12.19.2006

Re: Knicks-Nuggets brawl

12.19.2006

Isaiah Thomas
Head Coach, New York Knicks
MattMillen...IMean...IsaiahThomas@knicks.org


Dear Mr. Thomas:

You, sir, are a complete idiot.


Sincerely,

Russell Lee
Sports Fan
EwingForCoach@KnicksSuck.org

12.14.2006

Weekend Forecast (NFL... Awards)

Judging by last week's performance, I need to take a short break from the NFL pick-'em game. Thus, instead of predicting game winners this week, I'm going to nominate winners and runners-up for various NFL awards.

MVP
3. Peyton Manning: Despite the Colts' recent struggles, we needn't push the "Peyton Panic" button just yet. Indy still stands at 10-3, and Manning's stats, while not as great as we've come to expect, are still pretty darned good: 3,628 yards, 63.5% comp., 22 TDs, and 9 INTs. The Colts remain among the NFL's highest-scoring teams, and Peyton still does more--is asked to do more--than any other QB in the game. Without him, the Colts would be non-factors in the AFC. When it's all said and done, the elder Manning (especially if he wins a Super Bowl) may go down as one of the two or three best--perhaps the best--QB in the history of the NFL.

2. Drew Brees: Brees has already surpassed 4,000 yards, and is on pace to near the mythical 5,000-yard mark; his QB rating... over 100. Steering the ship for the heartwarmingly resurgent New Orleans Saints, he has played a key role in one of the year's foremost win-win/feel-good situations. Brees left San Diego under a cloud of confusion, as many fans and pundits questioned the Chargers' decision to let their star QB go and thus to hand the reigns over to an untested youngster. Fortunately, both San Diego and New Orleans have excelled as a result of the move. In addition to the Rivers-Brees lovefest, there's the overarching New Orleans Story. Considering what happened after Hurricane Katrina--and considering the low expectations surrounding this year's Saints team--it's both touching and pleasantly shocking to see Brees and company blazing a path that may well lead all the way to the Super Bowl.

1. LaDainian Tomlinson: 1,400+ rushing yards; nearly 500 receiving yards; 29--yes, 29!--touchdowns through 13 games. L.T. anchors the offense of the league's best team, the 11-2 Chargers, who have lost only two games, both being on the road and by margins of three points. Unless Marty decides to rest Tomlinson, this year's MVP may end the season with 1,800 yards and 35 touchdowns. Impressive indeed.

ROTY
3. Reggie Bush: With five overall TDs in his last two games, Reggie Bush is finally finding his niche. His best shot at NFL stardom no doubt lies in his being used in various ways, i.e. as a running back/wide receiver/returner. Bush isn't likely to make his name as a 25-carry between-the-tackles back. Nonetheless, if the Saints continue to utilize his considerable skills in the right ways, he could well become one of the NFL's most unique talents--maybe even as catalysing on offense as Prime Time was on the defensive side.

2. Devin Hester: One word describes Devin Hester: impact. Having returned five kicks (three punts, two kickoffs) for touchdowns this season, Hester unarguably makes use of his time on the field more effectively than anyone in football. A player with his dynamic speed can change the tenor of an entire game; so long as teams continue to kick him, the Bears are never "out of it." And here we see one of the most intriguing aspects of the Hester story: Teams keep sending kickoffs and punts his way! Explain that one.

1. Vince Young: Forget the rating. Forget the TD/interception ratio. Forget the funky delivery. The guy won consecutive games against the Eagles, Giants, and Colts. Even after seeing him on highlight reels for the past year, no one can stop the I'm-going-to-run-20-yards-and-score-untouched play. It won the Rose Bowl for Texas; now, it's winning games for the Titans. Quarterbacks are judged primarily by wins and losses, and only secondarily by individual stats. Vince is certainly delivering the W's. Hey, Houston, how's that Mario Williams pick workin' out?

COTY
3. Jeff Fisher: Arguably as good a coach as there is in the NFL; the guy has a should-have-gone-3-and-13 team on the brink of a .500 season.

2. Brian Billick: Had the moxie to fire his good friend Jim Fassel and start calling the play himself; it worked.

1. Sean Payton: The clear-cut choice; who's not pulling for these guys to win it all?

12.13.2006

Questioning "The Answer"

Let's consider the great teams who have played in the NBA Finals over the past 10-15 years:

The Heat... have Shaq and D-Wade.
The Lakers... had Shaq and Kobe.
The Spurs... had Robinson and Duncan.
The Bulls... had MJ and Pippen.
The Jazz... had Stockton and Malone.
The Sonics... had Glove and Reign.

Notice anything similar about all these champions? Here's a hint: each boasted two outstanding players--Hall-of-Famers, in many cases--on its roster.

Considering the list above, it's difficult to deny that success requires talent; and not just a single dominant player--we're talking multiple All Stars. From Worthy-Magic-Kareem and Chief-Larry Legend-McHale, to Jordan-Pippen and Shaq-Kobe, championship teams historically field loads of talent.


This long-winded introductory point brings me to the ultimate topic of this piece: Allen Iverson. In recent days the A.I. saga has reached near theatrical proportions, with the Sixers having "banished" their franchise player while "shopping him around." It appears, rather clearly, that the often tumultuous relationship between The Answer and his Philly team has run its course; as strange as it seems, Allen Iverson will soon wear a new uniform, and the Philadelphia 76ers will thereafter take the court without their diminutive talisman.

Not surprisingly, this most recent wave of Iverson drama has drawn both admirers and critics from their fenceposts. Longstanding A.I.-haters can now bellow that the Sixers have finally reached their senses and decided to trade the selfish, uncoachable ball hog. Conversely, Iverson admirers, who have long clamoured that the guy has never had a proper supporting cast, will now be able to test their theory, as it's assumed that Iverson will end up on a team like Minnesota or Sacramento. We will, no doubt, soon be able to answer The Questions: How will the Sixers fair without Iverson? What would Iverson be like if he played on a team with other decent players?

In light of my introductory emphasis on talent, it's no surprise that I reside in the pro-A.I. camp. I honestly consider Allen Iverson to be as talented as anyone who has played the game in the past 15 years--Jordan, Kobe, Shaq, Duncan, Wade, and Lebron included. At a (generous) 6'1, A.I. has found a way to succeed, scratch that... STAR, in a big man's league. In 2001, he singlehandedly--yes, singlehandedly--led the 76ers to the NBA Finals. The second-leading scorer on that team: Aaron McKie. The center: Dikembe Mutombo. No one can feasibly argue that this was a highly talented bunch. I'd even argue that, minus Iverson, the '01 Sixers may not have made the playoffs, much less won the Eastern Conference. Indeed, Iverson took the city of Philly upon his shoulders, put together an MVP season, and led his "team" to the brink of a championship. Unfortunately for the Sixers, they ran up against the Shaq-Kobe Lakers, one of the aforementioned talent-heavy teams of recent note.

Since 2001, the 76ers have made "efforts" to surround Iverson with talent. These moves, though, have been anything but impressive. Billy King's most notable play was the acquisition of a hobbling, long-overvalued Chris Webber, who looked nearly geriatric upon arriving in Philly. If this is the best that Iverson's naysayers can do--to point to the fact that he has played alongside talent, in the form of a playoff-tested former All Star who is now a shell of his former self--then their argument holds no water.

Until Iverson is surrounded with legitimate support--K.G., Ron Artest, Carmelo Anthony--we cannot say what his ultimate "legacy" will be. Nonetheless, at this point I personally view A.I. as a world-class, once-in-a-lifetime player who can hold his own against anyone. His baggage, while unattractive, comes nowhere close to overshadowing his abilities and contributions. Dennis "Crotch Kicker" Rodman was one of the most disreputable players in NBA history, but the Bulls could not have won rings without him; Ron "Fan Puncher/Crazy Man" Artest is a powder keg, but fans and writers will continue to cheer and honor him with Defensive Player of the Year awards; Kobe "Golden Boy" Bryant involved himself in a Colorado situation that far outweighs Iverson's transgressions in terms of character, yet we still anoint him The Next Jordan. Moreover, when Kobe shoots all the time because he has to (see: last season), we call him an MVP candidate; when Iverson does it, we crucify him.

One day, Allen Iverson will be in the Hall of Fame. He will perhaps be remembered as one of the most easy-to-root-for, unique players ever to wear an NBA uniform. I can only hope that, as a result of his impending change of location, he will be able to add "NBA Champion" and "Silencer of Ignorant Critics" to his resume.

12.10.2006

Rodriguez Already Rich

When Rich Rodriguez recently withdrew his name from consideration for the University of Alabama's vacant head-coaching position, legions of football people across of America likely scratched their heads. After all, 'Bama is one of the nation's most storied football schools, and leading the Tide is considered to be one of the premiere coaching opportunities in all of collegiate athletics. Why is it, then, that an on-the-rise coach in his early forties would turn down this high-profile SEC job in favor of remaining with his Big East-stigmatized (albeit successful) West Virginia team?

First and foremost, Rodriguez seems to recognize that he has developed something special in Morgantown. The Mountaineers just completed their fifth consecutive winning season (10-2), and will go on to play Georgia Tech in the Gator Bowl. Quite conceivably, this could have been an even more prestigious year for West Virginia. Their first loss came in a 44-34 barnburner at Louisville (a game that may have well swung the other way had it been played in Morgantown), while their second defeat occurred in a rare look-ahead slip-up against South Florida. For what its worth, Rodriguez led his team to a huge win in the very game to which they were looking ahead--a 41-39 season-ending thriller against Rutgers. Not only did this victory give the Mountaineers an impressive 10th win, but it also denied Rutgers what would have been a shocking Big East crown. Instead, the title went to Louisville, meaning that West Virginia does not have to feel so bad about losing a close game on the road... against the BCS-bound Cardinals. When you add this year's 10-win effort to last season's Big East title/Sugar Bowl victory over Georgia/final #5 AP ranking combo, it's hard to question the growing impressiveness of the West Virginia program.

