus I know that so many situational changes are going to occur during the game that the starting lineup isn't really going to tell me who is going to be impacting the game from beginning to end).
So I agree, we should get to see the lineups. But it's not as big a deal as all that. It's pretty easy to access rosters to know uniform numbers, and it's pretty easy to later access game books to see who actually started (though I don't know how Dr. Z does his charting, so maybe it is a hassle).
One more look at last week's Viking-Bear game
I don't think you can minimize the significance of the Vikings' win at Soldier Field last week.
Sure, the Bears aren't as good this season as they were last season. But in 2003 the 8-5 Vikings went to Soldier Field to play the 5-8 Chicago Bears (in Rex Grossman's first start, no less)--and lost. In 2004 the 7-4 Vikings went to Soldier Field to play the 4-7 Chicago Bears (with Chad Hutchinson at quarterback, no less)--and lost. The Vikings don't play well at Soldier Field, regardless of the quality of the two teams. To win a game at Soldier Field is good.
The game was also a notable improvement in Tarvaris Jackson's development. The last time we saw Jackson, he was on the road against the Lions throwing four interceptions; on Sunday he went into a road game and had no turnovers.
And regardless of the current quality of the Bear defense, this Viking offense has struggled the past few seasons against good and bad defenses alike. But they had offensive touchdowns of 35, 60, 67, and 73 yards. Something new is happening.
I don't know that a win at Soldier Field is a catalyst or even a sign that the 2007 Vikings are going to compete for the playoffs. But it's a good thing, and I think, a good thing for the future.
Week Seven Matchups
There are a lot of intriguing matchups week seven, and you can check NFL TV Distribution Maps to see what games you'll get to watch (it looks like a lot of you will get to watch my beloved Purple). The best game is the Monday Nighter, with 5-0 Indianapolis going at 4-1 Jacksonville (where last year's Super Bowl champs got pasted last season). The winner of that game will really be showing us something. But there appear to be a lot of competitive matchups Sunday, which may suggest a lot of close games with wild finishes.
Commercials
I'm finally ready to complain about those Visa Check Card commercials, where everything is humming along quickly and then some bozo tries to pay with cash and slows everything down. The premise is stupid: paying with cash is usually a quick transaction, at least as quick as using a card and possibly faster. Visa seems to be on a propaganda campaign to convince people that paying with a check card is faster than paying with cash, which I doubt is true.
But the recent New Orleans commercial...bleh. All these fun-loving people are buying up Saints merchandise, using their check cards and moving along. And then, here comes a yuppy in a pink polo shirt with a sweater wrapped around his shoulders, and he's buying tennis balls. He pays with cash and everybody stops to stare at him. Goodness, the appeal to populism (the regular folks loving their Saints opposed to the tennis playing and possibly rich snob) is pretty strong, isn't it? Furthermore, it's an appeal to popularity: be like everybody else (in appearance and action), or everybody will stop and stare at you for being an oddball). It annoys me every time I see it.
Tarvaris faces a 3-4
Mark Craig points out that the Cowboys run a 3-4 defense, which could have a big impact on Tarvaris Jackson.
Weekend
Enjoy your weekend everybody. Except Bear fans.
Gosh, things should look bad. Tony Romo, Terrell Owens, and Jason Witten could exploit a questionable Viking pass defense. The good Dallas run defense should force Minnesota to try beat them with Tarvaris Jackson and the passing game. Yet I've got hope.
Romo-erotic does throw some wild passes; the Vikings will have the opportunity for interceptions. The Viking running game (not just Adrian Peterson, but Chester Taylor and a very good run blocking offensive line) should be good enough to deal with eight-man fronts. And last week's Tarvaris Jackson to Troy Williamson 60 yard touchdown connection can give us some hope that the Vikings are capable of some plays downfield.
It appears that two weak pass defenses and two strong run defenses will face off. The Vikes rank 31st in pass completions allowed, 30th in pass yards allowed, 19th in yards per attempt allowed, and 20th in touchdown passes allowed, while ranking 2nd in rushing yards allowed, 1st in rushing yards per attempt allowed, and 1st in touchdown runs allowed (0). The Cowboys rank 30th in pass completions allowed, 29th in pass yards allowed, and 30th in touchdown passes allowed (but a solid 10th in yards per attempt allowed), while ranking 8th in rush yards allowed and 3rd in rush yards per attempt allowed).
I think this game is as simple as the matchups between run offenses and defenses and pass offenses and defenses. The Cowboys and Vikings both have good run offenses: which team will be able to to run effectively against a good run defense? Considering the Vikes currently rank #1 in rush yards and #1 in rush yards per attempt, I think they should be able to move the ball on the ground against even good run defenses. The Vikings and Cowboys each have exploitable pass defenses: which team is going to be able to beat the other team in the passing game? The Cowboys have an obvious advantage, ranking 3rd in passing yards, 2nd in passing yards per attempt, and 2nd in passing touchdowns, so they should be able to move the ball in the air.
It would be overly optimistic to pick the Vikings in a game at Dallas. To win, the Vikings need to run the ball effectively, connect on some big passing plays, and force Romo into turnovers. Those things are possible, of course--the Vikes have a chance in this game. But this will be their toughest game so far this season.
Fox won't reveal starting lineups
Dr. Z complained about it, and Deuce of Davenport (via Ballhype) agrees with Dr. Z: it's a bad thing that Fox is no longer showing starting lineups at the beginning of games.
I agree that a network should at least let viewers know who is starting a game, particularly on offensive line (so many situational personnel changes at offensive skill positions and at just about every defensive position makes some of the actual starters less significant). But I've frequently been bothered with the way networks do the starting lineups anyway, for two reasons:
They're long and bulky. A simple visual of the team's starters is useful. What I don't need to see, NBC, is each player announcing his name and college. This often gets in the way of seeing the offenses and defenses line up, and for some reason I'm in a blind panic that I'll miss a play because they're going through the lineup. It's easy to present the lineups simply and quickly, and there's no need for the drawn out feature.
They appear inaccurate. Doesn't it seem like you've seen the lineup show two running backs, two wide receivers, and a tight end in the starting lineup, and then for the first play the offense comes out with three or four wide receivers? I don't even trust the lineups I see (plus I know that so many situational changes are going to occur during the game that the starting lineup isn't really going to tell me who is going to be impacting the game from beginning to end).
So I agree, we should get to see the lineups. But it's not as big a deal as all that. It's pretty easy to access rosters to know uniform numbers, and it's pretty easy to later access game books to see who actually started (though I don't know how Dr. Z does his charting, so maybe it is a hassle).
One more look at last week's Viking-Bear game
I don't think you can minimize the significance of the Vikings' win at Soldier Field last week.
Sure, the Bears aren't as good this season as they were last season. But in 2003 the 8-5 Vikings went to Soldier Field to play the 5-8 Chicago Bears (in Rex Grossman's first start, no less)--and lost. In 2004 the 7-4 Vikings went to Soldier Field to play the 4-7 Chicago Bears (with Chad Hutchinson at quarterback, no less)--and lost. The Vikings don't play well at Soldier Field, regardless of the quality of the two teams. To win a game at Soldier Field is good.
The game was also a notable improvement in Tarvaris Jackson's development. The last time we saw Jackson, he was on the road against the Lions throwing four interceptions; on Sunday he went into a road game and had no turnovers.
And regardless of the current quality of the Bear defense, this Viking offense has struggled the past few seasons against good and bad defenses alike. But they had offensive touchdowns of 35, 60, 67, and 73 yards. Something new is happening.
I don't know that a win at Soldier Field is a catalyst or even a sign that the 2007 Vikings are going to compete for the playoffs. But it's a good thing, and I think, a good thing for the future.
Week Seven Matchups
There are a lot of intriguing matchups week seven, and you can check NFL TV Distribution Maps to see what games you'll get to watch (it looks like a lot of you will get to watch my beloved Purple). The best game is the Monday Nighter, with 5-0 Indianapolis going at 4-1 Jacksonville (where last year's Super Bowl champs got pasted last season). The winner of that game will really be showing us something. But there appear to be a lot of competitive matchups Sunday, which may suggest a lot of close games with wild finishes.
Commercials
I'm finally ready to complain about those Visa Check Card commercials, where everything is humming along quickly and then some bozo tries to pay with cash and slows everything down. The premise is stupid: paying with cash is usually a quick transaction, at least as quick as using a card and possibly faster. Visa seems to be on a propaganda campaign to convince people that paying with a check card is faster than paying with cash, which I doubt is true.
But the recent New Orleans commercial...bleh. All these fun-loving people are buying up Saints merchandise, using their check cards and moving along. And then, here comes a yuppy in a pink polo shirt with a sweater wrapped around his shoulders, and he's buying tennis balls. He pays with cash and everybody stops to stare at him. Goodness, the appeal to populism (the regular folks loving their Saints opposed to the tennis playing and possibly rich snob) is pretty strong, isn't it? Furthermore, it's an appeal to popularity: be like everybody else (in appearance and action), or everybody will stop and stare at you for being an oddball). It annoys me every time I see it.
Tarvaris faces a 3-4
Mark Craig points out that the Cowboys run a 3-4 defense, which could have a big impact on Tarvaris Jackson.
Weekend
Enjoy your weekend everybody. Except Bear fans.
Thursday, October 18, 2007
Thursday Viking Blizzard
The importance of Adrian Peterson's big plays
In the first four Viking games, Adrian Peterson showed the ability to churn out solid runs and first downs. But because of the weaknesses in the Viking passing game, those consistently good runs often came on drives that stalled anyway. As a result, the Vikings had scored just one offensive touchdown in each if their first four games.
Against the Bears, Peterson busted out three long touchdown runs. The Vikings had their best offensive game of the season, racking up four offensive touchdowns and 34 points.
And that's just what this Viking team needs from Peterson. The passing game is currently inadequate to consistently maintain drives. But if Peterson can both run consistently picking up first downs, and break long plays to score himself, then the Viking offense is in business.
The Vikes have eight offensive touchdowns this season. Adrian Peterson has scored five of them--and three of those were plays of 60+ yards. Including special teams, Peterson has had five plays of 55 yards or more.
Running behind a very good run blocking offensive line, Peterson is capable of taking the Viking offense from the "really sucks" level to the "occasionally electric" level.
