In my fantasy league, we start two RBs and two WRs, but you have the option to replace a second RB with a 3rd WR. People have done it occasionally, but nobody has really done it for a year. In 2006 I was about to change all that.
Due to trades and bizarre circumstances, my first four picks were Clinton Portis, Randy Moss, Marvin Harrison, and Steve Smith. It looked like I was going to be going with a pretty strong 1 RB, 3 WR lineup.
Then injuries happened. In week one, Clinton Portis and Steve Smith were replaced with Tatum Bell and Thomas Jones.
And now, in week two, it looks again like neither Portis nor Smith will be in the lineup.
But in week 2, I'll be bringing the experiment back, with a lineup featuring...ugh...Tatum Bell at RB, with Moss, Harrison, and (rube cred!) Troy Williamson at WR.
Now, why do I bore you with talk of my fantasy team? Because there's another interesting point of seeing Portis and Smith out weeks one and two. You see, I love the Vikings. I hate starting fantasy players against the Vikings because I'm clearly rooting for the players to get shut out...yet there's some part of me inside that has a little happiness if they do well. I don't like that; it just sort of makes me sick.
Well, in week one the Vikes played the Redskins...with Portis going about half the game. The Vikes won; could they have won against a Redskin team featuring Portis full time at full strength? I don't know. But my fantasy team struggles were clearly overwhelmed by Viking joy.
Now, in week two the Vikes play the Panthers...probably without Steve Smith. If Steve Smith were playing, the Panthers would probably be favored in this game (well, technically they are favored). But the Panthers are not only without the only man on their offense that scares anybody and the man who utterly destroyed the Vikes last year, they'll be without their starting MLB, LT, and probably C. The Vikes can and should win this game (it is in the Dome). So once again, my beloved Vikings get to face a significantly weakened team playing without one of my fantasy team's featured stars.
And you know what I say to this?
GREAT!
Not only do I get to skip any anxiety associated with a fantasy player going against the Vikings (benching the player doesn't really help--it just makes you feel like a tool if that player does well), but the Purple get to face a second team without their dynamic offensive star. I'll sacrifice The Experience to the Vikings, oh, pretty much every moment of my life.
(BTW, have you ever Google Image Searched "Fantasy Football"? The first several pages feature a lot of skimpily clad women for some reason. There are also a few cats. The whole exercise turned me off of including a pic with this post).
Anyway, enjoy week two people. Except for Packer and Bear fans.
Friday, September 15, 2006
A few football nuggets
Sometimes one wants two plus two to equal five.
One of Dostoevsky's big beefs was the idea that mathematical systems could make projections on human behavior, that everything that happened in the world was a matter of cause and effect. In books like Notes from the Underground, Dostoevsky attempted to show how all sorts of irrational forces impact human behavior and events.
I have similar skepticism about computer systems that attempt to project what a coach should do in a give situation. I think intense statistical analysis can tell us a lot about football; however, I don't think it can project what a give team, with a given offensive personel, facing another given team at a given date, with a specific defensive set with a specific defensive personel, with specific events that have already occured in the game (players getting worn down, plays already run, either successfully or unsuccessfully), at a specific point in the game, should do.
Getting ready for the Panthers.
The Vikes are likely facing the Panthers without Steve Smith, their best offensive player, a true playmaker who makes the offense potent (and even if he plays, will he be effective?). The Panthers have also just lost their starting left tackle, might be playing without their center, and will most likely be playing without their middle linebacker. I really shouldn't be as confident as I am, I know, but I don't see any reason the Vikings shouldn't win this game.
One of Dostoevsky's big beefs was the idea that mathematical systems could make projections on human behavior, that everything that happened in the world was a matter of cause and effect. In books like Notes from the Underground, Dostoevsky attempted to show how all sorts of irrational forces impact human behavior and events.
I have similar skepticism about computer systems that attempt to project what a coach should do in a give situation. I think intense statistical analysis can tell us a lot about football; however, I don't think it can project what a give team, with a given offensive personel, facing another given team at a given date, with a specific defensive set with a specific defensive personel, with specific events that have already occured in the game (players getting worn down, plays already run, either successfully or unsuccessfully), at a specific point in the game, should do.
Getting ready for the Panthers.
The Vikes are likely facing the Panthers without Steve Smith, their best offensive player, a true playmaker who makes the offense potent (and even if he plays, will he be effective?). The Panthers have also just lost their starting left tackle, might be playing without their center, and will most likely be playing without their middle linebacker. I really shouldn't be as confident as I am, I know, but I don't see any reason the Vikings shouldn't win this game.
Thursday, September 14, 2006
The waiting is the hardest part
All sorts of twentieth century writers have grabbed onto the concept of waiting as an important motif of the human condition. Samuel Beckett wrote "Waiting for Godot," which likely had an influence on Tom Stoppard (in "Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are Dead") and Harold Pinter (in "The Dumb Waiter): all are plays about two boobs sitting around waiting. You can find the concept of waiting important in novels by Jean Paul Sartre and Albert Camus. John Fowles writes in The Magus,
"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."
You don't have to tell football fans that waiting is a distinct feature of human existence. We wait all spring and summer for the opening games of football, counting them down, considering kickoff a sort of holy grail. We revel in that first week. And then, around Tuesday or Wednesday, we suddenly realize, "Oh. I didn't just reach Nirvana. I've got to wait again for some more." There are things to help. Plenty of articles around the internet to allow us to consume ourselves with yet more football. Oh, and there's work and family. But still the days grow long. And so each week we wait...and wait..and wait...
And ultimately, we may just be waiting for a chance to get our emotions stomped around, for the possibility that we'll spend the next week waiting in the foulest of moods.
"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."
You don't have to tell football fans that waiting is a distinct feature of human existence. We wait all spring and summer for the opening games of football, counting them down, considering kickoff a sort of holy grail. We revel in that first week. And then, around Tuesday or Wednesday, we suddenly realize, "Oh. I didn't just reach Nirvana. I've got to wait again for some more." There are things to help. Plenty of articles around the internet to allow us to consume ourselves with yet more football. Oh, and there's work and family. But still the days grow long. And so each week we wait...and wait..and wait...
And ultimately, we may just be waiting for a chance to get our emotions stomped around, for the possibility that we'll spend the next week waiting in the foulest of moods.
Tuesday, September 12, 2006
Joy in Mudville
After reading this Redskin fan's report of how things seem familiar for his team, it becomes clear why Viking fans are so ecstatic with last night's win.
Everything about the Viking game last night was unfamiliar.
First of all, they won a game on natural grass. For years, the Vikings simply didn't win outdoor football games (with the odd exception of Lambeau Field). That seems entirely in the past; these Vikings are built differently. I'm almost willing to believe the Vikings could win at Soldier Field this year. Almost.
The Vikes also showed a consistent ability to stop opposing offenses on 3rd down. Washington was just 4 for 13 on 3rd down attempts. I'm beginning to believe that my children will grow up in a world in which the Vikings play defense.
Clock Management was actually pretty good. Brad Johnson got the team in position for a field goal just before halftime that cut the deficit to 4. At the end of the game, Childress trusted the defense enough that he settled for a 3 point lead even though it would give Washington the ball with a minute left, rather than try for a TD that could have put the team up by 7 but would have given Washington longer to try tie it. It worked...barely (I'm hoping that when Dwight Smith returns to the lineup, opposing WRs won't get open so easily. Smoot, Winfield, and Sharper looked solid last night, but other members of the secondary were exposed).
And there was a real commitment to the running game. In a close game, the Vikings stuck with Chester Taylor running behind Steve Hutchinson, even though they didn't have a big average per rush. This looks like a team that wants to run the ball no matter what.
Other things look hopeful. Zero turnovers. Great pass protection. There were too many penalties, but Childress doesn't seem like a coach that will tolerate that for long. Nobody likes to see an extra point attempt bobbled away. But it is clear that these aren't the Vikings we've watched for the past several years. This is a team built not on speed and offensive fireworks but on toughness, discipline, and fundamentals.
Now the Vikes get to come home for two tough games against the Panther and then the Bears. The Vikings are starting the season against 3 2005 playoff teams (that also won 3 playoff games), but they've got a good shot at a 3-0 start (Steve Smith may still be limping and the Panthers may be overrated, the Vikes haven't lost to the Bears in the Dome since 2001, and I've got a lot of confidence in the Metrodome).
Everything about the Viking game last night was unfamiliar.
First of all, they won a game on natural grass. For years, the Vikings simply didn't win outdoor football games (with the odd exception of Lambeau Field). That seems entirely in the past; these Vikings are built differently. I'm almost willing to believe the Vikings could win at Soldier Field this year. Almost.
The Vikes also showed a consistent ability to stop opposing offenses on 3rd down. Washington was just 4 for 13 on 3rd down attempts. I'm beginning to believe that my children will grow up in a world in which the Vikings play defense.
Clock Management was actually pretty good. Brad Johnson got the team in position for a field goal just before halftime that cut the deficit to 4. At the end of the game, Childress trusted the defense enough that he settled for a 3 point lead even though it would give Washington the ball with a minute left, rather than try for a TD that could have put the team up by 7 but would have given Washington longer to try tie it. It worked...barely (I'm hoping that when Dwight Smith returns to the lineup, opposing WRs won't get open so easily. Smoot, Winfield, and Sharper looked solid last night, but other members of the secondary were exposed).
And there was a real commitment to the running game. In a close game, the Vikings stuck with Chester Taylor running behind Steve Hutchinson, even though they didn't have a big average per rush. This looks like a team that wants to run the ball no matter what.
Other things look hopeful. Zero turnovers. Great pass protection. There were too many penalties, but Childress doesn't seem like a coach that will tolerate that for long. Nobody likes to see an extra point attempt bobbled away. But it is clear that these aren't the Vikings we've watched for the past several years. This is a team built not on speed and offensive fireworks but on toughness, discipline, and fundamentals.
Now the Vikes get to come home for two tough games against the Panther and then the Bears. The Vikings are starting the season against 3 2005 playoff teams (that also won 3 playoff games), but they've got a good shot at a 3-0 start (Steve Smith may still be limping and the Panthers may be overrated, the Vikes haven't lost to the Bears in the Dome since 2001, and I've got a lot of confidence in the Metrodome).
Skol Vikings: Minnesota 19, Washington 16
During the season, all I care about is the Ws and the Ls. A W added to the standings give me a bit of euphoria to take me through the week; an L brings me down and keeps me down until the next W. I don't care how the team gets the W, how ugly they look, or how great they look in an L. I don't care if my team entertains you; the Vikes have spent a decade or more entertaining you, now it's just time for them to win.
And for anybody trying to minimize a road win against a returning playoff team (and winner of a playoff game), remember that a year ago the word on the Vikings was their total inability to win outdoors. That looks to be the past, man.
Here's what I saw in the Vikings' 19-16 win over Washington.
Bombs Away.
WTF? I thought this was a ball control offense. Every other pass, including 3rd and short, seemed to be a bomb downfield.
Troy Williamson had two TERRIBLE drops, but he did catch some passes--and he showed the speed to beat CBs deep. He should force defenses to consider him and help spread things out for the rest of the offense.
Darren Sharper's hit on Santana Moss
Like no other sport, in football you can point to individual plays that make big differences in the final result. Darren Sharper's hit on Santana Moss in the end zone at the end of the first half knocked the ball out of an open receiver's hand, preventing a TD and leading to a FG. That's a 4 point play in a 3 point game.
Pass Rush
No sacks, no interceptions. A disappointment? Yes. But the pass rush was effective. Mark Brunell was forced to scramble and/or throw the ball away a lot (thanks to pass rush combined with good coverage).
The defensive linemen will get sacks. But even without sacks, they impacted the game Monday.
Cornerback Tackling
Antoine Winfield was strong as usual, dropping open field runners to the ground right where he hit them. I'd expect nothing less. But Fred Smoot made an impact tackling too. It's a huge help to the linebackers to have CBs around them that can make tackles.
Commitment to the Running Game
Brad Childress is a little bit Andy Reid and a little bit Barry Alvarez. It's good to see a team staying with the run in a close game, even if it's been less than stellar for parts of the game.
3rd Down
The Vikes were better on 3rd down, offensively and defensively, than they were during much of the Tice era (especially defensively).
Special Teams
Troy Williamson and Mewelde Moore both look like capable returners.
My kitten
Traumatized by the beginning of football season. She doesn't understand at all that I'm dancing and jumping around the room.
Monday, September 11, 2006
Bowlful of Anxiety
We're just over 3 hours from Viking kickoff. I'm just under 5 hours from being able to watch them. So away we go with what worries me tonight.
Linebackers
I expect the Viking defensive line to dominate, as Udeze, Williams, Williams, and James recall images of Eller, Page, Larsen, and Marshall. I expect the secondary to perform admirably; I'm a little worried Santana Moss will get by everybody a time or two, but overall I don't fear Brunell or the Washington WRs. Winning the game on the defensive side of the ball will come down to the linebackers. Can they cover the TEs and RBs? Can they stop the Washington running game (most likely to feature Ladell Betts mostly)? Linebacker may once again be the big weakness for the Vikings; if they can't stop Washington from running the ball 4-5 yards a carry, as well as stop Washington from picking up 3rd downs with short passes, the Vikes are in trouble.
Wide Receivers
I think more of the Viking wideouts than most do; however, this is the type of game they must perform well in. Because of the Vikings' short passing game and Brad Johnson's intelligence, I'm not worried about the offensive line--if the wideouts can get open and make tough catches in traffic while getting hit. Johnson will be trying to release the ball in under 2 seconds; if the Viking WRs can't get any separation, and if they can't hang onto the ball with defenders draping them, it will be a very long night.
Special Teams
If tonight's game goes like many games have gone in week one, it will be a low scoring affair in which defensive lines hold the edge over offensive lines. The outcome could easily come down to field position. What will the Viking return game be like without Koren Robinson? Will Mewelde Moore be effective? And will the Vikings successfully cover the Washington returns? I fear a long punt or kick return setting Brunell up with the short field position that he'll require to function.
Linebackers
I expect the Viking defensive line to dominate, as Udeze, Williams, Williams, and James recall images of Eller, Page, Larsen, and Marshall. I expect the secondary to perform admirably; I'm a little worried Santana Moss will get by everybody a time or two, but overall I don't fear Brunell or the Washington WRs. Winning the game on the defensive side of the ball will come down to the linebackers. Can they cover the TEs and RBs? Can they stop the Washington running game (most likely to feature Ladell Betts mostly)? Linebacker may once again be the big weakness for the Vikings; if they can't stop Washington from running the ball 4-5 yards a carry, as well as stop Washington from picking up 3rd downs with short passes, the Vikes are in trouble.
Wide Receivers
I think more of the Viking wideouts than most do; however, this is the type of game they must perform well in. Because of the Vikings' short passing game and Brad Johnson's intelligence, I'm not worried about the offensive line--if the wideouts can get open and make tough catches in traffic while getting hit. Johnson will be trying to release the ball in under 2 seconds; if the Viking WRs can't get any separation, and if they can't hang onto the ball with defenders draping them, it will be a very long night.
Special Teams
If tonight's game goes like many games have gone in week one, it will be a low scoring affair in which defensive lines hold the edge over offensive lines. The outcome could easily come down to field position. What will the Viking return game be like without Koren Robinson? Will Mewelde Moore be effective? And will the Vikings successfully cover the Washington returns? I fear a long punt or kick return setting Brunell up with the short field position that he'll require to function.
Week One Nuggets of Wonderment
Each Monday, I will give you my brief thoughts from Sunday's action. This week I watched the Rams beat the Broncos, the Bears beat the Packers, and the Colts beat the Giants.
Does anybody else suffer from Sunday Night Insomnia?
The combination of the physical (a day's immobility and caffeine consumption) and the mental (statistics and images of plays dancing through my head) leave me lying awake for hours. Perhaps last night was particularly bad since I'm racked with anxiety over the Viking game tonight. Suddenly I started picturing Randle-El running back punt returns and wondering how many sacks and turnovers the Vikes can force out of Brunell.
Football language can be very homoerotic.
This is a sport where common words to precede "up the middle" include "penetrate," "pound it," and "hammer away." That said, am I being overly purile about these two exchanges?
John: "He's thinking, 'How am I going to get my mouth around that?'"
Al: "We can help."
John: "Tiki Barber has a lot more thunder than you'd think."
"The Shadow of Their Own End Zone"
On Dan Patrick's radio show Friday, Kordell Stewart called the Steelers winning a championship a "blessing in disguise" for Steeler fans. Hell of a disguise.
The Favre Tally
Favre remains 24 TDs away from Marino's cherished TD record, and has narrowed the margin to Blanda's interception record to 20. One of Favre's picks was to Nemesis himself.
I also have an Interception Theory. "For every one interception a quarterback throws, at least one pass will bounce off a defender's hands." Culpepper had 2 interceptions and 2 passes hit defenders' hands. Favre had 2 interceptions and 3 bounce off defender's hands. Peyton Manning had 1 interception and 3 bounce off defenders' hands.
They are football players, after all.
I like to watch for a cornerback's tackling ability. Tackling is why I think that while Deion Sanders is the greatest cover corner I've ever seen, Rod Woodson is a better football player. Tackling is why Antoine Winfield is my favorite Viking (he gives up passes, but he usually stops the WR cold right where he catches it).
Champ Bailey sticks out to me as a very good tackler.
Better special effects than The Matrix.
When I see that robot jumping around on the side of the screen during FOX broadcasts, I think, "So they paid money to have that thing done. Will that increase a single rating point? Will it increase a single person's enjoyment of the broadcast? Will it bring back a single viewer for the next week, just because of that?"
The only thing it could possibly do is entertain bored toddlers who are stuck watching football with their mothers and fathers.
