Sean Payton, head coach of the New Orleans Saints will face off against Peyton Manning, Quarterback of the Indianapolis Colts in Super Bowl XLIV.
Of course, there's always some controversy when it comes to the Championship games. I was pleased with the officiating until the overtime session for the NFC Championship game. I'm not sure if the referees just wanted to go home, or wanted to be able to walk safely down Bourbon St. Whichever the case, they gave the game to the wrong team.
On fourth and 1, the Saints went for it. The runner diving over the pile lost control of the football and did not regain control until he was behind the 1st down marker. Somehow this was granted as a first down. Had the correct call been made, Favre and the Vikings would have gotten the ball around mid-field. Only one team had been able to move the ball in the second half and that team was wearing purple.
On 3rd and 7, a phantom pass interference call was made on a ball over thrown by 10 yards. Had the right call been made, likely the Saints would have punted. They might have gone for it, but Belichick only coaches in New England.
On 2nd and 16, a ball that was trapped against the ground was declared a completed catch, allowing the Saints to go for a 40 yard field goal attempt. Had the correct call been made, they'd have been facing 3rd and 16 and looking at a 56 yard field goal attempt that they never would have tried.
As I perused the NFL rule book, it would seem that they've created the "Manning-rule" which is the conspicuous removal of the ruling that a Quarterback who goes under center and takes his hands out without the ball has committed a false start. Well, it's time to take another look at the rulebook.
The NFL rulebook states: "No player on offense may assist a runner except by blocking for him." The NFL needs to decide if they are going to remove this rule or start calling it. I am so tired of seeing three offensive linemen pushing their running back from behind in an effort to gain another three yards. This is illegal but, like the "Manning-rule," it happens every game. Call it or remove it.
Finally, It's time to change the way the NFL handles overtime. There is nothing exciting about a team making it to their opponent's 35 and winning the game with a field goal. I propose the following: Remove the sudden death aspect of overtime. The winner should be the first team to 6 points. Now there is some strategy to kicking a field goal. Do we take three and hope we can keep the other team from scoring a touchdown? Or do we go for the TD and the win now? At least this way to lose without ever touching the ball, you have to give up a touchdown.
For 16 seconds it looked like I was going to have a team to root for in Super Bowl XLIV, and then Favre threw another interception. So, now I have a team to root against: Go Saints!
One man's opinions on Politics, Movies, Faith, and Life. (And occasionally the weather.)
Sunday, January 24, 2010
Thursday, January 21, 2010
All Four Super Bowl Previews IV
What has become a perennial subject is one of my favorite posts. This is where I break down all four possible Super Bowls, discuss who will win, which one I'd like to see, and which one the league and the networks are pulling for.
If you'd like to see how I've done in the past, you can read my previous versions here (I'll list them with the year the Super Bowl happened along with the actual teams that faced off): 2007, Colts over Bears; 2008, Giants over Patriots; and 2009, Steelers over Cardinals.
First, I'm officially announcing that I am not going to make a prediction for either Championship game. It never seems to work out for me. I have my analysis and my expectations, but I'm not sharing any actual predictions.
And now, all four Super Bowl break-downs, from least compelling to most:
Saints vs Jets
There's not a lot for CBS to leverage here. The only real story is that it's a Super Bowl of "firsts". The Saints have never been before and the Jet's have a Rookie QB with an up and coming coach. That's about it. In regards to the actual game: they say it's defense that wins Championships but I think if the Jets make it their defense will be befuddled by the Saints multi-look offense. The Jets may have a very strong secondary but I think the Saints can overcome it. Winner: Saints(Loser: the viewers)
Saints vs Colts
This game could be fairly entertaining: Two gun slinging QBs with high powered offenses facing off. But for as many points as they can score, the Saints faced a much easier schedule than the Colts did. If this is the match-up there would be several lead changes, but Peyton would win his second ring (Then he'd only be 1 ring and 2 Super Bowl appearances behind Brady). Winner: Colts (Loser: Score Board Operator)
Vikings vs Jets
Now here's a storyline: Oldest Super Bowl QB ever in Favre vs an untested Rookie. The MVP worthy performance of Brett vs the shut down defense of the Revis and Jets. This game might resemble the beginning of the Patriots/Panthers Super Bowl where there was no scoring for the majority of the first half. This would likely be the closest of all four possible games. Winner: Vikings (Loser: Jim Caldwell, Colts coach for not going for 16-0)
Vikings vs Colts
This is definitely the game CBS executives pray for every night before bed. No two active Quarterbacks are more loved or followed than Brett Favre and Peyton Manning. Two Generations of greatness on one field. Will it be the passing of the torch? Or will Brett prove yet again why he deserves to be listed as the greatest of all time? Will the Vikings powerful D-Line get to Peyton? Will the Colts secondary make Favre of the Vikings look more like Favre of the Jets? It's just too close to call. Winner: Jersey Retailers (Loser: Joe Montana)
There you have it. What are your thoughts? Do you have a preference? Think I've picked the wrong winners? Now's your chance: be heard!
If you'd like to see how I've done in the past, you can read my previous versions here (I'll list them with the year the Super Bowl happened along with the actual teams that faced off): 2007, Colts over Bears; 2008, Giants over Patriots; and 2009, Steelers over Cardinals.
First, I'm officially announcing that I am not going to make a prediction for either Championship game. It never seems to work out for me. I have my analysis and my expectations, but I'm not sharing any actual predictions.
