The Voting Booth, Volume II

Welcome to the next exciting edition of The Voting Booth. In today's episode, we'll discuss the debate that just ended in Maryland between all of the GOP candidates known as "I'm sorry, your name again?" and "I didn't know he was running." And let's not forget "I wish he actually had a shot." (in fact, as I search the Internet for articles regarding this debate, I find that I may be the first to respond!)

Those present were: Sen Sam Brownback of KS, Rep Ron Paul of TX, Form Amb Alan Keyes of MD, Rep Tom Tancredo of CO, Rep Duncan Hunter of CA, Form Gov of AR Mike Huckabee. Those missing (conspicuously signified by an empty podium for each candidate) Mitt Romney, Rudy, McCain, and Fred Thompson.

Allow me to attempt to highlight the main talking points of each person:

Form Gov of AR Mike Huckabee: (He should absolutely be using the movie I <3 Huckabee in his campaign!) Definitely the most gentle spirit on the stage. Which means I don't remember much of what he said. He's not a fan of the death penalty, but sees it as a necessary evil in our society. He's very against the three strikes and you're out law, calling for more alcohol and drug rehabilitation rather than prison time. Oh yes, and when the question was about the Sudan, he managed to get in an anti-abortion sound byte.

Rep Ron Paul of TX: He is clearly the Libertarian in Republican clothes. He spoke most of allowing people to "keep the fruits of their labor," questioning our "world cop" mentality, arguing against the war on drugs, and tightening up our boarders. He sounded like Kerry when speaking about the war, how we needed to simply get out, we went in on false pretenses and now were mired in a five year battle with no end in sight. He said that when we fight wars, "They should be declared, we should go in with strength, with the thing and get out." He seems to be waaaay right in regards to the economy and waaaay left when it comes to the war. Good luck with that.

Sen Sam Brownback of KS: Somehow, on a stage of nearly all white candidates, Sen Brownback looked the whitest. I don't know what that means, but he seemed most out of place at this debate that was targeted at the African American voter. He proposed a reform to drug laws, said that we should support the people of Darfour with food and medical supplies, but not boots on the ground, and he had a solution for Iraq: Split it into three sections. The North for the Sunis, South West for the Kurds, and South East for the Shiites with Bagdad everyone's (or no one's) right at the hub where the three meet.

Rep Tom Tancredo of CO: It's unfortunate that ___ thinks so much faster than he can speak. He had many good things to say, not the least of which was regarding actually enforcing our laws against the hiring of illegals, questioning why it is believed that a black student would learn better if he were seated next to a white student, and his plan to "bring back the family doctor" through tax incentives. However, frequently, he "pulled a Mammet." (Watch Oleana, Glen Garry Glenross, State and Main, Heist, or Spartan and you'll understand.) Every time he answered a question, he began a sentence, then changed his mind midstream and would began an new sentence before the previous one had been completed. It was sadly distracting from many of the excellent points he had to make. Not the least of which was how illegals hurt workers at the "lowest rung" of our society by working for less than minimum wage.

Rep Duncan Hunter of CA: While he was the most personable debater, the "Friendship Ditch" from Speechless could have been the brain child of this candidate. He proposed a 800+ mile fence along our southern boarder stretching from Texas, through Arizona & New Mexico, ending in California. However, he also raised the solution of soaring health care coverage as capping malpractice suits in order to lower the insurance that doctors have to pay simply to practice what they spent 12 years learning. He also had a viable (though somewhat scary) plan for "leaving Iraq in victory." He proposed that we cycle the Iraqi soldiers through the most dangerous places in order to make them "battle tested." Once they are battle hardened, we can leave knowing they can handle the security of their country. Oh, yes, and he actually quoted Jack Kemp when he said, "A rising tide lifts all boats."

Form Amb Alan Keyes of MD: The only African American candidate at this debate focusing on "black issues." His primary focus was on the disintegration of the African American family and how that's lead to the high drop-out rate, high unemployment, high prison population, etc. Keyes was without question the most talented and passionate speaker. (If I call him eloquent, am I being racist? congrats to those of you who caught that reference) It seemed to me that the moderator always gave him less time than the others, maybe that's just because I liked hearing him talk.

Some of the topics that were discussed were:

The War: Everyone talked about getting out, some sooner than others. Paul and Hunter held the farthest opposing views on this one, with Paul playing the cut and run card and Hunter the stay till the job is done, then get out. And let's not forget Brownback's dividing of the country. (Just imagine if England made such a demand on us! We'd be outraged!)