Links
AP's emergence has brought with it a lot of national attention that the Vikings have lacked in recent years. Here's ESPN's Jeffri Chadiha with a feature on Peterson. Peterson alone can make the Vikings a TV draw, and if he keeps it up, Peterson can be the one to fill those Metrodome seats the rest of the season.
The Pioneer Press' Sean Jensen (a writer/reporter I like) says the "Minnesota Vikings might break out the passing game" against Dallas. The Star Tribune's Kevin Seifert (another writer/reporter I like) also writes about the Vikings' offense and passing game in "Vikings give opposition something to think about."
Patrick Reusse talks to Bryant McKinnie.
I Dislike Your Favorite Team and Daily Norseman also found Jim Souhan's latest Childress-bashing column annoying. I really wonder how Souhan pictures his intended audience. A bunch of unthinking schlubs laughing at his hideous jokes as they read the newspaper, agreeing with his baseless screeds? I don't think he's writing for an internet audience. I don't want to suggest that internet readers of his column are smarter than newspaper readers of his column (that's a generalization, and obviously false). But let's make a few generalizations about bloggers (and other internet commenters and readers). Since we are writing, we understand prose and are capable of evaluating what we read critically. Since we're on the internet, we're generally adept at researching on the internet, meaning we can easily verify facts and access statistics to defend our arguments (or shoot down yours). And finally, the internet is sort of the primary realm for rigorous statistical analysis of sports, and since we're used to well-supported and well-reasoned analysis, we respond to the pulp of columnists like Souhan pretty negatively.
Vikings.com takes note of Troy Williamson's 60 yard touchdown catch. You know the expectations for the passing game have slipped since the 1998-2004 period, when a single 60 yard completion has us reeling in excitement.
In the first four Viking games, Adrian Peterson showed the ability to churn out solid runs and first downs. But because of the weaknesses in the Viking passing game, those consistently good runs often came on drives that stalled anyway. As a result, the Vikings had scored just one offensive touchdown in each if their first four games.
Against the Bears, Peterson busted out three long touchdown runs. The Vikings had their best offensive game of the season, racking up four offensive touchdowns and 34 points.
And that's just what this Viking team needs from Peterson. The passing game is currently inadequate to consistently maintain drives. But if Peterson can both run consistently picking up first downs, and break long plays to score himself, then the Viking offense is in business.
The Vikes have eight offensive touchdowns this season. Adrian Peterson has scored five of them--and three of those were plays of 60+ yards. Including special teams, Peterson has had five plays of 55 yards or more.
Running behind a very good run blocking offensive line, Peterson is capable of taking the Viking offense from the "really sucks" level to the "occasionally electric" level.
Links
AP's emergence has brought with it a lot of national attention that the Vikings have lacked in recent years. Here's ESPN's Jeffri Chadiha with a feature on Peterson. Peterson alone can make the Vikings a TV draw, and if he keeps it up, Peterson can be the one to fill those Metrodome seats the rest of the season.
The Pioneer Press' Sean Jensen (a writer/reporter I like) says the "Minnesota Vikings might break out the passing game" against Dallas. The Star Tribune's Kevin Seifert (another writer/reporter I like) also writes about the Vikings' offense and passing game in "Vikings give opposition something to think about."
Patrick Reusse talks to Bryant McKinnie.
I Dislike Your Favorite Team and Daily Norseman also found Jim Souhan's latest Childress-bashing column annoying. I really wonder how Souhan pictures his intended audience. A bunch of unthinking schlubs laughing at his hideous jokes as they read the newspaper, agreeing with his baseless screeds? I don't think he's writing for an internet audience. I don't want to suggest that internet readers of his column are smarter than newspaper readers of his column (that's a generalization, and obviously false). But let's make a few generalizations about bloggers (and other internet commenters and readers). Since we are writing, we understand prose and are capable of evaluating what we read critically. Since we're on the internet, we're generally adept at researching on the internet, meaning we can easily verify facts and access statistics to defend our arguments (or shoot down yours). And finally, the internet is sort of the primary realm for rigorous statistical analysis of sports, and since we're used to well-supported and well-reasoned analysis, we respond to the pulp of columnists like Souhan pretty negatively.
Vikings.com takes note of Troy Williamson's 60 yard touchdown catch. You know the expectations for the passing game have slipped since the 1998-2004 period, when a single 60 yard completion has us reeling in excitement.
Oddball fans
At Epic Carnival, What was that bang? wonders about fans who bother writing in to complain about completely meaningless NFL power rankings.
Wednesday, October 17, 2007
Don't take my word for it.
So I argue that Brad Childress is right to limit Adrian Peterson to around 20 touches a game. But that doesn't matter, because you don't like me and I don't like you ("I like you." "Fine, you like me, but I don't like you." "Maybe you'd like me if you got to know me."). So don't bother with what I think.
Reuben Frank of SI writes "No rush to use Peterson: Vikings' Childress careful not to burn out rookie." Frank writes of other rookie RBs that have been overused and worn out, and suggests Brad Childress is doing the right thing for the good of the franchise by not selfishly thinking short-term and using up Peterson's ability. It's a sound argument.
You should also take note of what Dr. Z writes in this week's "Power Rankings": "Walter Payton ran angry. So did Emmitt Smith. Adrian Peterson runs angry. And he also has a lightning change of direction and more speed than anyone chasing him has. This is a rare package the Vikes have here. I just hope they don't screw it up." I would suggest one way the Vikes could screw it up is by giving Adrian Peterson 350+ carries as a rookie.
Adrian Peterson is special. Quite possibly all-time great special. He's certainly one of the top running backs in the league right now, and the Vikings' best offensive player, so he should get the ball to help the team win now. But 20-25 touches gives him that chance, and another 10-20 carries for Chester Taylor still helps the Vikings and helps Adrian Peterson stay fresh for a game, for a season, for a career. Herm Edwards rode Larry Johnson for a record 416 carries last season (with another 41 catches); Johnson then stunk in a playoff game and doesn't look the same this season. We can't have that with Adrian Peterson: he's too important.
There's still room for complaint. If Peterson starts getting significantly less than 20 touches a game (as he did against Green Bay), we should wonder what's going on. If Peterson is coming out of the game in the fourth quarter when the game is on the line (as he did against Kansas City and Green Bay), we should wonder what's going on. But if Peterson continues to share carries with Chester Taylor? That's just good football.
Reuben Frank of SI writes "No rush to use Peterson: Vikings' Childress careful not to burn out rookie." Frank writes of other rookie RBs that have been overused and worn out, and suggests Brad Childress is doing the right thing for the good of the franchise by not selfishly thinking short-term and using up Peterson's ability. It's a sound argument.
You should also take note of what Dr. Z writes in this week's "Power Rankings": "Walter Payton ran angry. So did Emmitt Smith. Adrian Peterson runs angry. And he also has a lightning change of direction and more speed than anyone chasing him has. This is a rare package the Vikes have here. I just hope they don't screw it up." I would suggest one way the Vikes could screw it up is by giving Adrian Peterson 350+ carries as a rookie.
Adrian Peterson is special. Quite possibly all-time great special. He's certainly one of the top running backs in the league right now, and the Vikings' best offensive player, so he should get the ball to help the team win now. But 20-25 touches gives him that chance, and another 10-20 carries for Chester Taylor still helps the Vikings and helps Adrian Peterson stay fresh for a game, for a season, for a career. Herm Edwards rode Larry Johnson for a record 416 carries last season (with another 41 catches); Johnson then stunk in a playoff game and doesn't look the same this season. We can't have that with Adrian Peterson: he's too important.
There's still room for complaint. If Peterson starts getting significantly less than 20 touches a game (as he did against Green Bay), we should wonder what's going on. If Peterson is coming out of the game in the fourth quarter when the game is on the line (as he did against Kansas City and Green Bay), we should wonder what's going on. But if Peterson continues to share carries with Chester Taylor? That's just good football.
Wednesday Blizzard: Jim Souhan lacks insight again
Jim Souhan is a columnist that exhibits no desire to bring insight, context, or understanding to sports. Brad Childress talks about keeping Adrian Peterson as the #2 RB (in a system that's clearly utilizing the #1 and #2 a lot), and maintains a modest, even keel approach to his young star to the press (something Bill Parcells did all the time, remember). Souhan responds by comparing Adrian Peterson to shitty and unused backup RBs from years ago in order to try show how stupid Brad Childress is.
But that's irrelevant. See this pro-football-reference.com post on RB usage trends. If Souhan were actually interested in analysis, he might check out pro-football-reference.com posts on RB overuse and injuries here and here, and RB deterioration here, here, and here.
And this should show why blogs can be and often are superior to columnists. The writers at pro-football-reference.com are interested in finding relevant historical context and comparisions, and are interested in looking closely at numbers, in order to bring understanding to football. Souhan just wants to make jokes and make fun of the coach, so he makes silly and irrelevant comparisions to unused backup RBs from the past, ignoring the current trend and the Vikings' strategy of utilizing two effective RBs.
Addendum: Souhan includes this sarcastic passage: "You can't win in the NFL without a great backup running back. Remember those great Cowboys teams, led by Troy Hambrick? Remember the Steel Curtain dynasty, led by Reggie Harrison?"
Harrison was a little used backup RB on two of the Steelers' Super Bowl teams. But if Souhan weren't deliberately trying to mock Childress, he might note that the Steelers often utilized backup RB Rocky Bleier, and that starting RB Franco Harris' career high for carries in a season was a rather low 310 (Harris only twice averaged 20 carries per game), so it's a pretty poor example.
Souhan also has a particularly unfair (and uninsightful) trope he uses three times. He writes that when Childress looks at Adrian Peterson, he "see[s] the next Allen Rice," that he "sees Alfred Anderson," or that he "see[s] Ted Brown." If he were being honest, he could say that Childress sees Peterson as Reggie Bush, Maurice Jones-Drew, Joseph Addai, Ronnie Brown, or Laurence Maroney--other talented rookie RBs that split carries with a veteran for various reasons. Now it's very possible (and I suspect likely) that Peterson is better than any of those RBs. But to say Brad Childress looks at Peterson and "sees" a lousy backup RB that didn't really play much is just stupid. Peterson is getting carries, and the more apt comparisons would be to the other young RBs that were kept fresh and effective by splitting carries. When Brad Childress calls Peterson the number two, he doesn't "see" one of those ineffective backups. He's using a two-back system, like a lot of other coaches use a two-back system. He's not going to wear down one RB by forcing 30 carries a game on him early in the season. It's reasonable strategy. Yes, Peterson should be #1 and Taylor should be #2, but they're both going to get a lot of carries. The thing is, Souhan knows this: he just wants to make stupid jokes and criticize Childress.