Even though the majority of onlookers may duly respect this rise to legitimacy, others will no doubt question Rodriguez's decision on the grounds that Alabama is, well, Alabama. Residing in the same pantheon as Notre Dame, Michigan, Oklahoma, and the like, Alabama carries a near holy sense of mystique about it. Bear Bryant, who won a staggering six national titles and went 232-46-9 during his 25-year tenure with the program, is perhaps the most famous figure in Alabama history. Considering his 24 consecutive bowl appearances and the reputation that he created, it's no wonder that all subsequent Tide coaches are expected to carry on a tradition of first-class greatness.

Despite this historical allure, Alabama's program has slipped over the past 10-15 years. Since upsetting Miami to win the 1992 national championship, the Crimson Tide have experienced up-and-down stretches. In 1999 they won the SEC championship; in 2000, they went 3-8. In 2005, they jumped out to an impressive 9-0 start and finished the season at 10-2; in 2006, Mike Shula was fired after a 6-6 season. There was Franchione; there were sanctions; there was Mike Price. Mike Price. Oye.

Indeed, the once revered Alabama football program has fallen upon hard times. It's really no surprise that Rich Rodriguez would choose to stay with his booming West Virginia team. At this point in time, the prospects for strong recruiting, conference titles (a.k.a. BCS berths), and national championship contention are, to be honest, stronger in Morgantown than they are in Tuscaloosa. Only an old-school, out-of-touch SEC apologist would argue otherwise.

In the end, Rich Rodriguez's decision to stay on at West Virginia represents both a commendable (and rare) show of loyalty and a demonstration of sound sense. Why would he leave a now-perennial contender and go to a struggling program where one medicore season could cost him his job? Why not stay at West Virginia and try to create the kind of hallowed mystique there that continues (perhaps undeservedly) to surround the University of Alabama? Indeed, by the time Rich Rodriguez leaves Morgantown, the WV job may very well occupy the same pedestal upon which storied programs such as 'Bama currently sit.

12.08.2006

Extra-Special Bonus

I can't seem to fall asleep, so here's an unexpected, standalone Frequent 5er for your enjoyment and edification:

Frequent 5er
Song: Bonnie 'Prince' Billy, "Just To See My Holly Home"
Word: ubiquitous
Random/Obscure Sports Reference: Remember when Johnny Vander Meer threw back-to-back no-hitters? Well, neither do I, seeing as it happened in June of 1938. Still, it must have been pretty awesome.
Random/Obscure Non-Sports Reference: According to several biographical sources, Dick Cheney avoided the draft on five separate occasions thanks to educational and "hardship" deferments. Didn't Republicans crucify Bill Clinton for being a "draft dodger?" And why is it that Cheney, once cleared from service, became disturbingly comfortable with the process of engineering wars?
Quote/Quip: Clothes make the man. Naked people have little or no influence on society. [Mark Twain]

12.07.2006

SCQ/Weekend Forecast (NFL)

I'm visiting my lovely girlfriend in Philadelphia this week, and have thus been unable to do a great deal of writing. In a true attempt at efficiency, I'm going to incorporate my Week 13 SCQ commentary into my predictions for the upcoming slate of games.

Cleveland v. Pittsburgh: The Browns travel this week to Heinz Field for a Thursday showdown with the 5-7 Steelers, who come in riding the momentum of 20-3 win over Tampa Bay. Unfortunately for Pittsburgh, a victory against the lowly Bucs does not exactly warrant a notch in the belt; fortunately, though, the Browns aren't much better. So, if nothing else, Bill Cowher's men may be able to crawl closer to the .500 mark. Cleveland certainly must have enjoyed last week's 31-28 home win over a legitimate Kansas City team. While impressive, such magic is not likely to stick around for long. (Note: While it is possible that this entry will not be published in full until Friday, the comments for this Thursday game were written at 5:30 pm on 12/7, several hours before kickoff.)
[20-14, Pittsburgh]

Oakland v. Cincinnati: After dropping five of six games, the Bengals have rebounded to win three in a row, including victories at New Orleans and against division-leading Baltimore. The defeat of the Ravens, in particular, seems to have vaulted Cincinnati back into the realm of legitimacy. A win over the Raiders, coupled with a Baltimore loss at Arrowhead, would leave the Bengals only one game back in the North. In case you haven't heard, the Raiders stink, and have yet to win a road game this season.
[34-14, Cincinnati]

Minnesota v. Detroit: (Insert bogus assertion that NFC used-to-be-Central games are fiercely competitive and entertaining, regardless of the teams' records.)
[21-17, Minnesota]

Baltimore v. Kansas City: Put simply, this game is LARGE. Last week Kansas City suffered the kind of crippling loss against the 3-8 Browns that real contenders simply cannot afford. Considering that they must travel next week to meet the red-hot Chargers, the Chiefs must find a way to defend their home turf against the Ravens; 8-5 looks a whole lot better than 7-6, especially when you're about to play a 10-2 team that hasn't lost at home all year. The Ravens, on the other hand, are suddenly in jeopardy of falling out of contention for home-field advantage in the playoffs. A loss this week would drop Billick's boys to 9-4 and put them behind Indy, San Diego, and New England (assuming the Pats defeat the Dolphins). Expect a low-scoring, hard-nosed battle between two teams looking to figure out who they really are.
[17-13, Kansas City]

New England v. Miami: The Patriots, who are 5-0 away from home this season, suddely find themselves in the top-tier mix. With Indy beginning to show signs of mortality, Brady and company stand in a prime position to shake things up at the top. The Pats have four winnable games remaining, and they must feel as though 13-3 would be good enough to secure home-field advantage in the playoffs. Then again, they seem to be a much better road team this year, so perhaps they'd prefer to enter the postseason in the middle of the pack and make a quiet run at the Lombardi Trophy. Miami, conversely, saw their momentum party crashed last week at the hands of the Jaguars. Don't expect them to rediscover their winning ways at the expense of the rolling Patriots.
[28-13, New England]

Atlanta v. Tampa Bay: The Falcons may have salvaged their season by defeating the Redskins last week. Even in a weak NFC, though, Atlanta needs to establish a bit more consistency before they can deservedly be called contenders. Some may view this game as a relatively easy one for the Falcons; keep in mind, though, that all three of the Bucs' wins have come at home. Look once again for the Vick ship to encounter thundering waves, and don't be surprised if Atlanta's hopes are purloined by the pirates at Raymond James Stadium.
[21-17, Tampa Bay]

Philadelphia v. Washington: Philly's win against Carolina on Monday might have initially led some folks to feel that the 6-6 Eagles now have a realistic chance of making the playoffs. Unfortunately for Philly fans, the Birds' next three games come at Washington, at New York, and at Dallas--a brutal stretch of road division contests, to be sure. The most winnable of these three matchups is undoubtedly this week's game against the 'Skins. Perhaps reaching a plus-.500 record will serve as motivation to the Eagles, leading them to peak at just the right time.
[17-10, Philadelphia]

New York Giants v. Carolina: Even in the anything-can-still-happen NFC, this game appears to be a must-win for both teams. It's been a Tale of Two Seasons for both of these clubs: the Panthers have been extremely up-and-down, losing 2, winning 4, losing 2, winning 2, and losing 2; the Giants, likewise, followed 5 straight wins with 4 consecutive losses. Indeed, it's hard to determine who needs this game more--the chameleon-like Panthers, who change shades from week to week, or the Jekyll-and-Hyde Giants, who stay in character (whether good or bad) for longer blocks of time. At 6-7, the losers of this dogfight will certainly have their backs against the wall.
[24-21, New York]

Indianapolis v. Jacksonville: While the Colts were handed their second loss last week at the hands (make that feet) of the Tennessee Titans, they don't tend to be known for losing back-t0-back games. Jacksonville boasts an impressive 5-1 record at home, but the quality of their performances continues to be inconsistent. Expect the on-and-off Jags to fade down the stretch, with games against New England and at Kansas City left to play.
[24-14, Indianapolis]

Tennessee v. Houston: Give me wondercoach Jeff Fisher! Give me Rob "Myyy" Bironas! Sign me up for a seat on the Titan bandwagon!
[28-10, Tennessee]

Seattle v. Arizona: The Cardinals and Raiders are probably the only two teams I'd never pick in an Upset Special.
[34-17, Seattle]

Green Bay v. San Francisco: This would have been an exciting matchup ten years ago.
[23-14, San Francisco]

Buffalo v. New York Jets: The Jets stand in a very favorable position from here on out. Their remaining opponents are Buffalo, Minnesota, Miami, and Oakland. Even in the cutthroat AFC, New York has a conceivable chance of earning a Wild Card spot. Buffalo, my favorite up-and-coming team, will likely struggle with starting back Willis McGahee out due to injury. I'd love to pick the Bills in a close one, but I expect the Jets to eke it out.
[17-13, New York]

Denver v. San Diego: Denver's once-promising season appears to be in serious jeopardy, while the Chargers continue to look like the best team in the NFL. It's Rookie Quarterback versus Mean Merriman and the Touchdown Machine. Chargers, in a rout.
[31-14, San Diego]

New Orleans v. Dallas: This game may very well go a long way in determining who gets the NFC's #2 seed. It will also feature the league's two hottest quarterbacks, MVP candidate Drew Brees and insta-celeb Tony Romo. I give the edge to the Cowboys, due to their solid secondary, their 4-1 home mark, and their recent wave of momentum. (If the game were being played in the Superdome, I'd probably pick the Saints.) Look for lots of passing yards on both sides in this one, with turnovers being the key to victory.
[28-24, Dallas]

Chicago v. St. Louis: In light of the recent performances put forth by Mr. Gross Man, I'm calling for a big upset in this one.
[16-10, St. Louis]

12.04.2006

College Football's Inescapable Conundrum

On Sunday evening the BCS yet again reared its ugly head, "choosing" Florida, rather than Michican, to play Ohio State in this season's BCS Championship Game. This most recent controversy has raised anew the widespread debate as to whether the college football powers-that-be should reassess the current postseason format. After all, it seems that almost every season some team or another (remember that undefeated Auburn team?) is left to wonder what might have been.

