On Wes Welker

This post was first an e-mail I wrote to my father in response to this New York Times article about the impact of losing Aaron Hernandez in last week's 20-18 home opener upset by the Arizona Cardinals over the New England Patriots.

I agree about the blocked punt certainly, but that's one of those things that just happens. Tough to predict - I mean obviously you want the line to protect the punter, but when you're as backed up as we were, it becomes a lot harder.

I also agree with Rodney Harrison that the line needs to be better. Tom Brady's already been sacked/knocked down in the first two games more than I like to see. The compounding effect, of course, is that he's rushing some of his throws leading to more incomplete passes. I am not sure why, but I don't feel as though the Arizona Cardinals defense got enough credit this week. They are clearly a stingy unit, especially with their secondary, and despite how good the San Francisco 49ers are, Arizona is going to make some noise in the NFC West.

As for the Wes Welker thing, I think people are blowing things way out of proportion. As you know, Brady and Bill Belichick were never wild about their reliance on Welker last year and despite the prevalence of Hernandez and Rob Gronkowski, they felt it was still a deficiency. A good portion of that had to do with the lack of a receiver capable of running the longer routes (Insert: Brandon Lloyd). I think Welker's usage in Week 1 was a match-ups thing, as was his increased activity in Week 2. Though, I do agree that Hernandez being hurt was a change in game plan, or in other words, the plan in Week 2 was the plan in Week 1. Regardless of that, once the match-ups favored Welker he hauled 5 catches for 95 yards.

The part that isn't getting talked about at all - which is astounding to me - is the emergence of Stevan Ridley as a bona fide featured running back. I mean, by definition this is going to reduce every pass catcher's targets across the board. Yes, the tight end offense is still the mainstay, so the targets to Hernandez/Gronkowski are still the first and second options on most plays with Lloyd/Welker/Julian Edelman on the others. Presumably Kellen Winslow takes the place of Hernandez for the next 6 weeks, though I have my doubts given that Chad Ochocinco, a very capable wide receiver, was not able to learn the New England offense over the better part of 5 months. Winslow's had 5 days.

Welker is still an important weapon.

Ridley's presence is going to change this offense in a good way and I think all Patriots fans should be excited. Yes, the tight ends are still immensely important and yes, they will continue to receive the lion's share of the targets. So a diminished role for Welker? Perhaps, but only time will tell. Is he getting Randy Moss-ed? I have lots of doubts. Moss was ousted as of a result a fundamental and philosophical change in the offense with Hernandez and Gronkowski - this fact the article points out correctly. What they are missing is that this hasn't changed. The rise of Ridley is a redistribution of play calling and with that a slight change in strategy from game to game, series to series. But it is not the same type of fundamental and philosophical shift.

A few minor points to tack on the end here. Let's not forget that targets is not an accurate representation of who the quarterback intended to throw the ball to when they called the play. Mistakes happen, the line can break where it wasn't supposed to, and well, the quarterback can just misread the defense. I know this a bit of a "cop out" argument, which is why I'm throwing it in as a minor point at the end. But it is still relevant.

Lastly, let's not put it past a tactician like Bill Belichick to convince everyone of thinking one way just to turn it right back around at the opportune moment to make everyone throw what they thought they knew out of the window. The less anyone knows, or rather can predict, the better. You can make the argument that the Patriots struggled in the Super Bowl because of what became somewhat too predictable of an offense. In other words, the more the other team has to prepare to defend, the higher the probability that the Patriots can routinely exploit the many offensive weapons they have.

Ryder Cup Rant

 This was made in response to a conversation on my fantasy golf league's message board. In the middle of what is clearly a long rant, I thought I should post it. To provide context for the start of this rant, I'm pasting comments made by my brother in the conversation:

"I think you'd be foolish not to take Stanley because when he's on he's lights-out, whereas Phil, Fowler, and Z. Johnson aren't as superior in their own victories. Plus, although I think Phil is a competitor, Rickie and Zach really aren't."

Wait...what?

How is Kyle Stanley "more superior in his victories" than Phil Mickelson? Well first of all, let's change that to "more superior in his victory" as Stanley has a whopping win total of 1 compared to Phil's 40. I agree that the 2nd half of Phil's season has been nowhere close to the pace he was on in the 1st half, but that's why the points are cumulative for the year. Phil gets in the top 8 because of literally just the insane run he went on in February, March, and April. Also, he loves Bethpage and could easily get a top 10 or better this week, changing the outlook of his recent struggles. Plus, I'm pretty sure when Phil's on he dominates the field better than a Kyle Stanley.

The bottom line is the US team is really deep this year, which is why we're seeing so many capable players on the bubble. Like the CBS crew said last week, that's a good problem for Davis to have. I mean, just look at the top 8 qualifiers:

Multiple wins on TOUR this year: Woods, Dufner, Z. Johnson

2012 Major champions: Simpson, Watson

All around solid seasons with a victory in a "premier" event: Kuchar (The PLAYERS) and Bradley (WGC-Bridgestone)

That leaves Phil. The fact that Phil was able to get into the top 8 with a T-36 at the PGA ought to demonstrate just how poorly Hunter Mahan has played in the 2nd half. I mean, he's won 2 tournaments this year, including a WGC, and ISN'T in the top 8. He also duffed a chip that could have won the 2010 Ryder Cup for the US...though, he wasn't totally at fault for being put in that position. That being said, he's an excellent match player. His control off the tee and on approach is so good that he should be on the team no question, even if his short game tends to unravel rounds for him.

Not that it's a question because he played his way into the top 8, but Zach Johnson is also a great fit for the Ryder. He balances out the Watson/Mickelson/Bradley contingent on our team by playing with control and a superior short game. He's the perfect counter to people like Donald and McDowell, who also don't win by hitting the ball far. There's a reason why control guys like Mahan and Donald have won the WGC match play in recent years and it's because their ability to minimize mistakes just wears down other golfers.

Those two reasons are why my second pick along with Mahan, if I'm Davis, is Poor Jim Furyk. I know, I can hardly sit still without having to shit my pants when I think about Poor Jim in a pressure situation, given his two epic meltdowns this year. Despite that, he's been rock solid and is basically half the reason why the US won the Presidents Cup last fall. Poor Jim Furyk was in Brookline in 1999 for the greatest Ryder Cup in history and has always been pumped up for international competition as a result. He gets one of my picks.