And now, all four Super Bowl break-downs, from least compelling to most:
Saints vs Jets
There's not a lot for CBS to leverage here. The only real story is that it's a Super Bowl of "firsts". The Saints have never been before and the Jet's have a Rookie QB with an up and coming coach. That's about it. In regards to the actual game: they say it's defense that wins Championships but I think if the Jets make it their defense will be befuddled by the Saints multi-look offense. The Jets may have a very strong secondary but I think the Saints can overcome it. Winner: Saints(Loser: the viewers)
Saints vs Colts
This game could be fairly entertaining: Two gun slinging QBs with high powered offenses facing off. But for as many points as they can score, the Saints faced a much easier schedule than the Colts did. If this is the match-up there would be several lead changes, but Peyton would win his second ring (Then he'd only be 1 ring and 2 Super Bowl appearances behind Brady). Winner: Colts (Loser: Score Board Operator)
Vikings vs Jets
Now here's a storyline: Oldest Super Bowl QB ever in Favre vs an untested Rookie. The MVP worthy performance of Brett vs the shut down defense of the Revis and Jets. This game might resemble the beginning of the Patriots/Panthers Super Bowl where there was no scoring for the majority of the first half. This would likely be the closest of all four possible games. Winner: Vikings (Loser: Jim Caldwell, Colts coach for not going for 16-0)
Vikings vs Colts
This is definitely the game CBS executives pray for every night before bed. No two active Quarterbacks are more loved or followed than Brett Favre and Peyton Manning. Two Generations of greatness on one field. Will it be the passing of the torch? Or will Brett prove yet again why he deserves to be listed as the greatest of all time? Will the Vikings powerful D-Line get to Peyton? Will the Colts secondary make Favre of the Vikings look more like Favre of the Jets? It's just too close to call. Winner: Jersey Retailers (Loser: Joe Montana)
There you have it. What are your thoughts? Do you have a preference? Think I've picked the wrong winners? Now's your chance: be heard!
NBC-ya
This may sound odd, but I used to be an NBC loyalist. If there were two shows on network TV that I wanted to watch, I favored the NBC show. I used to watch NBC's 11 o'clock news when I was in high school. I approved of NBC's choice of Leno over Letterman. I was upset when NBC lost the NFL. Funny, I don't feel quite so loyal anymore.
Not since NBC decided to stick it to the new guy because they made a colossal blunder that they can't admit to. That's what NBC head honcho Jeff Zucker is doing by forcing out Conan O'Brien from The Tonight Show.
I've read conflicting stories about the situation, but in either case Zucker shoulders the lion's share of the blame.
Scenario one: Leno is ready to retire but NBC can't let him go as he is one of only a few shows where NBC beats out the competition so they beg him to stay, offer him an obscenely large contract, and move him to Prime Time. The Jay Leno Show tanks and The Tonight Show under Conan's leadership falters so they try to get Leno back to 11:35.
Scenario two: Leno declares he'll be retiring in five years. NBC announces that Conan is the heir apparent to The Tonight Show throne. The late night scepter is set to be passed and Leno decides he's not ready to be done. NBC sees the possibilities and fears that Leno may sign with another network. So they offer him a Prime Time gig along with an obscene amount of money. The Jay Leno Show tanks and Leno starts to complain that he wants his old job back. Zucker tries to move Conan and The Tonight Show back to 12:05 to make room for a 1/2 hour Leno show.
In either scenario Conan says that the integrity of The Tonight Show is too great to change it's time slot. Zucker agrees and tells Conan to take a hike.
All of this hinges on the fact that the final decision is Zucker's call. In "scenario one" he made a major mess of NBC. The Prime Time show was his idea. Rather than cancel Leno's prime time failure and eat the obscene amount of money they signed him to, he'd rather give Conan the boot and move Leno back to 11:35.
In "scenario two" Zucker was afraid that Leno would sign with another network, so he creates a new show in prime time for Leno. After it tanks and Jay "the bully" Leno says he wants his old job back Zucker acquiesces and sends Conan packing rather than telling Leno that if he wants to take his ball and go home, that's up to him, but Zucker isn't going to move him to another team.
The dirtiest part about all of this is that under Conan's contract, anything that he's developed while with NBC is not his own intellectual property. So when he goes to FOX he can't take "In the Year 3000," "The Celebrity Survey," or "The Sears Tower wearing Sears Clothing" with him. They belong to NBC.
I was once one of Leno's most loyal viewers. Not anymore. I'll wait for Conan to sign with another network. Until then, it will be rare that my rabbit-eared TV will be tuned to 30-1 and I can guarantee that it won't be set to that channel past 11PM on weeknights.
Not since NBC decided to stick it to the new guy because they made a colossal blunder that they can't admit to. That's what NBC head honcho Jeff Zucker is doing by forcing out Conan O'Brien from The Tonight Show.
I've read conflicting stories about the situation, but in either case Zucker shoulders the lion's share of the blame.
Scenario one: Leno is ready to retire but NBC can't let him go as he is one of only a few shows where NBC beats out the competition so they beg him to stay, offer him an obscenely large contract, and move him to Prime Time. The Jay Leno Show tanks and The Tonight Show under Conan's leadership falters so they try to get Leno back to 11:35.
Scenario two: Leno declares he'll be retiring in five years. NBC announces that Conan is the heir apparent to The Tonight Show throne. The late night scepter is set to be passed and Leno decides he's not ready to be done. NBC sees the possibilities and fears that Leno may sign with another network. So they offer him a Prime Time gig along with an obscene amount of money. The Jay Leno Show tanks and Leno starts to complain that he wants his old job back. Zucker tries to move Conan and The Tonight Show back to 12:05 to make room for a 1/2 hour Leno show.