The most commonly proposed problem-solving alternatives vary widely. ESPN analyst Kirk Herbstreit, among others, has advocated a "plus one" system, under which two of the BCS bowls would specifically feature #1-#4 and #2-#3 matchups, with the two winners playing in an extra game--the "real" national championship game. (This system is comparable to a four-team playoff.) Other pundits and "football people" have called for an eight-team playoff, citing the successful definitiveness with which Division I-AA crowns its annual national champion. (Note: Division I-AA's playoff includes 16 teams.)

The problem is that none of these options will ever completely eradicate the presence of disgruntled teams and fans. If we consider each option on its relative merits, we will see that college football--due to its lack of conference standardization and its reliance on purely poll-based rankings--will likely never be able to crown a "true" national champion.

1. BCS
Before exploring possible alternatives, let's consider the current system. On numerous occasions (see: Oregon 2001-2002, Auburn 2004-2005, et al.) the BCS has proven to be an inconclusive, if not unreliable, system. Its rankings are based partially on computer polls, which means that "objective" measures such as strength-of-schedule play an ongoing role in determining a team's standing.

The "ongoing" aspect of these rankings serves as both an important and controversial one. Consider the University of Michigan's position in this season's BCS standings. Despite occupying the #2 spot after playing their final regular season game, the Wolverines were eclipsed, in successive weeks, by USC and Florida. Although numerous factors influenced these changes, they arose due in no small part to the fact that USC and Florida faced strong opponents (Notre Dame and Arkansas, respectively), while Michigan sat idle. In other words, the Trojans and the Gators saw their respective strengths-of-schedule "jump" as a result of their game order. (An entirely different yet related issue is brought to mind by Nebraska's 62-36 loss to Colorado in the 2001 Big 12 championship game. Because Nebraska already occupied such a strong BCS position, a 26-point loss wasn't even enough to remove them from the national championship game. Again--subjective viewpoints may have changed, but computer rankings worked their own black magic.)

Not surprisingly, human voters also changed their rankings based upon these difficult late-season games. Many members of the media seemingly operated under the "If Florida actually wins out, then I'll call them the #2 team in the nation" philosophy. Their erstwhile #2 team, Michigan, was simply serving as a "placeholder"--the default second-best-because-Florida-will-probably-lose team.

Can anyone conceivably call this a "fair" system? If Michigan had ended up earning the right to play for the national title, wouldn't the Florida Gators be able to construct a wholly viable and convincing argument for their own inclusion? Several columnists, including MSNBC.com's Michael Ventre, have argued that any team that loses a game puts itself "at the mercy" of the BCS system, all imperfections included. Sadly, even undefeated teams place themselves at the same mercy. Remember those Auburn Tigers of 2004? How about the '04 Utes? Both were among the four--yes, four--teams to go undefeated during that regular season. As the BCS would ultimately have it, Oklahoma and USC were selected to play for the national title.

Thus, when people point to last season's Texas-USC showdown as an example of BCS success, what they are actually pointing to is a season in which, rather arbitrarily, two--and exactly two--teams happened to go unbeaten. The Trojans and the Longhorns did not validate the BCS; they disguised it, at least for a short while.

2. "Plus One"
The "plus one" system, mentioned earlier, would include a framework in which the winners of #1-#4 and #2-#3 games would play in an "extra" game--the "legitimate" national championship. As the argument goes, such a format would remove the basis for 3rd-place complainers, a la this year's Michigan team.

Unfortunately, the "plus one" system falls well short of providing a clear-cut solution. In order to understand how and why, we need only consider this year's BCS rankings. Two two-loss teams--LSU, who lost to Auburn and Florida, and USC, who lost to Oregon St. and UCLA (gasp!)--are both ranked ahead of a one-loss Louisville team whose only defeat came at the hands of then-undefeated Rutgers. Could not the Cardinals justifiably argue that they deserve to be considered one of the nation's top four teams? Does not their body of work potentially trump that of the Trojans, who lost twice to non-top-20 teams? (Let's not latch onto Lee Corso's weak argument about the Big East playing a puny non-conference schedule. Louisville scheduled, well in advance, games against Miami and Kansas State this season. Both are perennially strong programs, with Miami being among the nation's top two or three over the past decade. We can't blame Louisville for their opponents' struggles.)

Similarly, Wisconsin could make a case that they should be invited to any four-team playoff, seeing as their only loss came to #3 Michigan. Despite an unimpressive non-conference schedule, the Badgers logged 11 wins in a Big Ten that is supposedly strong, at least if one is to value the accolades that have been bestowed upon Michigan's body of work.

Lastly, there's Boise State, who did not lose a game all season. While the Broncos may not be "worthy" of the #1-#2 game, they certainly should (it seems) be given a shot in the event that four teams are to vie for the crown.

Unfortunately, a "plus one" system would still leave Louisville, Wisconsin, and Boise State out of the national championship picture. Although an extra game would put an end to all of the Florida-Michigan fuss, it would not, by any stretch, give us a definitive national champion. Those teams left just outside of the top-4 bubble would still find themselves suffering at the "mercy" of the "system." Isn't that the very situation that a "plus one" would be meant to fix?

Playoff
An eight-team playoff, while more inclusive than any other system, would nonetheless incur many of the same problems mentioned above. Despite there being more teams in contention, arguments would certainly arise at the margins. Two-loss Wake Forest won the ACC this season, yet did not even come close to falling within the BCS top 8. Does mean that they would not be allowed in an eight-team playoff? Or, would the playoff automatically include all BCS-conference champions? Hmm.


Such are the conflicts that arise as a result of the BCS's grand structure. Bowl spots are guaranteed to conference champions regardless of their final BCS standing. Thus, there exists a difficult-to-balance mix of standardization and individuality. In other words, teams are judged by both their conference standing (standard) and their individual merits (i.e. strength-of-schedule, style points, and so on). The system, then, ends up being both objective and subjective, which leads to loads of confusion.

Until college football develops a uniform, pro-like structure (with similar conferences/divisions, playoffs, and the whole sha-bang), or at least an NCAA tournament-style system through which a broad number of teams are allowed into the postseason, it simply cannot purport to crown a conclusive national champion. The best we can hope for are splits, asterisks, and the occasional "consensus" #1.

12.03.2006

BCS: Best Conference Screwed?

Well, USC ruined my potentially perfect BCS projections. I'm fairly glad that UCLA pulled off the upset, though, as we will now find ourselves in yet another heated BCS debate. Memories of Miami-Nebraska (not Oregon) and Oklahoma-USC (not Auburn) are sure to resurface in the coming days. Which team will be chosen to play Ohio St. for the national title? Will it be the 1-loss Wolverines, with their 3rd-ranked schedule, or the 1-loss Gators, with the toughest schedule in the nation? Ahhh!

Anyhow, I'm going to enjoy an action-filled sports day that includes the BCS selection show and a full slate of NFL games. I'll save the overused playoff and "plus one" arguments and iterations for a later time.

Happy debatin' everyone!

12.02.2006

BCS Projections

Here are the 10 teams that I expect to win BCS berths...

ACC: Wake Forest
Big East: Louisville
Big 10: Ohio State
Big 12: Oklahoma
Pac 10: USC
SEC: Florida
At-large: Michigan, Boise State, Notre Dame, LSU


Frequent 5er
Song: Joseph Arthur, "Slide Away"
Word: concerted
Random/Obscure Sports Reference: Remember those "Lil' Penny" commercials? Those were great.
Random/Obscure Non-Sports Reference: "King of the Hill" was--and continues to be, via reruns--one of the most sharply intelligent, uniquely funny programs on television.
Quote: The self is not something ready-made, but something in continuous formation through choice of action. [John Dewey]

12.01.2006

Frequent 5er

The Frequent 5er will include various recommendations, recognitions, and references concerning music, vocabulary, philosophy, and so on. It will introduce non-sports-related subjects to "The Catapult," and will henceforth be appended semi-frequently to regular postings.


Song: Silver Jews, "Random Rules"

Word: decadence

Random/Obscure Sports Reference: Remember when the University of Tennessee won a football national championship with Tee Martin at quarterback, despite not winning one with Peyton Manning? That was weird.

Random/Obscure Non-Sports Reference: Nancy Grace's nightly program is nothing more than a television tabloid, the hostess herself nothing more than a dirtmonger. Over the past several days, her show has included stories about a microwaved infant, a celebrity paternity case, and the apparently widespread usage of crystal meth by bosses across the United States. Now that's real, relevant news!