Illegal immigration: No amnesty here! One of the topics they agreed on. Some delved into their plans more than others, including Huckabee's fence (which he mentioned after saying, "we should be thankful that we still live in a country people are trying to break into, rather than trying to escape from!"), Tancredo's "enforce the laws we have," and Keyes' "illegals help raise the unemployment level of blacks."

If DC should be allowed to have representation in Congress: More dissension ranging from Hunter's "if they want to be represented, give the land back to the states it came from and they can be represented." to Brownback's give them a representative. Most discussed the need to alter the Constitution to make this happen.

Photo ID cards for voting: No one really seemed to be against this one. Huckabee suggested a "voter photo" card, when you register you get your picture taken. Paul liked the idea of photo ID to vote but was obviously afraid of a "national ID card" saying he would veto any such measure (what exactly is my passport then?) Almost all of the candidates tied this into illegals voting and the need to prevent that.

The Death Penalty: Very split. Hunter did try to claim it was a deterrent. Tancredo wanted to reserve it for treason. See Huckabee's comment above. Paul's answer was not memorable, but I think he was against it. Brownback wants a "culture of life." Keyes had an interesting take saying that it was necessary so that when the crime was black on black, the perpetrator wouldn't think that the life they took was any less valuable than any other, he was for it.

Integration of Schools: Hunter said the population of the school should reflect the population of the community and shouldn't be too far for mom and dad to come in if necessary. Tancredo talked about needing more options and a voucher system.

Welfare/Unemployment: Paul somehow tied minimum wage into the reason that there are more unemployed African American High School graduates than there are unemployed white High School drop-outs, but not very well (I didn't get the correlation). But he also suggested making certain professions tax exempt if someone is taking it to "get back on their feet." He specifically mentioned waitstaff. Huckabee and Tancredo both blamed racism in the workplace and Keyes blamed the down fall of the black family unit and the fact that the welfare system pays people not to work.

Healthcare: Hunter wanted people to be able to purchase healthcare "across state lines" similar to car insurance. "A CA policy might cost $90/month and an NJ policy might cost $300/month but the NJ resident can not purchase the CA policy." Huckabee wanted federal assistance for healthcare to be equal to the percentage of the ill in each people group. For example, if 60% more black have heart disease, then they should get 60% more assistance.

Economic Growth: This was tied into the welfare and unemployment section but there were some interesting ideas that were shared. Paul, of course, had somewhat of a laize faire attitude. Hunter sounded a bit like Reaganomics. Brownback suggested location specific tax breaks. So the places that need the economic growth would benefit from exemptions for their town/city/zip code.

So, I know you are dying to hear you I would support. This is a tough one. There were aspects of each candidate that I really liked. I suppose, overall, I'd have to choose Alan Keyes. He's very likable. I think he could win votes from across the ailse. His statements make sense, they are well thought out, and not so much of an emotional appeal as they are simply logical solutions. I really liked a lot of what Tancredo had to say, and if Paul weren't such a leftist kook when it came to the War on Drugs and the war in Iraq he might have taken my #1 spot. Alright, just because I've been posting on sports so much, here's my "power ranking" for the candidates who debated tonight:

1)Keyes
2)Tancredo
3)Paul
4)Hunter
5)Huckabee
6)Brownback

Don't miss our next installment of "the Voting Booth." Coming soon to a blog near you!

NFL Power Rankings Week 3

Lots of movement this week including the biggest fall in JMO:JTF history!

1)New England (3-0) Last week: 1

Big wheels keep on rolling! Three games, three wins, three times 38 is on the scoreboard! Some are prematurely saying 19-0, but I'm pretty comfortable saying "Look out Post Season!"

2)Dallas (3-0) Last week: 5

Go go go Romo! What evasive techniques against a typically crushing Bear's D! Has America found their team again?

3)Indianapolis (3-0) Last week: 2

Hobbling over a hurt Houston? Not the powerhouse of years past, yet you still find ways to win.

4)Green Bay (3-0) Last week: 6

Sit down San Diego!

5)Pittsburgh (3-0) Last week: 4

yeah, yeah, yer three and oh, but you've beaten KC, Buffalo, and the 49ers. Granted convincingly (which is why you're number 5) but the only team that even had a shot was SF. The key to your power ranking is the number of TDs scored against you: 1!