In either scenario Conan says that the integrity of The Tonight Show is too great to change it's time slot. Zucker agrees and tells Conan to take a hike.
All of this hinges on the fact that the final decision is Zucker's call. In "scenario one" he made a major mess of NBC. The Prime Time show was his idea. Rather than cancel Leno's prime time failure and eat the obscene amount of money they signed him to, he'd rather give Conan the boot and move Leno back to 11:35.
In "scenario two" Zucker was afraid that Leno would sign with another network, so he creates a new show in prime time for Leno. After it tanks and Jay "the bully" Leno says he wants his old job back Zucker acquiesces and sends Conan packing rather than telling Leno that if he wants to take his ball and go home, that's up to him, but Zucker isn't going to move him to another team.
The dirtiest part about all of this is that under Conan's contract, anything that he's developed while with NBC is not his own intellectual property. So when he goes to FOX he can't take "In the Year 3000," "The Celebrity Survey," or "The Sears Tower wearing Sears Clothing" with him. They belong to NBC.
I was once one of Leno's most loyal viewers. Not anymore. I'll wait for Conan to sign with another network. Until then, it will be rare that my rabbit-eared TV will be tuned to 30-1 and I can guarantee that it won't be set to that channel past 11PM on weeknights.
Wednesday, January 20, 2010
41.
Massachusetts has spoken. The message was loud and clear. Just like the midterm elections under the 41st President were a mandate against the war, this run-off election was a mandate against Obama's plan for nationalized healthcare. Republican Senator Scott Brown is the 41st Republican in the Senate. The Democrats no longer have a filibuster proof majority. The healthcare bill can now be stopped.
In actuality, the Obama Administration should be thankful that they had this opportunity to hear from such a large number of independent voters. Not only independent voters, but independent voters who historically vote liberal. They swung to the right on this issue. And these aren't people who are uninformed about the President's healthcare agenda. As long as this bill has been on the table the Dems have been trying to sell it to America by pointing to Massachusetts and saying, "Look, it's working there." Massachusetts has just pointed back and said, "Nope, we don't want it."
As with all political issues the spin patrol is in high gear. High ranking Democratic officials are saying that this wasn't Massachusetts way of saying "No thank you" to the healthcare bill. The Dems are saying that Martha Coakley, the Democratic candidate, lost because she ran a lackluster uninspired campaign. She lost because she hinted that Curt Schilling might be a Yankees fan. Former President Clinton and President Obama both flew to Massachusetts to campaign for Ms Coakley. The Democratic Party pulled out all the stops and she lost. John Kerry wore a Yankees hat in Yankee stadium and he still carried Massachusetts.
You know what? That's fine with me. Let the Democrats think the vote isn't a mandate on Washington's politics and policies. Let them think it's about the Candidate and the campaign. The longer they swallow that Kool-Aid, the longer they will be out of touch with the majority of America's independent voters and the more seats they'll lose come November. Feel free to ignore the gubernatorial elections in New Jersey and Virginia. Pretend that Senator Brown won Massachusetts with his charisma. Bottom line: The Democrats lost Massachusetts and when the Democrats lose Massachusetts they have a national problem. If they want to stick their collective heads in the sand, that's fine with me.
The Obama Administration does have two final options to get their healthcare bill passed: They can either force a vote before Senator Brown is seated or they can force a delay in his seating so they can get their vote. I say: Go ahead. Force it through before he's seated. Be the party full of bullies that ignores the voters mandate. Either action would only increase the number of seats they are going to lose in November.
Finally, I have a correction to my previous post. I attributed a quote to some political pundit. I was wrong. The quote actually belonged to Senator Scott Brown. He was asked in a debate last week if he was willing to sit in Kennedy's seat and block health care reform. Brown replied, "With all due respect, it's not the Kennedys' seat, and it's not the Democrats' seat, it's the people's seat."
And for the first time in over 40 years, the people made the right decision!
In actuality, the Obama Administration should be thankful that they had this opportunity to hear from such a large number of independent voters. Not only independent voters, but independent voters who historically vote liberal. They swung to the right on this issue. And these aren't people who are uninformed about the President's healthcare agenda. As long as this bill has been on the table the Dems have been trying to sell it to America by pointing to Massachusetts and saying, "Look, it's working there." Massachusetts has just pointed back and said, "Nope, we don't want it."
As with all political issues the spin patrol is in high gear. High ranking Democratic officials are saying that this wasn't Massachusetts way of saying "No thank you" to the healthcare bill. The Dems are saying that Martha Coakley, the Democratic candidate, lost because she ran a lackluster uninspired campaign. She lost because she hinted that Curt Schilling might be a Yankees fan. Former President Clinton and President Obama both flew to Massachusetts to campaign for Ms Coakley. The Democratic Party pulled out all the stops and she lost. John Kerry wore a Yankees hat in Yankee stadium and he still carried Massachusetts.
You know what? That's fine with me. Let the Democrats think the vote isn't a mandate on Washington's politics and policies. Let them think it's about the Candidate and the campaign. The longer they swallow that Kool-Aid, the longer they will be out of touch with the majority of America's independent voters and the more seats they'll lose come November. Feel free to ignore the gubernatorial elections in New Jersey and Virginia. Pretend that Senator Brown won Massachusetts with his charisma. Bottom line: The Democrats lost Massachusetts and when the Democrats lose Massachusetts they have a national problem. If they want to stick their collective heads in the sand, that's fine with me.