Quality work
I thought that NBC's "Football Night in America" was a superb show. Good features, good coverage of highlights, good commentary. They could use a few more stats, but overall I'm very pleased with the coverage. Considering I don't get ESPN for financial reasons (as has been almost as well documented at this blog as the fact that I teach a class Monday night and will miss the beginning of the Viking game and am totally aware that I refuse to stop whining about it), I'm glad to get a good highlight show on a broadcast network.
The Black and Blue Division is Back.
Three NFC North teams played yesterday. They combined for 1 offensive touchdown. I really hope the Vikes can double that tonight.
Why am I not hyperventilating?
Sunday afternoons are a special experience when your favorite team doesn't play. During a Viking game I usually use up so much emotional energy before, during, and after the game, that sometimes I can't watch another game afterward. I'll go for a walk to try calm myself. So when the Vikings don't play and I get to watch three straight games, it's a surprisingly relaxing day. But I'd still rather be watching the Vikes.
Play(s) of the Day
Plaxico Burress's catches. Years of cheering for Randy Moss and Cris Carter have turned me into an aficionado for big athletic receivers who make crazy catches with spectacular use of hands.
Most Important Game of the Day
Falcons defeating Panthers. That game tells us a lot about both teams.
Minnesota at Washington
I don't think either team will be able to run the ball effectively tonight. The Vikings should be able to pressure Brunell into mistakes (I'm dreaming of 4 sacks and 3 interceptions), but I don't think Brad Johnson will be as easy to rattle. I'm suddenly concerned about special teams--I don't think the Vikes have a great return game, and I don't know how they'll do covering returns, either. But without Clinton Portis, Washington's offense is below average. Though I don't think the Vikings will succeed throwing the ball downfield, Brad Johnson's short passes should pick up first downs. Vikings win, 20-10.
But keep in mind, when it comes to the Vikings, I'm like Fox Mulder: I want to believe.
Does anybody else suffer from Sunday Night Insomnia?
The combination of the physical (a day's immobility and caffeine consumption) and the mental (statistics and images of plays dancing through my head) leave me lying awake for hours. Perhaps last night was particularly bad since I'm racked with anxiety over the Viking game tonight. Suddenly I started picturing Randle-El running back punt returns and wondering how many sacks and turnovers the Vikes can force out of Brunell.
Football language can be very homoerotic.
This is a sport where common words to precede "up the middle" include "penetrate," "pound it," and "hammer away." That said, am I being overly purile about these two exchanges?
John: "He's thinking, 'How am I going to get my mouth around that?'"
Al: "We can help."
John: "Tiki Barber has a lot more thunder than you'd think."
"The Shadow of Their Own End Zone"
On Dan Patrick's radio show Friday, Kordell Stewart called the Steelers winning a championship a "blessing in disguise" for Steeler fans. Hell of a disguise.
The Favre Tally
Favre remains 24 TDs away from Marino's cherished TD record, and has narrowed the margin to Blanda's interception record to 20. One of Favre's picks was to Nemesis himself.
I also have an Interception Theory. "For every one interception a quarterback throws, at least one pass will bounce off a defender's hands." Culpepper had 2 interceptions and 2 passes hit defenders' hands. Favre had 2 interceptions and 3 bounce off defender's hands. Peyton Manning had 1 interception and 3 bounce off defenders' hands.
They are football players, after all.
I like to watch for a cornerback's tackling ability. Tackling is why I think that while Deion Sanders is the greatest cover corner I've ever seen, Rod Woodson is a better football player. Tackling is why Antoine Winfield is my favorite Viking (he gives up passes, but he usually stops the WR cold right where he catches it).
Champ Bailey sticks out to me as a very good tackler.
Better special effects than The Matrix.
When I see that robot jumping around on the side of the screen during FOX broadcasts, I think, "So they paid money to have that thing done. Will that increase a single rating point? Will it increase a single person's enjoyment of the broadcast? Will it bring back a single viewer for the next week, just because of that?"
The only thing it could possibly do is entertain bored toddlers who are stuck watching football with their mothers and fathers.
Quality work
I thought that NBC's "Football Night in America" was a superb show. Good features, good coverage of highlights, good commentary. They could use a few more stats, but overall I'm very pleased with the coverage. Considering I don't get ESPN for financial reasons (as has been almost as well documented at this blog as the fact that I teach a class Monday night and will miss the beginning of the Viking game and am totally aware that I refuse to stop whining about it), I'm glad to get a good highlight show on a broadcast network.
The Black and Blue Division is Back.
Three NFC North teams played yesterday. They combined for 1 offensive touchdown. I really hope the Vikes can double that tonight.
Why am I not hyperventilating?
Sunday afternoons are a special experience when your favorite team doesn't play. During a Viking game I usually use up so much emotional energy before, during, and after the game, that sometimes I can't watch another game afterward. I'll go for a walk to try calm myself. So when the Vikings don't play and I get to watch three straight games, it's a surprisingly relaxing day. But I'd still rather be watching the Vikes.
Play(s) of the Day
Plaxico Burress's catches. Years of cheering for Randy Moss and Cris Carter have turned me into an aficionado for big athletic receivers who make crazy catches with spectacular use of hands.
Most Important Game of the Day
Falcons defeating Panthers. That game tells us a lot about both teams.
Minnesota at Washington
I don't think either team will be able to run the ball effectively tonight. The Vikings should be able to pressure Brunell into mistakes (I'm dreaming of 4 sacks and 3 interceptions), but I don't think Brad Johnson will be as easy to rattle. I'm suddenly concerned about special teams--I don't think the Vikes have a great return game, and I don't know how they'll do covering returns, either. But without Clinton Portis, Washington's offense is below average. Though I don't think the Vikings will succeed throwing the ball downfield, Brad Johnson's short passes should pick up first downs. Vikings win, 20-10.
But keep in mind, when it comes to the Vikings, I'm like Fox Mulder: I want to believe.
Friday, September 08, 2006
Enjoy week one, everybody. Except for Packer and Bear fans. Oh, well, if you're playing each other, I guess somebody has to enjoy it.
Sunday from noon until midnight I don't expect to leave my living room for any reason other than to go to the bathroom or kitchen during a commercial. I hope you all have fun. I'll return Monday to make sense of the chaos of Sunday and to twitch and shiver in anticipation for the Viking game.
A few lingering problems.
--I will be watching the Bears and Packers play, and I don't know who to root against.
--I'm still a bucket full of angst over teaching Monday night--I will miss the first half of the Vikings' game, I'll be trusting a VCR, be rushing home, worrying about everything. I thought this was supposed to be fun.
--Thanks to Clinton Portis and Steve Smith: my fantasy running backs for the weekend are now Thomas Jones and Tatum Bell.
--The most enjoyable game to watch should be the Colts-Giants. Lots of good offensive players on each team.
A few lingering problems.
--I will be watching the Bears and Packers play, and I don't know who to root against.
--I'm still a bucket full of angst over teaching Monday night--I will miss the first half of the Vikings' game, I'll be trusting a VCR, be rushing home, worrying about everything. I thought this was supposed to be fun.
--Thanks to Clinton Portis and Steve Smith: my fantasy running backs for the weekend are now Thomas Jones and Tatum Bell.
--The most enjoyable game to watch should be the Colts-Giants. Lots of good offensive players on each team.
Interceptionpepper lives
Yesterday, I wrote a list of things I was watching for in last night's Dolphin-Steeler game. So here are my thoughts (the photo is of me thinking about the game).
Troy Polamalu
I charted Polamalu's plays. He had 9 tackles (which matches NBC's report of 3 solo and 6 assists), 1 missed tackle, 4 plays where he was involved in the tackle (he doesn't get an assist, but he was around the ball impacting the tackle), a pass defensed, a forced fumble, an interception, and an "assisted breakup" (another player got the pass defense, but Polamalu was around, possibly making an impact).
That's not 45 tackles and 15 passes defensed, but it's an impactful game. Polamalu is one of the most versatile players in the league: a free safety/outside linebacker combo. He plays near the line of scrimmage most of the time, but is fully capable of dropping back and making an impact in coverage.
Culpepper’s mobility
He showed the ability to move around--but didn't it seem to lack zip?
I was almost wrong about the interceptions, but Daunte always comes through with some completely incomprehensible INTs when his team needs him to play well the most. Fandom is a funny world: for the past six seasons, Daunte's crazy 4th quarter INTs would leave me inconsolable; now I'm indifferent.
Chris Chambers
Not a great impact on the game. He ends with 5 catches for 59 yards, but was a nonfactor for much of the game. Pittsburgh's defense is good.
Willie Parker’s carries
It looks like he was out on goal line situations, so unless Cowher blames the RB on the goal line fumble last night, it looks like Parker will again score 1 TD for every 300 or so yards he rushes for.
Pittsburgh’s WRs
WRs other than Hines Ward had 3 catches for 38 yards and a TD. Will that be enough?
Ronnie Brown’s carries
Brown was an effective receiver last night, but Pittsburgh clearly shut him down on the ground.
(photo removed)
Troy Polamalu
I charted Polamalu's plays. He had 9 tackles (which matches NBC's report of 3 solo and 6 assists), 1 missed tackle, 4 plays where he was involved in the tackle (he doesn't get an assist, but he was around the ball impacting the tackle), a pass defensed, a forced fumble, an interception, and an "assisted breakup" (another player got the pass defense, but Polamalu was around, possibly making an impact).
That's not 45 tackles and 15 passes defensed, but it's an impactful game. Polamalu is one of the most versatile players in the league: a free safety/outside linebacker combo. He plays near the line of scrimmage most of the time, but is fully capable of dropping back and making an impact in coverage.
Culpepper’s mobility
He showed the ability to move around--but didn't it seem to lack zip?
I was almost wrong about the interceptions, but Daunte always comes through with some completely incomprehensible INTs when his team needs him to play well the most. Fandom is a funny world: for the past six seasons, Daunte's crazy 4th quarter INTs would leave me inconsolable; now I'm indifferent.
Chris Chambers
Not a great impact on the game. He ends with 5 catches for 59 yards, but was a nonfactor for much of the game. Pittsburgh's defense is good.
Willie Parker’s carries
It looks like he was out on goal line situations, so unless Cowher blames the RB on the goal line fumble last night, it looks like Parker will again score 1 TD for every 300 or so yards he rushes for.
Pittsburgh’s WRs
WRs other than Hines Ward had 3 catches for 38 yards and a TD. Will that be enough?
Ronnie Brown’s carries
Brown was an effective receiver last night, but Pittsburgh clearly shut him down on the ground.
(photo removed)
Thursday, September 07, 2006
Things to watch in tonight's Steeler-Dolphin game
Troy Polamalu
I’m under the impression that Polamalu ends every game with 45 tackles and 15 passes defensed. Is he that dominant a defender, or does his luxuriously flamboyant hair make every play he makes stand out to me? And should I chart tonight’s game to find out how many positive plays Polamalu makes?
Culpepper’s mobility
I will be surprised if Daunte throws less than two interceptions tonight; teams that mix and disguise their blitzes as well as Pittsburgh confuse Peyton Manning, so they’re sure as hell going to confuse Daunte. But how does he move? If he’s no longer the scrambler he was a few seasons ago, how good will he be?
Chris Chambers
I’ve never been impressed with Chambers’ numbers; however, he’s played under a conservative offensive coach and plenty of over-par QBs (I don’t use the expression sub-par, because in golf you WANT to be sub-par). Yet even being held back by the likes of Wannstedt and Fiedler, he’s been a pretty solid WR. Let’s see what he can do with Daunte.
Willie Parker’s carries
If Willie Parker gets goal line carries, he could be the steal of everbody’s fantasy football draft. By the way, I loathe the nickname “Fast Willie Parker.” If you’re an NFL RB, it is taken for granted that you are fast. Why bother with a nickname at all? Yet announcers just love calling him Fast Willie Parker; they find it harder and harder to even say his name without preceding it with “Fast.”
Pittsburgh’s WRs
Though we might not see much out of them tonight (I like Charlie Batch a lot, but his presence might lead Cowher to tighten up the game plan), we’re going to have to see SOMEBODY emerge as a competent #2 WR. The Steelers don’t go to the second wideout much; however, if a defense has a good coverage linebacker to get the tight end and doubles Hines Ward, that defense has basically eliminated the Steelers’ passing game.
Ronnie Brown’s carries
In college, he shared carries with Cadillac Williams. Last season, he shared carries with Ricky Williams. We’re all anxious to see how he does when he shares nothing.
(photo of Troy and Theodora Polamalu removed)
I’m under the impression that Polamalu ends every game with 45 tackles and 15 passes defensed. Is he that dominant a defender, or does his luxuriously flamboyant hair make every play he makes stand out to me? And should I chart tonight’s game to find out how many positive plays Polamalu makes?
Culpepper’s mobility
I will be surprised if Daunte throws less than two interceptions tonight; teams that mix and disguise their blitzes as well as Pittsburgh confuse Peyton Manning, so they’re sure as hell going to confuse Daunte. But how does he move? If he’s no longer the scrambler he was a few seasons ago, how good will he be?
Chris Chambers
I’ve never been impressed with Chambers’ numbers; however, he’s played under a conservative offensive coach and plenty of over-par QBs (I don’t use the expression sub-par, because in golf you WANT to be sub-par). Yet even being held back by the likes of Wannstedt and Fiedler, he’s been a pretty solid WR. Let’s see what he can do with Daunte.
Willie Parker’s carries
If Willie Parker gets goal line carries, he could be the steal of everbody’s fantasy football draft. By the way, I loathe the nickname “Fast Willie Parker.” If you’re an NFL RB, it is taken for granted that you are fast. Why bother with a nickname at all? Yet announcers just love calling him Fast Willie Parker; they find it harder and harder to even say his name without preceding it with “Fast.”
Pittsburgh’s WRs
Though we might not see much out of them tonight (I like Charlie Batch a lot, but his presence might lead Cowher to tighten up the game plan), we’re going to have to see SOMEBODY emerge as a competent #2 WR. The Steelers don’t go to the second wideout much; however, if a defense has a good coverage linebacker to get the tight end and doubles Hines Ward, that defense has basically eliminated the Steelers’ passing game.
Ronnie Brown’s carries
In college, he shared carries with Cadillac Williams. Last season, he shared carries with Ricky Williams. We’re all anxious to see how he does when he shares nothing.
(photo of Troy and Theodora Polamalu removed)
My most confident contrarian opinion: the Bears will suck.
In 2001, the Bears emerged to win 13 games before getting exposed in the playoffs by an incredible offensive player (McNabb). They're defense dominated to cover up their poor offense, and every break went their way.
In 2002, they won 4 games.
In 2005, the Bears emerged to win 11 games before getting exposed in the playoffs by an incredible offensive player (Steve Smith). They're defense dominated to cover up their poor offense, and every break went their way.
Why will 2006 be like 2002 for the Bears?
Simple. They are terrible offensively, and any injuries on defense could turn them from a contending football team to a TERRIBLE, TERRIBLE football team.
They're not built like a good football team should be. Should a team be able to go from good to TERRIBLE based on one injury to a middle linebacker, or one or two members of the secondary? Probably not. A real good contender will be built to withstand injuries (with the possible exception of quarterback).
IF a player like Urlacher gets injured (not a big "if"), they're doomed. If multiple players get injured on defense, they're a team that loses games 27-10. Without any functioning offense, any bad break, or any bad bounce, or any lack of luck, will destroy them. They have absolutely ZERO ability to play from behind. They have no quarterback capable of a two-minute drill.
The Bears will win 7 or less games in 2006. The Vikings just need to get to win #9 to win the division and get a home playoff game.
(Then again, when my young quarterbacks were struggling on Madden, I signed a 34 year old Brian Griese who suddenly turned my passing game potent. So who knows).
ADDENDUM: From 1995-2005, the Bears only made the playoffs when they had the #1 scoring defense (2001 and 2005). In that time, they've ranked #24 or lower in points scored 9 times. Basically, I feel for the Bears to win the division, they MUST have the #1 defense in the league. That's a lot of pressure and a lot can go wrong for it to be a necessity to be the best defense in the league in order to make the playoffs.
Also, does the fact that the Bears are more likely to compete to win the division than the Packers mean that this Sunday I have to...gulp...root for the Packers? Can I just root for a tie in which Favre throws 10 interceptions?
In 2002, they won 4 games.
In 2005, the Bears emerged to win 11 games before getting exposed in the playoffs by an incredible offensive player (Steve Smith). They're defense dominated to cover up their poor offense, and every break went their way.
Why will 2006 be like 2002 for the Bears?
Simple. They are terrible offensively, and any injuries on defense could turn them from a contending football team to a TERRIBLE, TERRIBLE football team.
They're not built like a good football team should be. Should a team be able to go from good to TERRIBLE based on one injury to a middle linebacker, or one or two members of the secondary? Probably not. A real good contender will be built to withstand injuries (with the possible exception of quarterback).
IF a player like Urlacher gets injured (not a big "if"), they're doomed. If multiple players get injured on defense, they're a team that loses games 27-10. Without any functioning offense, any bad break, or any bad bounce, or any lack of luck, will destroy them. They have absolutely ZERO ability to play from behind. They have no quarterback capable of a two-minute drill.
The Bears will win 7 or less games in 2006. The Vikings just need to get to win #9 to win the division and get a home playoff game.
(Then again, when my young quarterbacks were struggling on Madden, I signed a 34 year old Brian Griese who suddenly turned my passing game potent. So who knows).
ADDENDUM: From 1995-2005, the Bears only made the playoffs when they had the #1 scoring defense (2001 and 2005). In that time, they've ranked #24 or lower in points scored 9 times. Basically, I feel for the Bears to win the division, they MUST have the #1 defense in the league. That's a lot of pressure and a lot can go wrong for it to be a necessity to be the best defense in the league in order to make the playoffs.