Other links
But perhaps we should give Souhan credit for trying to make up jokes. Here are the first two sentences of Tom Powers' recent commentary: "Sixty-five points scored in the Vikings-Bears game! In other noteworthy events on Sunday, the moon turned blue, the cows came home and the devil was spotted throwing snowballs in his own backyard."
According to the Star Tribune, Chuck Foreman is happy seeing Adrian Peterson break his records.
You may have noticed Anthony Herrera on the field for the Vikings Sunday. The Star Tribune talks about his role as starter. In a related story, the Pioneer Press features the Vikings' offensive line performance against Chicago.
This week's Cold, Hard Football Facts' Big Play Index takes special note of the Vikings, who lead the league in big plays and big play differential. Seriously. Take a look: they have more big plays than any other team (despite already having their bye), and they have the best differential over the opponents. The other teams near the top are all good, but the Vikes are under .500. We'll see if this projects to improvement.
Footballguys compares Adrian Peterson to other rookie RBs.
Outsports comments on Brandon Lloyd's implication that Troy Aikman is gay.
But that's irrelevant. See this pro-football-reference.com post on RB usage trends. If Souhan were actually interested in analysis, he might check out pro-football-reference.com posts on RB overuse and injuries here and here, and RB deterioration here, here, and here.
And this should show why blogs can be and often are superior to columnists. The writers at pro-football-reference.com are interested in finding relevant historical context and comparisions, and are interested in looking closely at numbers, in order to bring understanding to football. Souhan just wants to make jokes and make fun of the coach, so he makes silly and irrelevant comparisions to unused backup RBs from the past, ignoring the current trend and the Vikings' strategy of utilizing two effective RBs.
Addendum: Souhan includes this sarcastic passage: "You can't win in the NFL without a great backup running back. Remember those great Cowboys teams, led by Troy Hambrick? Remember the Steel Curtain dynasty, led by Reggie Harrison?"
Harrison was a little used backup RB on two of the Steelers' Super Bowl teams. But if Souhan weren't deliberately trying to mock Childress, he might note that the Steelers often utilized backup RB Rocky Bleier, and that starting RB Franco Harris' career high for carries in a season was a rather low 310 (Harris only twice averaged 20 carries per game), so it's a pretty poor example.
Souhan also has a particularly unfair (and uninsightful) trope he uses three times. He writes that when Childress looks at Adrian Peterson, he "see[s] the next Allen Rice," that he "sees Alfred Anderson," or that he "see[s] Ted Brown." If he were being honest, he could say that Childress sees Peterson as Reggie Bush, Maurice Jones-Drew, Joseph Addai, Ronnie Brown, or Laurence Maroney--other talented rookie RBs that split carries with a veteran for various reasons. Now it's very possible (and I suspect likely) that Peterson is better than any of those RBs. But to say Brad Childress looks at Peterson and "sees" a lousy backup RB that didn't really play much is just stupid. Peterson is getting carries, and the more apt comparisons would be to the other young RBs that were kept fresh and effective by splitting carries. When Brad Childress calls Peterson the number two, he doesn't "see" one of those ineffective backups. He's using a two-back system, like a lot of other coaches use a two-back system. He's not going to wear down one RB by forcing 30 carries a game on him early in the season. It's reasonable strategy. Yes, Peterson should be #1 and Taylor should be #2, but they're both going to get a lot of carries. The thing is, Souhan knows this: he just wants to make stupid jokes and criticize Childress.
Other links
But perhaps we should give Souhan credit for trying to make up jokes. Here are the first two sentences of Tom Powers' recent commentary: "Sixty-five points scored in the Vikings-Bears game! In other noteworthy events on Sunday, the moon turned blue, the cows came home and the devil was spotted throwing snowballs in his own backyard."
According to the Star Tribune, Chuck Foreman is happy seeing Adrian Peterson break his records.
You may have noticed Anthony Herrera on the field for the Vikings Sunday. The Star Tribune talks about his role as starter. In a related story, the Pioneer Press features the Vikings' offensive line performance against Chicago.
This week's Cold, Hard Football Facts' Big Play Index takes special note of the Vikings, who lead the league in big plays and big play differential. Seriously. Take a look: they have more big plays than any other team (despite already having their bye), and they have the best differential over the opponents. The other teams near the top are all good, but the Vikes are under .500. We'll see if this projects to improvement.
Footballguys compares Adrian Peterson to other rookie RBs.
Outsports comments on Brandon Lloyd's implication that Troy Aikman is gay.
Tuesday, October 16, 2007
Sports Movies You've Never Seen (but should)
I like sports and I like movies, but most sports movies really suck. Here are two movies that are kinda sorta sports movies that I'm guessing not a single reader of this blog has seen. I like them. You might. But you probably won't. If you do decide to watch one, it's your hour and a half, not mine.
Strictly Ballroom
OK, so you likely don't consider ballroom dancing a sport. But this movie is about a competition that requires athletic training and ability. Furthermore, this Baz Luhrmann masterpiece has all the trappings of a sports movie. The scrappy underdog, struggling at first but willing to work. The brash talent that plays by his own rules. Long practice montages set to music. The mentors/coaches. The villainous competition. The corrupt association. The dramatic final competition scene.
Baz Luhrmann is my favorite director: I find in his films a metafictional flair and a mastery of movement, color, and music. You might not care for a movie about dancing, but seriously, it's really a sports movie in disguise.
Beer League
OK, so I think Dirty Work is a masterpiece, and Dirty Work co-writer Frank Sebastiano and co-star Artie Lange team up to bring us this movie about a softball league. It's dirty. It's sleazy. And the karate kid is in in. It's really a vehicle for raunchy jokes about trashy sex, but it's also about a softball team, and you might like it.
Strictly Ballroom
OK, so you likely don't consider ballroom dancing a sport. But this movie is about a competition that requires athletic training and ability. Furthermore, this Baz Luhrmann masterpiece has all the trappings of a sports movie. The scrappy underdog, struggling at first but willing to work. The brash talent that plays by his own rules. Long practice montages set to music. The mentors/coaches. The villainous competition. The corrupt association. The dramatic final competition scene.
Baz Luhrmann is my favorite director: I find in his films a metafictional flair and a mastery of movement, color, and music. You might not care for a movie about dancing, but seriously, it's really a sports movie in disguise.
Beer League
OK, so I think Dirty Work is a masterpiece, and Dirty Work co-writer Frank Sebastiano and co-star Artie Lange team up to bring us this movie about a softball league. It's dirty. It's sleazy. And the karate kid is in in. It's really a vehicle for raunchy jokes about trashy sex, but it's also about a softball team, and you might like it.
Monday, October 15, 2007
Keep Adrian Peterson Fresh
The Vikings are frustrating some fans with their insistence on using Chester Taylor a lot instead of giving primary carries to Adrian Peterson. But it's the right move. Adrian Peterson should be this team's dominant football player for the next decade, and the Vikings must not use him up.
Consider Earl Campbell. Campbell was one of the greatest running backs to ever play football, yet the Houston Oilers got just three great and two good seasons from Campbell. Consecutive seasons of 368, 373, and 361 carries just wore him down.
Consider Terrell Davis. Davis, too, might be one of the greatest running backs to ever play football, yet the Denver Broncos got just three great and one good seasons from Davis. In the Broncos' two-year run of winning Super Bowls, Davis carried the ball an incredible 951 times in regular and post-season games, and the rest of his career was destroyed with injuries. Davis and the Broncos might argue that it was worth it to win Super Bowls, but had the Broncos mixed it up more, Davis might have had a long, dominant career in Denver.
Football Outsiders has found convincing data showing that overusing running backs diminishes their effectiveness. We want Adrian Peterson running wild for the Vikings for the next ten seasons. That means that in the game against the Bears when Peterson was going bananas breaking off long runs, it's just fine that Chester Taylor got 22 carries and Adrian Peterson got 20. The Vikings shouldn't use up Adrian Peterson so that by 2011 he's effectively finished; they should use Peterson effectively so that by 2016 he's still a great football player.
It will be good for the Vikings in 2007, too. Mixing it up with Taylor and Peterson means that Peterson will be fresh and running hard in the fourth quarter. It also means that Peterson can be fresh and running hard in November and December.
I love Adrian Peterson, and I want to see him get the ball a lot; it's a joyous experience watching him break long, spectacular runs with quickness, cutbacks, moves, and speed. But I also want to see him get the ball a lot in a long, dominant Viking career.
Consider Earl Campbell. Campbell was one of the greatest running backs to ever play football, yet the Houston Oilers got just three great and two good seasons from Campbell. Consecutive seasons of 368, 373, and 361 carries just wore him down.
Consider Terrell Davis. Davis, too, might be one of the greatest running backs to ever play football, yet the Denver Broncos got just three great and one good seasons from Davis. In the Broncos' two-year run of winning Super Bowls, Davis carried the ball an incredible 951 times in regular and post-season games, and the rest of his career was destroyed with injuries. Davis and the Broncos might argue that it was worth it to win Super Bowls, but had the Broncos mixed it up more, Davis might have had a long, dominant career in Denver.
Football Outsiders has found convincing data showing that overusing running backs diminishes their effectiveness. We want Adrian Peterson running wild for the Vikings for the next ten seasons. That means that in the game against the Bears when Peterson was going bananas breaking off long runs, it's just fine that Chester Taylor got 22 carries and Adrian Peterson got 20. The Vikings shouldn't use up Adrian Peterson so that by 2011 he's effectively finished; they should use Peterson effectively so that by 2016 he's still a great football player.
It will be good for the Vikings in 2007, too. Mixing it up with Taylor and Peterson means that Peterson will be fresh and running hard in the fourth quarter. It also means that Peterson can be fresh and running hard in November and December.
I love Adrian Peterson, and I want to see him get the ball a lot; it's a joyous experience watching him break long, spectacular runs with quickness, cutbacks, moves, and speed. But I also want to see him get the ball a lot in a long, dominant Viking career.
Sunday, October 14, 2007
On the Couch, week six
For more on the Viking-Bear game, see "Trailing Clouds of Heaven: Vikings 34, Bears 31" below. "On the Couch" is a chance for thoughts on other NFL games, and some further thoughts on the Viking game.