The Obama Administration does have two final options to get their healthcare bill passed: They can either force a vote before Senator Brown is seated or they can force a delay in his seating so they can get their vote. I say: Go ahead. Force it through before he's seated. Be the party full of bullies that ignores the voters mandate. Either action would only increase the number of seats they are going to lose in November.
Finally, I have a correction to my previous post. I attributed a quote to some political pundit. I was wrong. The quote actually belonged to Senator Scott Brown. He was asked in a debate last week if he was willing to sit in Kennedy's seat and block health care reform. Brown replied, "With all due respect, it's not the Kennedys' seat, and it's not the Democrats' seat, it's the people's seat."
And for the first time in over 40 years, the people made the right decision!
Monday, January 18, 2010
Irony
There are two totally unrelated, wonderfully ironic possibilities in the very near future. One political, the other sports related. Perfect for JMO.
Massachusetts: The people of Massachusetts will soon be voting for a new US Senator. The seat vacated by Teddy Kennedy is up for grabs and it's anybody's guess right now which political party will claim victory. The Democratic candidate (Martha Coakley, MA's Attorney General) displayed an early lead, but the Republican hopeful (Scott Brown, MA State Senator) has made a late push. While Ms. Coakly once held as much as a 15% lead, most polls show a dead heat, and some even have her trailing very late in the game. (On a side note, one unbiased news reporter asked a political pundit who he thought would win Senator Kennedy's seat to which the commentator corrected him: "The seat does not belong to Edward Kennedy. It belongs to the good people of the state of Massachusetts." But there is no such thing as the liberal media.)
Where is the irony? I spoke, live, one on one, with a Congressman from New York. It was at a town fair and he didn't know that I wasn't one of his constituents. I requested that he vote against the healthcare plan. He asked me why I felt the way I did. I briefly listed some of my concerns. He was ready with the party line of, "Well, look at Massachusetts. It's worked there so clearly it can work on the national level." And now, it is Massachusetts that can decide if we will be forced to bear this irresponsible burden or not. This one Senate seat could upset the Democrats "Filibuster-proof" majority. If Scott Brown wins this election, the Republicans would have enough votes to kill the Healthcare Bill. How well is it working in Massachusetts? I guess we'll find out when the people of that blue state decide if we will be forced to have national healthcare or not.
Indianapolis: Week 16 of the NFL's regular season: The Jets are all but eliminated. They must win their last two games to have a shot at the post season. The Colts are looking at being only the second team ever to go 16-0. But they thumb their nose at history and curl up and die for their opponent. Who was that opponent? The New York Jets. If the Colts played like a real NFL team, the Jets would have been eliminated.
Where's the irony? The Jets have shocked football fans everywhere (Except in New York) by defeating both the Bengals and the Chargers. Now, in the AFC Championship game they face none other than the Indianapolis Colts. The very team that could have prevented them from getting to the playoffs. If the Jets are able to eliminate Dallas Clark and the Colts it would be poetic justice for the Colts deciding they didn't want to actually play any football for the final two weeks of the season.
I love irony of all kinds. I will be ecstatic if both of these ironic possibilities come to fruition!
Massachusetts: The people of Massachusetts will soon be voting for a new US Senator. The seat vacated by Teddy Kennedy is up for grabs and it's anybody's guess right now which political party will claim victory. The Democratic candidate (Martha Coakley, MA's Attorney General) displayed an early lead, but the Republican hopeful (Scott Brown, MA State Senator) has made a late push. While Ms. Coakly once held as much as a 15% lead, most polls show a dead heat, and some even have her trailing very late in the game. (On a side note, one unbiased news reporter asked a political pundit who he thought would win Senator Kennedy's seat to which the commentator corrected him: "The seat does not belong to Edward Kennedy. It belongs to the good people of the state of Massachusetts." But there is no such thing as the liberal media.)
Where is the irony? I spoke, live, one on one, with a Congressman from New York. It was at a town fair and he didn't know that I wasn't one of his constituents. I requested that he vote against the healthcare plan. He asked me why I felt the way I did. I briefly listed some of my concerns. He was ready with the party line of, "Well, look at Massachusetts. It's worked there so clearly it can work on the national level." And now, it is Massachusetts that can decide if we will be forced to bear this irresponsible burden or not. This one Senate seat could upset the Democrats "Filibuster-proof" majority. If Scott Brown wins this election, the Republicans would have enough votes to kill the Healthcare Bill. How well is it working in Massachusetts? I guess we'll find out when the people of that blue state decide if we will be forced to have national healthcare or not.
Indianapolis: Week 16 of the NFL's regular season: The Jets are all but eliminated. They must win their last two games to have a shot at the post season. The Colts are looking at being only the second team ever to go 16-0. But they thumb their nose at history and curl up and die for their opponent. Who was that opponent? The New York Jets. If the Colts played like a real NFL team, the Jets would have been eliminated.
Where's the irony? The Jets have shocked football fans everywhere (Except in New York) by defeating both the Bengals and the Chargers. Now, in the AFC Championship game they face none other than the Indianapolis Colts. The very team that could have prevented them from getting to the playoffs. If the Jets are able to eliminate Dallas Clark and the Colts it would be poetic justice for the Colts deciding they didn't want to actually play any football for the final two weeks of the season.
I love irony of all kinds. I will be ecstatic if both of these ironic possibilities come to fruition!
Sunday, January 17, 2010
Reflections on the Playoffs thus far
My beginning thoughts are general thoughts about no one specific game.