Also, does the fact that the Bears are more likely to compete to win the division than the Packers mean that this Sunday I have to...gulp...root for the Packers? Can I just root for a tie in which Favre throws 10 interceptions?
Wednesday, September 06, 2006
Brett Favre and Interceptions
Below is a comparision of Brett Favre's season INT totals to average of the league's team INTs for each year.
Using data from pro-football-reference.com, I've
figured out the average team interceptions thrown during each season from 1992-2005. It's not a perfect system to compare an individual's interception total to team totals (for all sorts of reasons that should spring to mind if you just think about it a bit), but it's as good as I could think to do. I've included the Packers in the team average, and if Favre is within 1 (up or down) of the league average, I'm listing him as average for that season. I won't reach conclusions: for now, make your own.
1992: BELOW
Favre: 13
Lg Avg: 18.54
1993: ABOVE
Favre: 24
Lg Avg: 16.75
1994: BELOW
Favre: 14
Lg Avg: 16.93
1995: BELOW
Favre: 13
Lg Avg: 17.07
1996: BELOW
Favre: 13
Lg Avg: 18.07
1997: AVERAGE
Favre: 16
Lg Avg: 15.97
1998: ABOVE
Favre: 23
Lg Avg: 16.97
1999: ABOVE
Favre: 23
Lg Avg: 17.39
2000: AVERAGE
Favre: 16
Lg Avg: 16.61
2001: BELOW
Favre: 15
Lg Avg: 17.58
2002: AVERAGE
Favre: 16
Lg Avg: 16.5
2003: ABOVE
Favre: 21
Lg Avg: 16.82
2004: AVERAGE
Favre: 17
Lg Avg: 16.38
2005: ABOVE
Favre: 29
Lg Avg: 15.84
Using data from pro-football-reference.com, I've
figured out the average team interceptions thrown during each season from 1992-2005. It's not a perfect system to compare an individual's interception total to team totals (for all sorts of reasons that should spring to mind if you just think about it a bit), but it's as good as I could think to do. I've included the Packers in the team average, and if Favre is within 1 (up or down) of the league average, I'm listing him as average for that season. I won't reach conclusions: for now, make your own.
1992: BELOW
Favre: 13
Lg Avg: 18.54
1993: ABOVE
Favre: 24
Lg Avg: 16.75
1994: BELOW
Favre: 14
Lg Avg: 16.93
1995: BELOW
Favre: 13
Lg Avg: 17.07
1996: BELOW
Favre: 13
Lg Avg: 18.07
1997: AVERAGE
Favre: 16
Lg Avg: 15.97
1998: ABOVE
Favre: 23
Lg Avg: 16.97
1999: ABOVE
Favre: 23
Lg Avg: 17.39
2000: AVERAGE
Favre: 16
Lg Avg: 16.61
2001: BELOW
Favre: 15
Lg Avg: 17.58
2002: AVERAGE
Favre: 16
Lg Avg: 16.5
2003: ABOVE
Favre: 21
Lg Avg: 16.82
2004: AVERAGE
Favre: 17
Lg Avg: 16.38
2005: ABOVE
Favre: 29
Lg Avg: 15.84
"The Shadow of Their Own End Zone" (1)
Cliches suck. They are usually a sign of poor or lazy writing. They also suck if they make little sense, if you botch them, or if you mix multiple cliches into one statement.
My favorite botched cliche is when a team is said to be in "the shadow of their own end zone." But end zones are a flat piece of earth; they don't really cast a shadow. What the announcer/writer means to say is "shadow of its own goalpost."
So this season, I will chronicle every botched (or simply bad) cliche I read. And we begin with Don Banks. In his SI column today, he writes:
"The Steelers could have their Super Bowl aura punctured immediately and find the deflation difficult to overcome as Cincinnati and Baltimore loom in their rear-view mirror."
Now you tell me: just what the hell does that mean? We've got balloon imagery and car imagery. But why would Pittsburgh be worried about teams looming in their rear-view mirror? Shouldn't they actually worry about the teams looming ahead? If they lose to the Dolphins, wouldn't the Dolphins be the ones looming in the rearview mirror?
My favorite botched cliche is when a team is said to be in "the shadow of their own end zone." But end zones are a flat piece of earth; they don't really cast a shadow. What the announcer/writer means to say is "shadow of its own goalpost."
So this season, I will chronicle every botched (or simply bad) cliche I read. And we begin with Don Banks. In his SI column today, he writes:
"The Steelers could have their Super Bowl aura punctured immediately and find the deflation difficult to overcome as Cincinnati and Baltimore loom in their rear-view mirror."
Now you tell me: just what the hell does that mean? We've got balloon imagery and car imagery. But why would Pittsburgh be worried about teams looming in their rear-view mirror? Shouldn't they actually worry about the teams looming ahead? If they lose to the Dolphins, wouldn't the Dolphins be the ones looming in the rearview mirror?
Fine! (or, I have too much time in my office)
To ensure a good parking space, I showed up in my office at 8:10 this morning for a 1:25 class. So far I've worked backwards compiling NFL team interceptions averages (more on this in another post), and I've played out the NFL schedule. So even though I claimed I wouldn't post this...well, I've now been in my office for 3 hours and 40 minutes and I really don't have work to do since it's the first day and I've got a lot of time before I have to read anything.
My method is simple. I look at every game from week 1 through week 17 individually and in less than 5 seconds mark why I think will win. That means there are few upsets, and the home teams usually win. Also, I can't will myself to pick against the Vikings in any single game. Also, since I go week 1 through 17 rather than looking at each team's schedule, I end up surprising myself but doing a better job of basing projections on team schedule rather than how I feel about them.
AFC East
Patriots 13-3
Dolphins 8-8
Bills 6-10
Jets 5-11
AFC North
Steelers 10-6
Bengals 9-7
Ravens 7-9
Browns 4-12
AFC South
Colts 14-2
Jaguars 11-5
Texans 4-12
Titans 3-13
AFC West
Broncos 12-4
Chargers 9-7
Chiefs 8-8
Raiders 8-8
NFC East
Eagles 11-5
Cowboys 10-6
Giants 10-6
Washington 8-8
NFC North
Vikings 16-0
Packers 6-10
Bears 6-10
Lions 4-12
NFC South
Panthers 9-7
Buccaneers 8-8
Falcons 8-8
Saints 5-11
NFC West
Seahawks 9-7
Cardinals 7-9
Rams 5-11
49ers 3-13
Playoffs
Wild Card
AFC: Broncos d. Bengals, Steelers d. Jaguars
NFC: Panthers d. Giants, Cowboys d. Seahawks
Division Round
AFC: Patriots d. Broncos, Colts d. Steelers
NFC: Vikings d. Cowboys, Panthers d. Eagles
Conference Championships
AFC: Colts d. Patriots
NFC: Vikings d. Panters
Super Bowl
Vikings d. Colts
So there you have it: my 2006 projections. I expect some teams to be better than I've projected, some worse. But let it be known that as long as I've done this I've picked the Vikings to win the Super Bowl and quite clearly I've never been correct, but I live and breathe with the hope that some day I will see my projection come through. Sometimes when I'm lounging about I'll start to imagine what it would be like to see the Vikings win the Super Bowl...and I get overwhelmed by the very idea.
My method is simple. I look at every game from week 1 through week 17 individually and in less than 5 seconds mark why I think will win. That means there are few upsets, and the home teams usually win. Also, I can't will myself to pick against the Vikings in any single game. Also, since I go week 1 through 17 rather than looking at each team's schedule, I end up surprising myself but doing a better job of basing projections on team schedule rather than how I feel about them.
AFC East
Patriots 13-3
Dolphins 8-8
Bills 6-10
Jets 5-11
AFC North
Steelers 10-6
Bengals 9-7
Ravens 7-9
Browns 4-12
AFC South
Colts 14-2
Jaguars 11-5
Texans 4-12
Titans 3-13
AFC West
Broncos 12-4
Chargers 9-7
Chiefs 8-8
Raiders 8-8
NFC East
Eagles 11-5
Cowboys 10-6
Giants 10-6
Washington 8-8
NFC North
Vikings 16-0
Packers 6-10
Bears 6-10
Lions 4-12
NFC South
Panthers 9-7
Buccaneers 8-8
Falcons 8-8
Saints 5-11
NFC West
Seahawks 9-7
Cardinals 7-9
Rams 5-11
49ers 3-13
Playoffs
Wild Card
AFC: Broncos d. Bengals, Steelers d. Jaguars
NFC: Panthers d. Giants, Cowboys d. Seahawks
Division Round
AFC: Patriots d. Broncos, Colts d. Steelers
NFC: Vikings d. Cowboys, Panthers d. Eagles
Conference Championships
AFC: Colts d. Patriots
NFC: Vikings d. Panters
Super Bowl
Vikings d. Colts
So there you have it: my 2006 projections. I expect some teams to be better than I've projected, some worse. But let it be known that as long as I've done this I've picked the Vikings to win the Super Bowl and quite clearly I've never been correct, but I live and breathe with the hope that some day I will see my projection come through. Sometimes when I'm lounging about I'll start to imagine what it would be like to see the Vikings win the Super Bowl...and I get overwhelmed by the very idea.
Tuesday, September 05, 2006
Today's NFL Comments: dumb predictions
It's hard for me to become fully aware that this is the beginning of the insanity that is the NFL season. Three things are throwing me off. First, this is also the first week of classes, so there are are things to concentrate on. Second, I don't have ESPN so I can't watch NFL previews all day long. And third, real games start Thursday but my beloved Vikes don't play until Monday night (when I teach a class, will get home in time to watch the second half, then will rewind the tape to watch what I missed in the first half). Usually, I'm so juiced up for Sunday I can't contain myself, Thursday is just an appetizer, and I spend Saturday night drunk to make Sunday come faster. But what now? All day Sunday I'll be enjoying the games profusely, of course, but I'll still be waiting for the Viking opener to really feel the season starting, and I'll miss that anyway. But the madness does begin this week whether my conscious mind is aware of it or not.
Anyway, today's comments:
RANDOM NFL PREDICTIONS THAT GO AGAINST CONSENSUS OPINION (DESPITE MY CLAIMS HERE)
The Chicago Bears will not make the playoffs.
9-7 will be enough for the Vikings to win the NFC North (though they Vikings will have 9 wins by week 10—they do have one bye week—so that shouldn’t be a problem).
Mark Brunell will suck, and Washington will be a disappointment this season until he gets benched.
IF Brett Favre finishes the season, he will break Dan Marino’s TD record, and he will break George Blanda’s INT record (he currently needs 24 TDs to tie Marino’s career mark of 420, and 22 INTs to tie Blanda’s career mark of 277).
The Philadelphia Eagles will win the NFC East.
Randy Moss will return to old form.
Tiki Barber and Larry Johnson will be fantasy disappointments.
I will suffer several mental breakdowns this season for not having ESPN or the NFL Network (it’s harder and harder to be a sports fan if you can’t afford a spendy TV package; then again, those of us who don’t have cable for financial reasons aren’t exactly the target audience of sports leagues who have the obvious goal of making money. But why did last night’s FSU-Miami game have to be on ESPN? I was planning on watching it. If I didn’t have a job that allowed me hours of internet access each day, I wouldn’t know what in the world was going on outside of the Vikings).
THINGS MOST COMMENTATORS ARE FORGETTING OR PRETENDING DON’T MATTER.
Daunte Culpepper threw 6 TDs and 12 INTs in the first 6 games of 2005.
Donovan McNabb is one of the top-5 QBs in the league, and he has shown the ability to elevate a team to playoff success without great talent around him on offense.
Brett Favre can catch Dan Marino’s TD record this season, which could have provided motivation for him to come back this season (the year before Marino broke Tarkenton’s records, it seemed that every story on the Dolphins focused on that; I’ve seen very few mentions of Favre’s approach of Marino’s record, for which I may need to do an extensive analysis in the coming months).
The losing team of the Super Bowl traditionally has unexpected struggles the next season (though who can pick against Seattle in the NFC West?)
Anyway, today's comments:
RANDOM NFL PREDICTIONS THAT GO AGAINST CONSENSUS OPINION (DESPITE MY CLAIMS HERE)
The Chicago Bears will not make the playoffs.
9-7 will be enough for the Vikings to win the NFC North (though they Vikings will have 9 wins by week 10—they do have one bye week—so that shouldn’t be a problem).
Mark Brunell will suck, and Washington will be a disappointment this season until he gets benched.
IF Brett Favre finishes the season, he will break Dan Marino’s TD record, and he will break George Blanda’s INT record (he currently needs 24 TDs to tie Marino’s career mark of 420, and 22 INTs to tie Blanda’s career mark of 277).
The Philadelphia Eagles will win the NFC East.
Randy Moss will return to old form.
Tiki Barber and Larry Johnson will be fantasy disappointments.
I will suffer several mental breakdowns this season for not having ESPN or the NFL Network (it’s harder and harder to be a sports fan if you can’t afford a spendy TV package; then again, those of us who don’t have cable for financial reasons aren’t exactly the target audience of sports leagues who have the obvious goal of making money. But why did last night’s FSU-Miami game have to be on ESPN? I was planning on watching it. If I didn’t have a job that allowed me hours of internet access each day, I wouldn’t know what in the world was going on outside of the Vikings).
THINGS MOST COMMENTATORS ARE FORGETTING OR PRETENDING DON’T MATTER.
Daunte Culpepper threw 6 TDs and 12 INTs in the first 6 games of 2005.
Donovan McNabb is one of the top-5 QBs in the league, and he has shown the ability to elevate a team to playoff success without great talent around him on offense.
Brett Favre can catch Dan Marino’s TD record this season, which could have provided motivation for him to come back this season (the year before Marino broke Tarkenton’s records, it seemed that every story on the Dolphins focused on that; I’ve seen very few mentions of Favre’s approach of Marino’s record, for which I may need to do an extensive analysis in the coming months).
The losing team of the Super Bowl traditionally has unexpected struggles the next season (though who can pick against Seattle in the NFC West?)
You Don't Want My Preview
Now is about the time I could do what most bloggers do and write about my predictions for the NFL season. But you don't want my predictions. To project the season, I sit at home ala Dr. Z and play out each game of the season on paper. I always pick the Vikings to go 16-0 and cruise to a Super Bowl championship. So it would be pretty pointless to write about that here. Instead, I've compiled some other NFL previews featuring the Vikings that you might enjoy.
I will say this though: the Viking defensive line should be the most dominant in the league. Yes, I really believe that. Pat Williams is a force of nature, Kevin Williams is a unique inside pass rusher, and Erasmus James and Kenechi Udeze on the outside should emerge as dominant players.
Deadspin NFL Preview
The Gatorade Dump's Fantasy Preview
Sports Illustrated Training Camp Postcard
ESPN Viking Preview
ESPN Training Camp Report
TMQ NFC Preview
SI Scouting Report on Vikings
Complete Sports
The Hater Nation
Tecmo Blog
I will say this though: the Viking defensive line should be the most dominant in the league. Yes, I really believe that. Pat Williams is a force of nature, Kevin Williams is a unique inside pass rusher, and Erasmus James and Kenechi Udeze on the outside should emerge as dominant players.
Deadspin NFL Preview
The Gatorade Dump's Fantasy Preview
Sports Illustrated Training Camp Postcard
ESPN Viking Preview
ESPN Training Camp Report
TMQ NFC Preview
SI Scouting Report on Vikings
Complete Sports
The Hater Nation
Tecmo Blog
Saturday, September 02, 2006
Let's Talk Language: what is offensive conservatism?
Rob's comments on my Derrida/Patriots post made me think: what do we mean when we call a team conservative?
To me, conservative offensive teams:
1. Run the ball a lot (or, if you prefer, don't pass the ball very often, especially on 1st down).
2. Don't throw downfield very much.
3. Don't risk very much on 3rd and long (and in general might be short of first downs on 3rd down passes).
4. Sit on a lead, lacking aggressiveness late in games.
5. Rarely vary the gameplan, running the same type of plays every game.
6. Run occasional gimmick plays to mask their general conservatism (but typically do so with a lead).
7. Run or pass largely dependent on field position.
8. Get more conservative in close games, late in games, and in playoff games (in calling more runs, shorter passes, and playing for ties or close games rather than trying to bury an opponent).
An important point to add: this isn't an either/or proposition. Teams aren't EITHER conservative OR aggressive: all teams are on a continuum, and they show up at differnet spots on the continuum at various times.
In this case, I really don't see the Patriots as a conservative offensive football team. They throw a lot, they're aggressive on third down, they don't tighten up the gameplan in the playoffs, they do vary their game plan and use a variety of plays (see the 2001 playoffs: in Brady's 1st playoff start, 15th total start, and in a snowstorm, he threw 52 times, and in the Super Bowl after the Rams tied and they had the ball in their own territory with a minute and a half, they aggressively went for the win).
So two questions:
1. What other descriptions would you use for a conservative offense?
2. What on my list do you not consider a description of a conservative offense?
To me, conservative offensive teams:
1. Run the ball a lot (or, if you prefer, don't pass the ball very often, especially on 1st down).
2. Don't throw downfield very much.
3. Don't risk very much on 3rd and long (and in general might be short of first downs on 3rd down passes).
4. Sit on a lead, lacking aggressiveness late in games.
5. Rarely vary the gameplan, running the same type of plays every game.
6. Run occasional gimmick plays to mask their general conservatism (but typically do so with a lead).
7. Run or pass largely dependent on field position.
8. Get more conservative in close games, late in games, and in playoff games (in calling more runs, shorter passes, and playing for ties or close games rather than trying to bury an opponent).
An important point to add: this isn't an either/or proposition. Teams aren't EITHER conservative OR aggressive: all teams are on a continuum, and they show up at differnet spots on the continuum at various times.