Randy Moss
Patriots-Cowboys Box Score
Honestly, as Moss has resurged as the league's dominant wide receiver this season, Patriot Randy Moss as seemed to be an entirely different entity than Viking Randy Moss. In a Patriot #81 uniform, he doesn't even look like the player I adored in a Viking #84 uniform. I still can't quite process that it's the same individual.
But today, seeing his touchdown negated by a picky offensive interference call, and seeing Moss calmly jog back to the huddle used to having his touchdowns negated by picky offensive interference calls that no other wide receiver gets called for, I realized yes, this Randy Moss is in fact the same Randy Moss that used to play for the Vikings.
While we're at it, shall we all just accept the Patriots' dominance of the 2007 season? Ideally, they'll go 16-0 and then lose to the Colts in the playoff game and be unfairly labeled as chokers. But really, looking at their schedule they still have to play the Colts (at Indianapolis), the Ravens (at Baltimore), and the Steelers (at home). Intriguing games all.
As I said last season, those of you who tire of New England's almost easy dominance can take heart. From 1981-1998, the San Francisco 49ers played in 10 NFC Championship games and won 5 Super Bowls. It must have seemed to many that they would never stop dominating. Since then they've won one playoff game and had three seasons with four or fewer wins. This will all cycle through.
Vinny freaking Testaverde
Panthers-Cardinals Box Score
This week I lamented to the Hazelweird League that Steve Smith's success was now dependent on Vinny freaking Testaverde. My brother, who doesn't follow football closely during the week, assumed I was joking. He then checked and realized I was serious, that Vinny Testaverde was actually in control of Steve Smith's success.
Well, after every possible fantasy football pundit told us all to bench Steve Smith today, he responded with 2 rushes for 15 yards and 10 receptions for 136 yards, including a 65 yard touchdown (for the record, I still started him).
So what does this say about you, David Carr? The Steve Smith fantasy experience cannot be halted by even Vinny freaking Testaverde, but you, David Carr, are capable of derailing it all.
Brett Favre
Would we really be a Viking blog if we didn't at least mention that nobody in the history of the NFL has thrown more interceptions than Brett Favre (AP Green Bay-Washington Recap at NFL.com)?
NFL Standings
Wacky things stand out. The Dolphins and Rams are each 0-6 despite seeming to have offensive talent (and the Rams have actually been doubled up in points). The Patriots now have 138 net points (the Patriots and the Steelers have each more than doubled up their opponents' points--neither team is that far from tripling up its opponents' points). The Chiefs are tied for the division lead (and have already beaten the Chargers once for a tie breaker). The Browns have scored 167 points, mostly with Derek Anderson.
Perspective
If the dates I heard today are correct, the weekend of the last time the Vikings beat the Bears at Soldier Field, I was living in a dorm and just started dating somebody. That person has now been my wife for three years, and we have a kid and a house. That's a long time. We can only imagine what would happen if my 2007 self went back in time and told my 2000 self the Vikes would lose in the NFC championship game 41-0, would then fail to win the division for years, still wouldn't have been to the Super Bowl by 2007, and that Randy Moss and Daunte Culpepper were both on other teams.
Sampling the Reviews: Adrian Peterson
Viking fans, if Monday is giving you grief, just go check out Adrian Peterson's highlights at NFL Video Galleries. And smile. Try to pick your favorite run. Just try.
"Vikings 34, Bears 31: The Adrian Peterson Show Co-Starring Devin Hester" (Fanhouse)
"Peterson Is Better Than Your Team's Back" (Fanhouse)
"Bumbling offense finds its footing" (Star Tribune)
"Vikings nip Bears on last-second FG" (Pioneer Press)
AP Recap (Sports Illustrated)
"Snap Judgments" (Sports Illustrated) Here Don Banks argues that the Vikings have to start Adrian Peterson over Chester Taylor and get him more carries. I understand the sentiment, but consider this: Peterson still had 27 touches. He's a rookie, and the singular hope for the Vikings' future. Plenty of RBs have been worn down too young due to overuse. I think Peterson should start and should get more carries than Chester Taylor, but the Vikings should definitely spell Peterson with Taylor plenty. Utilize Peterson effectively and often, but don't overuse him and ruin his effectiveness. He should dominate for this franchise for the next decade. That said, I'm frustrated every time I see #29 in the backfield instead of #28. I just want to be delighted by #28 for a long, long time.
"Adrian’s A Freak; Vikings Win Thriller" (Viking War Cry)
"Break-out" (The Viking Age)
"Adrian Peterson is the most explosive RB in the NFL" (Complete Sports)
"Peterson’s Playmaking Paces Vikings Victory" (Viking Update)
"Peterson Shines In Thriller" (Vikings.com)
"NFL: Top rookie rushing performances" (AP in Star Tribune)
"Peterson show dazzles Bears ... and Vikings" (Star Tribune)
"Vikings single-game records" (Star Tribune)
"Three Stars and the Purple Jesus" (The Ragnarok)
Randy Moss
Patriots-Cowboys Box Score
Honestly, as Moss has resurged as the league's dominant wide receiver this season, Patriot Randy Moss as seemed to be an entirely different entity than Viking Randy Moss. In a Patriot #81 uniform, he doesn't even look like the player I adored in a Viking #84 uniform. I still can't quite process that it's the same individual.
But today, seeing his touchdown negated by a picky offensive interference call, and seeing Moss calmly jog back to the huddle used to having his touchdowns negated by picky offensive interference calls that no other wide receiver gets called for, I realized yes, this Randy Moss is in fact the same Randy Moss that used to play for the Vikings.
While we're at it, shall we all just accept the Patriots' dominance of the 2007 season? Ideally, they'll go 16-0 and then lose to the Colts in the playoff game and be unfairly labeled as chokers. But really, looking at their schedule they still have to play the Colts (at Indianapolis), the Ravens (at Baltimore), and the Steelers (at home). Intriguing games all.
As I said last season, those of you who tire of New England's almost easy dominance can take heart. From 1981-1998, the San Francisco 49ers played in 10 NFC Championship games and won 5 Super Bowls. It must have seemed to many that they would never stop dominating. Since then they've won one playoff game and had three seasons with four or fewer wins. This will all cycle through.
Vinny freaking Testaverde
Panthers-Cardinals Box Score
This week I lamented to the Hazelweird League that Steve Smith's success was now dependent on Vinny freaking Testaverde. My brother, who doesn't follow football closely during the week, assumed I was joking. He then checked and realized I was serious, that Vinny Testaverde was actually in control of Steve Smith's success.
Well, after every possible fantasy football pundit told us all to bench Steve Smith today, he responded with 2 rushes for 15 yards and 10 receptions for 136 yards, including a 65 yard touchdown (for the record, I still started him).
So what does this say about you, David Carr? The Steve Smith fantasy experience cannot be halted by even Vinny freaking Testaverde, but you, David Carr, are capable of derailing it all.
Brett Favre
Would we really be a Viking blog if we didn't at least mention that nobody in the history of the NFL has thrown more interceptions than Brett Favre (AP Green Bay-Washington Recap at NFL.com)?
NFL Standings
Wacky things stand out. The Dolphins and Rams are each 0-6 despite seeming to have offensive talent (and the Rams have actually been doubled up in points). The Patriots now have 138 net points (the Patriots and the Steelers have each more than doubled up their opponents' points--neither team is that far from tripling up its opponents' points). The Chiefs are tied for the division lead (and have already beaten the Chargers once for a tie breaker). The Browns have scored 167 points, mostly with Derek Anderson.
Perspective
If the dates I heard today are correct, the weekend of the last time the Vikings beat the Bears at Soldier Field, I was living in a dorm and just started dating somebody. That person has now been my wife for three years, and we have a kid and a house. That's a long time. We can only imagine what would happen if my 2007 self went back in time and told my 2000 self the Vikes would lose in the NFC championship game 41-0, would then fail to win the division for years, still wouldn't have been to the Super Bowl by 2007, and that Randy Moss and Daunte Culpepper were both on other teams.
Sampling the Reviews: Adrian Peterson
Viking fans, if Monday is giving you grief, just go check out Adrian Peterson's highlights at NFL Video Galleries. And smile. Try to pick your favorite run. Just try.
"Vikings 34, Bears 31: The Adrian Peterson Show Co-Starring Devin Hester" (Fanhouse)
"Peterson Is Better Than Your Team's Back" (Fanhouse)
"Bumbling offense finds its footing" (Star Tribune)
"Vikings nip Bears on last-second FG" (Pioneer Press)
AP Recap (Sports Illustrated)
"Snap Judgments" (Sports Illustrated) Here Don Banks argues that the Vikings have to start Adrian Peterson over Chester Taylor and get him more carries. I understand the sentiment, but consider this: Peterson still had 27 touches. He's a rookie, and the singular hope for the Vikings' future. Plenty of RBs have been worn down too young due to overuse. I think Peterson should start and should get more carries than Chester Taylor, but the Vikings should definitely spell Peterson with Taylor plenty. Utilize Peterson effectively and often, but don't overuse him and ruin his effectiveness. He should dominate for this franchise for the next decade. That said, I'm frustrated every time I see #29 in the backfield instead of #28. I just want to be delighted by #28 for a long, long time.
"Adrian’s A Freak; Vikings Win Thriller" (Viking War Cry)
"Break-out" (The Viking Age)
"Adrian Peterson is the most explosive RB in the NFL" (Complete Sports)
"Peterson’s Playmaking Paces Vikings Victory" (Viking Update)
"Peterson Shines In Thriller" (Vikings.com)
"NFL: Top rookie rushing performances" (AP in Star Tribune)
"Peterson show dazzles Bears ... and Vikings" (Star Tribune)
"Vikings single-game records" (Star Tribune)
"Three Stars and the Purple Jesus" (The Ragnarok)
Trailing Clouds of Heaven: Vikings 34, Bears 31
Vikings-Bears Box Score at NFL.com
Vikings-Bears Play by Play at NFL.com
Vikings-Bears Game Center (with highlights) at NFL.com
Adrian Peterson
Viking fans, let us all be thankful to Adrian Peterson for providing this road victory over the Bears. After scoring a 67 yard touchdown, a 73 yard touchdown, and a 35 yard touchdown, Peterson should have provided the Vikes the cushion to win this game. But the Vikes gave up two long touchdown passes, allowing Chicago to tie the game. Then Peterson had a 53 yard kickoff return, allowing the Vikings to attempt the long field goal that Ryan Longwell made.