6)Tennessee (2-1) Last week: 9

As I expected, defeated the Saints on Monday night. Nearly handed Indy their first loss, you are on the way up!

7)Houston (2-1) Last week: 8

You almost handed Indy thier first loss. They handed you your first tally in the loss column, but you'll pull out of it. I expect a second place finish from you!

8)Jacksonville (2-1) Last week: off

Surprising surge. Surprised Denver as well, I'm sure. Keep it up and keep climbing!

9)Seattle (2-1) Last week: off

Sent Cinci packing (just like Cleveland) Not sure that it will last (hence the 9th ranking) but it looks like you should be able to handle most of the teams coming your way... There just not very good.

10)New York Giants (1-2) Last week: off

What a comeback against Washington! So you DO have some life left! Let's see it next week to, you've gotten back on JMO:JTF, now let's see you get higher than 10!

Notable removals: Chicago: Talk about a fall from grace! From the third spot to off the top ten. At 1-2 if you wanna get back on, maybe a new QB is the answer. San Diego: 1-2? 1-2? Ok, you beat Chicago (the team which has the opposite of your problem.) Where's your D? (of course, the Bears gave up over 30 against Dallas..) I'm really disappointed in you. What are you gonna do to come back from this terrible start? Cleveland: Props for getting on, but no one really expected you to stay. Maybe if you'd handled Oakland with ease, but not if you lose to them. Sorry.

Here's my free speech

Alright! Finally something non sports related that has captured my interest!

Florida State Student Tasered by Police!

I'm sure we've all seen the video by now. A FSU student at a John Kerry speech confronts Kerry on why he hasn't impeached President Bush and tosses a query regarding Kerry's membership in Yale's Skull and Bones club (of which Bush is also a member). Then proceeds to not allow the Senator to answer the questions. Apparently he sees the 15 seconds he's been given to pose his questions as a soapbox for the spewing of his own political agenda. Once he exceeds his time limit, the AV folks cut his mic. He becomes livid. Irate. After watching his erratic behavior for several moments, the campus police begin to attempt to escort him from the room. He resists. Finally, about seven officers have him pinned to the ground where he continues to resist. One of them gets out the taser. The student sees this and, while still resisting, admonishes the officer that tasing him is not necessary. The officer disagreed and we got the above headline.

So questions arise: What about free speech? Why didn't Kerry demand that the police unhand the poor boy? Did they use excessive force? I read one person refer to this incident as "the death of freedom in America."

Are you kidding me?! The death of freedom in America? Look, if you are going to ask a question, let the subject of your inquest answer it! If you are going to attend a function that has specific rules and regulations, follow them! If you are going to make an ass of yourself and the police think that you're behavior is too erratic for public safety, obey them!

Look, if the kid wanted to spout off he should have found some other way to do it. Stand outside with a megaphone. This way you aren't subjecting yourself to their rules. Get a column published in your school paper. There's no way you can be too left in a state university! Or do what some other intelligent people do: Blog it!

Kerry had no jurisdiction there, either. I've heard a few people talk about how weak he looked that he didn't say anything. He'd have looked even weaker (and foolish) if he were demanding that the police let him go and they were ignoring him. These weren't his secret service (not that he has any, and even if he did, they probably wouldn't listen to him either) they were campus police. Kerry made the right move by remaining silent during the incident.

Oh, and about those charges that have been levied against the boys in blue regarding "excessive force," they're ludicrous. I'd like to submit two questions for you:

1) What if the student were a Republican asking why Kerry thinks the government knows better how to spend our money? Or if he had been the descendant of a swift boat veteran, asking why Kerry choose to aggrandize his service record? What if someone with that type of worldview began acting in a similar manner? Would the tasing have been excessive? (I still say "no" by the way.)

2) What if (God forbid) the student went Virginia Tech on the audience? Would we not be saying, "Why didn't they stop him? Why did they allow him to go over his time limit? Couldn't they see he was losing control?" Aren't way too many people trying to blame VT's decisions of that day for the tragedy? Seems to me the police would be the favorite target if they didn't do anything as well. Sorry people who daily put their lives in jeopardy so that I can feel safe while I sip my $8.57 (not including tip) grande mocha latte complaining about the war in another country that I'm not really feeling the effects of while I offer zero solutions to solve it, you're wrong no matter what you do.