First, I want to hear the outrage from the "purists" for Favre and the Vikings running up the score on the Cowboys. I don't think that what the Patriots did in 2007 was "unsportsmanlike" but there are those that do. I want to hear from those people the same sentiment towards the Vikings. Or is only unsportsmanlike with it's a team that plays in New England?
Second, can we all agree that we now know why Belichick and the Patriots "Go for it" on fourth down so often? I'm fairly certain that these playoffs have proven that field goals are no longer "easy points." "Just put the points on the board" is no longer a guarantee. I think I've seen more missed field goals in the past 8 games than I've seen in an entire season.
So, for the Divisional playoff round, I decided to give up on analysis and just pick all of the teams that started with a "C": the Cardinals, Colts, Cowboys, and Chargers. Three of them lost. Why is it that the JMO curse doesn't seem to apply to teams that I don't like, but applies in all other cases? The only team that won that I picked was the game that I was hoping I'd picked wrong.
Speaking of the Colts, I have a few questions for the officiating team of that game.
1) Late in the first half a play was run and there were 9 seconds left on the clock. Then, just before the ball was snapped for the next play, the clock read 11 seconds. Where did those 2 seconds come from? Those two seconds allowed the Colts to run an extra play and score a TD, rather than have to settle for a FG.
2) Since when is a receiver who has caught the ball "Defenseless"? Third and goal, Dallas Clark catches a TD pass and the ball is knocked loose by a perfectly timed hit by the DB. But a flag is thrown giving the Colts 4 more chances to score. And they do. So, where is it in the rule book, again, that a receiver who has caught the ball is "defenseless"?
3) Are there special rules for players who wear a horseshoe on their helmet? I could have sworn that if you play the receiver and not the ball and you interfere with the completion of the pass that it's pass interference. Just like what happened when the Ravens faced 3rd and 3 in the 3rd. But, as my question supposes, there must be a separate rule book for the boys from Indy.
In the end, I knew that the Ravens would not win because a team can break down film, they can game plan, and they can execute. A team can pressure the QB, stop the run, disrupt the passing game, but there is one thing that no team can do. No team can defend against the refs.
Stay tuned to JMO. Don't miss my annual breakdown of all four possible Super Bowls. Let's see if I can call the participants and the winner of that game wrong, too!
First, I want to hear the outrage from the "purists" for Favre and the Vikings running up the score on the Cowboys. I don't think that what the Patriots did in 2007 was "unsportsmanlike" but there are those that do. I want to hear from those people the same sentiment towards the Vikings. Or is only unsportsmanlike with it's a team that plays in New England?
Second, can we all agree that we now know why Belichick and the Patriots "Go for it" on fourth down so often? I'm fairly certain that these playoffs have proven that field goals are no longer "easy points." "Just put the points on the board" is no longer a guarantee. I think I've seen more missed field goals in the past 8 games than I've seen in an entire season.
So, for the Divisional playoff round, I decided to give up on analysis and just pick all of the teams that started with a "C": the Cardinals, Colts, Cowboys, and Chargers. Three of them lost. Why is it that the JMO curse doesn't seem to apply to teams that I don't like, but applies in all other cases? The only team that won that I picked was the game that I was hoping I'd picked wrong.
Speaking of the Colts, I have a few questions for the officiating team of that game.
1) Late in the first half a play was run and there were 9 seconds left on the clock. Then, just before the ball was snapped for the next play, the clock read 11 seconds. Where did those 2 seconds come from? Those two seconds allowed the Colts to run an extra play and score a TD, rather than have to settle for a FG.
2) Since when is a receiver who has caught the ball "Defenseless"? Third and goal, Dallas Clark catches a TD pass and the ball is knocked loose by a perfectly timed hit by the DB. But a flag is thrown giving the Colts 4 more chances to score. And they do. So, where is it in the rule book, again, that a receiver who has caught the ball is "defenseless"?
3) Are there special rules for players who wear a horseshoe on their helmet? I could have sworn that if you play the receiver and not the ball and you interfere with the completion of the pass that it's pass interference. Just like what happened when the Ravens faced 3rd and 3 in the 3rd. But, as my question supposes, there must be a separate rule book for the boys from Indy.
In the end, I knew that the Ravens would not win because a team can break down film, they can game plan, and they can execute. A team can pressure the QB, stop the run, disrupt the passing game, but there is one thing that no team can do. No team can defend against the refs.
Stay tuned to JMO. Don't miss my annual breakdown of all four possible Super Bowls. Let's see if I can call the participants and the winner of that game wrong, too!
Friday, January 15, 2010
Imagine
It seems that every time the new year rolls around, someone decides it's a good idea to ring it in with John Lennon's "Imagine."
I'm not ashamed or afraid to admit that I don't like the song "Imagine." And not because I want my stuff or even due to my outspoken dedication to one specific religion.
The world that John imagines is one of a purposeless drab useless existence.
Imagine no religion and no heaven and hell. Ok, that means that the life I live is regulated to this world. There is no reward or punishment, so I have to find meaning in this life, as there isn't one that follows.
I'll pour myself into Patriotism and the defense and bettering of my country. Oh, wait, there are no boarders, boundaries, or countries. Ok, well, that's out.
Hmm, I'll find something I'm passionate about. What's that John? There's nothing to kill or die for? Well, while I get the nothing to kill for (with the exception of possibly killing one to save many others) If I have nothing to die for, what kind of life is that? I wouldn't give up my life for my children? My wife? I have no religion be martyred for or country to defend. What's left?