In this case, I really don't see the Patriots as a conservative offensive football team. They throw a lot, they're aggressive on third down, they don't tighten up the gameplan in the playoffs, they do vary their game plan and use a variety of plays (see the 2001 playoffs: in Brady's 1st playoff start, 15th total start, and in a snowstorm, he threw 52 times, and in the Super Bowl after the Rams tied and they had the ball in their own territory with a minute and a half, they aggressively went for the win).
So two questions:
1. What other descriptions would you use for a conservative offense?
2. What on my list do you not consider a description of a conservative offense?
Friday, September 01, 2006
The calendar says September
The Berserker Time Draws Near
The everlasting universe of things
Flows through the mind, and rolls its rapid waves,
Now dark--now glittering--now reflecting gloom--
--Percy Shelley
For a die-hard football fan, there are two seasons to life: the season and the other part. For some of us, the season calls for and creates an entirely different personality and lifestyle than the other part. Everything in the mind works differenty. Attitudes toward time are affected. Mood swings become dependent on football action far outside your control. The people close to you start to see you different, and if you bother to see them at all, they seem different too. It is the Berserker time.
And it starts soon. The blood-madness begins.
Viking Quarterbacks, Past and Present
Sports Illustrated (specifically, Dr. Z) are picking the Dolphins to win the AFC. Let me just say this, Dolphin fans: enjoy Daunte Culpepper. Enjoy the 400 yard games. But also enjoy the 3 turnover games. Enjoy the games against good opponents where the blitzing and coverage schemes force Culpepper into all sorts of "what the hell was that?" moments for you.
For some reason, the rest of the world is pretending Culpepper isn't the quarterback that threw 6 touchdowns and 12 interceptions in the first 6 games of 2005. Or that he's the quarterback with 81 career fumbles in 81 career games (well, I guess not everbody--obviously John Bolster is aware of it of I would have nothing to link to there). Or that he's had 6 seasons as a starter and has 2 playoff wins on his resume.
Basically, I don't see Daunte rising to help the Dolphins defeat competent defenses like New England or Pittsburgh in the playoffs.
But the Vikes have a new quarterback: Brooks Bollinger! Does this mean that the long statewide nightmare that is Mike McMahon is over?
I like Jeff George
So he hasn't thrown an NFL pass in years. He's not too old. Let's not forget he only came into the league a year before Brett Favre, and if Favre isn't too old to be a good starting NFL quarterback...wait, Brett Favre is too old to be a good starting NFL quarterback. Um...ah...look over there!
(You may ask yourself right now, "Hey, PV, your favorite team is starting Brad Johnson. How can you make fun of Favre for being too old to be any good?" And my answer is: an old Brad Johnson doesn't suck).
The everlasting universe of things
Flows through the mind, and rolls its rapid waves,
Now dark--now glittering--now reflecting gloom--
--Percy Shelley
For a die-hard football fan, there are two seasons to life: the season and the other part. For some of us, the season calls for and creates an entirely different personality and lifestyle than the other part. Everything in the mind works differenty. Attitudes toward time are affected. Mood swings become dependent on football action far outside your control. The people close to you start to see you different, and if you bother to see them at all, they seem different too. It is the Berserker time.
And it starts soon. The blood-madness begins.
Viking Quarterbacks, Past and Present
Sports Illustrated (specifically, Dr. Z) are picking the Dolphins to win the AFC. Let me just say this, Dolphin fans: enjoy Daunte Culpepper. Enjoy the 400 yard games. But also enjoy the 3 turnover games. Enjoy the games against good opponents where the blitzing and coverage schemes force Culpepper into all sorts of "what the hell was that?" moments for you.
For some reason, the rest of the world is pretending Culpepper isn't the quarterback that threw 6 touchdowns and 12 interceptions in the first 6 games of 2005. Or that he's the quarterback with 81 career fumbles in 81 career games (well, I guess not everbody--obviously John Bolster is aware of it of I would have nothing to link to there). Or that he's had 6 seasons as a starter and has 2 playoff wins on his resume.
Basically, I don't see Daunte rising to help the Dolphins defeat competent defenses like New England or Pittsburgh in the playoffs.
But the Vikes have a new quarterback: Brooks Bollinger! Does this mean that the long statewide nightmare that is Mike McMahon is over?
I like Jeff George
So he hasn't thrown an NFL pass in years. He's not too old. Let's not forget he only came into the league a year before Brett Favre, and if Favre isn't too old to be a good starting NFL quarterback...wait, Brett Favre is too old to be a good starting NFL quarterback. Um...ah...look over there!
(You may ask yourself right now, "Hey, PV, your favorite team is starting Brad Johnson. How can you make fun of Favre for being too old to be any good?" And my answer is: an old Brad Johnson doesn't suck).
Wednesday, August 30, 2006
Derrida and the New England Patriots
I find it utterly pointless when teams (or the specific offense or defense) talk about finding their "identity." That's language Mike Tice used to use: the offense has to find its "identity." Frankly, nothing matters less to winning football games. If you're worried about finding identity, are you really focusing on scoring more points than a specific opponent and winning the game?
The proof of the pointlessness of team "identity" is the New England Patriots. They've won 3 Super Bowls with no distinct philosophical identity. They cater game plans around specific opponents. Look at their defense under Belichik. Usually they use a 3-4, but often it looks distinctly like a 4-3. Against teams that pass a lot certain linebackers play more; against teams that run a lot, other linebackers play more. Sometimes they blitz a lot in a game; sometimes they spend most of the game rushing three or four and dropping everybody else into coverage. They don't play defense to show a particular identity: they play whatever defense they think can defeat the other team. New England's offense has also lacked this identity. Are they a grind it out, ball control offense? Sometimes. ARe they a spread-'em-out and throw every down offense? Sometimes. They don't care. They don't care how you think of their identity, since they know their real identity is as a team that wins football games.
Here's where Jacques Derrida comes in. Derrida talks about a decentered universe, in which a structure no longer has a distinct center (roughly, a center is a main idea that gives a structure meaning). To quote Peter Barry on post-structuralism, "The event concerns the 'decentring' of our intellectual universe. Prior to this event the existence of a norm or centre in all things was taken for granted (...) In the twentieth century, however, these centres were destroyed or eroded (...) In the resulting universe there are no absolutes or fixed points, so that the universe we live in is 'decentred' or inherently relativistic" (66-67).
I would like to apply Barry's summation to the NFL to argue that THE NEW ENGLAND PATRIOTS ARE THE ULTIMATE POST-MODERN FOOTBALL TEAM. They have no fixed identity--they adapt what they are to the situation. There's not unity, but disunity to their strategies. At the very least, their game planning and strategy is post-structuralist in that they don't rely on fixed points. Once could say they take Derrida's concept of "freeplay" to the football field.
However, most of us have a lot of anxiety about a decentred universe, and so we try to replace the center with something (this was Derrida's critique of Levi-Strauss). When there is no center, we create a center. In this case, we choose symbolic figures to represent the center so that we can make sense of the structure. For the most part, we've made Belichik (the deconstructive genius who creates this decentered form of football) and Tom Brady (the quarterback, and therefore symbol, or their succes) the representitive center of this structure. And maybe they are, in some ways, the center. But in style and strategy, they are a decentered football team.
Works Cited
Barry, Peter. Beginning Theory: An Introduction to Literary and Cultural Theory. Manchester: Manchester University Press, 1995.
The proof of the pointlessness of team "identity" is the New England Patriots. They've won 3 Super Bowls with no distinct philosophical identity. They cater game plans around specific opponents. Look at their defense under Belichik. Usually they use a 3-4, but often it looks distinctly like a 4-3. Against teams that pass a lot certain linebackers play more; against teams that run a lot, other linebackers play more. Sometimes they blitz a lot in a game; sometimes they spend most of the game rushing three or four and dropping everybody else into coverage. They don't play defense to show a particular identity: they play whatever defense they think can defeat the other team. New England's offense has also lacked this identity. Are they a grind it out, ball control offense? Sometimes. ARe they a spread-'em-out and throw every down offense? Sometimes. They don't care. They don't care how you think of their identity, since they know their real identity is as a team that wins football games.
Here's where Jacques Derrida comes in. Derrida talks about a decentered universe, in which a structure no longer has a distinct center (roughly, a center is a main idea that gives a structure meaning). To quote Peter Barry on post-structuralism, "The event concerns the 'decentring' of our intellectual universe. Prior to this event the existence of a norm or centre in all things was taken for granted (...) In the twentieth century, however, these centres were destroyed or eroded (...) In the resulting universe there are no absolutes or fixed points, so that the universe we live in is 'decentred' or inherently relativistic" (66-67).
I would like to apply Barry's summation to the NFL to argue that THE NEW ENGLAND PATRIOTS ARE THE ULTIMATE POST-MODERN FOOTBALL TEAM. They have no fixed identity--they adapt what they are to the situation. There's not unity, but disunity to their strategies. At the very least, their game planning and strategy is post-structuralist in that they don't rely on fixed points. Once could say they take Derrida's concept of "freeplay" to the football field.
However, most of us have a lot of anxiety about a decentred universe, and so we try to replace the center with something (this was Derrida's critique of Levi-Strauss). When there is no center, we create a center. In this case, we choose symbolic figures to represent the center so that we can make sense of the structure. For the most part, we've made Belichik (the deconstructive genius who creates this decentered form of football) and Tom Brady (the quarterback, and therefore symbol, or their succes) the representitive center of this structure. And maybe they are, in some ways, the center. But in style and strategy, they are a decentered football team.
Works Cited
Barry, Peter. Beginning Theory: An Introduction to Literary and Cultural Theory. Manchester: Manchester University Press, 1995.
Saturday, August 26, 2006
I've been to Vikingland and you know we've got a hell of a band
1.
This preseason is teaching us something about living in a football-crazed region. The Vikings currently have a quarterback controversy. No, no sensible people are arguing that Brad Johnson shouldn't be the #1 Quarterback. However, we've still got a quarterback controversy that the local coverage is all over that national coverage, I'm sure, doesn't give squat about.
You see, in Minnesota we've got a QB Controversy over who should be the #2 QB.
All evidence suggests Tarvaris Jackson is vastly superior, immediately, to Mike McMahon. But this is probably the #1 topic for Viking fans to talk about right now (and I've yet to hear a single fan opinion arguing for McMahon to be #2). Even the coach is answering questions vaguely and refusing to commit to anything like this is a real live quarterback controversy.
This is what residents of Valhalla chatter about--who should be the backup QB on our football team.
2.
As a Viking fan, I usually try to avoid the local columnists. Besides Patrick Reusse's insults of Viking fans (as documented below), it's pretty much a tossup who enjoys making fun of the Vikings more, Twin Cities columnists or Packer fans.
Currently, the fun thing to make fun of is the Viking offensive strategy. The Pioneer Press's Tom Powers is calling it the "Dink 'Em Dizzy" offense. The Strib's Patrick Reusse calls it the "revolutionary West Crawl offense."
I find two things interesting. One, that columnists are making fun of the Vikings offensive strategy based on what they've seen in THREE PRESEASON GAMES (during which, evidently, all the good coaches show off their big plays in order to impress everybody during these exhibitions), and two, the assumption that a ball control offense is inherently bad, has nothing to do with helping the defense to be good (no, all the three and outs of the past several seasons had no effect whatsoever on our terrible defense), and cannot possible be involved in a championship team.
This preseason is teaching us something about living in a football-crazed region. The Vikings currently have a quarterback controversy. No, no sensible people are arguing that Brad Johnson shouldn't be the #1 Quarterback. However, we've still got a quarterback controversy that the local coverage is all over that national coverage, I'm sure, doesn't give squat about.
You see, in Minnesota we've got a QB Controversy over who should be the #2 QB.
All evidence suggests Tarvaris Jackson is vastly superior, immediately, to Mike McMahon. But this is probably the #1 topic for Viking fans to talk about right now (and I've yet to hear a single fan opinion arguing for McMahon to be #2). Even the coach is answering questions vaguely and refusing to commit to anything like this is a real live quarterback controversy.
This is what residents of Valhalla chatter about--who should be the backup QB on our football team.
2.
As a Viking fan, I usually try to avoid the local columnists. Besides Patrick Reusse's insults of Viking fans (as documented below), it's pretty much a tossup who enjoys making fun of the Vikings more, Twin Cities columnists or Packer fans.
Currently, the fun thing to make fun of is the Viking offensive strategy. The Pioneer Press's Tom Powers is calling it the "Dink 'Em Dizzy" offense. The Strib's Patrick Reusse calls it the "revolutionary West Crawl offense."
I find two things interesting. One, that columnists are making fun of the Vikings offensive strategy based on what they've seen in THREE PRESEASON GAMES (during which, evidently, all the good coaches show off their big plays in order to impress everybody during these exhibitions), and two, the assumption that a ball control offense is inherently bad, has nothing to do with helping the defense to be good (no, all the three and outs of the past several seasons had no effect whatsoever on our terrible defense), and cannot possible be involved in a championship team.
Monday, August 21, 2006
Why Viking fans hate Patrick Reusse
The columnists for the Minneapolis Star Tribune are an odd bunch. Sid Hartman is the crazy old man who long ago abandoned logic and clarity. Jim Souhan doesn't really seem to care about making insightful comments about sports--that would actually get in the way of his attempts to write unfunny predictable jokes.
But the worst columnist of all is Patrick Reusse. Reusse is your typical bitter arrogant sports writer, with one strange feature--he seems to love insulting fans. He seems particularly to delight in making fun of Viking fans. And I've scoured the Lexis-Nexis for Reusse's columns to find the evidence (all quotes are from the Star Tribune via Lexis-Nexis).
First of all, here are a few nouns Reusse has used to describe all or some Viking fans: "Purple fanatics," "Purple Faithful," "zealots," "MMWs (Monday Morning Whiners), "Purple loyalists," "goofballs," "ungrateful louts." That tells part of the story. But let's look at some of his statements about Viking fans in the past few years to get a clearer picture.
Reusse: "Followers of the Minnesota Vikings are a collection of ungrateful louts… Hoots and sarcasm. That's all you horn-heads had to offer for a noble veteran willing to risk torn muscles to serve as a pinch punter for a couple of weeks."
Reusse: "Amazing, isn't it? Minnesota football fans will salute a returning troublemaker, while the baseball fans will have only boos when A.J. Pierzynski, merely an agitator, comes to the Dome this weekend with the White Sox."
Yes, just above he described Viking fans as "ungrateful louts" for booing punter Darren Bennett. However, he is amazed that Viking fans would cheer for a player who scored 100 regular season and postseason touchdowns for us.
Reusse: "Once the full squad is assembled, there are 29 Mankato sessions planned between Monday morning and the evening of Aug. 17, allowing the Purple zealots to surround the plateau of fields and hoot with delight any time Troy Williamson doesn't drop a pass."
Reusse: "The sulking and whining you find around the office and on the job site following a Vikings loss was delayed by 24 hours this week, since the beloved Purple was making its return to "Monday Night Football" after a two-season absence. Beyond that change in their weekly schedule, the result could not have been more spectacular for the masses of Minnesotans who live to complain about the injustices and inadequacies that accompany a Vikings defeat."
Sometimes Reusse makes fun of Viking fans who are positive about the Vikings. And sometimes he likes to make fun of those who actually complain when their favorite team loses a game.
Reusse: "Admit it, MMWs. This was a splendidly gray Tuesday to serve as an initial gloomy Monday of the fall. You had the chance to bash the officials, the quarterback and the coach.
What more could you ask ... the whiners' hat trick?"
Reusse: "Frequent puzzlement was expressed by the Purple Faithful and in the local media as to why Vikings owner Red McCombs was not rushing to make a lucrative offer for an extension to his sideline boss, Mike Tice."
I don't recall too many members of the Purple Faithful expressing puzzlement over Tice not getting an extention--what I heard was puzzlement over why Tice was an NFL coach.
Reusse: "Oct. 30: Tice introduced George Bush at a Target Center rally and gave a Vikings' No. 1 jersey. He told the crowd that Bush's presence in the White House made him feel safer.
Reaction: "It was a privilege for Tice to introduce the president of the United States. He had every right to do so."
Oct. 31: The New York Giants came into the Metrodome and took a 34-0 lead, before putting it in a cruise for a 34-13 victory.
Reaction: "If Tice would have been motivating his team and not wasting his time at a political rally, we would have ended the Giants' jinx today, even with Randy limping around.""
Evidently Reusse here shows the fickleness of Viking fans. Of course, these quotes are just made up by him. Furthermore, the reaction to Tice introducing Bush was hardly what he said--a lot of Viking fans, and not just Democrats, thought Tice shouldn't have done that. Oh well, rather than assuming variety of opinion, these made-up quotes work to show how mush-minded Viking fans are.
Reusse: "The Purple Faithful was grousing for two consecutive weeks…"
Reusse: "The Purple Faithful did the drinking for them."
Reusse: "I got caught in the crowd filing into the Metrodome 15 minutes before the kickoff. Now I'm going to be required to call my AA sponsor and inquire as to whether breathing air with an alcohol content of .25 constitutes a slip from sobriety."
Reusse: "Sodom. Gomorrah. And now comes the Metrodome on Christmas Eve as another memorable blight for Christianity."
I'm a bit confused about why Sodom and Gomorrah are a blight for Christianity. I guess it depends what he means by "for." But fair enough, let's add drunk fans at the Metrodome to Sodom and Gomorrah for all they represent. Evil fans.
Reusse: ""How are the Vikings going to replace the greatness of Moss?" the Purple Faithful moaned."
You see, the Purple Faithful "moan" and "grouse." Good word choices for people you don't like.
Reusse: "These Vikings have been immensely overrated in the alcohol-addled minds of their fans since the athletes reported to Mankato."
Now it makes sense! All Viking fans who thought the team might be good were drunk!
Reusse: "Fans unfairly give Johnson free pass; Quarterbacking futility doesn't come with the same background noise in the Metrodome.