Adrian Peterson is a joy; I haven't felt like this since Randy Moss was a Viking. We've got a real live game-breaker, and it's thrilling. With an offense as (talentless? inexperienced?) inconsistent as the Vikings have, the Vikings have trouble sustaining drives; a player capable of putting points on the board with a single long play is just what the Vikings need to stay in games.
This is as exciting as it gets: 224 yards rushing, 9 yards receiving, 128 kick return yards, three rushing touchdowns of 67, 73, and 35 yards. That's making big plays. That's one of the best players in the game.
And it wasn't just the length of the TD runs: it was the spectacular quality. He breaks tackles, he makes moves, he picks blocks and angles. He was running all over the field, cutting and angling. They were all just beautiful to watch.
That's Adrian Peterson, merely beginning his career as the greatest running back in Viking history.
Tarvaris Jackson
We saw good things from Jackson. His 60 touchdown pass was beautifully on target. He showed accuracy throwing on the move. He's very accurate on the slant pattern (unfortunately, he had at least two very good passes dropped). Perhaps most encouraging, I can't recall a really stupid decision from him (a Viking quarterback with no turnovers at Chicago? When's the last time that happened?). Tarvaris Jackson played a mistake free game against the Bears' defense, which is what the Vikings needed from him.
But there was also some bad. He was inaccurate on some passes to open receivers (the bad overthrow of Tony Richardson was particularly ugly, as that play could have gone far). At least once it appeared he could have easily run for a first down but threw a difficult pass instead (then again, other times he scrambled and made good decisions hitting open receivers instead of running).
9/23 isn't good, but in a game when the Vikings ran for 311 yards (the Vikings effectively used Peterson and Chester Taylor), Tarvaris Jackson was poised enough to make plays and avoid mistakes. We can still be optimistic--he played much better than the last time we saw him play.
Troy Williamson
Goodness sakes, that felt good. If Williamson can show he can beat a defender and catch the ball, and Jackson can show he can make an accurate pass on a deep throw, there's a whole new element in the Viking offense for defenses to account for and the Vikings to use.
Devin Hester
Is there a more feared player in the game today than Hester? No matter what is happening in the game, Hester can change the complexion in a single special teams play. Every punt and kickoff requires opposing fans to watch in anxious horror. He's a devastating player.
Brad Childress
The Vikings almost blew a late 14 point lead (actually, they did blow it but won anyway); the Vikes gave up two TD passes that were too easy and didn't hold onto the ball on offense. But I still thought Childress had an aggressive game plan. They ran on third and long a few times, but they also came out throwing at unexpected times and were taking shots downfield.
This was only Childress' third road win and third division win as the Vikings' head coach.
Wild Game
Did anybody really think this year we'd see a Viking game like this one? The shortest touchdown play for either team was a 33 yard TD catch for Muhsin Muhammed. The Bears had two 80+ yard TDs (a punt return and a reception by Devin Hester). The Vikings had three TDs of 60+ yards (two Peterson runs, one pass to Troy Williamson).
A win at Chicago!
In 2000 the Vikings beat the Bears at Soldier Field 28-16. Daunte Culpepper threw three TDs, including one to Cris Carter and one to Randy Moss. Robert Smith rushed for 170 yards.
Does that give you a feel for how long it's been? They lost road games against Chicago in 2001, 2002 (this one not in Soldier Field, which was being renovated), 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006. Some of those losses were beyond ugly. I've forgotten how to feel after a Viking win at Soldier Field.
And today the Vikings beat the Bears at Soldier Field 34-31. Tarvaris Jackson threw a touchdown to Troy Williamson, and Adrian Peterson had 224 yards rushing and three touchdowns. That 2000 win was at the end of something; let us hope this 2007 victory is at the beginning of something.
Vikings-Bears Play by Play at NFL.com
Vikings-Bears Game Center (with highlights) at NFL.com
Adrian Peterson
Viking fans, let us all be thankful to Adrian Peterson for providing this road victory over the Bears. After scoring a 67 yard touchdown, a 73 yard touchdown, and a 35 yard touchdown, Peterson should have provided the Vikes the cushion to win this game. But the Vikes gave up two long touchdown passes, allowing Chicago to tie the game. Then Peterson had a 53 yard kickoff return, allowing the Vikings to attempt the long field goal that Ryan Longwell made.
Adrian Peterson is a joy; I haven't felt like this since Randy Moss was a Viking. We've got a real live game-breaker, and it's thrilling. With an offense as (talentless? inexperienced?) inconsistent as the Vikings have, the Vikings have trouble sustaining drives; a player capable of putting points on the board with a single long play is just what the Vikings need to stay in games.
This is as exciting as it gets: 224 yards rushing, 9 yards receiving, 128 kick return yards, three rushing touchdowns of 67, 73, and 35 yards. That's making big plays. That's one of the best players in the game.
And it wasn't just the length of the TD runs: it was the spectacular quality. He breaks tackles, he makes moves, he picks blocks and angles. He was running all over the field, cutting and angling. They were all just beautiful to watch.
That's Adrian Peterson, merely beginning his career as the greatest running back in Viking history.
Tarvaris Jackson
We saw good things from Jackson. His 60 touchdown pass was beautifully on target. He showed accuracy throwing on the move. He's very accurate on the slant pattern (unfortunately, he had at least two very good passes dropped). Perhaps most encouraging, I can't recall a really stupid decision from him (a Viking quarterback with no turnovers at Chicago? When's the last time that happened?). Tarvaris Jackson played a mistake free game against the Bears' defense, which is what the Vikings needed from him.
But there was also some bad. He was inaccurate on some passes to open receivers (the bad overthrow of Tony Richardson was particularly ugly, as that play could have gone far). At least once it appeared he could have easily run for a first down but threw a difficult pass instead (then again, other times he scrambled and made good decisions hitting open receivers instead of running).
9/23 isn't good, but in a game when the Vikings ran for 311 yards (the Vikings effectively used Peterson and Chester Taylor), Tarvaris Jackson was poised enough to make plays and avoid mistakes. We can still be optimistic--he played much better than the last time we saw him play.
Troy Williamson
Goodness sakes, that felt good. If Williamson can show he can beat a defender and catch the ball, and Jackson can show he can make an accurate pass on a deep throw, there's a whole new element in the Viking offense for defenses to account for and the Vikings to use.
Devin Hester
Is there a more feared player in the game today than Hester? No matter what is happening in the game, Hester can change the complexion in a single special teams play. Every punt and kickoff requires opposing fans to watch in anxious horror. He's a devastating player.
Brad Childress
The Vikings almost blew a late 14 point lead (actually, they did blow it but won anyway); the Vikes gave up two TD passes that were too easy and didn't hold onto the ball on offense. But I still thought Childress had an aggressive game plan. They ran on third and long a few times, but they also came out throwing at unexpected times and were taking shots downfield.
This was only Childress' third road win and third division win as the Vikings' head coach.
Wild Game
Did anybody really think this year we'd see a Viking game like this one? The shortest touchdown play for either team was a 33 yard TD catch for Muhsin Muhammed. The Bears had two 80+ yard TDs (a punt return and a reception by Devin Hester). The Vikings had three TDs of 60+ yards (two Peterson runs, one pass to Troy Williamson).
A win at Chicago!
In 2000 the Vikings beat the Bears at Soldier Field 28-16. Daunte Culpepper threw three TDs, including one to Cris Carter and one to Randy Moss. Robert Smith rushed for 170 yards.
Does that give you a feel for how long it's been? They lost road games against Chicago in 2001, 2002 (this one not in Soldier Field, which was being renovated), 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006. Some of those losses were beyond ugly. I've forgotten how to feel after a Viking win at Soldier Field.
And today the Vikings beat the Bears at Soldier Field 34-31. Tarvaris Jackson threw a touchdown to Troy Williamson, and Adrian Peterson had 224 yards rushing and three touchdowns. That 2000 win was at the end of something; let us hope this 2007 victory is at the beginning of something.
Friday, October 12, 2007
Vikings at Soldier Field
If the Vikings win a road game against the Bears, I'll believe.
The last time the Vikes won a road game against the Bears was when they were an 11-5 team with Daunte Culpepper, Robert Smith, Randy Moss, and Cris Carter.
Soldier Field has come to represent for me the mediocrity, the disappointment, the underachievement, the inconsistency, and the downright suckiness of the Vikings from 2001-2006. And if this Viking team can beat this Bear team on the road, at Soldier Field, symbolically, all that may be over.
If it happens, we may be ready for something different.
And then, I'll believe.
The last time the Vikes won a road game against the Bears was when they were an 11-5 team with Daunte Culpepper, Robert Smith, Randy Moss, and Cris Carter.
Soldier Field has come to represent for me the mediocrity, the disappointment, the underachievement, the inconsistency, and the downright suckiness of the Vikings from 2001-2006. And if this Viking team can beat this Bear team on the road, at Soldier Field, symbolically, all that may be over.
If it happens, we may be ready for something different.
And then, I'll believe.
National Friday League, week six
Vikings-Bears
Defensively, I expect the Vikings to play well: Cedric Benson has proven nothing but that he sucks, so he's not going to get much against the Viking run defense. Brian Griese won't be as fun for the defense as Rex Grossman would have been, but he still might hang some interceptions up there. Chicago's offense shouldn't score much.
Offensively, I don't see how the Vikings will have much success. They'll have to hope that Adrian Peterson can break some long runs, put the team in 3rd and short a lot, and (I can't emphasize this enough), stay on the field. The Vikes particularly need Peterson in the red zone: there should not be a single red zone play that Peterson isn't in on, since he's the one dynamic threat on offense that can bust through the tight defense.
On Special Teams, of course I fear Devin Hester.
I think the Bears will win this game as the special teams and defense set the Bears up with good field position (or score outright themselves), and the Viking offense won't be able to mount a threat. But I may fear Soldier Field more than is reasonable (since the Vikes haven't won there since 2000), and this Viking team should have a legitimate shot at pulling out a rare road win against Chicago. We can hope.
We're lucky to have two papers.
The Star Tribune has an article (by Seifert and Zulgad) about the struggles of the Viking offense this year. The title is "Vikings offense: Getting there is half the battle." The subtitle is "The Vikings offense often has stalled short of the red zone, and some players have stepped up and offered to be part of the solution." The first two sentences of the article read "Fact: No NFL team has scored fewer offensive touchdowns than the Vikings this season. The gray area: why, and how to fix it."