I guess I'll live a life of comfort. Oh no! All of my stuff is gone! I have no possessions.
What am I left with? The brotherhood of man? Based on what? The fact that we live in a world devoid of hope, meaning, purpose, drive, or ambition.
John's utopia is in fact a distopia. If I lived in his imagined world I might just have found something to die for: to get out of it.
I'm not ashamed or afraid to admit that I don't like the song "Imagine." And not because I want my stuff or even due to my outspoken dedication to one specific religion.
The world that John imagines is one of a purposeless drab useless existence.
Imagine no religion and no heaven and hell. Ok, that means that the life I live is regulated to this world. There is no reward or punishment, so I have to find meaning in this life, as there isn't one that follows.
I'll pour myself into Patriotism and the defense and bettering of my country. Oh, wait, there are no boarders, boundaries, or countries. Ok, well, that's out.
Hmm, I'll find something I'm passionate about. What's that John? There's nothing to kill or die for? Well, while I get the nothing to kill for (with the exception of possibly killing one to save many others) If I have nothing to die for, what kind of life is that? I wouldn't give up my life for my children? My wife? I have no religion be martyred for or country to defend. What's left?
I guess I'll live a life of comfort. Oh no! All of my stuff is gone! I have no possessions.
What am I left with? The brotherhood of man? Based on what? The fact that we live in a world devoid of hope, meaning, purpose, drive, or ambition.
John's utopia is in fact a distopia. If I lived in his imagined world I might just have found something to die for: to get out of it.
Wednesday, January 06, 2010
Dodd's Done!
The Dump Dodd movement has been successful in removing Connecticut's Mortgage Sweetheart Senator Christopher Dodd. This is a major victory for the state of Connecticut. It marks the second time that voters have voiced their displeasure with the way the Democrats have been running things in their state. In 2008, the Democrats ran a challenger against their once favorite son Joe Lieberman. Lieberman lost in the primary so he ran as an independent, and won. The Democrats shot themselves in the foot by turning their back on their long term lemming. Now, he is free to vote his conscience, rather than tow the party line.
Hopefully, the Democrats will do it again. It seems clear to me that Christopher Dodd's decision not to run for reelection was due to much internal pressure. The only reason a politician doesn't run for reelection is if he or she has died. The Dump Dodd movement would have been more successful if he had run and lost (which was very likely). Instead, the Democrats have supplanted the disgraced Senator with Connecticut's business hating Attorney General. Richard Blumenthal (who has been the AG since '91) has been grooming himself (and his uber-slicked ultra-stiff hair) for a run at something. I've always assumed it was for Governor but I guess he's always had his sights set higher.
Blumenthal portrays himself as being a defender of the people, protecting the young and the old. However, in doing so he's chased out of Connecticut more companies (and therefore, jobs) than one can count. He has an abnormal approval rating due to the fact that he is frequently featuring himself on TV and telling the people of Connecticut what wonderful things he's doing for them. Like protecting them against dual labels on designer coats, and "unfair utility rates." While the latter sounds great, he never really did anything and I didn't make up the former. He made a specific appearance to let the people of Connecticut know that he wouldn't stand for designer coats to have the designer label over a generic label. Thanks Richard!
Perhaps the most unsettling aspect of this entire episode is that, before he even formally announced that he was planning on being a candidate for Dodd's vacated seat, Mr. Blumenthal received a cell phone call from none other than the President of the United States. Sounds to me like the Democrats are looking for another lemming. Let's hope Connecticut doesn't send one to Washington!
Hopefully, the Democrats will do it again. It seems clear to me that Christopher Dodd's decision not to run for reelection was due to much internal pressure. The only reason a politician doesn't run for reelection is if he or she has died. The Dump Dodd movement would have been more successful if he had run and lost (which was very likely). Instead, the Democrats have supplanted the disgraced Senator with Connecticut's business hating Attorney General. Richard Blumenthal (who has been the AG since '91) has been grooming himself (and his uber-slicked ultra-stiff hair) for a run at something. I've always assumed it was for Governor but I guess he's always had his sights set higher.
Blumenthal portrays himself as being a defender of the people, protecting the young and the old. However, in doing so he's chased out of Connecticut more companies (and therefore, jobs) than one can count. He has an abnormal approval rating due to the fact that he is frequently featuring himself on TV and telling the people of Connecticut what wonderful things he's doing for them. Like protecting them against dual labels on designer coats, and "unfair utility rates." While the latter sounds great, he never really did anything and I didn't make up the former. He made a specific appearance to let the people of Connecticut know that he wouldn't stand for designer coats to have the designer label over a generic label. Thanks Richard!
Perhaps the most unsettling aspect of this entire episode is that, before he even formally announced that he was planning on being a candidate for Dodd's vacated seat, Mr. Blumenthal received a cell phone call from none other than the President of the United States. Sounds to me like the Democrats are looking for another lemming. Let's hope Connecticut doesn't send one to Washington!
NFL Playoff Preview
It's that time again: Time for me to review how my preseason predictions panned out. In this post I'll also be cursing at least four teams by predicting that they will do well in the playoffs!
You can find my preseason preview here. Here's how I did:
AFC
East
Prediction: Patriots
Actual: Patriots
West
Prediction: Chargers
Actual: Chargers
(Other notable prediction: Denver would not win the division due to the preseason trade and that trade would keep them from the wild card. This didn't look good as Denver started out 6-0 but still managed to miss the playoffs)
North
Prediction: Steelers
Actual: Bengals
South
Prediction: Jaguars
Actual: Colts
(Um, yeah, Jaguars finished dead last)
Wild Card
Prediction: Colts & Titans
Actual: Ravens & Jets
NFC
East
Prediction: Giants
Actual: Cowboys
(This prediction looked pretty good when the Giants were 5-0, but they managed to miss the playoffs entirely.)