The boos that echoed so rudely in Daunte Culpepper's ears have turned to stony silence for his replacement.
…the partisans as they screamed with bug-eyed venom at the leader of the offense.
…but the Purple zealots chose to observe the haplessness of the quarterback and his offense mostly in silence.
That serves to reaffirm that many Vikings fans are phonies at best, and overly fond of the idea of having a white quarterback at worst."
This is when Reusse wanted the fans to boo Brad Johnson (who came into 2005 as a backup with no expectations and had just won 6 straight games) for one bad game, the same way they booed Daunte Culpepper (the starting QB, darling of the national media, with huge expectations) who frequently struggled.
Reusse: "He's white, too, which certainly guarantees more tolerance among that segment of Vikings fans that wears Purple to cover red necks. This isn't a theory, but a fact demonstrated by the muted response to Brad Johnson's stink-a-thons against Pittsburgh and Baltimore at season's end."
That's the thing: evidently all Viking fans who didn't like Daunte Culpepper were racists. Forget that Daunte was 2-5 as a starter and threw twice as many picks as TDs in 2005 and that Brad Johnson quarterbacked the Vikings to six straight wins and finished the year with twice as many TDs as INTs; if we thought Johnson did a better job and didn't boo one or two bad games, we must be racist. And Reusse is completely mistaken to say "this isn't a theory, but a fact." A muted response from fans doesn't prove that they are in fact racist: that is merely Reusse's theory to explain the muted response. Of course, if you've been a columnist long enough, you start to believe your theories are facts.
Patrick Reusse is not content to make fun of the Vikings; he also wants to make fun of Viking fans. And that, faithful readers, is why Viking fans hate Patrick Reusse.
But the worst columnist of all is Patrick Reusse. Reusse is your typical bitter arrogant sports writer, with one strange feature--he seems to love insulting fans. He seems particularly to delight in making fun of Viking fans. And I've scoured the Lexis-Nexis for Reusse's columns to find the evidence (all quotes are from the Star Tribune via Lexis-Nexis).
First of all, here are a few nouns Reusse has used to describe all or some Viking fans: "Purple fanatics," "Purple Faithful," "zealots," "MMWs (Monday Morning Whiners), "Purple loyalists," "goofballs," "ungrateful louts." That tells part of the story. But let's look at some of his statements about Viking fans in the past few years to get a clearer picture.
Reusse: "Followers of the Minnesota Vikings are a collection of ungrateful louts… Hoots and sarcasm. That's all you horn-heads had to offer for a noble veteran willing to risk torn muscles to serve as a pinch punter for a couple of weeks."
Reusse: "Amazing, isn't it? Minnesota football fans will salute a returning troublemaker, while the baseball fans will have only boos when A.J. Pierzynski, merely an agitator, comes to the Dome this weekend with the White Sox."
Yes, just above he described Viking fans as "ungrateful louts" for booing punter Darren Bennett. However, he is amazed that Viking fans would cheer for a player who scored 100 regular season and postseason touchdowns for us.
Reusse: "Once the full squad is assembled, there are 29 Mankato sessions planned between Monday morning and the evening of Aug. 17, allowing the Purple zealots to surround the plateau of fields and hoot with delight any time Troy Williamson doesn't drop a pass."
Reusse: "The sulking and whining you find around the office and on the job site following a Vikings loss was delayed by 24 hours this week, since the beloved Purple was making its return to "Monday Night Football" after a two-season absence. Beyond that change in their weekly schedule, the result could not have been more spectacular for the masses of Minnesotans who live to complain about the injustices and inadequacies that accompany a Vikings defeat."
Sometimes Reusse makes fun of Viking fans who are positive about the Vikings. And sometimes he likes to make fun of those who actually complain when their favorite team loses a game.
Reusse: "Admit it, MMWs. This was a splendidly gray Tuesday to serve as an initial gloomy Monday of the fall. You had the chance to bash the officials, the quarterback and the coach.
What more could you ask ... the whiners' hat trick?"
Reusse: "Frequent puzzlement was expressed by the Purple Faithful and in the local media as to why Vikings owner Red McCombs was not rushing to make a lucrative offer for an extension to his sideline boss, Mike Tice."
I don't recall too many members of the Purple Faithful expressing puzzlement over Tice not getting an extention--what I heard was puzzlement over why Tice was an NFL coach.
Reusse: "Oct. 30: Tice introduced George Bush at a Target Center rally and gave a Vikings' No. 1 jersey. He told the crowd that Bush's presence in the White House made him feel safer.
Reaction: "It was a privilege for Tice to introduce the president of the United States. He had every right to do so."
Oct. 31: The New York Giants came into the Metrodome and took a 34-0 lead, before putting it in a cruise for a 34-13 victory.
Reaction: "If Tice would have been motivating his team and not wasting his time at a political rally, we would have ended the Giants' jinx today, even with Randy limping around.""
Evidently Reusse here shows the fickleness of Viking fans. Of course, these quotes are just made up by him. Furthermore, the reaction to Tice introducing Bush was hardly what he said--a lot of Viking fans, and not just Democrats, thought Tice shouldn't have done that. Oh well, rather than assuming variety of opinion, these made-up quotes work to show how mush-minded Viking fans are.
Reusse: "The Purple Faithful was grousing for two consecutive weeks…"
Reusse: "The Purple Faithful did the drinking for them."
Reusse: "I got caught in the crowd filing into the Metrodome 15 minutes before the kickoff. Now I'm going to be required to call my AA sponsor and inquire as to whether breathing air with an alcohol content of .25 constitutes a slip from sobriety."
Reusse: "Sodom. Gomorrah. And now comes the Metrodome on Christmas Eve as another memorable blight for Christianity."
I'm a bit confused about why Sodom and Gomorrah are a blight for Christianity. I guess it depends what he means by "for." But fair enough, let's add drunk fans at the Metrodome to Sodom and Gomorrah for all they represent. Evil fans.
Reusse: ""How are the Vikings going to replace the greatness of Moss?" the Purple Faithful moaned."
You see, the Purple Faithful "moan" and "grouse." Good word choices for people you don't like.
Reusse: "These Vikings have been immensely overrated in the alcohol-addled minds of their fans since the athletes reported to Mankato."
Now it makes sense! All Viking fans who thought the team might be good were drunk!
Reusse: "Fans unfairly give Johnson free pass; Quarterbacking futility doesn't come with the same background noise in the Metrodome.
The boos that echoed so rudely in Daunte Culpepper's ears have turned to stony silence for his replacement.
…the partisans as they screamed with bug-eyed venom at the leader of the offense.
…but the Purple zealots chose to observe the haplessness of the quarterback and his offense mostly in silence.
That serves to reaffirm that many Vikings fans are phonies at best, and overly fond of the idea of having a white quarterback at worst."
This is when Reusse wanted the fans to boo Brad Johnson (who came into 2005 as a backup with no expectations and had just won 6 straight games) for one bad game, the same way they booed Daunte Culpepper (the starting QB, darling of the national media, with huge expectations) who frequently struggled.
Reusse: "He's white, too, which certainly guarantees more tolerance among that segment of Vikings fans that wears Purple to cover red necks. This isn't a theory, but a fact demonstrated by the muted response to Brad Johnson's stink-a-thons against Pittsburgh and Baltimore at season's end."
That's the thing: evidently all Viking fans who didn't like Daunte Culpepper were racists. Forget that Daunte was 2-5 as a starter and threw twice as many picks as TDs in 2005 and that Brad Johnson quarterbacked the Vikings to six straight wins and finished the year with twice as many TDs as INTs; if we thought Johnson did a better job and didn't boo one or two bad games, we must be racist. And Reusse is completely mistaken to say "this isn't a theory, but a fact." A muted response from fans doesn't prove that they are in fact racist: that is merely Reusse's theory to explain the muted response. Of course, if you've been a columnist long enough, you start to believe your theories are facts.
Patrick Reusse is not content to make fun of the Vikings; he also wants to make fun of Viking fans. And that, faithful readers, is why Viking fans hate Patrick Reusse.
Short passes got, short passes got, no reason to live.
Though I detest pre-season, I wouldn't be a quasi-insane fan of the Vikings without checking out parts of their preseason games. I could write all sorts of observations, insights, and predictions based on what I've watched, but I firmly believe the preseason tells you next to nothing about the quality of your team.
Still, the thing I am most hopeful about this season is the passing game. Brad Johnson may or may not be a weak-armed ninny, but with this short passing game, it really doesn't matter (until they decide Super Bowl champions by finding out which team's QB can throw the ball the farthest, I will continue to undervalue arm strength). It's been pleasant to see the short slant pattern a vital part of a Viking game plan--when it works, it seems like such an easy, unstoppable play. And with or without Koren Robinson, the Vikes have a deep and talented group of players to catch the ball. For big bodies with good hands, throw to Marcus Robinson or Jermaine Wiggins. For speed and quickness, throw to Troy Williamson. For solid ability especially from the slot, look for Travis Taylor. And out of the backfield are plenty of RBs capable of catching the ball (the best is Mewelde Moore, who is, alas, third string right now, and injured. When healthy, he's a dynamic football player--the trouble is, that's rare). I am happy with the short passing game, and Johnson has the savvy, experience, and intelligence to make smart decisions and give the Vikings a chance to win. A short passing game means less 3 and outs and more long drives, which also helps the defense. I'm confindent in the passing game.
And of course, tried and true Purple fans are in an uproar of excitement about what we've seen out of Tarvaris Jackson. When it is time for him to take over the reins of the position, the team will be in good hands.
Still, the thing I am most hopeful about this season is the passing game. Brad Johnson may or may not be a weak-armed ninny, but with this short passing game, it really doesn't matter (until they decide Super Bowl champions by finding out which team's QB can throw the ball the farthest, I will continue to undervalue arm strength). It's been pleasant to see the short slant pattern a vital part of a Viking game plan--when it works, it seems like such an easy, unstoppable play. And with or without Koren Robinson, the Vikes have a deep and talented group of players to catch the ball. For big bodies with good hands, throw to Marcus Robinson or Jermaine Wiggins. For speed and quickness, throw to Troy Williamson. For solid ability especially from the slot, look for Travis Taylor. And out of the backfield are plenty of RBs capable of catching the ball (the best is Mewelde Moore, who is, alas, third string right now, and injured. When healthy, he's a dynamic football player--the trouble is, that's rare). I am happy with the short passing game, and Johnson has the savvy, experience, and intelligence to make smart decisions and give the Vikings a chance to win. A short passing game means less 3 and outs and more long drives, which also helps the defense. I'm confindent in the passing game.
And of course, tried and true Purple fans are in an uproar of excitement about what we've seen out of Tarvaris Jackson. When it is time for him to take over the reins of the position, the team will be in good hands.
More on K-Rob and Greenway
Koren Robinson
I firmly believe K-Rob was directly responsible for 3-5 wins last season (at the very least, he had a kick return for a TD in a 3 pt. win, an 80 yard TD reception in a 5 pt. win, and a long return to set up a quick drive for a game winning field goal in a 3 pt. win).
HOWEVER, he must immediately cease being referred to as the #1 receiver. There are currently 6 Vikings on the 2006 roster who had as many or more receptions for the Vikes than Robinson had in 2005. He was only called the #1 WR because Childress called him that, and it was based on what he'd do in 2006. Now he's not going to be there in 2006. He has never actually been the Vikings' #1 WR, and now he never will be. Are people still going to call him the #1 receiver (as the local media continues to do) in week 12? C'mon!
I would worry about his loss as a return man, but the Vikes were already trying to replace him there anyway.
Chad Greenway
Everybody had high hopes for Greenway this season. However, he's a rookie. You can't actually count on a contribution from him; since there is no NFL work with which to judge him, you could just as easily have gotten a non-contribution from him this season even if he dressed. Yeah, it sucks--but it just means there is one less unproven linebacker the Vikings are hoping to depend on in 2006.
But in all seriousness, I'm the eternally optimistic Viking fan, so don't put too much stock into my hopefulness--I'm still dreaming of the Vikes somehow winning the Super Bowl this year and naming my child after whoever starts at Quarterback.
I firmly believe K-Rob was directly responsible for 3-5 wins last season (at the very least, he had a kick return for a TD in a 3 pt. win, an 80 yard TD reception in a 5 pt. win, and a long return to set up a quick drive for a game winning field goal in a 3 pt. win).
HOWEVER, he must immediately cease being referred to as the #1 receiver. There are currently 6 Vikings on the 2006 roster who had as many or more receptions for the Vikes than Robinson had in 2005. He was only called the #1 WR because Childress called him that, and it was based on what he'd do in 2006. Now he's not going to be there in 2006. He has never actually been the Vikings' #1 WR, and now he never will be. Are people still going to call him the #1 receiver (as the local media continues to do) in week 12? C'mon!
I would worry about his loss as a return man, but the Vikes were already trying to replace him there anyway.
Chad Greenway
Everybody had high hopes for Greenway this season. However, he's a rookie. You can't actually count on a contribution from him; since there is no NFL work with which to judge him, you could just as easily have gotten a non-contribution from him this season even if he dressed. Yeah, it sucks--but it just means there is one less unproven linebacker the Vikings are hoping to depend on in 2006.
But in all seriousness, I'm the eternally optimistic Viking fan, so don't put too much stock into my hopefulness--I'm still dreaming of the Vikes somehow winning the Super Bowl this year and naming my child after whoever starts at Quarterback.
Thursday, August 17, 2006
This is not the Eve of Destruction
To listen to the local media reaction, Koren Robinson is actually Don Hutson, and the only WRs left on the roster are 5 Dez Whites. But this simply isn't the case. Koren Robinson had all of 22 receptions in 2005--less than half the amount caught by Travis Taylor. Plus the Vikes still have Marcus Robinson, a solid WR, and Troy Williamson, a first-round pick just a year ago who struggled in 2005 because he was a raw athlete who played in a run-dominated offense in college. Koren Robinson's WR skills were not going to make or break the 2006 Vikings; he was a better return man, but Childress was already trying to find other people to take that duty anyway. Losing Koren Robinson is hardly a season-destroying disaster.
Losing Chad Greenway is bad news--no team wants to play a season without its first-round draft pick, especially when that player plays your team's most questionable position. This means that instead of hoping that youngish veterans like Napoleon Harris, EJ Henderson, Dontarrius Thomas, and Ben Leber step up, the Vikings now need them to play well--and they need to get production out of a few other relative no-name linebackers. Bad news--but also not season-destroying.
I don't know what the Vikings are going to do this season, and this has been a hard week, but I don't know that anything that happened this week cost the team a single win in 2006.
Losing Chad Greenway is bad news--no team wants to play a season without its first-round draft pick, especially when that player plays your team's most questionable position. This means that instead of hoping that youngish veterans like Napoleon Harris, EJ Henderson, Dontarrius Thomas, and Ben Leber step up, the Vikings now need them to play well--and they need to get production out of a few other relative no-name linebackers. Bad news--but also not season-destroying.
I don't know what the Vikings are going to do this season, and this has been a hard week, but I don't know that anything that happened this week cost the team a single win in 2006.
Saturday, August 12, 2006
Football Nuggets
--Preseason football is a lose-lose situation. If your team does poorly, you've got anxiety about how bad it is. If you team does well, you've got the sadness of knowing it doesn't count and you don't know if the team will be able to duplicate that when it counts. I've spent many hours watching the Chiefs practice (PRACTICE! WE'RE TALKING PRACTICE!), but I still don't want to watch preseason football.
--My prediction for Fantasy Football Player of the Year: Clinton Portis. Alexander is following an all-time great season and can never measure up, Larry Johnson is somehow the consensus #1 even though he lost both starting tackles and his fullback, LT will be LT, but Portis is the guy with a high ceiling and a high floor. In his four seasons playing, his floor is 1300 yards and 7 TDs, but he's had 1500 yards and double-digit TDs in the 3 other seasons. Now he's got Al Saunders, the guy who helped Priest Holmes into the Fantasy Football Hall of Fame. At the beginning of next year, Clinton Portis will be the consensus #1 pick.
--The Pioneer Press has been saying good things about EJ Henderson's camp (I know, everybody praises everybody's camp, but they actually cite specific plays from practice, so it's not the typical slurp-job). Can a disappointing linebacker step up in his fourth season to be a Pro Bowl caliber player? Clearly he's got talent, but the buzz for three years has been his lack of off-the-field learning about on-the-field situations. He could be showing off his athletic ability in practice (PRACTICE! WE'RE TALKING ABOUT PRACTICE), but then will show his befuddlement against other teams. But in his fourth year, you'd think experience would help him bring his talent to fuller potential. Once again the Viking linebacker corp seems full of young talented guys--who really haven't done much in the NFL.
--LenDale White continues to live as a sparkling gem of dignity, humility, and humanity. I've always heard that the best way for a rookie to endear himself to teammates was to spit at them. Lord knows every time I've been spit at, my thought has been, "Man, I sure don't like you for spitting on me...but goddamnit, I respect you."
--Here's the highlight of the day I watched the Kansas City Chief's practice. In a 7 on 7 drill, Trent Green threw a pass a bit high to Larry Johnson. The pass bounced off LJ's hands and into the hands of a linebacker. On the first day of training camp, in a 7 on 7 drill, rather than letting it go, LJ sticks with the ball and knocks it out of the defender's hands before he can get possession of the interception. The ball hit the ground, and then LJ threw his helmet to the ground in frustration. I think this is a pretty good sign of LJ's desire and intensity.
--My pick for the 2007 NFL Draft #1 pick has been, remains, and will remain, the Buffalo Bills.
--As Polonius says, "To thine own self be true." So I couldn't manage to finish our 2006 fantasy draft without Mewelde Moore, Troy Williamson, Jermaine Wiggins, and the Viking Defense on my roster. The debate continues: in fantasy football, do you act as a mercenary going strictly for the wins, or do you follow your heart and select the players you love, or the players on the team you love?