So, children, what can we learn from this? ("And so what we have learned applies to our lives today...") Read my lips: Never resist arrest! He wasn't tasered for his political opinions. He wasn't tasered because he went over his time limit. He wasn't tasered because he was disrespectful to an elected official. He wasn't even tasered because he started acting like an idiot. He was tasered because he resisted the authorities. Look, if you're right and their wrong, you'll look like even more of a martyr when the truth comes out and people see how compliant you were. This kid has some sore wrists and two red welts somewhere on his body right now. He could have avoided them, but he asked for them and he deserved them.

(And on a totally unrelated side note: If a "politicians" job is to make laws. Why don't we just refer to them as law makers? What's the difference between a "politician" and a "law maker?" Seriously, I want to hear the connotations that those words carry for you)

A Brief Memo to Terry Francona From Every Citizen of Red Sox Nation Who Bleeds Boston:

For the love of all things good and pure, and for the hope of the playoffs and winning the division: Cease and desist putting Eric Gagne in the game close and late!!

Thank you.

NFL Power Rankings Week 2

Some new faces and some fall of the chart entirely on this weeks JMO:Just the facts! No one is safe!

1) New England (2-0) last week:2

Who needs cameras?! They made SD look like KC! And how many times did LT see the zone? Zero! Granted, this was at home, but it was an amazing show of power. Indy better watch out!

2) Indianapolis (2-0) last week:1

Almost toppled by a tepid TN? Perhaps the strong showing against NO last week was because they're pretty bad, not because your D has suddenly arrived.

3) Chicago (1-1) last week:4

Winning because your defense can score. You do what you gotta do. This isn't the offensive power rankings, it's the whole team that counts. Keep finding ways to win and maybe Rex will contribute as well.

4) Pittsburgh (2-0) last week: off

Two games, 10 points against! That's not something to sneeze at. Plus, convincing wins both weeks. Now let's see if you can continue against teams other than KC and Buff...

5) Dallas (2-0) last week:5

Looked like you could have used TO's recording of MIA's D! Looked like you struggled a bit against a pretty poor team. I've no doubt you'll climb as the weeks roll on, but there were other's better than you in week two.

6) Green Bay (2-0) last week:7

A surprising win against Eli and the G-men sending them to 0-2. Special teams getting it done as well. Favre looked superb. I guess it really is age before beauty.

7) San Diego (1-1) last week:3

Chicago held you to 10 points at the half. NE held you to 14 for the game and LT has 1 rushing TD over two weeks. Where's the offensive powerhouse we were told to expect? (And why does LT get to wear a tinted visor? Is it migraines? I'd think six 250+ lbs men slamming into you at full speed would cause more migraines than a little light. Or is it so that the D can't see your eyes. Just wondering, because it didn't seem to matter last week.

8) Houston (2-0) last week:10

Looks like ATL should have let Schaub play last year! They might have done better than the sub .500 season they had. Off to a great start and defeated a not-too-shabby CAR! What's next? Indy?

9) Tennessee (1-1) last week:off

Two points. Two points from beating Peyton and the Colts. An excellent showing, welcome to the top ten.

10) Cleveland (1-1) last week:off (32)

Yes, Cleveland, I had you pegged as the worst team in the NFL and no one is more surprised than me that you've made it on to JMO:JTF. However, I cannot ignore 51 points scored against the Bungles. Sure, you gave up 45, but you still won! Because of this, I now vow never to bet on football, ever!

Notable removals: NO (0-2) last week: 9. Tampa Bay?! You lost to Tampa Bay? I'm disgusted! Cincinnati (1-1) last week: 6. No. seriously. That's not funny. You were my lock of the week. I will never trust you again. New York Giants (0-2) last week: 8 Hurt or not you've gotta find a way to win or I'm going to have a very sad brother-in-law!

Honorable Mention: New York Jets (0-2) Hey, New York has a Clemens that can throw! Too bad they don't have receivers who can catch. The rookie tied the game three times against a tough BALT D, only to have his wide outs drop the touchdown passes. Whoops, next time he won't hit you in the hands.

Patriots Caught Spying?

Has JMO become solely a sports blog? It may appear as much, but fear not, the other topics will return shortly. In the meantime, we do have other sports topics to discuss.