Quote/Quip: If we spoke a different language, we would perceive a somewhat different world. [Ludwig Wittgenstein]

Weekend Forecast (NFL)

NFL
Minnesota v. Chicago: The Vikes are fresh off a victory against the lowly Cardinals, while the Bears last week came out on the losing end of a low-scoring TurnoverFest in Foxboro. Chicago's defense will surely maintain its intensity at home, but no one knows what to expect on the offensive side of the ball. Still, even if Grossman continues to struggle, expect Urlacher and crew to carry the day.
[20-10, Chicago]

Kansas City v. Cleveland: The Chiefs' season began with a scary episode involving Trent Green, and with two tough opening losses against Cincinnati and (at) Denver. Since their bye week, however, Herm Edwards and company are 7-2, having logged wins over Seattle, San Diego, and Denver (all at Arrowhead). With successive critical games against Baltimore and San Diego coming up, the Chiefs can ill afford a slip-up against the miserable Browns. Expect K.C. to improve to .500 on the road.
[27-17, Kansas City]

San Diego v. Buffalo: Ahh, no one--and I mean no one--is developing a bandwagon quite like the Buffalo Bills! OK, so maybe that's an exaggeration. Still, the Bills have won two straight, and were mere minutes away from beating the Colts in Week 10, which would have put their current streak at four. J.P. Losman, Willis McGahee, and Lee Evans (stud!) are beginning to mature together, and could very well evolve into a dangerous offensive core. As much as I'd love to pick Buffalo--especially since they are playing at home--I simply cannot bet against the San Diego... actually, forget trendy sensibility! Call the family! Tell the kids! It's a HUGE Upset Special!
[24-21, Buffalo]

Indianapolis v. Tennessee: Vince Young has compiled a 4-4 record as a starter, which includes last week's miraculous comeback against the tailspinning Giants. He appears poised to put to rest his many naysayers and their misgivings about his technique and how he "fits" in the NFL. Nonetheless, Peyton Manning is Peyton Manning, and he's likely looking to resume his aerial assault on the NFL record books. After all, Joseph Addai loudly claimed the spotlight for one game--and enough is enough. We can't let the Colts suddenly decide to develop a running game!
[31-20, Indianapolis]

New York Jets v. Green Bay: The Jets are 3-2 on the road; the Packers are 1-4 at Lambeau. The Jets have five winnable games left (and could potentially go 11-5), with their most difficult remaining contest coming in Week 16 at Miami; the Packers are... done. Expect the Jets to bring their A-game as they look to win back-to-back games for only the second time this season.

Atlanta v. Washington: The hard-to-figure Falcons, who have matched road victories against Carolina and Cincinnati with losses to Detroit and Cleveland, are mired in a four-game backslide. If they are to salvage any degree of respectability for this season, they must find a way to right the ship and win should-be gimmes at Washington and at Tampa Bay. If they drop one or both of these games, they run the risk of ending the season on an epic losing note, with tough games against the Cowboys and Panthers yet to be played. Washington managed to steal a win last week at home against Carolina, but are otherwise thoroughly mediocre; there's simply little to say about the 'Skins.
[14-10, Atlanta]

Detroit v. New England: While this may not be Belichick and Brady's most talented squad, the '06 Patriots stand at a relatively quiet 8-3. Their remaining opponents--Detroit, Miami, Houston, Jacksonville, and Tennessee--pose little threat to a potential 13-3 season. Heck, even 12-4 might end up being good enough for a #2 seed in the AFC. Under such circumstances, N.E. would only need to win one road playoff game to make it to the Super Bowl. Does this sort of scenario ring a bell? The seemingly third- or fourth-best Patriots hit their stride at the right time and make an impressive playoff push, much to the bewilderment of fans and pundits who could have sworn that the "system" had finally fallen flat on its face. Hmm.
[31-10, New England]

Arizona v. St. Louis: Rams, by default.
[28-10, St. Louis]

San Francisco v. New Orleans: San Francisco, while much improved, has won only once on the road--and that victory came in Detroit. At 5-6, the lovable Niners have several difficult games left, including road journeys to Seattle and Denver. An 8-8 season would certainly make for an impressive feat, but there are just too many roadblocks for Mike Nolan's guys. The Saints, who have surrendered 125 points in their four losses, could arguably be the best team in the NFL if they had even a halfway respectable defense. Fortunately for them, the 49ers also give up lots and lots of points.
[33-21, New Orleans]

Houston v. Oakland: Hmmm.
[17-10, Houston]

Jacksonville v. Miami: Jacksonville = ?!%$. Miami has won four in a row, including consecutive triumphs over Chicago and Kansas City. Look for Saban's team to keep the streak alive against the road-challenged Jaguars (who, by the way, = !@#^&).
[17-10, Miami]

Dallas v. New York Giants: This NFC East showdown, along with Seattle @ Denver, perhaps stands to be the week's most interesting game. The Giants' organization has become a well-covered circus, with coach Tom Coughlin and star defensive end Michael Strahan among the most recent figures to have thrown team members under the proverbial bus (and rather publicly, I might add). Add this to Eli's ongoing struggles, and it's easy to see that the Giants absolutely cannot afford to fall to 6-6, which would put them a full two games behind Dallas in the NFC East. (Fortunately for the G-men, and unfortunately for fans, the Wild Card spots in the pathetic NFC may well go to teams who are 8-8 or worse, so even with a loss New York will still have a legitimate chance to make the playoffs.) While I haven't yet climbed aboard the Tony Romo Super Bowl bandwagon, I can't see the Giants beating a streaking, confident Cowboys team.
[28-20, Dallas]

Tampa Bay v. Pittsburgh: This is a battle between the NFC team that I predicted would reach the Super Bowl and the AFC team that numerous pundits picked to repeat as conference champions. Boy, were we dead wrong or what? The Bucs and Steelers sit at a combined 7-15, which includes a shameful 1-10 road record. I'll give the edge to Pittsburgh, solely because they are playing at home.
[20-7, Pittsburgh]

Seattle v. Denver: This Sunday Night game provides an intriguing matchup of 7-4 teams that are looking to define their seasons. Mike Shanahan and his recently humbled Broncos, losers of two straight, will place this year's hopes on the arm of rookie QB Jay Cutler. With games still to play against the Chargers and Bengals, Denver's '06 campaign could easily turn from riches to rags. The newly healthy Seahawks, meanwhile, appear ready to climb the depleted NFC standings in hopes of potentially earning the #2 seed. Look for Matt Hasselbeck (injured finger and all), Shaun Alexander, and crew to wield their opportunistic swords and pull off an upset in Denver.
[20-14, Seattle]

Carolina v. Philadelphia: Without McNabb, the Eagles (sadly) are toast. The Panthers have yet another chance to prove themselves--but don't expect too much, lest you be greatly disappointed.
[13-10, Carolina]

11.30.2006

Red, Red Whine

Disagreement surrounding this year's MLB MVP awards continues to stir, with the most recent round of sulking coming from World Series winner and NL runner-up Albert Pujols. The St. Louis first baseman, who many consider to be the best all-around player in the game, was recently quoted as saying that a player who does not take his team to the playoffs (i.e., Ryan Howard) should not be voted his league's Most Valuable Player.

The relationship between team success and individual accolades has been well documented and debated, with particularly well-reasoned commentary coming from my aforementioned brother-in-arms Mike, whose blog (http://mao-musings.blogspot.com) is well worth a gander. (His primary emphasis surrounds MVP winners and World Series appearances, rather than the postseason in general.) While league MVP's do not often come from LCS winners, they do generally play for contenders. However, with A-Rod winning the award several years ago as a member of last-placed Texas, and in light of Ryan Howard's recent victory, questions persist as to whether or not a Most Valuable Player "should" come from a playoff team.

If we are to take the honor at its name--the Most Valuable Player award--then it is patently illogical and indefensible to assert that the MVP "must" play for a postseason team. A player's discernible value to his team cannot rightfully be measured purely in terms of his team's overall standing. In other words, if (for example) Player X were to hit 65 HR and compile 190RBI next season for an 88-win team, say Baltimore, that missed the Wild Card by 1/2 a game, it would be wrong to insist that he should not be the MVP simply because the Orioles would miss the postseason. Anyone who posts league-high numbers and brings an otherwise mediocre team to the brink of the playoffs is, without a doubt, valuable.

Enter Ryan Howard. The guy played on a Phillies team that traded its most proven hitter (Bobby Abreu) and one of its most capable pitchers (the late Cory Lidle) because playoff contention seemed nothing more than a pipe dream. Nonetheless, Howard posted ridiculous numbers--.313, 58HR, 149RBI--while nearly leading a no-name group of players to a Wild Card shocker. He led the NL in homers and runs driven in, and his team won more games than Albert Pujols's Cardinals. Stick the Redbirds in the NL East with the runaway Mets and see if they make the playoffs.

Speaking of the Cards... let's consider their roster. First, there's ace pitcher Chris Carpenter, a Cy Young winner who is a full-fledged #1 starter. Then, there are underrated center-fielder Jim Edmonds and world-class 3rd-bagger Scott Rolen--two guys who could hit 3rd and 4th for nearly any team in the Majors. Remove Pujols from this equation and replace him with a so-s0 .280-30-100 guy, and you still find yourself with a solid core of a team, perhaps even a contender. Take Howard away from Philly, however, and what do you have? Overhyped leadoff man Jimmy Rollins? Up-and-coming yet still maturing Chase Utley? Heck, without Ryan Howard the Phillies may have won 15-20 fewer games and remained light years away from contention. With his dynamite performances and clutch hits, though, they nearly made the postseason.

Here's another key point: Being on a last-placed team and winning the MVP, a la Alex Rodriguez, is somewhat different than playing for a legitimate contender, as was the case with Howard and the Phillies. It's extremely difficult (though perhaps completely viable) to argue that a player from a cellar-dwelling team is indeed the league's most valuable. People are not generally swayed by "With him they won 70; without him they'd have won 40" arguments. The difference between 65 and 85 wins, however, is extremely significant, even if 85 wins are not quite good enough to make the playoffs.