That leaves two and this is where the difficulty begins for me. If you're going with the "ride the hot hand" strategy, the picks would be Van Pelt and Stricker. Aside from missing the cut at the Open, Bo's worst finish in his last 6 starts is a T-24 (collected 3 top-10s in there). Similar for Strick in his last 6 starts: 3 top-10s, 2 top-5s, worst finish was a T-23.

Dustin Johnson is creeping into the hot hand category lately. That could be official with a strong finish this week. He's had a strong year overall, including a win, and should be an intimidating match player from tee to green. Emphasis is on the "to green" portion of the last sentence. DJ becomes very not intimidating around and on the green, but that still doesn't change the fact that his length on 5s and shorter 4s should be a huge match format advantage.

Rickie Fowler is an slightly different position. Like Johnson, he's had an overall good year. Upon closer examination, that is mostly due to flat out insane month he had from 4/29 thru 5/27, finishing in order T-10, 1st, T-2, T-5. Since then, he's cooled off in a major way. His best finish has been a T-31, he's finished over par in each event, and missed the cut at the PGA. He started off this week well too, though, so we'll see if that changes things.

Snedeker just doesn't quite make the cut for me and I have hard time making a case for him, though again I think this is mostly due to how deep the US is this season. He picked up a win way back in January at Torrey Pines, but otherwise he's claim is mostly staked on the strong T-3 he put up at the Open. In another year, he might be in, but he's just overall not been good enough to get a spot.

Given all of this, I make my other captain's picks Bo Van Pelt and Steve Stricker. In addition to the things I've mentioned above, Van Pelt brings another big stick to the table, while Stricker brings his superior battle tested putter. In fact, I wouldn't be surprised to see a US victory sealed by a stroke from Strick's flat blade.

I don't care who Jose Maria Olazalabalaba picks because I hope Europe loses.

Yes, this is going on the blog.

I’m baaaaaaaaacccccccckkkkkkkk / The Prodigal Rambler Returns

Greetings friends of the Facebook, Twitter, and all other varieties. Greetings family. Greetings person who found my blog by Googling “Eisenhower hat”. It’s been a long 6 months since I last contributed to this here blog and even longer since I’ve maintained a posting schedule that resembles anything close to regular. There was a big change in my life last December, one that did not exist during my first 7 months writing. I got a job…like one that pays me…money. Like real money. It isn’t one that consisted of binge reading sports news, pouring over statistics for an hour or two, and then writing for a few more.

So, that was my excuse but I continued to use it well past its expiration date. And so much has happened I don’t even know where to begin. For the Boston in me: I’m not ready to talk about the Patriots or the Celtics. The Bruins convinced me just enough that they could repeat and yet still did the honorary bow out in the first round act that is seemingly required of the defending champions. Once the Red Sox finish 81-81 on the dot, I’ll be ready to bust out a manifesto on that.

For the everything else in me: the stupid Miami Heat and how many times I’ve said “God damn Lebron James” between the NBA playoffs and the Olympics. The LA Kings winning the Stanley Cup and the ascendancy of my Avon Old Farms classmate Jonathan Quick as the best goaltender in the world. BUBBA winning the Masters. Tiger winning 3 tournaments, despite going major-less again (more on that).  Roger winning another Wimbledon. The odd feeling that teams like the Pittsburgh Pirates and Baltimore Orioles might be in the post-season. The gut wrenching feeling that the Yankees are really good again and the surprising feeling that the Phillies aren’t favored to sweep their way to a World Series.

And of course, the Olympics and all of its freakishly athletic glory: my unabashed affinity for gymnastics. Michael Phelps solidifying himself as the greatest Olympian and arguably athlete of all-time. Usain Bolt doing his thing and maintaining his status with Jon Quick as “athletes with last name’s that best represent their skill set.” Seeing Kirani James win Grenada’s first ever medal, a Gold no less. Getting to cheer for a team that has Lebron James on it (the worst of guilty sins). Kerri Walsh and Misty May-Treanor. Andy Murray getting his redemption and winning an (almost) major tournament in front of the home crowd. And every other random awesome thing that I saw. How do the Olympics get any better? Golf in 2016!!!!!!

And that represents my awesome segue into this post’s topic of conversation.

When Rory McIlroy drained his birdie putt on the 72^nd hole of the 2012 PGA Championship to seal a record 8 stroke victory, Jim Nantz of CBS proudly declared him as the king of golf. McIlory simply obliterated the field at the Pete Dye designed Ocean Course at Kiawah Island, finishing the weekend with an eleven under 67-66 virtuoso performance. He was bogey free on Sunday and needed just 24 putts for the round.

Glory's last shot goes to Rory in 2012.

Those of you who visited the site last summer may have come across this article. You’ll remember at the time that I took particular exception to the notion that Rory had de-throned Tiger Woods as the king of golf. And the rest of 2011 played out more or less how I expected. Rory didn’t have much at the Open a month later and wasn’t seen at all around the US for the rest of the year, save the Bridgestone and the PGA, where he hurt his wrist on Thursday, effectively knocking him out of the tournament. Tiger struggled to regain his form after battling through injury before finding a way into the winner’s circle (unofficially, a point to which I took offense and still do) late in the fall.

Both golfers started 2012 with some fire. Tiger fired off a closing 62 and finished second to Rory at PGA National. Shortly after that though, Tiger took an official victory at Bay Hill. But both were noticeably poor at Augusta and McIlroy fell into a slump and publicly admitted he hadn’t been practicing enough. He had another poor showing for his US Open title defense, not even making the cut. Meanwhile, Tiger bagged his second win of the season at Muirfield Village and then headed into the weekend at Olympic with a share of the lead. But it was all for not, as he shot 75-73 to finish out of the top 10 at +7.

Yet still, McIlroy continued to struggle while Tiger continued to show signs of improvement. In his preparations for the Open, he passed Jack Nicklaus with the 74^th win of his career coming at Congressional. He started the Open very strong and headed into Sunday just 5 back of the (to that point) flawless Adam Scott. A pot bunker induced triple bogey highlighted what was another poor finish, but still Woods finished in a tie for 3^rd place. The real meltdown belonged to Scott who ceded the Claret Jug to Ernie Els in the most epic of fashions.

Rory meanwhile finished in a tie for 60^th place despite starting the tournament with a strong 67. Heading into the Bridgestone two weeks ago, it was pretty obvious that Tiger was better bet between the two. Woods struggled with something each round until Sunday when he put it all together to vault himself into the top 10. McIlroy, on the other hand, found something in his game on Thursday and translated that into a 67-67-68 stretch that placed him in a tie for 5^th place.