The Pioneer Press has an article (by Seeholzer) about the struggles of the Viking offense this year. The title is "Offense hasn't seen enough of red zone." The subtitle is "Mistakes stalling too many drives, Bevell says." The first two sentences read "With only four touchdowns in four games, the Vikings' offense has obvious scoring issues, but offensive coordinator Darrell Bevell said it's not a red-zone problem. The problem is getting into the red zone."
Week Six Matchups
Everyone's atwitter about the Dallas-New England matchup, but I'm more thrilled with the prime time games this week. Seahawks-Saints! Giants-Falcons! Of course I'm kidding. Signal to Noise thinks the NFL should just move the Cowboys-Patriots game to Sunday night--he's in that blue part of this map that gets to watch San Diego-Oakland instead. I feel worse for the gray part of that map that gets to watch Arizona-Carolina. Oh, to be beholden to the arbitrary wrath of the network/league gods.
I'm also interested in that Washington-Green Bay game--should be an interesting matchup among two of the seemingly good NFC teams.
That Pizza Hut Commercial
You know that Pizza Hut commercial that's sometimes on during games, when the family comes home and the dad was responsible for dinner and he just ordered pizza, and he says "Who's the man?" and his wife says "I love you" in a sort of awkward, strange moment? I'm pretty sure the wife was one of the women that Kramer and Mickey fought over in "The Yada Yada" (imdb and wikipedia). The next time it's on, watch it and tell me if that seems right. I once thought I was impressing a date at a movie by pointing out all the actors in the previews and film that had been on Seinfeld. No second date, though.
Fantasy Narcissism
In the Ghosts of Wayne Fontes' League, I have four regular starters on bye, including Peyton Manning. A waiver block prevented me from getting Jason Campbell. Gus freaking Frerotte is my starting fantasy quarterback this weekend. Look upon my works and despair. Nothing else remains. And all that.
In the Hazelweird League, I don't know whether to start Donovan McNabb or Vince Young this weekend. All I want is a quarterback that can get me the expected 7+ points a fantasy quarterback should get in this league, and I can never manage it.
"My God, I never asked you to do this!" In the Hazelweird League, my most expensive player was Steve Smith. Would have have spent the money on Smith if I knew by week six Vinny Testaverde would be responsible for his success? Does the pope crap in the woods? Does a bear wear a funny hat? Well, I don't know, maybe popes used to crap in the woods, and I know people have put funny hats on bears. I hope nobody interprets that joke as anti-Catholic. It's not. It's not anti-bear either. Though people shouldn't put funny hats on bears. The joke is anti-people-putting-funny-hats-on-bears. The answer is no, by the way.
Weekend
Enjoy your weekend, people. Except Bear and Packer fans.
Defensively, I expect the Vikings to play well: Cedric Benson has proven nothing but that he sucks, so he's not going to get much against the Viking run defense. Brian Griese won't be as fun for the defense as Rex Grossman would have been, but he still might hang some interceptions up there. Chicago's offense shouldn't score much.
Offensively, I don't see how the Vikings will have much success. They'll have to hope that Adrian Peterson can break some long runs, put the team in 3rd and short a lot, and (I can't emphasize this enough), stay on the field. The Vikes particularly need Peterson in the red zone: there should not be a single red zone play that Peterson isn't in on, since he's the one dynamic threat on offense that can bust through the tight defense.
On Special Teams, of course I fear Devin Hester.
I think the Bears will win this game as the special teams and defense set the Bears up with good field position (or score outright themselves), and the Viking offense won't be able to mount a threat. But I may fear Soldier Field more than is reasonable (since the Vikes haven't won there since 2000), and this Viking team should have a legitimate shot at pulling out a rare road win against Chicago. We can hope.
We're lucky to have two papers.
The Star Tribune has an article (by Seifert and Zulgad) about the struggles of the Viking offense this year. The title is "Vikings offense: Getting there is half the battle." The subtitle is "The Vikings offense often has stalled short of the red zone, and some players have stepped up and offered to be part of the solution." The first two sentences of the article read "Fact: No NFL team has scored fewer offensive touchdowns than the Vikings this season. The gray area: why, and how to fix it."
The Pioneer Press has an article (by Seeholzer) about the struggles of the Viking offense this year. The title is "Offense hasn't seen enough of red zone." The subtitle is "Mistakes stalling too many drives, Bevell says." The first two sentences read "With only four touchdowns in four games, the Vikings' offense has obvious scoring issues, but offensive coordinator Darrell Bevell said it's not a red-zone problem. The problem is getting into the red zone."
Week Six Matchups
Everyone's atwitter about the Dallas-New England matchup, but I'm more thrilled with the prime time games this week. Seahawks-Saints! Giants-Falcons! Of course I'm kidding. Signal to Noise thinks the NFL should just move the Cowboys-Patriots game to Sunday night--he's in that blue part of this map that gets to watch San Diego-Oakland instead. I feel worse for the gray part of that map that gets to watch Arizona-Carolina. Oh, to be beholden to the arbitrary wrath of the network/league gods.
I'm also interested in that Washington-Green Bay game--should be an interesting matchup among two of the seemingly good NFC teams.
That Pizza Hut Commercial
You know that Pizza Hut commercial that's sometimes on during games, when the family comes home and the dad was responsible for dinner and he just ordered pizza, and he says "Who's the man?" and his wife says "I love you" in a sort of awkward, strange moment? I'm pretty sure the wife was one of the women that Kramer and Mickey fought over in "The Yada Yada" (imdb and wikipedia). The next time it's on, watch it and tell me if that seems right. I once thought I was impressing a date at a movie by pointing out all the actors in the previews and film that had been on Seinfeld. No second date, though.
Fantasy Narcissism
In the Ghosts of Wayne Fontes' League, I have four regular starters on bye, including Peyton Manning. A waiver block prevented me from getting Jason Campbell. Gus freaking Frerotte is my starting fantasy quarterback this weekend. Look upon my works and despair. Nothing else remains. And all that.
In the Hazelweird League, I don't know whether to start Donovan McNabb or Vince Young this weekend. All I want is a quarterback that can get me the expected 7+ points a fantasy quarterback should get in this league, and I can never manage it.
"My God, I never asked you to do this!" In the Hazelweird League, my most expensive player was Steve Smith. Would have have spent the money on Smith if I knew by week six Vinny Testaverde would be responsible for his success? Does the pope crap in the woods? Does a bear wear a funny hat? Well, I don't know, maybe popes used to crap in the woods, and I know people have put funny hats on bears. I hope nobody interprets that joke as anti-Catholic. It's not. It's not anti-bear either. Though people shouldn't put funny hats on bears. The joke is anti-people-putting-funny-hats-on-bears. The answer is no, by the way.
Weekend
Enjoy your weekend, people. Except Bear and Packer fans.
Thursday, October 11, 2007
Thursday Blizzard
One reason I love to watch football is to see individual players so good, they disrupt and alter the opposing team's strategies. Randy Moss forces opposing secondaries to focus on him, opening up everything else. In his prime, Deion Sanders dictated the offense's strategy by his mere presence. These are the players I love to watch play. Mike Sando has an ESPN article about what current players force opposing teams to alter their game plans.
Stephanie Stradley at Fanhouse features perspectives of Travis Johnson, reminding us that people and stories are almost always more complex and nuanced than a lot of commentary and coverage would have us believe. The Starting Five also points out the absurd language of the AP explanation of Trent Green's injury.
Viking Update looks at the upcoming game at Soldier Field.
According to the Pioneer Press, Brad Childress won't name his starting QB for this week.
See Zygi Wilf hanging out with fans at Fanhouse.
Cold, Hard Football Facts compares the 1992 Cowboys to the 2004 Patriots. Boy, those Cowboy teams were good. I always consider the 1994 49ers the best team I ever saw. With slightly different rosters, the Cowboys were clearly better than the 49ers in 1992 and 1993, and still played them tough in the 1994 NFC Championship game (where turnovers really killed the Cowboys). CHFF says the Patriots are better than the Cowboys (but it seems to me that CHFF is full of Patriot homers, too--there are a lot of reasons why this comparison favors Dallas).
Stephanie Stradley at Fanhouse features perspectives of Travis Johnson, reminding us that people and stories are almost always more complex and nuanced than a lot of commentary and coverage would have us believe. The Starting Five also points out the absurd language of the AP explanation of Trent Green's injury.
Viking Update looks at the upcoming game at Soldier Field.
According to the Pioneer Press, Brad Childress won't name his starting QB for this week.
See Zygi Wilf hanging out with fans at Fanhouse.
Cold, Hard Football Facts compares the 1992 Cowboys to the 2004 Patriots. Boy, those Cowboy teams were good. I always consider the 1994 49ers the best team I ever saw. With slightly different rosters, the Cowboys were clearly better than the 49ers in 1992 and 1993, and still played them tough in the 1994 NFC Championship game (where turnovers really killed the Cowboys). CHFF says the Patriots are better than the Cowboys (but it seems to me that CHFF is full of Patriot homers, too--there are a lot of reasons why this comparison favors Dallas).
Wednesday, October 10, 2007
wwtb? on text messaging
What was that bang? dislikes the effect of text messaging on language, and now blames Peter King for the decline of language in his recent Epic Carnival post, "Peter King quotes Text Message, Hastens Fall of Civilization."
Tuesday, October 09, 2007
Tuesday Night Blizzard
Back when the Vikings had a good offense (it wasn't that long ago), a trip to Soldier Field was a dreadful experience all around. The Vikes haven't won at Soldier Field since 2000: everything about the Bears and Chicago seemed specifically designed to make the Vikings suck. Now, with a team based on defense and running, and coming off a weekend without a Viking game, I'm just looking forward to the game.
Peter King quotes Trent Green's text message in text message speak (or should I say, txt mssg spk). What was that bang? will have more to say on this subject soon.
Football Outsiders compares Tom Brady's great start to other parts of his career and to other great quarterbacking stretches.
The Star Tribune reports that Tarvaris Jackson says he is ready to play.
The Pioneer Press talks to Viking players after the bye.
Daily Norseman convinces himself to be excited for the Vikings.
Vikings.com notes that the Viking-Cowboy game in a few weeks has been moved to 3:15. If this were a home game, I would start bitching now and would not stop until after the game. It's a road game, so "meh."