West
Prediction: Cardinals
Actual: Cardinals
North
Prediction: Vikings
Actual: Vikings
(Other notable prediction: Detroit would win two whole games this year. That's exactly how many they won!)
South
Prediction: Panthers
Actual: Saints
(Panthers came in second...)
Wild Card
Prediction: Cowboys & Falcons
Actual: Packers & Eagles
And when it comes to my preseason playoff predictions all that I have to say for them is that my Super Bowl is still possible (though unlikely) with Patriots vs Vikings.
Playoff Predictions
I don't know that I've had more trouble picking winners than I've had this year. Complicating matters is that three of the four first round contests are rematches of week 17 games. In all three cases one team completely dominated the other. Should be easy, right? Wrong. I guarantee that round one will not have the exact same outcome as week 17.
Alright, here we go:
AFC
Wild Card Round:
Jets at Bengals
The Jets absolutely owned the Bengals last week. But here's the problem: more than any other team, the Bengals controlled who they faced this week (as they played Sunday night). If they beat the Jets, they would have faced Baltimore. In losing to the Jets, they face the Jets. They played a team who needed to win and saw how they did it. Now they know how to beat them. The Bengals selected their opponent and did so accurately.
Winner: Bengals
Ravens at Patriots
The Patriots purposefully lost to the Texans to prevent the Steelers from getting into the playoffs. While the Patriots have struggled this year, they haven't done so at home. Patriots win even without Welker.
Winner: Patriots
Divisional Round:
Bengals at Chargers
The Chargers are one of the only teams going into the playoffs with a winning streak. The Jets have a 2 game winning streak but both teams basically forfeited the games. Bengals will be unable to overcome the Chargers.
Winner: Chargers
Patriots at Colts
The Patriots should have beaten the Colts earlier in the season. Even though the Colts have been struggling (needing a fourth quarter comeback to achieve half of their victories and are on a two game losing streak) the Patriots are without Welker. Will the pressure be too much for a rookie coach? Will Belichick out think the Colts? It will be a good game, a close game, but the Colts will emerge victorious.
Winner: Colts
Championship Round:
Chargers at Colts
No contest. The Chargers will be on a 12 game winning streak, the Colts will have won one of their last three games. Having given up in the last two games of the season, the added pressure to win it all is too great for Peyton. He throws an incredible three interceptions. His third coming during a last gasp fourth quarter comeback attempt that (obviously) falls short. This will, yet again, give Colts fans a reason to despise the Chargers, almost as much as they hate the Patriots.
Winner: Chargers
NFC
Wild Card Round:
Eagles at Cowboys
I've heard it said that it's very hard to defeat a team three times in one season. That is what the Cowboys would have to do if they are to defeat the Eagles. Something else working against the Cowboys is that they haven't won a playoff game since 1996. And yet, both the Eagles and the Cowboys had everything to play for last week: Division on the line, host a playoff game, beat a hated rival. And who came out on top? The Cowboys ~ and it wasn't close. Once again, everything is on the line: Win, move on; lose, go home. Eagles are going home.
Winner: Cowboys
Packers at Cardinals
This is the hardest game for me to figure out. There was no reason for either team to go all out last week, and yet both did. And in doing so, the Cardinals looked mediocre and the Packers, stellar. But the Cardinals are so inconsistent that they just might win this game. And the Packers have proven inconsistent enough that they might lose it. Somehow, I don't think they will.
Winner: Packers
Divisional Round:
Packers at Saints
The Saints are in rough shape. Unlike the number one seed in the AFC, the number one seed in the NFC actually tried to win their last three games. But they lost all them (including the 3 win Buccaneers)! The '07 Patriots, '01 Rams, and the '08 Cardinals have shown us that while a powerful offense may get you to the playoffs, you can't win it all without a defense, which is something the Saints lack. Packers shock with a win.
Winner: Packers
Cowboys at Vikings
Some have called the Cowboys "the most dangerous team in the NFC." I don't think those people are paying much attention to one of the leagues most talented rushers with the most experienced active Quarterback at the helm. Romo may be good, but Favre is great. With the "controversy" in the Vikings locker room over, and with Childress recognizing that he needs to trust his star QB, the Cowboys don't stand a chance.
Winner: Vikings
Championship Round:
Packers at Vikings
The "Don't Miss" match-up of the post season. Favre takes on his old team. Two power running games match up against two great defenses. Something's gotta give. Something has to separate these two teams. Favre is the difference maker.
Winner: Vikings
Super Bowl
Chargers vs Vikings
We'd be in for a treat of a Super Bowl. The second year in a row where one man stands poised on the brink of history as the first Quarterback to lead two different teams to a Super Bowl victory. The other team has a leader who is beginning to be in the discussion with such greats as Brady and Manning. Does youth triumph over age? Or does experience dominate the new comer? I'd like to see Favre win.
Winner: Chargers
There you have it. Now we know that the Chargers will definitely not win it all. Let's see who actually does! Feel free to provide your predictions. What a great time of year!