And I guess that’s really the story for me because McIlroy is at the age where the memory is shorter, the swagger is higher, and the ability to turn everything around in a few holes is seemingly much easier. If you paid close attention the leaderboard last week, you got the impression that Kiawah was going to hold the field at bay. Upon closer examination, the wet and windy conditions on Friday were the only thing holding McIlroy back from pure domination. There was an interesting debate on Sunday regarding his past comments about not playing in the wind that seemed just, well, unbelievable.

I mean, no one likes playing in the wind. If they say they do, they’re lying. I played golf in Colorado for 6 years where it is almost always windy. I got used to it, sure, but did I ever grow to like it? Debatable. And let’s put “wind” into context. We’re not talking about the steady 10 mph left to right cross-breeze. As the CBS crew pointed out, when he meant wind, he probably meant the 22 mph whipping type of wind that likes to throw rain in your face and gust up to 30 mph right as you start your backswing.

So sure, McIlroy doesn’t like playing in the wind and until he grows to accept that and move on (read: not play the ball 767 miles up in the air), he’ll probably play himself out of a few majors. But we can safely bet that he will also do what he did at Kiawah, which was play the 54 holes he had good weather for at a staggering 16 under par, at only the hardest golf course in the United States. It’s now the 3^rd time in last 11 majors that an Ulsterman has won, which is kind of crazy for a country of less than 2 million. Also crazy when you consider that one other person from the island of Ireland has won a major.

Despite all of this, I’m still not ready to fully anoint Rory as the king of golf. I know I’m probably splitting hairs, but hear me out. We’ve known he has the skill set since 2008. He’s also proven that when his game is on, he will dominate the field in a way that is reminiscent only of the man whom he’s in the process of taking the crown from. What we haven’t seen is the consistency week in and week out, to me a defining characteristic of Tiger’s reign of dominance from 1999 through 2008. I know the majors are over, but if Rory can push this momentum forward into a FedEx Cup victory he will have also won the most accurate marker of the “year’s best golfer” that’s out there.

If he can do this, then I would say there’s absolutely no question, especially when you consider how few events he’s played in on TOUR this year. When you think about it, even though he left Chubby Chandler and stated he would enter more TOUR events that really hasn’t happened yet. If anything, he just played less overall in 2012 and yet his record is quite impressive for a golfer who went through a 2-month slump during which he missed 3 cuts in 5 events. All I’m saying is that an argument can be made that the scary consistency isn’t there yet for Rory and when Tiger was king, there was no argument.

There’s no better test for Rory right now than the FedEx Cup, too. He will have to play four consecutive weeks (assuming he sits out Wyndham this week), which he hasn’t done all year. He’s gone 3 weeks in a row on two separate occasions. In the fist stretch, his finishes were 2^nd, 1^st, and 3^rd. In the second, they were Cut, Cut, T-7. He’ll also be vying against the best talent in the world this season. The top 15 in the FedEx standings is just riddled with talent, both young and old. And of course, the one person sitting in front of him at the moment is Tiger Woods.

So what do we make of 2012 for Woods? At the end of the day, the most important factor is to put the entire time frame starting from 2010 into context. It was well documented so I don’t need to go into much detail beyond that we know 2010 was mostly Tiger struggling with his mental game as life kind of whirl winded for a while. Fast forward to Augusta in 2011 and the 31 on the front nine on Sunday. It looks like he’s made the turnaround until putts fail to drop on the back, which leads to the questions. We find out in his answers to those questions that he strained his left Achilles playing out of the pine straw earlier in the week. A short while later, he withdraws after 9 holes at The Players and we don’t see him for nearly 3 months.

Given the context, he was ready to win mentally speaking, but he was employing a golf swing that was not sustainable, given that one swing with unsure footing led to a major injury. Cue Sean Foley, the new swing, and a fresh start. In my opinion, the progression was really fast, stupidly fast. I think it would probably the average pro 2-3 years to complete the progression Tiger did. He went from barely being able to break par or make cuts to winning an unsanctioned (but perfectly legit) event in 4 months and a TOUR event in 7 months. He contended in the final three majors of the year, won two more TOUR stops, and will more than likely be in the pole position for the start of the FedEx Cup, which he has an excellent chance to win.

Jack doesn't think Tiger is "just another guy"

Tiger always defined his career in terms of majors, so he can’t blame everyone for obliging. In this sense, 2012 fell short of expectations especially from a fan’s perspective. I reject the notion that Tiger “is just another guy” now solely because of his weekend performances at the last three majors, though. The “just another guy” guy does not win 3 tournaments in the first 13 months after a major injury and surgery. The “just another guy” guy probably hasn’t even won 3 tournaments in his career. I think Tiger is simply learning to trust himself with his new swing and new approach. That manifested into 3 wins because he is so comfortable at certain golf courses. It’s no surprise that he won at his favorite venues when seen in this light.

So it’s short of our expectations and even of his own because that’s where he’s set the bar. But Tiger and Sean Foley can’t pretend like major strides weren’t gained this season; they know it, even if they can’t publicly admit it. Unless Jason Dufner wins a playoff event and the FedEx, Woods will likely be the Player of the Year. He’s also a dead lock for Comeback Player of the Year. No one has ever won both awards, though the Comeback has only been around since 1990. Not quite major #15, but yet another record nonetheless.

Tiger Still Getting Out Of The Woods

Mickelson wins 40th career title 

Yesterday, the PGA Tour was set up with a confluence of events that its investors pray for, at least when it’s possible. For just the tenth time ever, Tiger Woods and Phil Mickelson were paired together on a Sunday, just a few shots off the 54-hole lead held by Charlie Wi. This is basically what TV execs and American golf sponsor dream about. The model for American sports investment, in this area, revolves around the promotion of stars. In other sports, this is relatively easy to do. There’s a consistent schedule. Barring injury, the stars play.

Golf doesn’t have it so easy. Luckily, there are enough fans now that every WGC and Tour event is broadcast. Beyond the fans this is also thanks to the partnership between CBS Sports and the Golf Channel. But there are only a handful of “promotion worthy” stars in the game and they don’t play every week. If you’re wondering who these people are, watch for when the CBS broadcast first kicks off, when the play the opening video montage. You see Woods and Phil. You’ll also see Rory McIlroy, Luke Donald, Rickie Fowler, and Dustin Johnson. This represents an obvious mix of established superstars, well known faces, and the up and coming generation. My guess is that this was also carefully established so that on any given week, at least one of these players will be seen on TV over the weekend.

Two legends of the game, Phil wins this round.