Tom Powers starts a column with a joke about the Vikings losing to the bye week. Seriously. He really does. Next week he may tell us just why the chicken crossed the road (via Viking War Cry).
Cold, Hard Football Facts has an interesting Bendability Index and Scoreability Index.
Dr. Z talks about "Fear-driven football," giving coaches some hell.
Footballguys tells fantasy owners to trade Steve Smith while you can; he sucks without Jake Delhomme. I put this on my blog because I already failed to try trade Steve Smith to other Hazelweirders, and now I'll just keep him. I did manage to buy low on Larry Johnson, who I actually don't expect to be good this season but it's worth the shot.
Every so often I like to remind people I write at a few other (non-sports) blogs: Costanza Book Club, where I write about literature and ideas (for an estimated two regular readers, which actually liberates me to write whatever hocus pocus I want); We Have Mixed Feelings About Sven Sundgaard, about TV, frugality, and the Twin Cities (it started off as a collective effort, but my blogmates abandoned me--every day I think about abandoning it myself); and Cruelty-Free Mommy, which is my wife's blog about parenting where I make occasional contributions. So, if those things interest you, you can go look.
Peter King quotes Trent Green's text message in text message speak (or should I say, txt mssg spk). What was that bang? will have more to say on this subject soon.
Football Outsiders compares Tom Brady's great start to other parts of his career and to other great quarterbacking stretches.
The Star Tribune reports that Tarvaris Jackson says he is ready to play.
The Pioneer Press talks to Viking players after the bye.
Daily Norseman convinces himself to be excited for the Vikings.
Vikings.com notes that the Viking-Cowboy game in a few weeks has been moved to 3:15. If this were a home game, I would start bitching now and would not stop until after the game. It's a road game, so "meh."
Tom Powers starts a column with a joke about the Vikings losing to the bye week. Seriously. He really does. Next week he may tell us just why the chicken crossed the road (via Viking War Cry).
Cold, Hard Football Facts has an interesting Bendability Index and Scoreability Index.
Dr. Z talks about "Fear-driven football," giving coaches some hell.
Footballguys tells fantasy owners to trade Steve Smith while you can; he sucks without Jake Delhomme. I put this on my blog because I already failed to try trade Steve Smith to other Hazelweirders, and now I'll just keep him. I did manage to buy low on Larry Johnson, who I actually don't expect to be good this season but it's worth the shot.
Every so often I like to remind people I write at a few other (non-sports) blogs: Costanza Book Club, where I write about literature and ideas (for an estimated two regular readers, which actually liberates me to write whatever hocus pocus I want); We Have Mixed Feelings About Sven Sundgaard, about TV, frugality, and the Twin Cities (it started off as a collective effort, but my blogmates abandoned me--every day I think about abandoning it myself); and Cruelty-Free Mommy, which is my wife's blog about parenting where I make occasional contributions. So, if those things interest you, you can go look.
The Little Things Count...
Apparently I am an idiot.
This post previously was filled with drivel that unfortunately was a long rant that led to me sticking my foot in my proverbial mouth.
This post previously was filled with drivel that unfortunately was a long rant that led to me sticking my foot in my proverbial mouth.
The Tarvaris Revolution Begins Anew
Revolutions rarely take quickly. The French Revolution brought the Terror and an Empire and more Monarchy before it really brought a Republic.So don't despair, Tarvaris revolutionaries. The Revolution lives. Tarvaris Jackson will likely return this Sunday (SI), and Tarvaris's early struggles are merely this Revolution's Reign of Terror. Perhaps we'll still have to endure a Napoleonic Empire and restoration of the Monarchy, but there is hope that the Revolution can still take root among a weary and wanting people.
Vive la Revolution!
Sunday, October 07, 2007
On the Couch, week five
week five scoresstandings through week five
For a stretch of the 1990s, the NFL season was mostly for our weekly amusement as we waited to see whether Dallas or San Francisco would win the NFC Championship Game. Now it feels a bit like this is all for laughs until Indianapolis and New England play again in January.
That may sound dreary, but there are other young football teams off to good starts that are pretty entertaining. The Tennesee Titans are exciting, if only because Vince Young is some sort of demigod, perhaps a Nephilim. The Washington football organization could be interesting this season: Jason Campbell looks good, and it's always fun to see competent young quarterbacks emerge (until they just become good veterans, like Ben Roethlisberger: then they bore me), and Clinton Portis is a fun player. If they just had a nickname that wasn't so clearly racist, I could get behind this team. The Dallas Cowboys have been tearing it up, too. Last season Romo-erotic was on my fantasy team and I was openly rooting for the Cowboys to succeed. This season I don't have any of the major Cowboys on my fantasy team, and so I'm mildly indifferent to their rise. This just goes to show how fickle fantasy football can make us: I don't have any loyalty to any of these players from year to year.
But if it comes down to the Patriots and the Colts, my rooting interests are firmly with the Colts. I don't know why I should dislike New England now, but I do (those fans in Boston have had a bit too much pleasure lately, haven't they?). And I don't know why I should like the Colts, but I do (I got used to hoping Manning would win a championship, I think, and now that it's happened, I'm just used to rooting for him and his team).
Is the hatred dying?
For years a Packer loss would fill me with open and inexplicable glee. Just utter, unrestrained happiness. Often this was because the Vikes and Packers were fighting for a division title, but even when it had no effect on the Vikings, I took immense pleasure in Packer losses. But for whatever reason, now I don't. For most of the past decade, a game like tonight's Bears' victory over the Packers would have left me roaming about the house grinning. Tonight I'm strangely indifferent. Perhaps it's that I don't like the Bears, either. Perhaps the sense of urgency for rooting against the Packers is gone. Perhaps this bout of humidity temporarily broke my ability to feel anything other than sweat and discomfort. Perhaps, as my wife suggested, I've grown up ("But the Viking losses make me feel worse," I protested. Why I protested the suggestion I've grown up is beyond me).
Eventually, people get tired of hating, and amnesty can heal a weary people (at least that's how my favorite history teacher explained the Edict of Nantes). Perhaps I'm just exhausted from what is recognizably a childish, immature hatred, and it is time to grow up, to set aside animosity, to find healing and peace. I reach my hand out to you, Packer fans. I'll never like your team, and I'll never be happy for your team's success, but I am pushing away the venom. Let us just be.
Since you asked...
A reader asked me to provide my own ranking of the greatest quarterbacks of all-time. For now, I'll make it easy and just tell you who I believe to be the greatest quarterback of all-time. It's Peyton Manning. Perhaps when time allows I can write a lengthy spirited argument for why, right now, Peyton Manning is the best quarterback to every play the game.
But I see a lot of subjective lists; I like seeing some more intense statistical analysis. Pro-football-reference.com had two good posts on the subject of all-time quarterbacks (here and here), and Davis21wylie had a good ranking at Armchair GM (here).
Looking ahead to Week 6, a Fantasy Football Chasm of Horrors
Next week, the Bills, Broncos, Lions, Colts, Steelers, and 49ers are on bye. I cannot recall so many fantasy stars missing in a single week. Just consider how many fantasy teams are going to be relying on backups as Marshawn Lynch, Lee Evans, Travis Henry, Javon Walker, Roy Williams, Jon Kitna, Peyton Manning, Dallas Clark, Marvin Harrison, Reggie Wayne, Joseph Addai, Adam Vinatieri, Ben Roethlisberger, Willie Parker, Jeff Reed, the Steeler Defense, and Frank Gore are out (though some of these regular starters could be out for other reasons, anyway). It could be a horror show. I say, let us have fun with this.
Friday, October 05, 2007
National Friday League, week five
Ah, the bye week, or as The Simpsons calls it, "a harrowing bye week, which no one enjoys." But really, a bye week can be enjoyable: without the stress of your favorite team's game, you can relax and just watch football. But the bye (and grading papers) has my mind scattered, so expect this National Friday League installment to be more pointless and rambling than usual.Let's go ahead and look at the NFL's standings for a few amusing bits of nothing through four weeks.
The Cowboys have scored 151 points (37.75 pg), the Patriots 148 (37 pg), and the Colts 131 (32.75 pg). The Cowboys and Patriots have 19 TDs each, the Colts 15. Serious question, and keep in mind all of these totals include any defensive scores: which do you think is the best offense? I don't know: they're each uber-talented, and they can each beat a defense pretty much every way possible.
ADDENDUM: Football Outsiders looks at the numbers by down and suggests Dallas can't sustain this current level of success.
But this is more impressive: the Patriots have scored 100 points more than their opponents. And how early are they going to clinch their division? I'm hoping the Colts' make a home field advantage fight of it, because my Hazelweird team is counting on Bill Belichick saving Laurence Maroney for the cold weather games of November and December.
Football Commercials
In my composition classes, I include a unit on analyzing advertisements, because I think it is useful in a lot of ways. So I typically pay closer attention to commercials than most people (sometimes I'll start ranting about what I'm seeing on a commercial, and my wife will just look at me flummoxed, thinking I'm just pulling some subject out of nowhere and making absurd references. Last night I saw a commercial telling me sugar has 15 calories per teaspoon. "Pshaw," I said. "How much is a teaspoon, anyway?" Unsure how to answer this since she wasn't watching the commercial, she cried out "What are you talking about?" I suppose: how, out of nowhere, are you supposed to just explain how much a teaspoon is? In a related anecdote, I was in a grocery store on Tuesday--October 2nd-- and a man asked me when Halloween was. I just looked at him. "When is Halloween?" he repeated. "October 31st?" I said, thinking I was being set up for some sort of joke by a lonely old man. "No, when is it in relation to now?" he asked. He wanted to know how far away Halloween was--or as I would have framed it, "How long until Halloween?"; he didn't know the current date, and didn't want to forget to get candy and get "caught empty handed." Anyway, I have a serious, serious problem with parentheses. It seems I'll just put anything into parentheses. If I read a student's paper with parentheticals like I use, I would be incredulous. This is so uneven. Seriously, when you get out of this parenthetical, you're not going to remember exactly what I was originally talking about. It was advertisements. I'll get out now). But this year's NFL commercials are just boring. There just aren't very many creative or amusing ads at all. Are there any ads that anybody has particularly enjoyed?