I have a few other thoughts regarding the way that Major League Baseball records the stats for pitchers. For starters, in the 30-3 win that the Rangers celebrated over the Orioles, a Rangers pitcher recorded a save! Yes, a save was awarded when the pitcher had a 27 run lead! Why? Did he somehow allow the tying run to come to the plate without allowing a run to score? Nope, it's because he pitched the last three complete innings. How ridiculous! Also, if it's a pitcher's fault, a save shouldn't be awarded if the pitcher allows the tying run to come to the plate. I'm alright if the pitcher comes in with a four run lead and the bases loaded, but if he allows the runners and then saves the game? You gotta be kidding! It's almost a way for pitcher's to pad their stats. "Let's see, it's not a save for me with a four run lead unless the tying run gets to bat. So I'll get these two outs and then load the bases..." Additionally, if a pitcher allows a runner to reach and then is pulled from the game, if that runner scores because of the performance of the reliever, it's charged to the pitcher who allowed him to reach! So if Petit walks the bases loaded in the ninth after pitching a no hitter, Rivera comes in, allows those three runs to score and then gets three outs. Rivera's ERA for the game is 0.0, Petit didn't allow a hit, gave up three walks, yet his ERA increases by 0.33 and if his team scored 2 or fewer runs, he gets the loss! Some statisticians have begun to record "inherited runners allowed to score" and "holds" (which is when the pitcher prevents inherited runners from scoring when it's not a save situation), but they still score ERA the archaic way. Add these thoughts to my previous ones regarding MLB Pitching stats and you'll see that something really needs to change!

Ok, now for the main reason for this post: The Patriots seem to be in some hot water. It seems that a Patriot's lackey (Matt Estrella) was caught videoing the Jet's Defensive Coordinator as he sent signals into the Jet's D. (Didn't the Patriot act allow this type of activity?) The punishment has already been handed out. $250,000 fine for the Patriots, $500,000 fine for Belichick personally, and the Patriots lose a first round draft pick! (1st round if they reach the playoffs, 2nd and 3rd if they fail to make it to the post season!) This is a huge fine for something that's nearly useless! How is it useless? Allow me to elaborate:

Vous parlez francais? Si vous ne parlez pas francais, cette mots vous n'aide pas. Si le Patriots ne comprend pas le signifacations le Jets avont pour lui "D", le video est aussi inutile! Basically, what I'm saying is that unless the Patriots have the Jet's defensive play book and know what each gesture means, the video is pointless. Our little Full House is learning sign language, his grandmother isn't. She was baby sitting one night and our little guy was trying to tell her that he wanted his stuffed elephant. Grandma didn't know what he was saying and he got his stuffed lamb instead. It's the same situation here. If New England doesn't know what it means when the coordinator bangs his fists together, then videoing him doing it is pointless.

I heard an insider who knows what goes on in the NFL say, "It's no big deal. It's kinda like Bonds: It's not like the Patriots are the only ones doing it." (So where is the punishment for the baseball players who cheated?) Apparently, the flying Elvises on the side of the Patriot's helmets are actually targets (which we all knew were there anyway. You'll notice the only difficult team they play at home is the Chargers, and it's on week 2! (Anybody else remember that Shawn Merriman tested possitive for steroids last year? I guess that means it'll be the New England Stealers vs the San Diego Juicers.)) I bet it stops now. You'll not hear about another team doing this. It's just too bad the Patriots had to be the example.

Even former Patriots players said that they never saw this while they were on the team. And they didn't receive last minute changes from the sideline after their opponent sent in their defensive play. If you are going to video in order to study it and use it later, wouldn't it make sense to actually use it? Wouldn't your players notice the changes at the line? You can't radio into the QB once a certain amount of time has ticked off the play clock. How do you use this information? Why don't any players (current or former) have any evidence of this being footage being used? Anyone? Anyone? Bueller?

Let's say the Patriots were doing this to steal signals. Check out what Mike Shanahan (former head coach of the Denver Broncos) said five years ago: "Our guy keeps a pair of binoculars on their signal-callers every game. With any luck, we have their defensive signals figured out by halftime. Sometimes, by the end of the first quarter."

I think that Aaron Schatz said it best on Bill Simmons column:

"On the other hand ... the negative reaction to this is just completely overblown. The Patriots were breaking rules because they are obsessed with getting every minor strategic advantage, but that doesn't change the fact the strategic advantage is minor. The idea that suddenly all three Super Bowl championships are tainted is ridiculous. If they caught Tampa Bay doing this, would people be suggesting that the Bucs' 2002 championship was tainted? Terrell Davis actually suggested on NFL.com that the league should ban the Patriots from the playoffs for two years. You know, since that's how the NFL became the most popular sports league in America, by sending a message to every sports fan in six states that they should go away and stop paying attention for two seasons."