Indeed, Albert Pujols's whining falls flat on two counts. First, there's the line of argument presented above, which illustrates that team success and individual achievement are, while related, not inseparable. Secondly, there's a more general, sportsmanship-driven argument. If team success is the barometer by which great players are to be measured, then Pujols should shut his yapper and celebrate the fact that he's a World Series champion. Remember the World Series? It's the title for which every team competes, and its trophy stands as a symbol of team excellence. The MVP is an individual award, to be given to the player who is most valuable to his team. If we start awarding it based upon a team's final standing--or, as some people would have it, start voting on it after the postseason is over--then we risk turning it into a Best Player On The Best Team award, or a Had A Good Postseason honor.

Albert Pujols and his misguided bandwagoners need to stop their tasteless whining; in fact, Pujols should even apologize for his unwarranted criticism of Ryan Howard's achievement. There are indeed arguments to be made in favor of Pujols, but there are no arguments to be made against Ryan Howard. "Most Valuable" means just that--most valuable--and no one can sensibly claim that Ryan Howard does not deserve such billing.

11.28.2006

Sequel in Seattle?

As I made clear yesterday, three of the NFC's preseason heavyweights--Carolina, Atlanta, and New York--currently find themselves in the midst of season-killing meltdowns, each seemingly unable to forge a consistent identity. Without a doubt, numerous folks stand to benefit from this plague: division leaders Dallas and New Orleans, who now effectively control their own destinies; 5-6 teams such as the 49ers and Eagles, who now have reason to believe that wild card spots lay within reach; and wanna-be pundits such as myself, who now have a host of targets at which to fire. Who, though, is the biggest potential reward-reaper of all? Answer: the newly healthy (and defending NFC champion) Seattle Seahawks.

Due largely to a slew of key injuries, Mike Holmgren's 7-4 team has practically flown under the mainstream radar. Most NFC-related coverage, for that matter, has focused on the previously mentioned struggling teams; Super Bowl talk, when it does peek its head from beneath the cloud of disappointment, generally centers around either the defense-will-win-it Bears or the newly resurgent Cowboys and their substitute-turned-savior, Tony Romo. Clearly, the quiet, left-coast Seahawks sit in an advantageous position.

First, let's consider their remaining schedule. They still have games left against Arizona, San Francisco, and Tampa Bay, all of whom are inferior opponents. They face the increasingly sexy Chargers on Christmas Eve in Seattle, where the Seahawks have lost only once all season (Week 7 against Minnesota, the game in which Hasselbeck was injured). The only other difficult game that Seattle has left is next week's Sunday-night showdown at Mile High--and a win there isn't unthinkable, considering that the Broncos will be starting Jay Cutler, a rookie, at quarterback. Thus, the Seahawks could realistically finish the year at 11-5, which may well be good enough to earn the NFC's #2 seed. (The Bears, with five should-win's left on their schedule, should retain the #1 seed rather easily, unless they utterly collapse.)

More important than the schedule is the recent return to health of Seattle's two most important players, QB Matt Hasselbeck and reigning NFL MVP Shaun Alexander. Hasselbeck, who admittedly was not playing his best football before getting hurt, nonetheless delivered strong performances in key early-season wins against the Giants and Rams. Having established himself as one of the league's most reliable field generals, his return will certainly catalyse the whole of the Seattle organization.

Similarly, Shaun Alexander's return is a much-welcomed gift for the Seahawks. Although he struggled in the early part of the season, Alexander seemingly discovered his edge on Monday night, carrying the ball 40 times for 201 yards in a win over Green Bay. That being said, his return to the lineup serves as more than a mere statistical jolt. Alexander, much like Hasselbeck, lends the Seattle offense a measure of trust and confidence. He has repeatedly shown his ability to carry the offensive load (20-30 times per game), and everyone around him will surely feel more confident now that they can operate with a renewed sense of balance.

If this all sounds a bit silly to you, you need only step back and look at the overall NFC picture. Assuming (albeit optimistically) that the Bears maintain the #1 seed and the Seahawks earn the #2 spot... who is capable of going to Qwest Field and leaving with a win? The Giants? (Riiight.) The Falcons? (Hardly.) The Saints? (Maybe... if they can manage, for once, to score 35 points and not surrender 42.) The Cowboys? (Yes, they are the red-hot media darlings of the moment, and perhaps deservedly so. But before we crown them champions, let's see Tony Romo go into the hostile environs of Seattle and perform in the clutch.)

Even if the Seahawks are able to jump all these (manageable) hurdles and make it to the NFC title game, presumably in Chicago, they will still have their work cut out for them. Remember, though, that they defeated an incredibly talented Carolina team to reach the Super Bowl last season. Moreover, disrupting Rex Grossman and the frequently invisible Chicago offense appears to be a relatively easy undertaking; 17 points may be enough to beat the Bears.

Obviously, this scenario is by no means a done deal--it's simply one of numerous possibilities in the up-for-grabs NFC. The Panthers could yet turn things around; Eli and his Giants may soon right their ship; perhaps the Bears will prove us all wrong. Until these things happen, though, watch for the Seattle Seahawks to mount another quiet charge.



11.27.2006

SCQ: Losing Touch

Before I step under center and assume the role of Swivel Chair Quarterback, I must take a moment to toot my own winner-picking horn. If the Seahawks take care of business tonight against the visiting Packers, I'll close the weekend at a 10-3 mark--not bad at all. (Particularly rewarding, by the way, were the Buffalo and Tennessee picks. The Giants, whose utter implosion I duly anticipated, are FINISHED.)

Those New York "Football" Giants were hardly alone in the "Uh-Oh" category this weekend. In fact, today's SCQ is all about statement-making losses:

Buffalo 27, Jacksonville 24
Statement: We, the Jacksonville Jaguars, no longer deserve to be considered a legitimate AFC contender. Despite a healthy dose of early-season hype, we have begun to show our truest colors--which happen to be camouflage. Our defense, the supposed anchor of our team, could not even hold a 4th-quarter lead against the mostly average Buffalo Bills. What's more, we can't win on the road. With a 6-5 record, we have no chance of gaining home-field advantage and thereby contending the playoffs. Heck, at this point, we have little hope of even making the postseason. Oh, how far we've fallen.

Baltimore 27, Pittsburgh 0
Statement: We, the defending Super Bowl champions, are now officially a non-factor. Our QB has pulled a complete tank-job, our tried-and-true RB retired at the end of last season, and our coach may well be on his way to N.C. State. Were it not for the presence of class-act wide receiver Hines Ward on our roster, there would be absolutely no reason for anyone to pay even the slightest bit of attention to us.

New Orleans 31, Atlanta 13
Statement: We, the perennially disappointing Atlanta Falcons, and our quarterback (well, sort of) Michael Vick, hereby resign all future right to hang our helmets on the overused "Hey, he led us to a playoff victory at Lambeau" defense. It is readily apparent that we lack all of the following: NFL-worthy wide receivers, the slightest vestiges of a defense, general direction, and a discernible identity. Half the people "out there" swear that we're a few tweaks away from being a legit Super Bowl contender; the other half believe that we're a few weeks away from requiring a complete overhaul. At this time, we plead the 5th.

Washington 17, Carolina 13
Statement: To all those pundits and prognosticators who predicted that we would represent the NFC in the Super Bowl, we, the Carolina Panthers, formally say, "Haaaaaaa!" Despite the fact that our team includes the league's best receiving combo and its scariest defensive end, our running game continues to be anemic, and our tackling is...well, horrible. We simply cannot figure out how to parlay a great coach and considerable on-field talent into wins. But hey, there's always next year.

New England 17, Chicago 13
Statement: Despite standing at 9-2 and remaining at the top of the NFC shuffle, we, the Chicago Bears, will continually fail to garner respect until we demonstrate two things: 1) that our offense consists of something more than a sometimes-Peyton, sometimes-Eli quarterback, and 2) that we can post a bona fide signature win. If we fail to do these things, we will bring to mind the New York Giants, circa Super Bowl XXXV, being summarily whipped by a superior AFC opponent. Some will go so far as to argue that we would not even earn a playoff spot were we in the AFC, despite the fact that we may very well win the sterile NFC.

Tennessee 24, New York Giants 21
Statement: We, the Giants, are currently in a state of turmoil. Our coach has lost all control of the team. Our soon-to-be-retired running back continues to lodge (justified) complaints about his lack of inclusion in the offense. And, most disturbingly, our handpicked #1 quarterback is...for lack of a better word...awful. We hereby forfeit our Super Bowl aspirations, as well as our claim to the NFC East crown. Henceforth, we shall fight in earnest to salvage a playoff spot. Oh, and while we're here, we'd like to invite everyone to Tom Coughlin's farewell party. Bring dip!

Minnesota 31, Arizona 26
Statement: Goodbye, Dennis Green. Hello, high draft pick. We, the Cardinals, would love to sit and chat, but we're off to plan for next season's "Maybe 10-6, Probably 6-10" parade.

11.26.2006

Trojan Tidbits

Depending upon the results of the SEC and Big 12 championship games, and assuming that Notre Dame is invited to play in either the Sugar or Rose Bowl, USC could potentially lay claim to having tallied three non-conference victories against BCS-bound teams: Arkansas (50-14, in Fayetteville), Nebraska (28-10), and the Fighting Irish (44-24).