The fortune of having Tiger and Phil in the second to last pairing on a Sunday gunning for a title has remarkably happened just nine times before yesterday. Before yesterday, Tiger had won the tournament three times to Phil’s one, despite the fact that Mickelson has scored better than him five consecutive times. Yesterday at Pebble Beach, Lefty upped the ante and then some.

Tiger is clearly getting the Friday through Saturday thing figured out, but hasn't yet regained the inner ninja status he once held on Sunday. My friend Steven made the good point that he’s always been best as a front runner. I can see that, especially given Tiger's comments after the round yesterday, when he said he thought he'd need a 67 or 68 to win. You can think like that when you have the lead, but not when you're behind. Starting with Johnson Wagner a month ago, the last four PGA Tour winners entered the final round at least four shots off the lead. You can run the numbers when you have the lead and say, “OK, the best round out there today is a 65. I have a three shot lead. I need to shoot a 67 to win.”

Granted, you can’t come from behind to win without a little help from the front runner. Brandt Snedeker only won at Torrey Pines because Kyle Stanley melted down on the 18^th. Stanley himself only won the following week because Spencer Levin dropped shot after shot down the stretch at TPC Scottsdale. If Charlie Wi doesn’t 4-putt the first hole at Pebble yesterday, he finishes in a playoff with Phil. Wi also lipped out an easy par tapper later in the round. If he makes that, Phil’s 64 comes up one stroke short (although, the case can easily be made that in such a scenario Phil surely would have gone for it on 18, instead of safely hitting a 4 iron off the tee).

Tiger looked unconfident and overwhelmed all day yesterday. In short, he’s not quite there yet. In the final round, Woods looked as he did through all four rounds of the Bridgestone Invitational last August, his first event since withdrawing from the Players with an injury that kept him out of the game for several months. It was the same way he looked the following week when he struggled to find par at Atlanta Athletic Club. His confidence is on the rise and anyone who saw him in the first three rounds at Pebble could tell.

Yet still, in Dubai he shared the lead with Robert Rock, a relatively unknown Englishman who was still a club pro when Woods was winning his 14^th major in 2008. This was the type of matchup where the inferior (supposedly, Rock) falters under the weight of Tiger’s (and his fans’) presence. Instead, Rock played a steady round while Tiger failed to muster anything of a challenge. This weekend, the media was ready to write up the “he’s back!” article, only to see him stumble on the 7^th and never recover. To his credit, Tiger reminded everyone that he won back at the Chevron a few months ago, and that’s a win in his book, no matter what anyone else says. This is a point I emphasized myself.

I can't believe Lefty's turnaround. When I was watching him at Torrey Pines, he looked downright terrible. Awful. But then he comes out and shoots a 64 on Sunday at Pebble for his 40th win. That's Phil, I guess. Remember, though, last year he bagged a win at the Houston Open and was more or less irrelevant for the rest of the year, save his almost run at the British in July. Nick Faldo argued that at the age of 41, a guy like Mickelson is only going to get up for the majors, and maybe the tournaments that mean something to him. I guess that makes sense, either way Phil showed us once again that when he's on, he's the best in the world.

Maybe it’s just because he’s been a pro for so long that one or two little things is all it takes. When watching him at Torrey, I felt it was irrelevant that he changed his putting grip given that the issue he was having was finding the green in the first place. Phil calls his coach, Butch Harmon, down to Phoenix last week to sort it out. Butch makes one adjustment with Lefty’s back knee and viola – four rounds under par, a closing 64, and his 40^th career victory. It’s not that I just can’t believe the turnaround as much as it’s just flat out scary. I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again now, if Phil is on at Augusta, no one has a chance in hell at beating him. Period. Not even Woods. And I think you guys know how I feel about Tiger.

Nevertheless, I still think Tiger makes a serious run at Augusta in April. In some poetic way, it just makes sense that he’d break his slump by winning at the same place he did way back in 1997 when he roared onto the scene. With Mickelson playing his best though, it could well be a difficult task. Perhaps they’ll be paired together on that final Sunday? We can only hope.

When Sports Go Political

I can safely say today that I’m not a fan of athletes getting political. In today’s permanently connected world, where tidbits of news become fully blown debates about society or politics within hours of going viral, the sneaky power that once was an athlete’s ability to make a stark political or social statement is completely lost. When Tommie Smith and John Carlos stood on the podium at the 1968 Olympics in Mexico City with heads down and a fist, covered by a black glove, clenched and raised to the sky, it sent a clear, and powerful message. There was something drastically wrong with our society and it had been so for far, far too long.

Slightly more powerful than a Facebook post

When Muhammed Ali refused to join the U.S. Army in protest of the Vietnam War, it was a big deal. Not just for society, but for Ali himself. He was arrested and stripped of his heavyweight title. Athletes are uniquely positioned in society to make powerful statements about serious things. This is so because sports tend to transcend the socio-political consciousness of individuals. We care about what happens on the field of play, about raw athletic ability, keenness of mind, and the truly fantastic combination of the two. Because fondness of a team, of a player transcends the other divisions we have amongst ourselves, when that moment happens where the apolitical becomes political, shockwaves are sent throughout the system.

However, for me the progression of time and the nature of our instantly viral world have tarnished an athlete’s ability to go political. What Smith and Carlos did over 50 years ago was subtle in its implementation, but profound in its setting. On a world stage, they made a powerful statement about race in the United States with a simple gesture. Perhaps because we have progressed from those days, there are just fewer opportunities.

Former slugging first baseman Carlos Delgado refused to stand during a singing of “God Bless America” some years ago to protest the Iraq War. It was effective in so far as everyone noticed it, but it required far too much explanation. Maybe Carlos didn’t think it through too well. In the end, it seemed like more people were offended by it because the singing of “God Bless America” in the middle of the 8^th inning during Major League Baseball games was adopted in the fallout of 9/11. As a member of the New York Mets, that just didn’t go over so well.

During the stretch run of the 2004 season, former Boston Red Sox starting pitcher Curt Schilling started spouting political and publicly endorsed, if you can even call it that, the reelection bid for George W. Bush. Now, not only was he doing so in a decidedly blue state but in an election year where the challenger was a Senator from that very state. But because most Red Sox fans wanted a World Series more than they wanted George Bush out of office (and if any of them ever try to dissuade you otherwise, they’re flat out lying), the reaction was basically to pretend not to register. Like when someone says something really awkward that silences the room and before it becomes way too awkward someone else jump starts a conversation about what a nice day it was yesterday.