The Peyton Manning Fantasy Experiment
Remember how in the Ghosts of Wayne Fontes' fantasy league, which features 14 teams, I took Peyton Manning 6th overall? I was the only person not to take a RB in the first round. Through four weeks, I'm 4-0 and leading in total points. I'm not writing this to brag (sort of), but to reiterate a fantasy football principle: if you are in a deep league, you want to get a guaranteed fantasy producer with your first pick. Obviously it took other good picks (Plaxico Burress, Roy Williams, Dallas Clark) to build a competitive team, but Manning is a guaranteed fantasy producer, and I passed on risky RBs in order to get him. So far, anyway, it appears it was the right move.
Matchups
I'm intrigued by several of week 5's matchups. I'm not as thrilled with what games the networks are allowing me to watch: I just want to watch my own fantasy players. What pleasure am I supposed to derive out of watching the Giants and Jets? I'm also not entirely sure I'll be able to stomach watching the Sunday night Bears-Packers game--I'd actually rather grade papers. That's senseless.
Links
Go look at the photo accompanying this Mark Craig article. Are there words for this image? I'm a bit horrified by it, and I'm not entirely sure why.
Adrian Peterson: rookie of the month, shameless self-promoter (Pioneer Press).
Viking Update points out the projected difficulty of the Vikings' schedule has been flipped up.
The Ragnarok and Daily Norseman are thrilled with Sidney Rice.
Football Outsiders finds that Devin Hester's TD return rate makes him arguably the greatest return man in NFL history. It's fun to see the other names on the list: Gale Sayers is right behind him, and Ollie Matson is just a bit further down. Fun players.
Joe Sports Fan looks at some ridiculous quotes about Brett Favre (via Fanhouse).
Weekend
Enjoy the weekend everybody. Except Packer fans.
Wednesday, October 03, 2007
wwtb?'s latest at Epic Carnival
Our own What was that bang? writes at Epic Carnival about "First Name Quarterbacks," complaining about the chumminess with which announcers talk about some players. Check it out, and once again, check out the other fine contributions at Epic Carnival.
Wednesday Blizzard
There's a lot of interesting NFL stuff out there today.
Roy Williams is going to start tipping pizza delivery people (Fanhouse). I've got a coupon for a free pizza sitting at home right now (it just became valid October 1). I'm excited.
Michael David Smith compares Brett Favre to other great QBs (FO on Fox). He says both Marino and Tarkenton are better than Favre. I smile.
The Vikings schedule actually gets easier, and they could get some wins (Fanhouse). When I projected the season, I had the Vikings winning their first four games, then losing their next five. But now three of the next four games are against currently 1-3 teams.
Evidently Tarvaris Jackson will start again (Fanhouse). That's good--it's not as if Kelly Holcomb has given the Vikes a reason not to go back to Jackson, as I thought he might. Jackson can throw hard.
Michael Vick took an eight hour class from PETA (Sports Illustrated). Cripes. I'm an animal rights guy, and even I cringe at the idea of an eight hour class from PETA.
Marc Bulger is out; Scott Linehan favorite Gus Frerotte is in (Sports Illustrated).
Dr. Z's power rankings usually include amusing banter (Sports Illustrated).
The Vikings continue to defy CHFF's Big Play Index: they're +8, tied with 4-0 Dallas and 3-1 Pittsburgh, and just behind 4-0 New England (Cold, Hard Football Facts).
My impression of Bart Starr has always been that he's a decent QB that got to play on a great team, but in CHFF's comparison of Starr and Favre, it's clear Starr has the statistics to measure up with the greats (Cold, Hard Football Facts).
Roy Williams is going to start tipping pizza delivery people (Fanhouse). I've got a coupon for a free pizza sitting at home right now (it just became valid October 1). I'm excited.
Michael David Smith compares Brett Favre to other great QBs (FO on Fox). He says both Marino and Tarkenton are better than Favre. I smile.
The Vikings schedule actually gets easier, and they could get some wins (Fanhouse). When I projected the season, I had the Vikings winning their first four games, then losing their next five. But now three of the next four games are against currently 1-3 teams.
Evidently Tarvaris Jackson will start again (Fanhouse). That's good--it's not as if Kelly Holcomb has given the Vikes a reason not to go back to Jackson, as I thought he might. Jackson can throw hard.
Michael Vick took an eight hour class from PETA (Sports Illustrated). Cripes. I'm an animal rights guy, and even I cringe at the idea of an eight hour class from PETA.
Marc Bulger is out; Scott Linehan favorite Gus Frerotte is in (Sports Illustrated).
Dr. Z's power rankings usually include amusing banter (Sports Illustrated).
The Vikings continue to defy CHFF's Big Play Index: they're +8, tied with 4-0 Dallas and 3-1 Pittsburgh, and just behind 4-0 New England (Cold, Hard Football Facts).
My impression of Bart Starr has always been that he's a decent QB that got to play on a great team, but in CHFF's comparison of Starr and Favre, it's clear Starr has the statistics to measure up with the greats (Cold, Hard Football Facts).
To quote a caveman: "Ah, what?"
In The Star Tribune, Zygi Wilf has this to say about fan reaction to the Vikings' struggles:
"The fans are great here. I don't think there is a lot of frustration. I think there is a lot of patience, and I just hope we can reward them with more and more victories sooner rather than later."
I don't pretend to have my finger on the pulse of all the hornheads, but Zygi is willfully blind if he thinks there is no frustration among Viking fans. The team could barely (and really didn't) sell out the opener. The team played against the Packers, and many, many Packer fans were able to get tickets that Viking fans didn't want. And certainly Viking fans that communicate on the internet have been expressing frustration.
There's hope among Viking fans. A lot of us are thrilled with the potential of Adrian Peterson and Sidney Rice. We recognize that the team has been competitive in all its games, and that they may be very close to taking a step up. And we love the defense. But clearly, there's "a lot of frustration" among most Viking fans.
"The fans are great here. I don't think there is a lot of frustration. I think there is a lot of patience, and I just hope we can reward them with more and more victories sooner rather than later."
I don't pretend to have my finger on the pulse of all the hornheads, but Zygi is willfully blind if he thinks there is no frustration among Viking fans. The team could barely (and really didn't) sell out the opener. The team played against the Packers, and many, many Packer fans were able to get tickets that Viking fans didn't want. And certainly Viking fans that communicate on the internet have been expressing frustration.
There's hope among Viking fans. A lot of us are thrilled with the potential of Adrian Peterson and Sidney Rice. We recognize that the team has been competitive in all its games, and that they may be very close to taking a step up. And we love the defense. But clearly, there's "a lot of frustration" among most Viking fans.
Monday, October 01, 2007
On a Viking Fan's Spiritual Crisis, and "Jealousy" of Fans
Waiting: a Spiritual Crisis
One of my favorite passages in all of literature comes from John Fowles in The Magus, and it seems to me written for Viking fans:
"The smallest hope, a bare continuing to exist, is enough for the antihero’s future; leave him, says our age, leave him where mankind is in its history, at a crossroads, in dilemma, with all to lose and only more of the same to win; let him survive, but give him no direction, no reward; because we too are waiting, in our solitary rooms where the telephone never rings. Waiting for this girl, this truth, this crystal of humanity, this reality lost through imagination, to return; and to say she returns is a lie."
As Viking fans, we survive, but with no direction or reward; we play a game of waiting, and it’s vain waiting, as for us, “this truth, this crystal of humanity, this reality lost through imagination,” will not come. We wait and wait and wait, and all in vain.
A Viking Super Bowl win would give redemption to all our previous sports fan suffering. Alas, we are not fated for such an event: our lot is to continually wait on an empty and hopeless promise. We wait, expecting some redemptive fulfillment for all this disappointment, but it is not our lot. Red Sox fans got it. But we won't.
And so I realize that I cannot sit in my solitary room waiting for the phone to ring: I must seek meaning elsewhere. It is a spiritual crisis, a recognition that the hoped for moment of redemption is for others, but not for us.
It's not you; it's me.
Recently I've heard a few Packer fans suggest that Viking fans are jealous of what Packer fans have, that Viking fans are bitter because we wish we were Packer fans and have their fan experience. Please, stop: it only makes you sound condescending and arrogant. Yes, I'm jealous of any fanbase that has seen its favorite team win a championship. And yes, I'm jealous of a fanbase that has been able to follow a recognized all-time great quarterback for his entire career. But there's nothing special about you in particular: the same standard makes me jealous of Denver Bronco fans. Yep, I wish the Vikings had a championship, and that makes me envious of the teams that do have championships. But it doesn't mean I wish I were you in particular. It's not about you, but about our own suffering and longing gazes toward those who have the joy we wish we had. It's not you; it's me.
One of my favorite passages in all of literature comes from John Fowles in The Magus, and it seems to me written for Viking fans:
"The smallest hope, a bare continuing to exist, is enough for the antihero’s future; leave him, says our age, leave him where mankind is in its history, at a crossroads, in dilemma, with all to lose and only more of the same to win; let him survive, but give him no direction, no reward; because we too are waiting, in our solitary rooms where the telephone never rings. Waiting for this girl, this truth, this crystal of humanity, this reality lost through imagination, to return; and to say she returns is a lie."
As Viking fans, we survive, but with no direction or reward; we play a game of waiting, and it’s vain waiting, as for us, “this truth, this crystal of humanity, this reality lost through imagination,” will not come. We wait and wait and wait, and all in vain.
A Viking Super Bowl win would give redemption to all our previous sports fan suffering. Alas, we are not fated for such an event: our lot is to continually wait on an empty and hopeless promise. We wait, expecting some redemptive fulfillment for all this disappointment, but it is not our lot. Red Sox fans got it. But we won't.
And so I realize that I cannot sit in my solitary room waiting for the phone to ring: I must seek meaning elsewhere. It is a spiritual crisis, a recognition that the hoped for moment of redemption is for others, but not for us.
It's not you; it's me.
Recently I've heard a few Packer fans suggest that Viking fans are jealous of what Packer fans have, that Viking fans are bitter because we wish we were Packer fans and have their fan experience. Please, stop: it only makes you sound condescending and arrogant. Yes, I'm jealous of any fanbase that has seen its favorite team win a championship. And yes, I'm jealous of a fanbase that has been able to follow a recognized all-time great quarterback for his entire career. But there's nothing special about you in particular: the same standard makes me jealous of Denver Bronco fans. Yep, I wish the Vikings had a championship, and that makes me envious of the teams that do have championships. But it doesn't mean I wish I were you in particular. It's not about you, but about our own suffering and longing gazes toward those who have the joy we wish we had. It's not you; it's me.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)