Michigan, despite losing only once in an already-classic heartbreaker at #1 Ohio State, hardly boasts such an impressive body of work. They do hold victories over the otherwise undefeated Wisconsin Badgers and the 10-win Irish; however, Wisconsin's own cupcake schedule and Notre Dame's lack of a signature win do little to bolster the Wolverines' resumé.

So long as the Trojans dispose of their L.A. rivals next week, there's no question that they belong in the national title game.

(I loathe the BCS, but I nonetheless want to ensure that its so-called Championship Game does, in fact, fulfill its charge of featuring the nation's two best teams.)

11.25.2006

Strike the Pose!

Perhaps I should wait one more week before naming my 5 Heisman finalists, as several contenders still have key games left to play.

Eh, I'll live on the edge.

#5, Ray Rice, Rutgers: The diminutive 19-year-old sophomore has logged 1388 yards and 16 TDs for the Rutgers Scarlet Knights, one of the nation's true Cinderella stories. With a trip to Morgantown still on the schedule, Rice has a legitimate shot to surpass the impressive 1500-yard mark (especially in light of the Mountaineers' disastrous performance against South Florida). Many critics will argue that Rice's reputation has been excessively bolstered by the sentimentality surrounding Rutgers' magical season. To those folks I say, Show the Scarlet Knights some love! Who knew that the State University of New Jersey even had a Big East football program? Rice (in tandem with a great coach and hard-working teammates) helped vault this program from practical anonymity all the way to the BCS precipice. Performances of note include: 23-108-1TD in a 33-0 shellacking of Illinois, 39-225-1TD in a win at Pittsburgh, and 22-131-2TD in a historic defeat of Louisville. If Rice goes into Morgantown and puts forth a solid effort, then it'll be hard to deny him a trip to New York.

#4, Steve Slaton, West Virginia: With one game still to play, Slaton will likely finish the season with more than 2,000 all-purpose yards and almost 20 TDs. He and hot-footed quarterback Pat White are the nation's top one-two rushing combo, which makes it no surprise that the Mountaineers have scored at least 34 points in all but two games this season. Without a doubt, West Virginia fields as potent an offense as any team in the country; Slaton, with his 7.7 yards-per-carry average, is its primary catalyst. Notable games: 21-195-2TD against Maryland (victory), 18-156-1TD at Louisville (loss), and 23-215-2TD in a win at Pittsburgh.

#3, Brady Quinn, Notre Dame: Quinn finished the '06 campaign with a staggering 35 TD passes against only 5 interceptions, 3 of which came in one game that he'd like to forget--a humbling 47-21 home loss to Michigan. After that defeat, he went on a torrid nine-game streak, posting 29 touchdown passes against only a pair of picks, and leading the Irish to an overall mark of 10-2. With four years as the QB of a newly resurgent high-profile team under his belt, Brady (no, not that Brady) appears poised to be christened the NFL's next Golden Boy. Don't be surprised to hear his name called before all others on draft day.

#2, Darren McFadden, Arkansas: Arguably the most valuable and versatile back in all of college football, Darren McFadden has led the Razorbacks to a surprising berth in the SEC Championship Game. In addition to compiling 1400+ yards and 14 rushing TDs, McFadden has helped to throw (quite literally) a unique twist into the Arkansas offense, often lining up at quarterback in the so-called "Wildcat" formation. 5-5 with 2TD passes--not bad, huh? McFadden helped run the Razorbacks to the brink of a national title shot, and he clearly deserves a spot on the Heisman stage, especially if the Hogs defeat Florida and earn the right to represent the nation's toughest conference in a BCS bowl. Impressive performances: 145 yards in an enormous win at Auburn, 219 yards-2TD in a road victory against the Gamecocks, and 21-182-2TD in a nail-biting loss to LSU.

And now, the winner...
#1, Troy Smith, Ohio State: 30 touchdown passes. 5 interceptions. Quarterback ratings of 177.7 and 162.8 against #2 Texas and #2 Michigan, respectively. (And yes, that 24-7 victory over the 'Horns took place in Austin.) Whilst steering the ship for the clear-cut #1 team in the nation, Smith has shown little sign of running aground. Look for him to contribute a performance of (Vince) Young-like proportions in the BCS Championship Game, and for Ohio State to defeat whomever their opponent may be. Also, rest assured that Troy Smith's name will grace this year's Heisman Trophy.


Honorable Mentions: Colt Brennan, QB, Hawaii (72% comp./4,589 yards/51 TD passes); Ian Johnson, RB, Boise State (1600+ yards and 24 TDs for an undefeated, BCS-busting Bronco team, including a monstrous 22-240-5TD effort in a 42-14 thumping of the Trojan-slaying Oregon State Beavers); Mike Hart, RB, Michigan (1500+ yards and 14 TDs for a team whose only loss came in an epic 42-39 showdown in Columbus, a game in which Hart carried the ball 23 times for 142 yards and 3 touchdowns)

11.24.2006

Weekend Forecast (EPL, NFL)

EPL
Charlton v. Everton: Everton, while currently in 7th spot, trail 3rd-place Portsmouth by a mere three points. With impact players like Andy Johnson and Tim Cahill, the Toffees certainly know how to net their share of goals. Charlton, on the other hand, currently sit at the bottom of the table. With only eight points earned from thirteen matches, the Addicks are in need of a momentum-changing victory.
[2-0, Everton]

Aston Villa v. Middlesbrough: Disappointing Middlesbrough, who have yet to notch a victory on the road this season, must travel to Villa Park, where the home men have ceded only three goals in six games (4-2-0). Though they currently sit 5th in the table, Villa have lost only once in 13 overall matches (5-7-1). If they can develop a knockout punch, Martin O'neill's squad may well be a legitimate factor in the race for Champion's League spots.
[1-0, Villa]

Fulham v. Reading: Newly promoted (and surprising) Reading currently sit 8th, though they trail 4th-place Arsenal by only three points. Perennial middle-meddlers Fulham are hoping to correct the disappointing form shown in last week's 3-1 loss against Manchester City. Most notable about this game is that each team features a member of the U.S. national team! It's McBride v. Convey!
[1-1, draw]

Liverpool v. Manchester City: Perhaps second to Newcastle in terms of general disappointment, Liverpool boast an embarrassing 0-2-5 road mark, having scored only a single goal in those seven away matches. City hold an equally dismal 0-1-5 road record, having surrendered a league-worst 14 away goals. This week's match-up is at Ansfield, which surely gives Liverpool the edge. Still, Rafa Benitez must find a way to win on the road if Liverpool are to have any chance of rescuing their season. Such poor play is hardly becoming of a recent European Champion.
[2-1, Liverpool]

West Ham v. Sheffield United: Fortunately for struggling West Ham, Sheffield must travel to Upton Park. The EPL newcomers have yet to claw their way out of the relegation zone, having managed only a pair of wins thus far. Things, however, look equally bleak for West Ham. Invigorated by high-profile signings including Argentinian star Carlos Tevez, the Hammers surely figured to be far more than one point clear of the relegation zone at this juncture in the season. Alan Pardew has his work cut out for him.
[1-0, West Ham]

Bolton v. Arsenal: Expect the Gunners to ride into the Reebok Stadium on a wave of midweek Champion's League momentum. Currently 4th in the table, Arsenal must soon show whether they have what it takes to shake up the two-team race between Man. U. and Chelsea.
[3-1, Arsenal]

Newcastle v. Portsmouth: Portsmouth began the season as a fantasy owner's dream, led by scoring machine Kanu and a staunch defense anchored by rejuvenated stars David James and Sol Campbell. Although Pompey are beginning to "come back to Earth," they needn't worry about "Most Disappointing Team" front-runner Newcastle. Parker, Martins, Duff, and company have done little of note, posting a lowly eight goals in 13 matches played.
[2-0, Portsmouth]

Tottenham v. Wigan: Fresh off a season in which they impressively retained their top-flight status, Wigan are currently riding a five-match unbeaten streak, highlighted by back-to-back road victories against Fulham and Bolton. Spurs, ever the yearly pick for "Next Big Team," stand poised to star in A Tale of Two Seasons: 4-1-1 at home, 0-3-4 on the road. Look for Tottenham to try to find their goal-scoring touch this weekend at White Hart Lane.
[2-1, Tottenham]

Manchester United v. Chelsea: This is the first of what are sure to be a pair of vitally important clashes between the EPL's top two teams. While each club has suffered only a single Premiership loss, both experienced midweek 1-0 defeats in Champion's League group play (United against Celtic, Chelsea against Werder Bremen). Make no mistake: neither Sir Alex Ferguson nor Jose Mourinho will allow his team to enter this match with a hangover. Ferguson's Red Devils hungrily wish to puncture the aura that surrounds the defending champs, while Mourinho's men look to reiterate their intentions of retaining the EPL crown. It's "we're back" versus "we ain't going nowhere."
[2-2, draw]

NFL
Cincinatti v. Cleveland: While the Bengals stand at a disappointing 5-5, they remain 5th in the NFL in points scored. Indeed, Carson Palmer and crew can score with the best of 'em. Following a big win in New Orleans, the Bengals need to continue to improve their defense while remaining strong as ever on the offensive side. The Browns, on the other hand, are...the Browns. Despite my previous praise of their uniforms--and despite the fact that Braylon Edwards is becoming a stud--Cleveland is still Cleveland.
[31-10, Cincinatti]

Jacksonville v. Buffalo: The Jaguars are the NFL's most perplexing team, boasting wins over the Giants, Eagles, and Cowboys, while recording losses to the Redskins and Texans (twice). The Bills continue to ebb and flow, though they have won two of their last three games, with the one loss being a 17-16 heartbreaker against the then-undefeated Colts. In a game between two inconsistent teams such as Jacksonville and Buffalo, home-field advantage generally sways things. Look for the Bills to inch closer to the .500 mark.
[17-14, Buffalo]