Of course, not all athletic acts of politics have been ineffectual. When the Phoenix Suns wore “Los Suns” jerseys as a way of protesting a recent Arizona state immigration law, it invoked images of a subtle but still in your face way of making a political statement.  When hockey player Sean Avery publicly made statements in support of gay marriage, it sent multiple shockwaves. On the one hand, it’s a particularly divisive issue in our society today. On the other, many people who loved to hate Sean Avery for everything he’s done on the ice were forced to respect, or at least level with the guy for doing something seemingly so unlike his on ice persona.

Some of that was done away when he utilized an opportunity earlier this year to reopen his thoughts on homophobia. But he did so in an inexplicable fashion. In the aftermath of Wayne Simmonds, a black man and current member of the Philadelphia Flyers, dealing with having a banana thrown at him on the ice, Avery went to the press and said that Simmonds had launched homophobic slurs at him on the ice in the past. Somehow apologizing to the media for saying words that just come out in the heat of the moment became part of Simmonds having to deal with an incredibly ridiculous and offensive incident. Really Sean Avery? I’m not entirely sure defending some racist Detroit Red Wings fan (two really awful things if you ask me) is an effective way of communicating your views on homophobia.

So when I heard about Boston Bruins goaltender Tim Thomas refusing to attend the traditional champions visit at the White House, I expected there to be a juicy story behind it. At the very least, Thomas would release some treatise on the Obama administration or the national debt, something along these lines. Only to find out that he chose not to attend because he’s one of those odd anti-government anarchist types. As far as political statements go, I am the least bit impressed. First of all, I’ve never been able to understand this view. The government started growing beyond its constitutional conception as early as 1803 when Thomas Jefferson made the Louisiana Purchase. That was 16 years after the Constitution was signed. I mean, even engaging in this argument means operating under the assumption that a bunch of dudes in the 1780s knew what society would be like some 230 years later.

Thomas’ statement doesn’t just transcend sports; it transcends reason, but before I get too political myself, let’s just leave it on a joke about how goalies are always crazy. At the end of the day, what I care about most is what happens on, well in this case, the ice. I’m more concerned about whether Timmy can replicate his historic 2010 season and lead the Bruins to another Stanley Cup. I respect the fact that he has some deep personal beliefs and beyond what was required of him because it became news, he seems to not really want to talk about it. It’s the opposite of Sean Avery – he’s not going to utilize talking about a bad call or lengthy suspension as a metaphor for his anti-government beliefs. He just really didn’t want to go to the White House and while I find that weird (because it was probably cool) I’m not losing sleep over it.

A Closing Thought on the Super Bowl

The only time I’ve been close to this nervous for a Super Bowl was in 2001. Brady was a rookie who had gone on an improbable run with his team, part of that being a game that was played in a blizzard, decided by a field goal, and enabled in part by a rule effectively being invented on the spot. All that ran into Kurt Warner and the mighty Rams. I was afraid that the result would be what most of the country predicted. Instead, we got one of the most memorable upsets in recent Super Bowl history. People that have grown to hate Brady and New England for their continued success will still, now somewhat ashamedly, admit to having totally rooted for the Patriots in that game.

For a Patriots fan, the last four years have been a constant exercise in what should have been. In uniquely improbable fashion, the New York Giants ended the run at perfection with their own upset in 2007. Then we lost Brady for all of 2008. The following season ended in embarrassment as Ray Rice and the Ravens smoked New England at Gillette Stadium. The 2010 team bounced back from that loss to secure a bye and face our hated division rivals, the New York Jets, only to lose and have to endure the awful punishment of seeing Rex Ryan happy.

This year is different, though. At an overall of 15-3, the Patriots are somehow the underdog in this game. The Giants overall record of 12-7 doesn’t accurately depict how good Eli Manning and their offense has been. It doesn’t show how solid they’ve played defensively for the last two months. In 2007, the Giants had to somehow stop the Patriots offense, which they did, but the game still came down to one of the most improbable catches, and plays, in NFL playoff history.

I’m nervous, not because everything on paper looks to be in the Giants favor, but because my experience, at least this year, has been paper means absolutely nothing. On paper, the Eagles were supposed to go to the Super Bowl. On paper, that team became the Packers, who were supposed to, on paper, complete the 18-0 dream that the 2007 Patriots failed to realize. I have the feeling that this game will be well contested on both sides of the ball. I’m nervous because I think it will come down to some type of weird, improbable, and lucky play. I just really hope it’s an end around for 60 yards and a touchdown by Julian Edelman with one minute left in the game…something epic like that.

Photo Credit: Tommie Smith's Facebook page

Double Feature – Breaking Down NHL’s New Conference Plan and Tiger Woods Returns To The Winner’s Circle

Some weeks, there just isn’t much to write about. I didn’t produce anything in the final week of November. I chalked this up to “taking a break for the holiday” but in reality, I didn’t have much to go with. I just kept waiting for something big to happen. The NBA decided to come back, but my reaction to that was a mix of indifference and callousness. Indifference because the lockout gave me time to realize that hockey and football are superior products, in my mind. Callousness because this “11^th hour” decision proved how pointless and stupid the lockout was in the first place. I mean, I guess the owners came out on top and got what they wanted. On the other hand, the players end up looking stupid because they should have known they would lose on the deal anyway, all of which suggests that this could have been resolved over the summer.

So as last week rolled along, I found that nothing was really sparking my interest. I had my own “11^th hour” when, in the course of a conversation, I realized it would be fun to talk about Brendan Shanahan and his penchant for handing down suspensions. It was a good topic and fun to research, but the last three days have provided a whirlwind of conversational topic. So much so, that I’ve decided to take the unprecedented move to post a double feature this week. So here we go, twice the bang for your buck.

Breaking Down the NHL’s New Conference Plan

I hardly had but a few moments to soak up the Boston Bruins latest victory before hearing about a “radical new plan” to reorganize the 30 teams in the NHL. The Board of Governors approved the plan last night; however, implementation is pending approval by the player’s union. If everyone’s on board, the new scheme could be in place as early as next season. Unlike the NBA, the NHL has always been willing to adopt changes to fix what isn’t working, and usually this turns out for the better. I’m not going to rest my case on past decisions working out, but history does suggest that overall, these types of changes benefit everyone involved.

The current system has an Eastern and Western conference, both with 15 teams. Within those conferences, there are three divisions with five teams each. It’s nice, easy, straightforward, and mathematically sound. Eight teams from each conference make the playoffs, with the three division winners taking the top three seeds in descending order of overall points. For the most part, the divisions and conferences made geographic sense as well. The exceptions were Columbus and Nashville, which are closer to the East coast, but in the Western Conference.