--My prediction for Fantasy Football Player of the Year: Clinton Portis. Alexander is following an all-time great season and can never measure up, Larry Johnson is somehow the consensus #1 even though he lost both starting tackles and his fullback, LT will be LT, but Portis is the guy with a high ceiling and a high floor. In his four seasons playing, his floor is 1300 yards and 7 TDs, but he's had 1500 yards and double-digit TDs in the 3 other seasons. Now he's got Al Saunders, the guy who helped Priest Holmes into the Fantasy Football Hall of Fame. At the beginning of next year, Clinton Portis will be the consensus #1 pick.
--The Pioneer Press has been saying good things about EJ Henderson's camp (I know, everybody praises everybody's camp, but they actually cite specific plays from practice, so it's not the typical slurp-job). Can a disappointing linebacker step up in his fourth season to be a Pro Bowl caliber player? Clearly he's got talent, but the buzz for three years has been his lack of off-the-field learning about on-the-field situations. He could be showing off his athletic ability in practice (PRACTICE! WE'RE TALKING ABOUT PRACTICE), but then will show his befuddlement against other teams. But in his fourth year, you'd think experience would help him bring his talent to fuller potential. Once again the Viking linebacker corp seems full of young talented guys--who really haven't done much in the NFL.
--LenDale White continues to live as a sparkling gem of dignity, humility, and humanity. I've always heard that the best way for a rookie to endear himself to teammates was to spit at them. Lord knows every time I've been spit at, my thought has been, "Man, I sure don't like you for spitting on me...but goddamnit, I respect you."
--Here's the highlight of the day I watched the Kansas City Chief's practice. In a 7 on 7 drill, Trent Green threw a pass a bit high to Larry Johnson. The pass bounced off LJ's hands and into the hands of a linebacker. On the first day of training camp, in a 7 on 7 drill, rather than letting it go, LJ sticks with the ball and knocks it out of the defender's hands before he can get possession of the interception. The ball hit the ground, and then LJ threw his helmet to the ground in frustration. I think this is a pretty good sign of LJ's desire and intensity.
--My pick for the 2007 NFL Draft #1 pick has been, remains, and will remain, the Buffalo Bills.
--As Polonius says, "To thine own self be true." So I couldn't manage to finish our 2006 fantasy draft without Mewelde Moore, Troy Williamson, Jermaine Wiggins, and the Viking Defense on my roster. The debate continues: in fantasy football, do you act as a mercenary going strictly for the wins, or do you follow your heart and select the players you love, or the players on the team you love?
Monday, August 07, 2006
George Costanza and the Vikings
Remember when George's new religion became "The Opposite," and he acted against every instinct he had? Good times for everybody. And an important parallel to the sports world.
When a coach is fired and another coach is hired to replace him, often the new coach is hired because he displays the exact opposite characteristics of his predecessor. So far, Brad Childress is looking to be the precice opposite of Mike Tice: serious, professional, detail-oriented, experienced, expecting a hard-working, business-line attitude from the players--but also lacking clear personality, wit, or charisma. The Vikings underachieved under Tice--with Daunte and Randy, Tice could never win more than 9 games. Now Daunte and Randy are gone, and Childress will have to (and be expected to) overachieve. Some players will appreciate this change (Antoine Winfield in particular, I think); others won't. Most fans are going to appreciate this change: all we care about is winning. Most members of the local media are probably going to be tougher on Childress than they were on Tice. Tice gave them personality, access, quotes, insight, and stories. Childress doesn't seem likely to give them any of that. If Tice hadn't been such a likeable guy, the local media would have been crushing him for years (the evidence is that some people were claiming Tice deserved another year with the team after 4 years, no division titles, and one off-the-field debacle after another).
We'll see how this goes. The players who can't handle taking football seriously will be weeded out and replaced by guys who buy into Childress's system. Still, it all depends on Brad Johnson staying healthy and the team getting success out of the linebackers.
When a coach is fired and another coach is hired to replace him, often the new coach is hired because he displays the exact opposite characteristics of his predecessor. So far, Brad Childress is looking to be the precice opposite of Mike Tice: serious, professional, detail-oriented, experienced, expecting a hard-working, business-line attitude from the players--but also lacking clear personality, wit, or charisma. The Vikings underachieved under Tice--with Daunte and Randy, Tice could never win more than 9 games. Now Daunte and Randy are gone, and Childress will have to (and be expected to) overachieve. Some players will appreciate this change (Antoine Winfield in particular, I think); others won't. Most fans are going to appreciate this change: all we care about is winning. Most members of the local media are probably going to be tougher on Childress than they were on Tice. Tice gave them personality, access, quotes, insight, and stories. Childress doesn't seem likely to give them any of that. If Tice hadn't been such a likeable guy, the local media would have been crushing him for years (the evidence is that some people were claiming Tice deserved another year with the team after 4 years, no division titles, and one off-the-field debacle after another).
We'll see how this goes. The players who can't handle taking football seriously will be weeded out and replaced by guys who buy into Childress's system. Still, it all depends on Brad Johnson staying healthy and the team getting success out of the linebackers.
Tuesday, August 01, 2006
Dwight Smith and Dez White
The Vikes signed two new players that have little to no emotional effect on me.
Dwight Smith
This is a good move--it's always a good idea to add depth to the secondary if you can. The secondary is now probably the Vikings' strongest unit--CBs Antoine Winfield and Fred Smoot, safeties Darren Sharper and Tank Williams, nickel backs like Dwight Smith, Willie Offord, and Cedric Griffin. But my biggest worries about the Vikes this season are, in order, 1. Brad Johnson's health, 2. Linebacker Play, 3. the ability of skill position players to make big plays. So Dwight Smith is sort of ho hum to me.
Dez White
Let's say sometime this season, Mike McMahon attempts a pass to Dez White in a meaningful moment of a regular season game. Should I still watch the games? I admit that I couldn't stomach many of the Spergeon Wynn games and didn't watch. When I did, it was too heartbreaking watching Randy Moss and Cris Carter run around without anybody who could throw to them. So I'd probably still watch the games if Mike McMahon is throwing to Dez White. But still...
Dwight Smith
This is a good move--it's always a good idea to add depth to the secondary if you can. The secondary is now probably the Vikings' strongest unit--CBs Antoine Winfield and Fred Smoot, safeties Darren Sharper and Tank Williams, nickel backs like Dwight Smith, Willie Offord, and Cedric Griffin. But my biggest worries about the Vikes this season are, in order, 1. Brad Johnson's health, 2. Linebacker Play, 3. the ability of skill position players to make big plays. So Dwight Smith is sort of ho hum to me.
Dez White
Let's say sometime this season, Mike McMahon attempts a pass to Dez White in a meaningful moment of a regular season game. Should I still watch the games? I admit that I couldn't stomach many of the Spergeon Wynn games and didn't watch. When I did, it was too heartbreaking watching Randy Moss and Cris Carter run around without anybody who could throw to them. So I'd probably still watch the games if Mike McMahon is throwing to Dez White. But still...
Friday, July 28, 2006
Chuck Klosterman is OK
I'm not a big fan of Chuck Klosterman, but I like that he examines the existential meaning of sports. There aren't any writers that I know of who are doing it as he does it--and it's the sort of think I think is worth doing.
Reality and Fantasy Don't Mix
Reality and Fantasy Don't Mix
Narcissism and Me (or, how I learned to stop worrying and love parentheses)
This afternoon, I plan on going out to the UW-River Falls football field to watch the Kansas City Chiefs open up training camp. After matriculating, living, and working in River Falls for eight years, I've had the chance to watch a lot of training camp (two different summers I lived maybe 500 yards from the practice field). I don't have any great loyalty to the Chiefs, but when I was growing up in small towns in Minnesota, I would have killed for the chance to go for a short walk in order to watch an NFL team practice (I would rather watch practice than preseason--preseason football is the most dispicable thing in sports. And yes, last season I sat through an entire preseason game at the Metrodome, but that was largely because of my crazy step-father-in-law. How crazy is he? On the way to the stadium, he says to me, "Joe, are you a fighter?" "Uh, no..." I said. "Hmm," he replies, "Is your dad?" Anyway, I'm on a disasterously long parenthetical here, so let's just end it now). So I take what chances I can to catch the Chiefs practicing, and I've been very entertained over the years. Highlights, of course, are the times the Vikes came to town to scrimmage the Chiefs--the entire town feels overrun by crazy Viking fans. Uh, people like me, I guess, that just didn't live there.
Now, I don't have a rooting interest in the Chiefs at all (other than the two and a half years Priest Holmes was on my fantasy team). When the Chiefs played the Vikings a few seasons ago, there was not a shred of my being that rooted for the Chiefs (though when the Vikes got up by about three touchdowns, I didn't mind Priest Holmes getting his garbage TDs in). I don't have a big passion for them, but I now have a sorting of "following" interest in them. I watch their games on TV because I've watched them practice.
So today should be fun. There are rumors that Willie Roaf is retiring (how does that affect Larry Johnson's fantasy value?). There's a new regime in, so we'll get to see how Herm Edwards runs a camp. I'll get to see Larry Johnson run around (though at camp, my favorite thing to watch is the Wide Receivers).
See, this blog entry is pretty pointless, with no real insight or perspective. But today I get to spend the day in the air conditioned bliss of my office, spend lunch at the culinary bliss of China Moon, and spend the late afternoon watching professional football players perform various drills (so I'm happy, and I don't care what you think of my lousy blog today).
Now, I don't have a rooting interest in the Chiefs at all (other than the two and a half years Priest Holmes was on my fantasy team). When the Chiefs played the Vikings a few seasons ago, there was not a shred of my being that rooted for the Chiefs (though when the Vikes got up by about three touchdowns, I didn't mind Priest Holmes getting his garbage TDs in). I don't have a big passion for them, but I now have a sorting of "following" interest in them. I watch their games on TV because I've watched them practice.
So today should be fun. There are rumors that Willie Roaf is retiring (how does that affect Larry Johnson's fantasy value?). There's a new regime in, so we'll get to see how Herm Edwards runs a camp. I'll get to see Larry Johnson run around (though at camp, my favorite thing to watch is the Wide Receivers).
See, this blog entry is pretty pointless, with no real insight or perspective. But today I get to spend the day in the air conditioned bliss of my office, spend lunch at the culinary bliss of China Moon, and spend the late afternoon watching professional football players perform various drills (so I'm happy, and I don't care what you think of my lousy blog today).
Monday, July 24, 2006
Fantasy Football: if you play head to head, you are a sucker.
The biggest flaw of fantasy football is that most league's play head-to-head competition. Don't you hate when your fantasy team had a great week and had the second-most points of the week, but you had to play against the team that had the most points of the week, so you get a loss, while a bunch of people who did way worse than you get a win? Too much is left to chance. At the end of the season, you could have the most total points, but be in 5th place. It's preposterous.
Of course head-to-head competition is great in sports. But in sports, when Team A competes against Team B, Team A has something to do with the success of Team B. Not so in fantasy football.
What if the PGA Tour did things like fantasy football? Let's say they pair up the golfers randomly. Each golfer only golfs against that one opponent. What you do against the rest of the field doesn't matter at all to your success. If you happen to get paired up against Tiger Woods, then you will not get to win. Even if you have a better score than 90% of the rest of the golfers in the tournament, you will finish below them.
That's ridiculous, right? Why would anybody want to follow such a system, in which it barely matters if you do better than most people?
So what's the solution? One solution is to assign the champion by total points. This is a bad solution: consistency doesn't matter, and following your team throughout each week barely matters.
But there's a better solution. We call it CROSS COUNTRY SCORING.
When I ran in a cross country team, we would have meets against several opposing teams. This was much more competitive and efficient than scheduling all sorts of head-to-head meets between only two teams. And yet, it was very easy to determine who you beat because if you do better than one team, you get a W, and if you do worse than another team, you get an L. If you run in a meet with 10 teams, you have a chance for 9 wins and losses.
Let's explain for Fantasy Football. Let's say the league has 10 teams. During each week, every team competes against every other team. If you have the most points, that means you beat 9 people, and you go 9-0. If you have the second-most points, it's still OK, because you beat 8 people to go 8-1. If you have the lowest score, you got beat by 9 people to go 0-9. Etc., Etc., Etc. So getting a high score helps you even if you don't have the high score.
#1 score= 9-0
#2 score= 8-1
#3 score= 7-2
#4 score= 6-3
#5 score= 5-4
#6 score= 4-5
#7 score= 3-6
#8 score= 2-7
#9 score= 1-8
#10 score= 0-9
There are often ties in this system; ties just go as part of your record. You then don't have a playoff--you play 17 weeks, and whoever has the most wins is the champion.
The added benefit is that as a fantasy football competitor, EVERY GAME MATTERS TO YOU. If you go head-to-head, your only fantasy interest is games in which your players play and your opponents players play. With a Cross Country Scoring System, there is almost never a game without some effect. Every single Monday Night game could affect your finish.
Another benefit is that you're never out of it. In my league, last season's champion was in last place at the half-way point. Each week has so much potential to force you up or down in the standings.
Head-to-Head Competition in Fantasy Football is no way to determine the best team.
Of course head-to-head competition is great in sports. But in sports, when Team A competes against Team B, Team A has something to do with the success of Team B. Not so in fantasy football.
What if the PGA Tour did things like fantasy football? Let's say they pair up the golfers randomly. Each golfer only golfs against that one opponent. What you do against the rest of the field doesn't matter at all to your success. If you happen to get paired up against Tiger Woods, then you will not get to win. Even if you have a better score than 90% of the rest of the golfers in the tournament, you will finish below them.
That's ridiculous, right? Why would anybody want to follow such a system, in which it barely matters if you do better than most people?
So what's the solution? One solution is to assign the champion by total points. This is a bad solution: consistency doesn't matter, and following your team throughout each week barely matters.
But there's a better solution. We call it CROSS COUNTRY SCORING.
When I ran in a cross country team, we would have meets against several opposing teams. This was much more competitive and efficient than scheduling all sorts of head-to-head meets between only two teams. And yet, it was very easy to determine who you beat because if you do better than one team, you get a W, and if you do worse than another team, you get an L. If you run in a meet with 10 teams, you have a chance for 9 wins and losses.
Let's explain for Fantasy Football. Let's say the league has 10 teams. During each week, every team competes against every other team. If you have the most points, that means you beat 9 people, and you go 9-0. If you have the second-most points, it's still OK, because you beat 8 people to go 8-1. If you have the lowest score, you got beat by 9 people to go 0-9. Etc., Etc., Etc. So getting a high score helps you even if you don't have the high score.
#1 score= 9-0
#2 score= 8-1
#3 score= 7-2
#4 score= 6-3
#5 score= 5-4
#6 score= 4-5
#7 score= 3-6
#8 score= 2-7
#9 score= 1-8
#10 score= 0-9
There are often ties in this system; ties just go as part of your record. You then don't have a playoff--you play 17 weeks, and whoever has the most wins is the champion.
The added benefit is that as a fantasy football competitor, EVERY GAME MATTERS TO YOU. If you go head-to-head, your only fantasy interest is games in which your players play and your opponents players play. With a Cross Country Scoring System, there is almost never a game without some effect. Every single Monday Night game could affect your finish.
Another benefit is that you're never out of it. In my league, last season's champion was in last place at the half-way point. Each week has so much potential to force you up or down in the standings.
Head-to-Head Competition in Fantasy Football is no way to determine the best team.
Saturday, July 22, 2006
So much depends on a red wheelbarrow...er...Brad Johnson
I have recurring nightmares. Sometimes I dream that I am supposed to be in a play, but I screw everything up because I'm late, or I don't know my lines, or I don't know the blocking, or I don't know what play it actually is (which makes sense, since I'm just dreaming and never went to any audition or rehearsals). And even though I haven't been on an organized basketball team in 8 years, I have frequent dreams about being on a basketball team and spending all my time at the end of the bench.
And now, and likely for several months, I'll have a recurring daydream-nightmare. I'll fear that Brad Johnson is going to get injured this season. Is Brad Johnson a make-or-break superstar QB that the Viking offense can't live without? Not on the surface, he's not. But there are three reasons that Brad Johnson is the most important player on the Vikings.
#1: Mike McMahon is the backup QB.
#2: The other QBs on the roster are J.T. O'Sullivan and Tavaris Jackson.
#3: See 1.
Johnson is a solid, saavy, smart, functional quarterback. If the Viking defense can perform (soon I'll write about how so much depends on Chad Greenway) and the running game performs (in 2006 a running play up the middle will involve Hutchinson, Birk, Hicks, Richardson, and Taylor, 5 players who didn't play a game for the Vikes in 2006), that should be just what the Vikings need.
But if Johnson goes down, it's like when Homer Simpson ordered the best item on the menu stuffed with the second best item on the menu, and got lobster stuffed with tacos. The qb cupboard is pretty bare. It's like spending a week eating nothing but mac & cheese just to get all the boxes out of the cupboard that you've hoarded for months, buying them because they were cheap, then discovering a dozen cans of generic pork and beans behind them. It's over.
I saw Mike McMahon play last year. I assume, too, did Brad Childress, considering he was McMahon's offensive coordinator. And yet Childress has decided that his best course of action in 2006 is to start the season with a 38 year old QB who has played 16 games in a season only three times, with Mike McMahon as the only thing between starting a QB with 0 NFL attempts.
This is why I have recurring daymares. The Vikes were 9-7 last season, improved immensely at offensive line (the biggest weakness last season), drafted a first-round linebacker (the team's second biggest weakness last season), and now seem to have a real pro head coach. And yet without Brad Johnson, it is just a team led by Mike McMahon (in other words a 5-11 team) or a team led by a QB with no attempts (in other words, who the flip knows?).
This is why in 2006, even though the Vikings certainly have better players on the roster, Brad Johnson will be the most important player on the team.