Pittsburgh v. Baltimore: The wheels of the Big Ben Bandwagon have fallen off, and memories of Super Bowl XXXV are alive in Baltimore. With two difficult road games (at Cincinatti and at Kansas City) upcoming, expect Baltimore to pounce upon the defending champs in this tune-up.
[28-10, Baltimore]

New Orleans v. Atlanta: Drew Brees, coming off of a 510-yard losing performance against the Bengals, takes his Big Easy aerial attack to the Georgia Dome to meet the Falcons, losers of three straight. Meanwhile, Michael Vick will surely be looking to set his critics (including Jim Mora Sr.) straight. Each of these teams has played in its share of shootouts this season, so don't expect to see a great deal of defense in this one. Give the edge to the Saints, who won the first go-'round 23-3.
[34-24, New Orleans]

Carolina v. Washington: The Panthers are beginning to look, if only somewhat, like a team who could at least challenge for the NFC's Super Bowl spot. So long as they have a healthy Steve Smith and a decently effective running game, Carolina stands a chance to beat anyone they play. The Redskins, conversely, are...bad. The generous 4.5-point line presumably entails a small measure of home-field momentum for Washington. Heh...
[28-10, Carolina]

San Francisco v. St. Louis: Hold the presses! The 49ers sit in 2nd place in the NFC West, only one game behind defending conference champs Seattle. Despite fielding the league's second-worst scoring defense, the Niners have inched their way to a 5-5 record. Lo and behold, what better chance to break the .500 barrier than to face the freefalling Rams? (Granted, "freefalling" may be too harsh a term, as St. Louis is coming off of a difficult stretch--Seattle (twice), San Diego, Kansas City, and Carolina.) Still, all were losses, and San Francisco will try to strike while the iron is hot, using a healthy dose of Frank Gore to open up the passing game for a much-improved Alex Smith. Don't be surprised if they pull off an upset on the road.
[24-20, San Francisco]

Arizona v. Minnesota: 16.1 points per game versus 16.7 points per game. Were I able to offer even a modestly satirical preview of this game, believe me, I'd do it.
[3-0, Minnesota]

Houston v. New York Jets: If there is such a thing as an "on the cusp" 3-7 team, it may be the Houston Texans. They suffered close losses to the Giants and Bills (four points, three points), and lay claim to two--count 'em, two--wins over the Jacksonville Jaguars. David Carr, despite failing to throw a touchdown pass in his last four games, is showing that he can be a worthy starter in the NFL, especially if complemented by a not-awful offensive line, a solid running game, and a respectable defense. Oh yeah--Andre Johnson is a beast. The Jets, who followed a potentially season-defining win against the Patriots by posting a "0" against the Bears, are entering a make-or-break stretch of winnable games against Houston, Green Bay, Buffalo, and Minnesota. With division-leading New England facing those very same 9-1 Bears this week, the Jets have an opportunity to climb and create a genuine AFC East power struggle. It's a shame that they're the most boring team in the NFL.
[13-10, Houston, OT]

Oakland v. San Diego: Yes, LT may actually score half a dozen touchdowns.
[42-7, San Diego]

Chicago v. New England: Man-oh-man, a Thanksgiving weekend showdown between the league's two stingiest defenses. That's right--despite being lambasted and left for dead by pundits everywhere, the supposedly "past-it" Patriots are surrendering a mere 13.1 points per game this season, second only to Chicago's 12.0. Commentators are billing this as New England's "identity game"--a game which, if lost, will drop the Patriots from their dynastic pedestal into the common masses of the AFC. For Chicago, this is also an identity game. The Bears, who have struggled to gain credibility despite a 9-1 record, can silence scores of critics by marching into Foxboro and leaving with the spoils. Look for this to be a low-scoring affair, with touchdowns coming at a premium. And one last warning: Don't throw Belichick, Brady, and the boys under the bus just yet.
[14-10, New England]

New York Giants v. Tennessee: Eli = struggling. Eli = overrated. Giants = primed for implosion. Call this the Upset Special!
[24-17, Tennessee]

Philadelphia v. Indianapolis: Donovan McNabb's injury may end up as one of the saddest sports stories of the year. Whether you're a McNabb-lover or -hater, you can't deny the fact that the guy is as fierce and competitive as any QB in the NFL. Unfortunately, the Eagles now stand without their leader--and without any semblance of a running game. Peyton and the Colts, with the 16-0 monkey off their backs, can now get back to the business of throwing the football down everyone's throats.
[31-10, Indianapolis]

Green Bay v. Seattle: Truthfully, the big story surrounding this game will have nothing to do with the end score, nor will it have anything to do with Matt Hasselbeck returning just in time for Mike Holmgren to face his former team. The headline here is that Brett Favre will apparently make his 232nd consecutive start as the Packers' quarterback, despite suffering a nerve injury in his elbow last week . Boy, I would looove to pick the Packers in a sentimental upset. However, the game is being played in Seattle, which means it's a virtual lock for the Seahawks.
[24-14, Seattle]

11.23.2006

Turkey Day

Today, I'm not going to complain about the fact that the Chiefs-Broncos game is being aired on the NFL Network. I'm not going to reiterate the across-the-board importance of Gonzaga's jump from mid-major to elite basketball power (Boy, did they shut down UNC's Tyler Hansbrough or what?). No, today I'm not even going to rail against the ridiculous, starry-eyed wave of Dallas Cowboy/Tony Romo over-hype that seems to be sweeping the sports nation.

Instead, I simply say...Happy Thanksgiving.

11.22.2006

Are You Ready For Some Football?

Aaah, late November. A perfect season for succulent turkey, plenty-sweet desserts, and, of course, football. That's right--it's that time of year during which epic 11-versus-11 wars are waged; when millions of fans the world over are preparing to wave their banners of support; when electric offenses and ironclad defenses suit up and step onto turf-covered battlefields.

Indeed, the Thanksgiving season is synonymous with football--or, as you may know it better, soccer.

While millions of American ready themselves for a weekend full of NCAA and NFL pigskin, more millions across the world are gearing up for a make-or-break stretch of footie. Only yesterday, Gordan Strachan and his Celtic men achieved a historic Champion's League victory over legendary Manchester United. The 1-0 win, which came by virtue of a stunning 81st-minute free-kick from Shunsuke Nakamura, vaulted the Glasgow club into the knockout stages (Final 16) of the UEFA Champion's League for the first time in its history. Lest you doubt the popularity and complete infusion of "soccer" in European culture, look no further than the tens of thousands of fans who stood long after Celtic's victory crooning "You'll Never Walk Alone." Try as you may, but you'll not be able to gaze upon such a stirring event without feeling a sweeping sense of nostalgia, regardless of your national and/or geographical loyalties.

Whilst living and teaching ESL in Suzhou, China, I met an older Glaswegian gentleman at a bar. When I asked him whether he "cheered" for Celtic or same-city rival Rangers, his response was priceless: "Celtic--and I don't 'cheer' far 'em, I bleeeeed far 'em." Unfortunately, the majority of Americans continually refuse to embrace or appreciate this unequalled spirit, choosing to dismiss soccer as a dull, highlight-less game. Nonetheless, for those who love European football--for those who understand how it is embedded into Europeans' very identity--this is a stellar time of year.

The EPL (English Premier League) season is 1/3 complete. This is the point in the schedule when leads can be made insurmountable and significant deficits can be erased. Having played 13 of 38 games, teams still have an opportunity to monitor-and-adjust and hopefully climb the table; by the time that 2/3 of the season is in the books, though, fates will be largely sealed. Indeed, it's "movin' time."

On Sunday, only five days after an epic loss to Celtic, the Red Devils of Manchester United must play host to defending EPL champions and current second-place squad Chelsea. Separated by a mere three points (one win), Man. U. and Chelsea appear primed for a classic two-team title race. Other potential contenders such as Portsmouth, Arsenal, and Aston Villa continue to posture for a spot in next year's Champion's League, an honor awarded to the EPL's top four finishers. And, on the opposite end of the spectrum, bottom-dwellers like Newcastle and Charlton are clawing for their top-flight lives. (The three teams with the fewest points at season's end will be relegated, i.e. demoted to a lower division.)

With Champion's League and relegation, we see two fundamental facets of European football that distinguish it (for the better) from American sports--and that render this a particularly compelling time of year. Qualification for the Champion's League is open to teams from every expanse of Europe, from virtually every league in every nation. Teams who make it into one of eight four-team groups must finish either first or second within their group in order to advance to the sixteen-team knockout tournament. At competition's end, the champions can truly claim to be masters of Europe, having risen above hundreds and hundreds of other clubs to attain the title.

While Champion's League represents a yearly gauntlet that rewards both own-league and European success, relegation stands as the ultimate shake-up mechanism. Each year the bottom three teams in the EPL, for example, are demoted--yes, kicked out!--from the top flight. Only by finishing in the top three in the Championship division will they be allowed to re-enter the Premiership. Imagine, if you will, an NFL or NBA team being relegated from the league as a result of poor performance, or a minor-league baseball team being given the opportunity to ascend to the Majors. Such possibilities would spice things up, no?

Yes, indeed, this is a wonderful time of year. Paths to national and European glory are being carved, and top-tier reputations are in jeopardy. On mud-mangled pitches in storied stadiums, warriors will fight in earnest to leave their marks on the world's game.

I ask: Are you ready for some football?