You can find my preseason preview here. Here's how I did:
AFC
East
Prediction: Patriots
Actual: Patriots
West
Prediction: Chargers
Actual: Chargers
(Other notable prediction: Denver would not win the division due to the preseason trade and that trade would keep them from the wild card. This didn't look good as Denver started out 6-0 but still managed to miss the playoffs)
North
Prediction: Steelers
Actual: Bengals
South
Prediction: Jaguars
Actual: Colts
(Um, yeah, Jaguars finished dead last)
Wild Card
Prediction: Colts & Titans
Actual: Ravens & Jets
NFC
East
Prediction: Giants
Actual: Cowboys
(This prediction looked pretty good when the Giants were 5-0, but they managed to miss the playoffs entirely.)
West
Prediction: Cardinals
Actual: Cardinals
North
Prediction: Vikings
Actual: Vikings
(Other notable prediction: Detroit would win two whole games this year. That's exactly how many they won!)
South
Prediction: Panthers
Actual: Saints
(Panthers came in second...)
Wild Card
Prediction: Cowboys & Falcons
Actual: Packers & Eagles
And when it comes to my preseason playoff predictions all that I have to say for them is that my Super Bowl is still possible (though unlikely) with Patriots vs Vikings.
Playoff Predictions
I don't know that I've had more trouble picking winners than I've had this year. Complicating matters is that three of the four first round contests are rematches of week 17 games. In all three cases one team completely dominated the other. Should be easy, right? Wrong. I guarantee that round one will not have the exact same outcome as week 17.
Alright, here we go:
AFC
Wild Card Round:
Jets at Bengals
The Jets absolutely owned the Bengals last week. But here's the problem: more than any other team, the Bengals controlled who they faced this week (as they played Sunday night). If they beat the Jets, they would have faced Baltimore. In losing to the Jets, they face the Jets. They played a team who needed to win and saw how they did it. Now they know how to beat them. The Bengals selected their opponent and did so accurately.
Winner: Bengals
Ravens at Patriots
The Patriots purposefully lost to the Texans to prevent the Steelers from getting into the playoffs. While the Patriots have struggled this year, they haven't done so at home. Patriots win even without Welker.
Winner: Patriots
Divisional Round:
Bengals at Chargers
The Chargers are one of the only teams going into the playoffs with a winning streak. The Jets have a 2 game winning streak but both teams basically forfeited the games. Bengals will be unable to overcome the Chargers.
Winner: Chargers
Patriots at Colts
The Patriots should have beaten the Colts earlier in the season. Even though the Colts have been struggling (needing a fourth quarter comeback to achieve half of their victories and are on a two game losing streak) the Patriots are without Welker. Will the pressure be too much for a rookie coach? Will Belichick out think the Colts? It will be a good game, a close game, but the Colts will emerge victorious.
Winner: Colts
Championship Round:
Chargers at Colts
No contest. The Chargers will be on a 12 game winning streak, the Colts will have won one of their last three games. Having given up in the last two games of the season, the added pressure to win it all is too great for Peyton. He throws an incredible three interceptions. His third coming during a last gasp fourth quarter comeback attempt that (obviously) falls short. This will, yet again, give Colts fans a reason to despise the Chargers, almost as much as they hate the Patriots.
Winner: Chargers
NFC
Wild Card Round:
Eagles at Cowboys
I've heard it said that it's very hard to defeat a team three times in one season. That is what the Cowboys would have to do if they are to defeat the Eagles. Something else working against the Cowboys is that they haven't won a playoff game since 1996. And yet, both the Eagles and the Cowboys had everything to play for last week: Division on the line, host a playoff game, beat a hated rival. And who came out on top? The Cowboys ~ and it wasn't close. Once again, everything is on the line: Win, move on; lose, go home. Eagles are going home.
Winner: Cowboys
Packers at Cardinals
This is the hardest game for me to figure out. There was no reason for either team to go all out last week, and yet both did. And in doing so, the Cardinals looked mediocre and the Packers, stellar. But the Cardinals are so inconsistent that they just might win this game. And the Packers have proven inconsistent enough that they might lose it. Somehow, I don't think they will.
Winner: Packers
Divisional Round:
Packers at Saints
The Saints are in rough shape. Unlike the number one seed in the AFC, the number one seed in the NFC actually tried to win their last three games. But they lost all them (including the 3 win Buccaneers)! The '07 Patriots, '01 Rams, and the '08 Cardinals have shown us that while a powerful offense may get you to the playoffs, you can't win it all without a defense, which is something the Saints lack. Packers shock with a win.
Winner: Packers
Cowboys at Vikings
Some have called the Cowboys "the most dangerous team in the NFC." I don't think those people are paying much attention to one of the leagues most talented rushers with the most experienced active Quarterback at the helm. Romo may be good, but Favre is great. With the "controversy" in the Vikings locker room over, and with Childress recognizing that he needs to trust his star QB, the Cowboys don't stand a chance.
Winner: Vikings
Championship Round:
Packers at Vikings
The "Don't Miss" match-up of the post season. Favre takes on his old team. Two power running games match up against two great defenses. Something's gotta give. Something has to separate these two teams. Favre is the difference maker.
Winner: Vikings
Super Bowl
Chargers vs Vikings
We'd be in for a treat of a Super Bowl. The second year in a row where one man stands poised on the brink of history as the first Quarterback to lead two different teams to a Super Bowl victory. The other team has a leader who is beginning to be in the discussion with such greats as Brady and Manning. Does youth triumph over age? Or does experience dominate the new comer? I'd like to see Favre win.
Winner: Chargers
There you have it. Now we know that the Chargers will definitely not win it all. Let's see who actually does! Feel free to provide your predictions. What a great time of year!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)