And now, and likely for several months, I'll have a recurring daydream-nightmare. I'll fear that Brad Johnson is going to get injured this season. Is Brad Johnson a make-or-break superstar QB that the Viking offense can't live without? Not on the surface, he's not. But there are three reasons that Brad Johnson is the most important player on the Vikings.
#1: Mike McMahon is the backup QB.
#2: The other QBs on the roster are J.T. O'Sullivan and Tavaris Jackson.
#3: See 1.
Johnson is a solid, saavy, smart, functional quarterback. If the Viking defense can perform (soon I'll write about how so much depends on Chad Greenway) and the running game performs (in 2006 a running play up the middle will involve Hutchinson, Birk, Hicks, Richardson, and Taylor, 5 players who didn't play a game for the Vikes in 2006), that should be just what the Vikings need.
But if Johnson goes down, it's like when Homer Simpson ordered the best item on the menu stuffed with the second best item on the menu, and got lobster stuffed with tacos. The qb cupboard is pretty bare. It's like spending a week eating nothing but mac & cheese just to get all the boxes out of the cupboard that you've hoarded for months, buying them because they were cheap, then discovering a dozen cans of generic pork and beans behind them. It's over.
I saw Mike McMahon play last year. I assume, too, did Brad Childress, considering he was McMahon's offensive coordinator. And yet Childress has decided that his best course of action in 2006 is to start the season with a 38 year old QB who has played 16 games in a season only three times, with Mike McMahon as the only thing between starting a QB with 0 NFL attempts.
This is why I have recurring daymares. The Vikes were 9-7 last season, improved immensely at offensive line (the biggest weakness last season), drafted a first-round linebacker (the team's second biggest weakness last season), and now seem to have a real pro head coach. And yet without Brad Johnson, it is just a team led by Mike McMahon (in other words a 5-11 team) or a team led by a QB with no attempts (in other words, who the flip knows?).
This is why in 2006, even though the Vikings certainly have better players on the roster, Brad Johnson will be the most important player on the team.
Friday, July 14, 2006
My second-least favorite player: LenDale White
According to profootballtalk.com, it was LenDale White who asked Esera Tuaolo at the rookie symposium, "Is it offensive if I call you a faggot if you are a faggot?"
If this true, I now have somebody to replace Favre when he retires. My two LenDale White rookie cards are now getting pulled from my album and might get placed in some bike spokes (well, my bike has a flat tire that I've been too cheap to fix for the last year. I'll have to find something else to do with them).
Good old Southern Cal, they sure do have some sparkling gems of humanity as alumni, don't they?
If this true, I now have somebody to replace Favre when he retires. My two LenDale White rookie cards are now getting pulled from my album and might get placed in some bike spokes (well, my bike has a flat tire that I've been too cheap to fix for the last year. I'll have to find something else to do with them).
Good old Southern Cal, they sure do have some sparkling gems of humanity as alumni, don't they?
Tuesday, July 11, 2006
NFL coaches and moustaches
I don't what what percentage of men have moustaches. I would guess it's pretty low, but I admit I haven't been paying attention. The percentage is clearly higher than the percentage of women with moustaches. But that is neither here nor there.
But NFL head coaches have moustaches at an alarmingly high rate. There are only 32 head coaches, and Bill Cowher, Romeo Crennel, Mike Holmgren, Tony Dungy, Jeff Fisher, Andy Reid, and Brad Childress all frequently don the stache. That's 7 of 32. And there are others I can't recall offhand (and guess what, this public library computer has trouble opening two browsers; whither September when the Pacifist Viking blog comes off it's part-time suckassedness and returns to full-time suckassedness?): it seems to me Herm Edwards and Denny Green occasionally go moustachioed.
So, is this the source of some ultimate football power? Does the moustache convey a personage who cares nothing about his personal life and grooming, and is so consumed by football that nothing else matters? Does it make it difficult for the opposing team to hire lip-readers to try and steal play calls?
In an attempt to discover the ultimate football knowledge that lies in the moustache, I will be growing one for the impending fantasy football draft. What secrets will I hide in it? What special powers will it grant me?
But NFL head coaches have moustaches at an alarmingly high rate. There are only 32 head coaches, and Bill Cowher, Romeo Crennel, Mike Holmgren, Tony Dungy, Jeff Fisher, Andy Reid, and Brad Childress all frequently don the stache. That's 7 of 32. And there are others I can't recall offhand (and guess what, this public library computer has trouble opening two browsers; whither September when the Pacifist Viking blog comes off it's part-time suckassedness and returns to full-time suckassedness?): it seems to me Herm Edwards and Denny Green occasionally go moustachioed.
So, is this the source of some ultimate football power? Does the moustache convey a personage who cares nothing about his personal life and grooming, and is so consumed by football that nothing else matters? Does it make it difficult for the opposing team to hire lip-readers to try and steal play calls?
In an attempt to discover the ultimate football knowledge that lies in the moustache, I will be growing one for the impending fantasy football draft. What secrets will I hide in it? What special powers will it grant me?
Saturday, June 24, 2006
Long Research Project
I believe that too much focus is placed on championships when evaluating individual players. Certainly great players elevate their games in clutch moments, but championships are won by teams. For the sake of narrative simplicity, championships often get personified by an individual or small group. No matter what the causes of the Patriots three Super Bowls, Brady and Belichick will be the figures who leap out as the symbolic faces of those championships. As a result, Brady will get credit for winning the championships. In fact, the Patriots team won the championships (though I am firmly convinced that Brady and Belichick are the primary reasons they won the championships).
I thought I'd go back to 1957 (Bill Russell's rookie season, and in my mind the start of the NBA as we know it) and look at each season's champion. I would pick out the team's best player, then pick out the second best player, and see if there are other notable greats on the team. I can make arguments about why I'd choose a player as the best or second best on the team, but I'll save them for now. Choosing comes from statistical and non-statistical reasoning. The point here is to look at the individual players who personify their teams' championships, and then see what help there was.
I'm collecting the data from basketball-reference.com. For the second best players, I'll list their ppg, rpg, and apg to illustrate their contributions. I'm giving regular season stats, but I'm looking at playoff stats too to determine importance to team.
I'm doing this for two reasons. First, I want to show that most great players that win championships do so because they have other great players around them. Second, I want to see which players we could say really did carry teams to championships; in other words, who won titles with the worst #2? That's hard to say in the cases of teams that are legendary for their team play, but I'll still take Rick Barry in '75 and Hakeem Olajuwon in '94 for winning titles without a great #2 at the time.
1957: Boston Celtics
Best Player: Bill Russell
#2: Bob Cousy (20.6-4.8-7.5)
Others: Bill Sharman
1958: St. Louis Hawks
Best Player: Bob Pettitt
#2: Cliff Hagen (19.9-10.1-2.5)
1959: Boston Celtics
Best Player: Bill Russell
#2: Bob Cousy (20.0-5.5-8.6)
Others: Bill Sharman, Sam Jones
1960: Boston Celtics
Best Player: Bill Russell
#2: Tom Heinsohn (21.7-10.6-2.5)
Others: Bill Sharman, Bob Cousy, Sam Jones
1961: Boston Celtics
Best Player: Bill Russell
#2: Tom Heinsohn (21.3-9.9-1.9)
Others: Bill Sharman, Bob Cousy, Sam Jones
1962: Boston Celtics
Best Player: Bill Russell
#2: Tom Heinsohn (22.1-9.5-2.1)
Others: Bob Cousy, Sam Jones
1963: Boston Celtics
Best Player: Bill Russell
#2: Sam Jones (19.7-5.2-3.2)
Others: Bob Cousy, John Havlicek
1964: Boston Celtics
Best Player: Bill Russell
#2: Sam Jones (19.4-4.6-2.7)
Others: John Havlicek
1965: Boston Celtics
Best Player: Bill Russell
#2: Sam Jones (25.9-5.1-2.8)
Others: John Havlicek
1966: Boston Celtics
Best Player: Bill Russell
#2: Sam Jones (23.2-5.1-3.2)
Others: John Havlicek
1967: Philadelphia 76ers
Best Player: Wilt Chamberlain
#2: Hal Greer (22.1-5.3-3.8)
Others: Chet Walker, Billy Cunningham
1968: Boston Celtics
Best Player: Bill Russell
#2: John Havlicek (20.7-6.7-4.7)
Others: Sam Jones
1969: Boston Celtics
Best Player: Bill Russell
#2: John Havlicek (21.6-7.0-5.4)
Others: Sam Jones
1970: New York Knicks
Best Player: Willis Reed
#2: Walt Frazier (20.9-6.0-8.2)
Others: Dave DeBusschere
1971: Milwaukee Bucks
Best Player: Kareem Abdul-Jabbar
#2: Oscar Robertson (19.4-5.7-8.2)
1972: Los Angeles Lakers
Best Player: Wilt Chamberlain
#2: Jerry West (25.8-4.2-9.7)
Others: Gail Goodrich
1973: New York Knicks
Best Player: Walt Frazier
#2: Earl Monroe (15.5-3.3-3.8)
Others: Dave DeBusschere, Willis Reed, Jerry Lucas
1974: Boston Celtics
Best Player: Dave Cowens
#2: John Havlicek (22.6-6.4-5.9)
Others: Jo Jo White
1975: Golden State Warriors
Best Player: Rick Barry
#2: Jamaal Wilkes (14.2-8.2-2.2)
1976: Boston Celtics
Best Player: Dave Cowens
#2: Jo Jo White (18.9-3.8-5.4)
Others: John Havlicek
1977: Portland Trailblazers
Best Player: Bill Walton
#2: Maurice Lucas (20.6-11.4-2.9)
1978: Washington Bullets
Best Player: Elvin Hayes
#2: Wes Unseld (7.6-11.9-4.1)
Others: Bob Dandridge
1979: Seattle Supersonics
Best Player: Gus Williams
#2: Dennis Johnson (15.9-4.7-3.5)
Others: Jack Sikma
1980: LA Lakers
Best Player: Kareem Abdul-Jabbar
#2: Magic Johnson (18.0-7.7-7.3)
Others: Jamaal Wilkes, Norm Nixon
1981: Boston Celtics
Best Player: Larry Bird
#2: Robert Parish (18.9-9.5-1.8)
Others: Cedric Maxwell, Tiny Archibald, Kevin McHale
1982: LA Lakers
Best Player: Magic Johnson
#2: Kareem Abdul-Jabbar (23.9-8.7-3.0)
Others: Jamaal Wilkes, Norm Nixon
1983: Philadelphia 76ers
Best Player: Moses Malone
#2: Julius Erving (21.4-6.8-3.7)
Others: Andrew Toney
1984: Boston Celtics
Best Player: Larry Bird
#2: Robert Parish (19.0-10.7-1.7)
Others: Kevin McHale, Dennis Johnson
1985: LA Lakers
Best Player: Magic Johnson
#2: Kareem Abdul Jabbar (22.0-7.9-3.2)
Others: James Worthy, Byron Scott
1986: Boston Celtics
Best Player: Larry Bird
#2: Kevin McHale (21.3-8.1-2.7)
Others: Robert Parish, Dennis Johnson, Bill Walton)
1987: LA Lakers
Best Player: Magic Johnson
#2: James Worthy (19.4-5.7-2.8)
Others: Kareem Abdul-Jabbar, Byron Scott
1988: LA Lakers
Best Player: Magic Johnson
#2: James Worthy (19.7-5.0-3.9)
Others: Byron Scott, Kareem Abdul-Jabbar
1989: Detroit Pistons
Best Player: Isiah Thomas
#2: Joe Dumars (17.2-2.5-5.7)
Others: Dennis Rodman
1990: Detroit Pistons
Best Player: Isiah Thomas
#2: Joe Dumars (17.8-2.8-4.9)
Others: Dennis Rodman
1991: Chicago Bulls
Best Player: Michael Jordan
#2: Scottie Pippen (17.8-7.3-6.2)
1992: Chicago Bulls
Best Player: Michael Jordan
#2: Scottie Pippen (21.0-7.7-7.0)
1993: Chicago Bulls
Best Player: Michael Jordan
#2: Scottie Pippen (18.6-7.7-6.3)
1994: Houston Rockets
Best Player: Hakeem Olajuwon
#2: Otis Thorpe (14.0-10.6-3.6)
1995: Houston Rockets
Best Player: Hakeem Olajuwon
#2: Clyde Drexler (21.4-7.0-4.4)
1996: Chicago Bulls
Best Player: Michael Jordan
#2: Scottie Pippen (19.4-6.4-5.9)
Others: Dennis Rodman
1997: Chicago Bulls
Best Player: Michael Jordan
#2: Scottie Pippen (20.2-6.5-5.7)
Others: Dennis Rodman
1998: Chicago Bulls
Best Player: Michael Jordan
#2: Scottie Pippen (19.1-5.2-5.8)
Others: Dennis Rodman
1999: San Antonio Spurs
Best Player: Tim Duncan
#2: David Robinson (15.8-10.0-2.1)
2000: LA Lakers
Best Player: Shaquille O'Neal
#2: Kobe Bryant (22.5-6.3-4.9)
Others: Glen Rice
2001: LA Lakers
Best Player: Shaquille O'Neal
#2: Kobe Bryant (28.5-5.9-5.0)
2002: LA Lakers
Best Player: Shaquille O'Neal
#2: Kobe Bryant (25.2-5.5-5.5)
2003: San Antonio Spurs
Best Player: Tim Duncan
#2: Tony Parker (15.5-2.6-5.3)
Others: David Robinson
2004: Detroit Pistons
Best Player: Ben Wallace
#2: Chauncey Billups (16.9-3.5-5.7)
Others: Richard Hamilton, Tayshaun Prince, Rasheed Wallace
2005: San Antonio Spurs
Best Player: Tim Duncan
#2: Manu Ginobli (16.0-3.4-4.4)
Others: Tony Parker
2006: Miami Heat
Best Player: Dwyane Wade
#2: Shaquille O'Neal (20.0-9.2-1.9)
I thought I'd go back to 1957 (Bill Russell's rookie season, and in my mind the start of the NBA as we know it) and look at each season's champion. I would pick out the team's best player, then pick out the second best player, and see if there are other notable greats on the team. I can make arguments about why I'd choose a player as the best or second best on the team, but I'll save them for now. Choosing comes from statistical and non-statistical reasoning. The point here is to look at the individual players who personify their teams' championships, and then see what help there was.
I'm collecting the data from basketball-reference.com. For the second best players, I'll list their ppg, rpg, and apg to illustrate their contributions. I'm giving regular season stats, but I'm looking at playoff stats too to determine importance to team.
I'm doing this for two reasons. First, I want to show that most great players that win championships do so because they have other great players around them. Second, I want to see which players we could say really did carry teams to championships; in other words, who won titles with the worst #2? That's hard to say in the cases of teams that are legendary for their team play, but I'll still take Rick Barry in '75 and Hakeem Olajuwon in '94 for winning titles without a great #2 at the time.