This past summer, the former Atlanta Thrashers became the new Winnipeg Jets. As a member of the Southeast Division in the Eastern Conference, this immediately presented a travel nightmare every team in that division (Winnipeg, Carolina, Washington, Florida, Tampa Bay). On the face, the way to resolve this was fairly simple. You could move Columbus or Nashville from the Central division in the West to the Southeast and have Winnipeg take their spot. In light of other concerns, this was not the simple solution.

And by other concerns, I mean mainly the concerns of the owners of the Detroit Red Wings, Columbus Blue Jackets, Minnesota Wild, and the Dallas Stars. As the teams (well, American teams) separated farthest from the rest of the league, they’ve always had concerns about the large amount of travel. It’s not just about the travel schedule, though. Well in the first place, how can it be? This schedule hasn’t prevented the Red Wings from making the playoffs every year since the current system was adopted before the 1993-1994 season (picking up four Stanley Cups along the way). While I’ll admit the Blue Jackets have always had a tough schedule because they’re in the Western Conference, I submit that having a good hockey team is still the number one contributor to success in the NHL, shockingly.

The new plan separates the 30 teams into four roughly geographically based groups. The more or less western teams would be split into two eight-team conferences, and the eastern teams into two seven-team conferences. Minnesota, Dallas, and Winnipeg would join the current members of the Central division in a more or less mid-West conference. Leaving the remaining members of the Northwest and Pacific divisions a “west coast” conference. That makes some sense. Logistically, it seems to benefit Minnesota and Dallas the most. Columbus and Detroit would play more games within their own time zone as well. In the east, however, the sense starts to fade.

Instead of holding to that model, the two Florida based teams would join the current members of the Northeast division in one conference, while Carolina and Washington would join the current Atlantic division teams in the other. Overall, this is how it would look:

Eh, basically West Coast	Mid-West
Edmonton	Detroit
Calgary	Minnesota
Vancouver	Chicago
Colorado	Columbus
Phoenix	St. Louis
Los Angeles	Winnipeg
Anaheim	Dallas
San Jose	Nashville
Northeast + Florida	Middle Colonies
Boston	New York Rangers
Toronto	Philadelphia
Buffalo	New Jersey
Ottawa	Pittsburgh
Montreal	New York Islanders
Florida	Washington
Tampa Bay	Carolina

With the western conferences, this more or less makes sense. Colorado and Phoenix aren’t exactly on the West coast, but because Nashville and Columbus are the eastern-most middle of the country teams, they have to be where they are. You can also see the correlation in terms of big media markets, so between that and the travel, it seems like a good plan. The other big facet of the alignment is due to economic concerns. Under the new schedule, every team has a home-and-home series with every other team in the league. The NHL has been seeing the benefits of this setup since they first instituted it, and the idea that fans will have the chance to see stars from every team in the league is a good one.

However, that also means the east coast teams will have an increased travel schedule. I suppose the trade off there is that they have an advantage being in a seven-team conference. Economically, the big winners in this realignment would be the teams in the “middle colonies” conference. The owners of the current Atlantic division teams successfully campaigned to keep those teams together because they wanted to keep those rivalries intact. Their intra-conference travel schedule is also the lightest. Geographically, it would have made more sense for the New York teams, or maybe one of them and the Devils to join with the current Northeast. But because the Atlantic rivalries are profitable to those franchises, they were on board with the concerns of the Pennsylvania teams.

And from the standpoint of the Florida teams, they come out on top anyway. Their main concern was to remove Winnipeg from the equation. The potential economic benefits of having teams like Boston, Montreal, and Toronto (big hockey markets) come to town three times a year far outweighed having an easier travel schedule with a team like Columbus in the conference. Beyond Columbus not being a good team, it is also a small market. Having the Northeast teams come down will draw viewership from the local retiree population, as well as fans traveling to see their team play. I mean, who from the northeast doesn’t like going to Florida in the middle of the winter?

One part of this plan I do like is the playoff scheme. In the first two rounds, the top four teams would play each other for their respective conference championships. It has not yet been determined how the four conference champions would be seeded for the third round. Guaranteed intra-conference matchups through the first two rounds will provide great entertainment and should boost ratings. Many of these rivalries are already cemented and under the proposed plan that would only increase.

If everyone’s on board, then I’m all for it. It seems weird, but I understand the logic and I know the NHL has been looking for ways to increase its economic strength. I agree that having home-and-home series, and being able to see every team is a crucial part of that. But the minute I hear people – fans, writers, players, owners, GMs, presidents, whatever – from Detroit, Dallas, Chicago, Minnesota, Winnipeg, and maybe even Columbus if they’re ever good, whine about how it’s sooooo much harder to make the playoffs in an eight team conference, I will kindly say I told you so. The plan works because it should benefit everyone economically, but it also only happened because those teams saw an opportunity to reduce their travel schedule and prevent the loss of money in the event they’re playing playoff games on the West Coast that start at 10:30 PM.

The cynical part of me wants to call this the “So Mid-Westerners Can Go To Bed On Time” plan, but I know there’s much more to it than that. As I pointed out before, teams with tough schedules can still win a lot of hockey games and still do well in the playoffs. As perplexing as it is to have the two Florida teams in a conference with five other teams that reside north of New York City, I know that overnight the toughest conference in the league would become the “middle colonies” one. I’m not overjoyed by every aspect of this plan, but if it becomes reality, I’ll be OK with it. It seems like it will foster growth and at time when the NBA continues to take steps backward, the NHL is perhaps making a necessary move to keep things going forward.

Tiger Woods Returns to the Winner’s Circle

On Sunday, Tiger Woods drained clutch birdie putts on the 17^th and 18^th holes to cement a victory at the Chevron World Challenge, an annual tournament hosted for the benefit of the Tiger Woods Foundation at the Nicklaus-designed Sherwood Country Club in Thousand Oaks, California. It’s an off-season money grab, but because of the format, it’s become an eligible tournament for World Golf Ranking points. The format calls for the defending champion, the four major winners from that year, 11 officially ranked golfers, and four invitees of foundation.

Short of winning another major, the most anticipated moment in golf was seeing Tiger Woods win a tournament again, of any kind. It appears that the next most anticipated moment was quickly dismissing that win as meaningless. When you’re the best golfer in the world, the standards are set pretty high. Woods was coming off a pretty successful Australian swing. He finished third in the Australian Open before playing very well in the Presidents Cup, clinching the final point for the Americans. More importantly, his swing just looks better. The routine cast of NBC/Golf Channel announcers couldn’t stop talking about the sound his clubs are making at contact.