Here's my final thought on the matter (which is my suggestion that Belichick didn't know that it was happening): The head coach for the Jets is Eric Mangini. He used to be a defensive coach under Belichick. If Bill has been doing this for the number of years that other teams allege, why would he do it against a man who used to be in his inner circle? Mangini would have known that this was something that was a regular practice of New England. Just look at the picture. The guy who's videoing is not trying to hide it! It's not like it's a pen camera! It's a huge shoulder camera! He's on the Jet's side of the field! Why would you do this? Was this a $750,000 practical joke that also cost a draft pick? Mangini was a Defensive coordinator... They only videoed the defense... Was it a gag? Was Big Bill just trying to get into Mangini's head? Did Belichick not know it was happening? (Bill's a big fan of film... was Estrella trying to get into his good graces? Has he been fired?) It just makes no sense.

The Patriots "cheated" in a manner that in no way assisted them for that game. My only supposition (if this were truly strategic) is that they were hoping to review the video of the defensive coordinator with video of the game and try to match them up. It just seems so pointless. I am ashamed that my team acted in this manner and I'm mad that they lost a draft pick. But I also feel that the punishment was way too severe. It didn't help them in that game and didn't guarantee an edge in a future game. (And if they've been doing it in the past, it clearly didn't help last year against Indy in the AFC Championship game.) (Is this why the Patriots don't lose to the same team twice in one year?) All in all, I'm pretty irked.

Don't forget to tune in next Tuesday for week two of JMO:Just the Facts.

NFL Power Rankings Week 1

This (I hope) will be a weekly post on JMO. Some of you may remember my power rankings last year (not posted) as "Just the facts", and so they shall remain. So, let's get started:

JMO Power Rankings: Just the facts
Week 1
1) Indianapolis (1-0):

Wow! So there is a "D" in Indy! They held the Saints powerful running game in check and didn't allow them back in the game through the pass. The defending Super Bowl Champions are a force to be reckoned with.

2) New England (1-0):

"Brady to Moss: TOUCHDOWN!" Whew! Get used to hearing that! The Patriots continue to prove that they are a powerhouse. The Jets aren't a bad team but the Pats made them look like one.

3) San Diego (1-0):

They overcame the best D in the NFC. LT threw for another TD. As you can see, there's at good team in SD. Watch out next week, when they play NE!

4) Chicago (0-1):

They held the Chargers to only 14 points! Seven points in the first half! Not many teams will duplicate that feat. Now if they can just find a way to win in spite of Rex.

5) Dallas (1-0):

45 points! And it got to the point where it was as though the announcer would say "And it's third and who cares for the Cowboys." They seemed unstoppable. I guess you have to be if you are going to score 45 points.

6) Cincinnati (1-0):

A come from behind win over a very good Baltimore team. Was it in Ocho Cinco that they were last in the Super Bowl? (Actually, it was Ocho Nueve) Well, Ocho Cinco might just lead them back!

7) Green Bay (1-0):

I'm not above eating my own words. Green Bay held a decent Eagles team in check and managed to pull out a victory. Maybe Favre's hair is actually silver, can they bring the big silver trophy back to Lambeau?

8) New York Giants (0-1):

Nearly came from behind against Dallas. Shrank a 16 point deficit to three. Too bad the injury bug has bitten (and hard). We'll see how you fair with a back up QB and RB. (by the way, when Tiki was on NBC talking about the Giants, he kept saying "we" and "us" and "our." Hey Tiki: You retired! You're not on the team! (Or are you? They don't have a RB, remember?))

9) New Orleans (0-1):

The Colts made them look average! No running game (Bush didn't seem to have an exit strategy on how to get out of the backfield!) and no defense. Better turn it around if you wanna stay on this list!

10) Houston (1-0):

Houston, welcome to your first ever appearance on JMO:JTF! Schaub brings a big victory to the Texans. Can it continue?

Tune in next week to see where your favorite team ends up on Just the Facts!

NFL Preview

Better late than never it's the JMO NFL Preview!

So, with only 1/2 hour to spare before the opening kick-off of the 2007-2008 NFL season, here's what I see happening this year in the NFL:

NFC:

(Let's start with the boring league in the hopes that you'll read all the way through to the end!)