11.21.2006

Manning Up

Now that Philip Rivers is beginning to display his considerable quarterbacking abilities with the red-hot San Diego Chargers, and with the New York Giants looking more mediocre by the week, the "Eli question" is being raised anew. Little Manning's most recent Monday-night meltdown in Jacksonville did little to silence the debate. Did the Giants make a mistake in choosing Manning instead of Rivers (or Roethlisberger)? Do we place unfair expectations on Manning solely because of his last name? Should we simply sit back and allow Eli to mature at a "reasonable" rate?

Well...maybe, no, and absolutely not.

Allow me to explain.

Did the Giants make a mistake in choosing Manning instead of Rivers (or Roethlisberger)?
Of all the common Eli-related questions, this one requires the most patience to answer. To be sure, Roethlisberger (version 2k5) and Rivers appear primed for top-tier success. Big Ben, despite his recent struggles, has already secured a Ring; Rivers, whose Chargers currently look like the best team in the National Football League, looks like he may one day join the Jordanesque ranks of uh-oh draft-day lore. Nonetheless, these three QBs still stand in the early stages of their careers, having only been in the league for some 2 1/2 years. Hence, I feel that we should reserve opinion on this particular question until 2010 or so. Only then will we be able to assess a substantial body of work.

Do we place unfair expectations on Manning solely because of his last name?
The answer to this question is simple: no. Numerous commentators, including "Around the Horn" contributor Jim Armstrong, have asserted that we'd view Eli much less harshly were his name John Doe. Along this view, we unreasonably "expect" Eli to carry on the genetic Manning legend.

Such logic is terribly flawed. If Eli Manning were John Doe or Mo Schmoe, we wouldn't be holding these debates; if Eli Manning were not Eli Manning, he wouldn't be the starting QB for the New York Giants. Other successful college quarterbacks of recent note--e.g., Tim Couch, Joey Harrington, and Rex Grossman--have entered the NFL and shown that their pro legacies may not live up to their NCAA prologues. Nonetheless, we do not cry in outrage. We do not call for their heads.

The obvious point to be made here is that Eli was a celebrated #1 overall draft pick--by far the most highly touted golden boy of his or any recent class. My follow-up point is this: Eli's position was influenced almost primarily by his last name. His college stats were spectacular, but so were Couch's, Harrington's, and Grossman's. The key motivation for our shock at Eli's poor play is simple: We expected him to be Peyton Lite. We expected him to climb onto the nation's biggest stage in the nation's biggest sport and immediately become a star. Now, the prospect of Eli spending his career as a slightly above-average NFL quarterback has left us befuddled.

Perhaps Eli will indeed turn out to be a top-5 QB at some point down the road, thus justifying the pre-draft circus that followed him. No one knows what the future may hold. As for our current concern--it's wholly justified. We don't place "unfair" expectations on Eli simply because his last name is Manning. Rather, Eli Manning is who he is--is where he is--largely because his last name is Manning. There is, as they (sort of) say, no separating the Manning from the myth; we set the bar, and there's no lowering it now. Eli's name got him to where he is. The time for "objective" expectations has long since passed.

Should we simply sit back and allow Eli to mature at a reasonable rate?
See previous question/answer.

Boise Among Men?

Amidst the ongoing flurry of rematch- and playoff-related BCS debates, there are countless college football what-if's to ponder. One of the most interesting stories--that of the Boise State Broncos--has gone largely untold, or more accurately, unimagined.

We're all quite familiar with the "Smurf turf" that covers Boise's one-of-a-kind home field. We're also well familiar with the oft-replicated David-versus-Goliath(s) storyline: a mid-major team posts an impressive record but is denied national championship consideration due to a weak schedule. (See Alex Smith and Utah, 2004). Smith's Utah team did earn the chance to play in a BCS bowl, but garnered little support for a shot at the Big One.

Here we see one of the key differences between college football and, say, college basketball. The NCAA basketball tournament is a mid-major team's dream. Consider Gonzaga, a program that came virtually out of nowhere and established itself as a perennial March contender. Initially, fans clamoured that the Zags were "overrated," that they would soon show themselves to be nothing more than one-and-done pretenders. Fortunately for Gonzaga (and for the fans who enjoy watching them inject a sense of freshness into the college basketball scene), they utilized their initial tournament opportunities, and have since strode into the upper echelon of March powers.

The key here: Gonzaga (or George Mason, UAB, et. al.) was offered a seat at the table. The very idea of a tournament is that no worthy team--of which we select some 65 annually in college basketball--is denied a chance, no matter how slight, to play for the national title. If it's true that Team A is nothing more than a non-major weakling, then this will manifest itself when they square off against a "traditional" powerhouse. In other words, they still PLAY THE GAME. Presumptions and punditry are thrown out the window in favor of--gasp--competition.

Of course, the adoption of such a clear-cut process has eluded college football (For an exploration of the reasons behind this, visit my pal Mike's blog at http://mao-musings.blogspot.com/). On the collegiate gridiron, reputations and opinions stem not solely from on-field play, but also from memories and images of yesteryear. Woven into our national football fabric are visions of Big Ten winters, with Woody and Bo duking it out; of the Fighting Irish suiting up for their yearly Trojan War; of smash-mouth Big 12 grudge matches; and of classic intra-Florida showdowns. When we see, for example, this year's Notre Dame team, we don't recognize it as consisting of an above-average offense combined with a so-so defense. Rather, we see Quinn as Montana, Weis as Rockne--a constellation of faded Irish glory. When we consider USC's upcoming game against UCLA, we paint it as an always-difficult "rivalry game" (which supposedly adds to the perceived allure of USC's schedule strength), rather than as a game that the would-be #2 team in the country should win by 30 points.

No, there isn't yet a thread for Boise in this fabric. Unlike the Gonzagas of the basketball world, Boise State cannot immediately play its way into the national consciousness. What, then, are they to do? A traditional powerhouse from a historic conference has the luxury of citing "reputation." Consider this year's Big 10, which features three exceptionally strong teams--Ohio State, Michigan, and Wisconsin--but is otherwise overrated more heavily than any sports entity in America. For instance, take away Michigan's wins over ND and Wisconsin. What other worthy teams have they beaten? Penn State? Michigan State? Indeed, the Big 10 has stood upon fraudulent legs throughout this entire season, being rescued only by its eye-popping top-heaviness.

Boise, oh Boise, is left to navigate a much tougher passage. They are left to play in a weak conference, and their non-conference strength-of-schedule prospects continue to be tenuous. What major college power would be willing to schedule a non-conference game against Boise State early on in the season? Texas? USC? Ohio State? Michigan? These teams know that a loss in such a game would, effectively speaking, end their national title hopes. Despite the fact that Boise is a perennial statistical juggernaut, writers would nonetheless point to the fact that a contender lost to...Boise State!

In order to gain a seat at football's hallowed table, Boise will likely have to remain undefeated for an entire season, beat a major-conference team in a BCS bowl, and then replicate the feat the following year (or years) to show that they are indeed legitimate. Even then, voters may be hesitant to put the Smurfs in the money-grubbing BCS Championship Game.

After all, wouldn't we rather witness a finale filled with ghosts?

11.20.2006

Uniform-ity

On Friday I presumed that I'd spend this chilly Monday morning penning an ill-spirited polemic against both the BCS and the growing army of Ohio State-Michigan rematch supporters. However, the so-called "Game of the Millennium" turned out to be...well...almost exactly that. Trailing last year's Texas-USC epic only slightly, this weekend's game left me utterly perplexed as to who should be #2, #3, and so on.

Thus, I'm going to withhold my rankings for now and instead use today's space to address a completely unrelated topic: uniforms. Ever since my good friend Mike began following (and occasionally contributing to) the UniWatch blog, I've given a great deal of thought to the question, "What makes a good football uniform?" Time and time again, I find myself reaching the same answers: simplicity (in both color and template) and timelessness.

Here are my (currently worn) Top 5 college and Top 3 pro football uniforms:

College
5. Ohio State: As you'll discover in the forthcoming rankings, I'm a sucker for solid-colored, logo-less helmets. The Buckeyes' classic silver, combined with a simplistic shirt (whether home-field red or on-the-road white), makes for a sharp look.

4. Notre Dame: Gold helmets. Nameless jerseys. Recognizable from anywhere. Enough said.

3. University of Texas: While I don't care for ornate and/or cartoonish logos, I enjoy a simple, muted icon. The burnt-orange longhorn, which is set against an otherwise all-white helmet, provides a strong complement to both the burnt-orange-on-white home uniform and the white-on-white road version. Hook 'em horns.

2. Penn State: I flip-flopped on my #1 and #2 selections several times before ultimately leaving Penn State as runner-up. The Nittany Lions' get-up is the epitome of class. The road uniforms are practically pristine, with the lone (navy blue) color coming from a single helmet stripe and the numbers on the shirts; the home uniforms, which are even sharper, include a blue shirt. Undoubtedly this uniform is anchored by the seemingly boring yet singularly appealing white helmet.

1. Alabama: No logo. Basic colors--crimson and white. And, the kicker: numbers on the helmets! If every team adopted this uniform template with their own school colors, I would not argue. Best in class...Roll Tide.

Pro
3. San Diego Chargers: Two words: lightning bolts.

2. Chicago Bears: The combination of the legendary 'C', the orange-ish trim, and the stylish socks render this one of the most classic uniforms in all of sports.

1. Cleveland Browns: The Browns demand respect for maintaining the league's only logo-less helmet. The home uniform--solid brown shirt and orange helmet--exudes the toughness and cold-weather feel of the old AFC Central division. (You'll have no trouble seeing these guys in the snow.) Indeed, this uniform is one of the most underrated in the sports world.