Perhaps most importantly for Tiger, the putting game has been getting increasingly better. Of course, it’s always easier to make more putts by getting yourself in better position. There have been hiccups along the way, for example, at times in Australia, it seemed like he would have the flat blade in one round, and lose it the next. I think it starts with the rest of his game, though. Now that he’s been healthy and able to practice every day with coach Sean Foley, the results are finally starting to show. Being more confident in his ability to make fairways and greens has let Tiger focus again on making putts. It’s impossible to have a good day on the green when your mind is thinking about how you keep pulling your drives or chunking your irons.

Sherwood is an excellent test of golf, as are most courses designed by Jack Nicklaus. For me, the signature of a Nicklaus hole is the green. If there are any easy greens at Sherwood, I couldn’t find them. They are typically small, usually undulating, often tiered, and always incredibly fast. But, the layout isn’t devoid of scoring opportunities. Precision is always key, but the four par 5s and a couple short par 4s provide some excellent chances. Add the fact that the tournament came on the heels of a prolific windstorm on the California coast and you’ve got a pretty good recipe for a tournament. Last year, Graeme McDowell and Tiger finished regulation at -15. This year, Tiger won at -10. The windy conditions on Saturday alone accounted for those five strokes, but conditions were pretty tough all around.

Even so, many people have been dismissing Tiger’s win on Sunday. It’s funny that all those people in the summer that were saying he just had to win something are turning around and saying this isn’t enough, he only beat 17 other golfers, it’s just a money grab that no one cares about, etc. First of all, I watched the last two rounds and I didn’t see anybody not caring. Whether it’s the Transitions Championship, the U.S. Open, or the CVS Caremark Charity Classic, I don’t think professionals do that. Furthermore, it’s a complete double standard to say McDowell’s win over Tiger in a playoff last year at the very same tournament was the “perfect end to a perfect season” and the ultimate moment of the world’s best golfers saying to Woods, “we’re not afraid of you anymore” and then turn around and say the next year that it doesn’t mean anything when Tiger wins.

Furthermore, ten of the golfers in the field combined to win 14 tournaments on the PGA Tour this year, and one on the European Tour. That list includes Keegan Bradley, who won the PGA Championship, and Bill Haas, who won the FedEx Cup. The remaining seven who didn’t are all ranked golfers. Four of those seven had excellent overall seasons on Tour. The remaining two (Zach Johnson, Jim Furyk) happen to be the other two major champions in the field besides Woods and Bradley. OK, so the other major winners weren’t there. Guess what? They all play on the European Tour.

Rory McIlroy was busy winning the Hong Kong Open, yeah…exactly…the Hong Kong Open. If McIlroy wants to seriously challenge Woods’ throne, he’s going to have to play in more events against him. Hmm, maybe that’s why he fired his agent Chubby Chandler and declared his 2012 schedule will feature several more PGA Tour stops? Same goes for Charl Schwartzel. And Darren Clarke, well, the man has suffered enough and is not in his mid-20s. Besides, he was probably too hung over anyway. So yes, he only beat 17 other golfers, but he beat 17 other really good golfers. And really, 17 isn’t that far off from 25, which is about the number of good golfers in a given Tour stop anyway. Beating 50 guys who are playing for a paycheck isn’t that remarkable.

Trying to belabor this point by saying Martin Kaymer and Lee Westwood weren’t there doesn’t hold water either. Guess where else they aren’t? On the PGA Tour with any regularity. Given the strength of the field at the tournament, I wouldn’t say that Dustin Johnson’s presence would have made a stark difference. He hasn’t had quite the year that, say, Luke Donald has had. Nor does he boast the career resume that Phil Mickelson has. So OK. Phil and Luke weren’t there and if they were, you could say Tiger beat a tougher field. That doesn’t mean the field he beat was weak, though.

The biggest positive of winning this past week was the way Tiger won, though. When asked after the round what being in contention means, Zach Johnson stated that to him that means having a chance to win the tournament with four holes left. I’m not sure Tiger’s ever been wired that way, but nonetheless, he played the tournament in that fashion. He posted 69-67 in his first two rounds to finish with the 54-hole lead. On a windblown Saturday during which bogeys were aplenty, Woods was able to battle and stave off disaster with a +1 round of 73, on a day where he clearly didn’t have his best stuff, especially on the green. For most of Sunday, things were going that way too. For the most part, he held a one stroke lead over Johnson but was never able to go on that stretch of three or four holes he used to have where all of a sudden he’s got a five stroke lead.

In fact, the opposite happened. Johnson hung around, played his game, and was unfazed by Woods. On the tricky par 5 sixteenth, both players elected to lay up to wedge distance. This played directly into Johnson’s favor and sure enough, he made birdie while Tiger failed to make par. None of those putts Tiger seemed to always make were falling, a fact of which the television viewer was reminded of by the broadcast team no less than 100 times on Sunday. But when it mattered most, they did. After Johnson’s putt burned the edge on 17, Woods curled his in, fist pump to boot. From nearly identical positions on the 18^th fairway, Tiger was able to get his second within 10 feet, while Johnson had a makeable, but farther putt. After missing and tapping in for par, Johnson stood next to his caddy and watched as Tiger confidently drained his birdie for the victory. Zach looked up at his caddy, nodded and said, “Yep.” It has been two years, but we’re still accustomed to seeing Tiger come through in the clutch moments. We still have a winter to get through, but my eyes – and I bet Tiger’s too – are on Augusta in April.

SHANABAN

The NHL’s new disciplinarian has no qualms handing out suspensions

Since the lost season in 2004-2005, the NHL has regained some momentum it had in the national sports consciousness. That year gave the league time to address some critical rule changes, which has resulted in a much more enjoyable and authentic brand of play. Add that with an influx of young talent, led by marketable stars such as Sidney Crosby and Alexander Ovechkin, and you have a winning recipe. However, this does not mean some of the age-old criticisms have gone away. In this era of ever-increasing knowledge about things like head injuries, the NHL has put forth a continual effort to regulate and hopefully curb behavior that can have disastrous consequences.