1957: Boston Celtics
Best Player: Bill Russell
#2: Bob Cousy (20.6-4.8-7.5)
Others: Bill Sharman
1958: St. Louis Hawks
Best Player: Bob Pettitt
#2: Cliff Hagen (19.9-10.1-2.5)
1959: Boston Celtics
Best Player: Bill Russell
#2: Bob Cousy (20.0-5.5-8.6)
Others: Bill Sharman, Sam Jones
1960: Boston Celtics
Best Player: Bill Russell
#2: Tom Heinsohn (21.7-10.6-2.5)
Others: Bill Sharman, Bob Cousy, Sam Jones
1961: Boston Celtics
Best Player: Bill Russell
#2: Tom Heinsohn (21.3-9.9-1.9)
Others: Bill Sharman, Bob Cousy, Sam Jones
1962: Boston Celtics
Best Player: Bill Russell
#2: Tom Heinsohn (22.1-9.5-2.1)
Others: Bob Cousy, Sam Jones
1963: Boston Celtics
Best Player: Bill Russell
#2: Sam Jones (19.7-5.2-3.2)
Others: Bob Cousy, John Havlicek
1964: Boston Celtics
Best Player: Bill Russell
#2: Sam Jones (19.4-4.6-2.7)
Others: John Havlicek
1965: Boston Celtics
Best Player: Bill Russell
#2: Sam Jones (25.9-5.1-2.8)
Others: John Havlicek
1966: Boston Celtics
Best Player: Bill Russell
#2: Sam Jones (23.2-5.1-3.2)
Others: John Havlicek
1967: Philadelphia 76ers
Best Player: Wilt Chamberlain
#2: Hal Greer (22.1-5.3-3.8)
Others: Chet Walker, Billy Cunningham
1968: Boston Celtics
Best Player: Bill Russell
#2: John Havlicek (20.7-6.7-4.7)
Others: Sam Jones
1969: Boston Celtics
Best Player: Bill Russell
#2: John Havlicek (21.6-7.0-5.4)
Others: Sam Jones
1970: New York Knicks
Best Player: Willis Reed
#2: Walt Frazier (20.9-6.0-8.2)
Others: Dave DeBusschere
1971: Milwaukee Bucks
Best Player: Kareem Abdul-Jabbar
#2: Oscar Robertson (19.4-5.7-8.2)
1972: Los Angeles Lakers
Best Player: Wilt Chamberlain
#2: Jerry West (25.8-4.2-9.7)
Others: Gail Goodrich
1973: New York Knicks
Best Player: Walt Frazier
#2: Earl Monroe (15.5-3.3-3.8)
Others: Dave DeBusschere, Willis Reed, Jerry Lucas
1974: Boston Celtics
Best Player: Dave Cowens
#2: John Havlicek (22.6-6.4-5.9)
Others: Jo Jo White
1975: Golden State Warriors
Best Player: Rick Barry
#2: Jamaal Wilkes (14.2-8.2-2.2)
1976: Boston Celtics
Best Player: Dave Cowens
#2: Jo Jo White (18.9-3.8-5.4)
Others: John Havlicek
1977: Portland Trailblazers
Best Player: Bill Walton
#2: Maurice Lucas (20.6-11.4-2.9)
1978: Washington Bullets
Best Player: Elvin Hayes
#2: Wes Unseld (7.6-11.9-4.1)
Others: Bob Dandridge
1979: Seattle Supersonics
Best Player: Gus Williams
#2: Dennis Johnson (15.9-4.7-3.5)
Others: Jack Sikma
1980: LA Lakers
Best Player: Kareem Abdul-Jabbar
#2: Magic Johnson (18.0-7.7-7.3)
Others: Jamaal Wilkes, Norm Nixon
1981: Boston Celtics
Best Player: Larry Bird
#2: Robert Parish (18.9-9.5-1.8)
Others: Cedric Maxwell, Tiny Archibald, Kevin McHale
1982: LA Lakers
Best Player: Magic Johnson
#2: Kareem Abdul-Jabbar (23.9-8.7-3.0)
Others: Jamaal Wilkes, Norm Nixon
1983: Philadelphia 76ers
Best Player: Moses Malone
#2: Julius Erving (21.4-6.8-3.7)
Others: Andrew Toney
1984: Boston Celtics
Best Player: Larry Bird
#2: Robert Parish (19.0-10.7-1.7)
Others: Kevin McHale, Dennis Johnson
1985: LA Lakers
Best Player: Magic Johnson
#2: Kareem Abdul Jabbar (22.0-7.9-3.2)
Others: James Worthy, Byron Scott
1986: Boston Celtics
Best Player: Larry Bird
#2: Kevin McHale (21.3-8.1-2.7)
Others: Robert Parish, Dennis Johnson, Bill Walton)
1987: LA Lakers
Best Player: Magic Johnson
#2: James Worthy (19.4-5.7-2.8)
Others: Kareem Abdul-Jabbar, Byron Scott
1988: LA Lakers
Best Player: Magic Johnson
#2: James Worthy (19.7-5.0-3.9)
Others: Byron Scott, Kareem Abdul-Jabbar
1989: Detroit Pistons
Best Player: Isiah Thomas
#2: Joe Dumars (17.2-2.5-5.7)
Others: Dennis Rodman
1990: Detroit Pistons
Best Player: Isiah Thomas
#2: Joe Dumars (17.8-2.8-4.9)
Others: Dennis Rodman
1991: Chicago Bulls
Best Player: Michael Jordan
#2: Scottie Pippen (17.8-7.3-6.2)
1992: Chicago Bulls
Best Player: Michael Jordan
#2: Scottie Pippen (21.0-7.7-7.0)
1993: Chicago Bulls
Best Player: Michael Jordan
#2: Scottie Pippen (18.6-7.7-6.3)
1994: Houston Rockets
Best Player: Hakeem Olajuwon
#2: Otis Thorpe (14.0-10.6-3.6)
1995: Houston Rockets
Best Player: Hakeem Olajuwon
#2: Clyde Drexler (21.4-7.0-4.4)
1996: Chicago Bulls
Best Player: Michael Jordan
#2: Scottie Pippen (19.4-6.4-5.9)
Others: Dennis Rodman
1997: Chicago Bulls
Best Player: Michael Jordan
#2: Scottie Pippen (20.2-6.5-5.7)
Others: Dennis Rodman
1998: Chicago Bulls
Best Player: Michael Jordan
#2: Scottie Pippen (19.1-5.2-5.8)
Others: Dennis Rodman
1999: San Antonio Spurs
Best Player: Tim Duncan
#2: David Robinson (15.8-10.0-2.1)
2000: LA Lakers
Best Player: Shaquille O'Neal
#2: Kobe Bryant (22.5-6.3-4.9)
Others: Glen Rice
2001: LA Lakers
Best Player: Shaquille O'Neal
#2: Kobe Bryant (28.5-5.9-5.0)
2002: LA Lakers
Best Player: Shaquille O'Neal
#2: Kobe Bryant (25.2-5.5-5.5)
2003: San Antonio Spurs
Best Player: Tim Duncan
#2: Tony Parker (15.5-2.6-5.3)
Others: David Robinson
2004: Detroit Pistons
Best Player: Ben Wallace
#2: Chauncey Billups (16.9-3.5-5.7)
Others: Richard Hamilton, Tayshaun Prince, Rasheed Wallace
2005: San Antonio Spurs
Best Player: Tim Duncan
#2: Manu Ginobli (16.0-3.4-4.4)
Others: Tony Parker
2006: Miami Heat
Best Player: Dwyane Wade
#2: Shaquille O'Neal (20.0-9.2-1.9)
Soon it will be football day...
My favorite day of the year is the opening Sunday of football. Alas, the Vikes don't even play until Monday at 6:00 central. I'll be teaching from 5:00-8:00 (and it's tough to cancel the first day of class), followed by a half-hour commute home. If the antenna and VCR all work together.... This is roughly the 435th time I've whined about this. I will whine about this roughly 678 more times. Anyway, a few football thoughts.
My favorite "what if": The Miami Dolphins
We all know that when the last undefeated team of each season loses, the '72 Dolphins celebrate. But what would happen if the last team to lose is...the Miami Dolphins! I would LOVE to see the Dolphins start out 10-0 sometime and see what the old-timers do. I can't even begin to describe how excited I am that such an occurance COULD happen.
One of the top 32 starting QBs in the NFL
A peeve: how easily and thoughtlessly people throw out things like "he's one of the top 3 players in the league" or "he's one of the top 5 QBs in the league" and all that without actually giving it some thought. Often, when you do think about the comment briefly, you realize the claim is totally outrageous. Now, Peter King does this ALL THE TIME, but I've also read columns in which he explores, for example, how many QBs he'd take over Drew Brees. That's good. Don't be lazy: if you're going to say "he's a top 3 running back" or whatever, give it some thought and make sure there aren't 3 other RBs you'd take over whoever you're talking about. Otherwise we've got 10 "Top 5" players at any given time.
Vikings
All I can really predict for the 2006 Vikings is this: they will go between 5-11 and 11-5. I'm not sure they have more than 11 wins in them, and I'm pretty sure aren't worse than 5 wins. Nothing in between will suprise me. New coach, new offensive system, new defensive system...I have no idea. All I can do is approach every season hoping this is the one where I'll see the beloved Purple win a Super Bowl.
Anxiety
Every year I dread the possibility of seeing the Packers win a Super Bowl. If I had to witness the Packers win a 13th championship before the Vikes win their first...well, that would be difficult to stomach. Plus I despise Favre. I watch Packer playoff games with as much nervousness as I watch any Viking game. This season, I don't fear the Packers winning the Super Bowl. I do fear Favre throwing his 420th and 421st TD pass. But there's also something to be hopeful for: interception number 277 and 278. During the season, each week I will give a Favre tally at this blog. Favre has 396 TDs and 255 INTs--so he's 24 away from the TD record and 22 from the INT record. Which will he break? Both? Then which first? What sort of odds are we looking at here? And should I just start a separate anti-Favre blog to keep the venom off this one?
My favorite "what if": The Miami Dolphins
We all know that when the last undefeated team of each season loses, the '72 Dolphins celebrate. But what would happen if the last team to lose is...the Miami Dolphins! I would LOVE to see the Dolphins start out 10-0 sometime and see what the old-timers do. I can't even begin to describe how excited I am that such an occurance COULD happen.
One of the top 32 starting QBs in the NFL
A peeve: how easily and thoughtlessly people throw out things like "he's one of the top 3 players in the league" or "he's one of the top 5 QBs in the league" and all that without actually giving it some thought. Often, when you do think about the comment briefly, you realize the claim is totally outrageous. Now, Peter King does this ALL THE TIME, but I've also read columns in which he explores, for example, how many QBs he'd take over Drew Brees. That's good. Don't be lazy: if you're going to say "he's a top 3 running back" or whatever, give it some thought and make sure there aren't 3 other RBs you'd take over whoever you're talking about. Otherwise we've got 10 "Top 5" players at any given time.
Vikings
All I can really predict for the 2006 Vikings is this: they will go between 5-11 and 11-5. I'm not sure they have more than 11 wins in them, and I'm pretty sure aren't worse than 5 wins. Nothing in between will suprise me. New coach, new offensive system, new defensive system...I have no idea. All I can do is approach every season hoping this is the one where I'll see the beloved Purple win a Super Bowl.
Anxiety
Every year I dread the possibility of seeing the Packers win a Super Bowl. If I had to witness the Packers win a 13th championship before the Vikes win their first...well, that would be difficult to stomach. Plus I despise Favre. I watch Packer playoff games with as much nervousness as I watch any Viking game. This season, I don't fear the Packers winning the Super Bowl. I do fear Favre throwing his 420th and 421st TD pass. But there's also something to be hopeful for: interception number 277 and 278. During the season, each week I will give a Favre tally at this blog. Favre has 396 TDs and 255 INTs--so he's 24 away from the TD record and 22 from the INT record. Which will he break? Both? Then which first? What sort of odds are we looking at here? And should I just start a separate anti-Favre blog to keep the venom off this one?
Thursday, June 22, 2006
Fun Fantasy Football Rules
Some friends and I have been discussing ways to turn our impending fantasy football draft into a drinking game. Here are some other rules I'd like to suggest.
Person to select Brett Favre: take two pills of Vicodin and throw an interception to my kitten.
People who select Randy McMichael or Ahman Green: since real domestic violence is never funny, you just have to create a straw figure of your significant other, then start fighting.
Person to select Peyton Manning: Start really strong and confident, then start wilting anytime anybody looks at you, and come up short with stupid picks repeatedly as the draft comes to a close.
Person to select Ben Roethlisberger: Ride my bike straight into the garage door.
People who select Seattle Seahawks: It's only draft time, but it's not too early to start blaming the refs because you didn't win the championship.
Person to select Reggie Bush: on your next pick, act like you're going to be making an easy, no-brainer pick, then throw a lateral to a slow player running behind you and pick somebody who sucks.
Person to select Terrell Owens: by rule, you automatically receive Donovan McNabb, but you are obligated to spend the season talking about how much better you'd be with Brett Favre.
First person to make a joke about how you'd like to draft Eli Manning, but you're worried he'll refuse to play for your team: everybody present gets to punch you in the throat or in the crotch. It's the puncher's choice.
Person to select Drew Brees: you must smear something onto your face in the shape of his birthmark.
Person to select Randy Moss: when you've decided to make your pick, sit silently doing nothing. As your time winds down and somebody asks you to hurry up and make a pick, shout, "I pick when I want to pick!" If the commissioner threatens to fine you if you don't get your pick in on time, say "straight cash homey." When you finally do select Moss, pretend to take a crap on the floor and then pretend to wipe your ass on the wall (under no circumstances should you ACTUALLY crap on the floor and wipe your ass on the wall).
Person to select Daunte Culpepper: First, start trying to pick up a drink but repeatedly fumble it. Then try throw out a pick but allow it to be easily intercepted. Then send everybody an email telling them how you feel.
Person to select Mewelde Moore: start making the pick, and then act like you got injured trying to do it.
OK, some real drinking game rules.
First to select a QB: take a drink
First to select a TE: take a drink
First to select a D: take a shot
First to select a K: take a shot
First Homer Pick: take a shot
(this includes drafting players on your favorite NFL team OR alumni from your favorite college team. If I draft a UCLA Bruin, I take a shot. If Justin drafts a Duke Blue Devil...ah, hell, my brother at Bemidji State has a better chance of drafting a Beaver than Justin has of selecting a Blue Devil.)
First Reach Pick: take a shot
First Double Pick: take a double shot and remove one article of clothing
(In a snake draft, trying to draft a player who has already been selected is a cardinal sin.)
We need more suggestions: both of the first variety, and the second.
Person to select Brett Favre: take two pills of Vicodin and throw an interception to my kitten.
People who select Randy McMichael or Ahman Green: since real domestic violence is never funny, you just have to create a straw figure of your significant other, then start fighting.
Person to select Peyton Manning: Start really strong and confident, then start wilting anytime anybody looks at you, and come up short with stupid picks repeatedly as the draft comes to a close.
Person to select Ben Roethlisberger: Ride my bike straight into the garage door.
People who select Seattle Seahawks: It's only draft time, but it's not too early to start blaming the refs because you didn't win the championship.
Person to select Reggie Bush: on your next pick, act like you're going to be making an easy, no-brainer pick, then throw a lateral to a slow player running behind you and pick somebody who sucks.
Person to select Terrell Owens: by rule, you automatically receive Donovan McNabb, but you are obligated to spend the season talking about how much better you'd be with Brett Favre.
First person to make a joke about how you'd like to draft Eli Manning, but you're worried he'll refuse to play for your team: everybody present gets to punch you in the throat or in the crotch. It's the puncher's choice.
Person to select Drew Brees: you must smear something onto your face in the shape of his birthmark.
Person to select Randy Moss: when you've decided to make your pick, sit silently doing nothing. As your time winds down and somebody asks you to hurry up and make a pick, shout, "I pick when I want to pick!" If the commissioner threatens to fine you if you don't get your pick in on time, say "straight cash homey." When you finally do select Moss, pretend to take a crap on the floor and then pretend to wipe your ass on the wall (under no circumstances should you ACTUALLY crap on the floor and wipe your ass on the wall).
Person to select Daunte Culpepper: First, start trying to pick up a drink but repeatedly fumble it. Then try throw out a pick but allow it to be easily intercepted. Then send everybody an email telling them how you feel.
Person to select Mewelde Moore: start making the pick, and then act like you got injured trying to do it.
OK, some real drinking game rules.
First to select a QB: take a drink
First to select a TE: take a drink
First to select a D: take a shot
First to select a K: take a shot
First Homer Pick: take a shot
(this includes drafting players on your favorite NFL team OR alumni from your favorite college team. If I draft a UCLA Bruin, I take a shot. If Justin drafts a Duke Blue Devil...ah, hell, my brother at Bemidji State has a better chance of drafting a Beaver than Justin has of selecting a Blue Devil.)
First Reach Pick: take a shot
First Double Pick: take a double shot and remove one article of clothing
(In a snake draft, trying to draft a player who has already been selected is a cardinal sin.)
We need more suggestions: both of the first variety, and the second.
Wednesday, June 21, 2006
Wade's place in NBA history
Here's the question: how many NBA players have won NBA championships within their first three years AS THE BEST PLAYER ON THEIR TEAMS?
It's a short list.
Bill Russell won in his 1st and 3rd year.
Magic Johnson won in his 1st and 3rd year (Kareem was MVP Magic's rookie year, but Magic was Finals MVP, so for the sake of argument, let's consider Magic the team's best player for these two titles).
Larry Bird won in his 2nd year.
Tim Duncan won in his 2nd year.
Dwayne Wade won in his 3rd year.
So Wade is definitely already an all-timer.
However, let's look closer at these players before making assumptions about the meaning of this in all-time greatness.
Russell joined a Celtic team that featured Bob Cousy and Bill Sharman, both voted in '96 to be among the 50 greatest NBA players ever.
Magic joined a team that featured Kareem Abdul-Jabar, who is a legitimate contender for GREATEST PLAYER EVER status.
Larry Legend won his first title in '81 playing alongside three members of the '96 50 Greatest: Robert Parrish, Kevin McHale, and Tiny Archibald.
Tim Duncan joined an aging but still effective David Robinson.
And Wade was on a team that added an aging but still effective Shaquille O'Neal in his second year.
Certainly this is an impressive list of players. But each joined a team that was already loaded with some talent that could compliment them.
(one other comment on Wilt as the greatest athlete ever: I looked at the back of a card and learned that in the 1961-62 season, Wilt played all but 8 possible minutes of the NBA season. Yet you're not going to hear him mentioned with Cal Ripken, Lance Armstrong, or Brett Favre [who actually doesn't even have the record for most consecutive games played, though he gets all sorts of credit--Jim Marshall had the record until a pointless punter broke it. We don't recognize punters here at Pacifist Viking--all hail Jim Marshall] as the paragons of durability and stamina in American sports lore. He should be).
It's a short list.
Bill Russell won in his 1st and 3rd year.
Magic Johnson won in his 1st and 3rd year (Kareem was MVP Magic's rookie year, but Magic was Finals MVP, so for the sake of argument, let's consider Magic the team's best player for these two titles).
Larry Bird won in his 2nd year.
Tim Duncan won in his 2nd year.
Dwayne Wade won in his 3rd year.
So Wade is definitely already an all-timer.
However, let's look closer at these players before making assumptions about the meaning of this in all-time greatness.
Russell joined a Celtic team that featured Bob Cousy and Bill Sharman, both voted in '96 to be among the 50 greatest NBA players ever.
Magic joined a team that featured Kareem Abdul-Jabar, who is a legitimate contender for GREATEST PLAYER EVER status.
Larry Legend won his first title in '81 playing alongside three members of the '96 50 Greatest: Robert Parrish, Kevin McHale, and Tiny Archibald.
Tim Duncan joined an aging but still effective David Robinson.
And Wade was on a team that added an aging but still effective Shaquille O'Neal in his second year.
Certainly this is an impressive list of players. But each joined a team that was already loaded with some talent that could compliment them.
(one other comment on Wilt as the greatest athlete ever: I looked at the back of a card and learned that in the 1961-62 season, Wilt played all but 8 possible minutes of the NBA season. Yet you're not going to hear him mentioned with Cal Ripken, Lance Armstrong, or Brett Favre [who actually doesn't even have the record for most consecutive games played, though he gets all sorts of credit--Jim Marshall had the record until a pointless punter broke it. We don't recognize punters here at Pacifist Viking--all hail Jim Marshall] as the paragons of durability and stamina in American sports lore. He should be).
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)