East
Dallas, Philadelphia, New York Giants, Washington
Not nearly as competetive as last year. Watch for a humbled and hungry Tony Romo to lead his team to the top of this division. Without Tiki Barber the Giants will end up cut from the post season. It'll be a close shave, but Philly will edge them out for the wild card spot. There certainly won't be three teams from this division in the big dance like last year.
Winner: Dallas


West
Seattle, San Fransico, Saint Louis, Arizona
This was a difficult division to determine a victor in. Frank Gore impressed a lot of people last year! But Shawn Alexander is still Shawn Alexander and while Hasselbeck is not Brady or Manning, I'd take him if the others were hurt. The Rams and Cardinals remain peranial bottom feeders. That, and how could I pick a team who's star is named Gore?! However, I think the supreme court will hand a wild card berth to the Niners.
Winner: Seattle

North
Chicago, Green Bay, Detroit, Minnesotta
Talk about an easy pick! I submit that there should be a rule that no one with grey hair should be allowed to start at QB for an NFL team. The only reason I think the Packers will finish in second is because Kitna and Bell won't be able to lift the Lions out of the slump and the only name I recongize on the Vikes roster is Ryan Longwell (But I'd hate to have been TE Visanthe Shiancoe in 1st grade! He probably has trouble spelling his name now! "Defense wins championships" is the old adage. It needs to be updated to include a disclaimer regarding the QB. But with their ability to stop the run and the addition of Benson, the Bears will waltz into the postseason.
Winner: Chicago

South
New Orleans, Carolina, Tampa Bay, Atlanta
With out Vick, the Falcons will be Vicktory-less. Tampa may have a Cadillac, but they need a Hum-V. Foster and Smith are still good, but DelHomme is still a toss and hope QB. No question, New Orleans is very happy about one man named Bush as he'll lead the Saints as they go marching into the playoffs.
Winner: New Orleans

AFC

East
New England, New York Jets, Buffalo, Miami
It's tough to not sound like a homer when the rest of your division is so bad. Patriots had no losses they can't over come, and with the Moss threat their WR core is so good they released Caldwell, their leading receiver last year! Don't get me wrong, the Jets will be surprising, not a threat, just surprising. They'll grab a WC spot while Buff and Miami both have sub-five hundred seasons
Winner: New England

West
San Diego, Denver, Kansas City, Los Angeles
LT, Rivers, Gates. If it weren't foolish to have so many people from one team on a fantasy league, I'd start all three of them. Denver's D will lift them over and aging LJ in KC. There's no division where it's easier to pick the team that will finish fourth than this one. The Silver and Black will slither back to LA in last place.
Winner: San Diego

North
Baltimore, Cincinatti, Pittsburgh, Cleveland
I think it's fitting that the Bengals wear orange. That way when the players who are arrested are serving time, they can still show some solidarity with their collegues. Palmer continues to recover and Big Ben's bell's been rung. Watch for Baltimore to sneak into the lead near the end of the season. Cinci snatches a wild card spot.
Winner: Baltimore

South
Indianapolis, Jacksonville, Houston, Tennessee
Even though both Manning brothers were in the top five among QBs with errant passes last year, this brother will still be able to get to the post season. Teams need to learn that the way to stop the Colts is to run the ball. They gave up a league worst 5+ yrd/carry last year, it keeps the clock running and Peyton off the field. (Watch for the Saints to prove that opening night!) With the addition of Shaub to Houston, the Texans will elevate over Young and the Titans. Jacksonville will continue to depress their fans by narrowly missing the post season again this year.
Winner: Indianapolis

Playoffs:
AFC
round 1
NYJ @ INDY winner INDY
CIN @ BALT winner CIN
NE Bye SD Bye

round 2
CIN @ NE winner NE
INDY @ SD winner SD

round 3
SD @ NE winner NE

NFC
round 1
PHI @ SEA winner SEA
SF @ CHI winner CHI
DAL Bye NO Bye

round 2
CHI @ DAL winner DAL
SEA @ NO winner NO

round 3
DAL @ NO winner DAL

SUPER BOWL

NE vs DAL winner NE

(Just in case you missed it, the order in which the teams are listed in each division is the order in which I think they'll finish.) There you have it. So, where am I right? Where am I wrong? lemmie hear your opinion!