After 13 years as the head disciplinarian, Colin Campbell stepped down, in part because his son Gregory plays for the Boston Bruins, but more because the league really needed a fresh set of eyes. In a time of heightened scrutiny, Campbell found it difficult to maintain a sense of consistency when handing down suspensions and fines. Shanahan is that fresh set of eyes, and he also played in the post-lockout NHL (he retired as a player in 2009). Furthermore, Shanahan was no stranger to physical play, as he racked up 2,489 penalty minutes in 1,524 career games.

Like football, hockey is a physical sport where contact is not only allowed, but indeed a necessity to playing the game properly. Unlike football, you don’t skate around carrying the puck in your hands, but rather use a stick. Now, the stick is supposed to be an implement, but sometimes it is used as a weapon. And even more unlike football, fighting is also a critical part of the game. In these ways, many people view hockey as a violent sport. How it is any less violent than football, I’ve never been quite sure. Then again, I grew up playing and loving hockey. Likewise, it often seems the most vocal critics of hockey’s violence are those who are disconnected from the game, as in, they are and were never fans and/or never played the game.

Shanahan adminstering a Shanaban

In very similar ways, both the NFL and NHL have gone to increasing lengths to address head injuries. As we learn more about concussions, we’re able to see more ways that they can happen. Campbell’s inability to maintain consistency seemed to stem from his lack of feel for the speed of today’s game, however, Shanahan is someone who does have that feel. Part of the effort to have consistent rulings has been Shanahan’s openness and clear explanation of the play in question as it relates directly to the language of the rule. Instead of textual releases, Shanahan has put himself on video for each suspension he’s handed out thus far. These videos are directly accessible on NHL.com’s home page. Shanahan is also posting links to the videos on his Twitter page, which is likewise retweeted by the NHL’s Twitter feed.

These are exactly the type of steps the league should be taking not only to regulate illegal behavior on the ice, but also to address the game’s critics. But beyond these efforts, Brendan Shanahan has also been a swift and unforgiving executor of justice. He set the precedent early by handing out nine suspensions in the preseason alone, totaling 60 games (29 served in preseason, 31 served in the regular season). Of those preseason suspensions, six were for five more games. In 2010-2011, Colin Campbell handed out six such suspensions in the preseason, regular season, and playoffs combined. Add the 5 gamer Shanahan slapped on the Oilers Andy Sutton for elbowing on November 1^st and he’s topped Campbell’s mark from last year…and it’s only December 2^nd. You break the rules, you get a Shanaban. Simple as that.

And Shanaban’s are on a torrid pace. Last year, players served 112 regular season games at a rate of 16 games per month. Through two months of the season this year, Shanaban’s total 55 games, or a clip of 27.5 per month. That puts us on pace for suspensions of 192 regular season games. I’ve broken down some numbers over the past three years so we can marvel at Shanahan’s disciplinary prowess:

Year	Head/Late	Illegal Hit	Stick	Fight	Other	Total	Head%
09-10	30	45	6	10	0	86	35%
10-11	93	14	3	11	8	129	72%
11-12	40	33	2	9	0	84	48%

As you can see, suspensions this season have nearly matched the total from two years ago, in just two months. For clarification purposes, I went through all the suspensions from the past three seasons and attempted to identify all that were directly related to potential head injuries and separated the others into their respective categories. I believe the reason for the discrepancy between 2009-2010 and last season is due to the NHL’s effort to address the danger of head injuries. I also believe Campbell’s way of classifying these incidents led to complaints of inconsistency in his rulings, and the reason why 93 of 129 games served can be classified as relating to head injury. However, that doesn’t change the fact that the league is showing increasing efforts to address these plays. Broadly speaking, over the last three years 85% of games served to suspension have related to head injury and late/illegal hits.

Suspensions and fines for stick penalties are only for the worst cases, although Shanahan seems to be a little stricter in that area as well. He’s already handed out five fines totaling $10,000 for those infractions, in addition to a two game suspension to Minnesota’s Pierre-Marc Bouchard for a high-sticking incident. Fighting suspensions are pretty easy to classify and occur when players directly break a well-defined rule (such as leaving the bench to instigate a fight, as Anaheim’s Jean-Francois Jacques did in the preseason).

I applaud Shanahan for not having any qualms about handing out suspensions and increasing their severity based upon the circumstances of the play. I also applaud him for going on screen to give an explanation every time it happens. It’s already getting redundant, but it’s still the right move. It gives the media, fans, and players a direct explanation. Players should know what to expect if they make a dangerous hit or use their stick in a way other than what it’s intended to do. I hated him as a player (mostly because I hate the Red Wings) but as the head disciplinarian for the NHL, he’s doing a marvelous job. Handing out nearly 200 games in suspensions may alter the way the game is played somewhat, but it is a necessary step to protect players from disastrous, and potentially career-ending (Marc Savard) injuries. Hockey is a physical sport, but Shanahan and the NHL are showing that irrational and dangerous plays will not be tolerated.

Extra Tidbits

- I got message from my good friend Asher the other day that said “Bobby Valentine…Yikes.” This immediately prompted me to declare the over/under on games managed by Bobby Valentine for the Boston Red Sox is +/- 260 games. We both took the under. My prediction: He’ll take the 2012 team within striking distance of the wild card but ultimately fall short. This will probably be blamed on personnel (i.e. starting pitching) and injuries. But when the 2013 Red Sox are 50-50 through 100 games, he’ll get canned and go back to ESPN. Here’s to hoping I’m wrong.

- Through two months of the season, I’m doing better than I expected on my preseason NHL picks. In both conferences, I’m 3 for 5 (Boston, Buffalo, Pittsburgh, Detroit, San Jose, Los Angeles). Two of the teams I’ve picked have fired their head coach already, though. But only one team I picked is worse than 11^th place right now. There’s a lot of hockey left and I could still end up looking dumb. Or really smart. Time will tell.

- Speaking of predictions, remember back when I said the 49ers would be 9-1 entering their Week 10 matchup with the Ravens? Yeah, that’s right. Oops, I also said the Lions would be 8-2 heading into their Week 10 game against Green Bay. But hey, 7-3 is only one game off.  I still like the Lions over the Bears in the NFC Wild Card now that Cutler is hurt and Caleb Hanie is, well, Caleb Hanie. But that greatly depends on Detroit beating the Saints this week, which is a stretch. I also claimed not to be surprised about the Bills because I expected them to be good, so…yeah, I’ve got to own up to that now. Sorry Timmy, sorry Lopez.

- So the NBA? Great! I’m going to miss reading 75 different versions of the same article on Grantland about the lockout. They did such a great job of exposing every flaw about the NBA that my interest in watching any games before the playoffs start is almost nil.