NFL Week 4 picks

OK, week 3 is behind us... I'm almost over the shock of having to admit that the Bills might actually be good, and the Sox are done gakking their season away, so now I can better focus on the games ahead, and with any luck, put together a better showing than last week, where I spit up all over myself. So... without further ado... on to the picks. As always, home team is in CAPS.

New Orleans (-7) over JACKSONVILLE
I'm not sure we learned anything about the Jaguars new rookie QB Blane Gabbert given the monsoon they played in last week. But I do know about the Saints. They've added a bit of balance in the running game and should win this game by at least 10.

Detroit (+1.5) over DALLAS
Detroit might have taken a half to get unstuck last week on the road against Minnesota, but I can't for the life of me figure out what oddsmakers saw from the Cowboys Monday night to have them favored over the Lions. Lions' defensive pressure + Ndomukong Suh + Romo's cracked ribs = painful 2nd quarter exit.

San Francisco (+9) over PHILADELPHIA
Too many points, and Mike Vick is going to be taking snaps and holding the football with a bad hand, broken or not. I see lots of turnovers here... not enough to allow the Niners to win, but they'll keep it close enough to cover.  Vick separates his shoulder and Eagles immediately look for a QB that's a little less injury prone, and sign Humpty-Dumpty to a 1 year contract.

Washington (-2) over ST LOUIS
Rams are a mess offensively, and aren't doing much on defense either. Washington was exposed a bit last week and played more like the team I think they really are, but their defense is still very good and should keep the Rams off the scoreboard for the most part.

Tennessee (+1) over CLEVELAND
This game is all about the running backs. Both teams will try to get their star RBs back into the groove after slow starts and injuries, and control the game on the ground. The loss of Kenney Britt will hurt, but I think Tennessee will be able to do enough through the air to win. In other news, Colt McCoy voted "player with best Porn Name in the NFL" by his peers.

CINCINNATI (+3) over Buffalo
No, this isn't a "sour-grapes" pick... so shut up. The Bills played their superbowl last week and this has all the makings of a "let-down" game. You don't get yourself up mentally for a game and you can find yourself sleepwalking through it and getting beat by a lesser team before you know it. I'll take the Bengals for the straight up win. Also, now that the Bills appear to have a decent team with a couple of decent players, the Bills' Pro Shop outside of Ralph Wilson Stadium is scrambling trying to figure out what to do with all the Brian Moorman jerseys they ordered before the season.

KANSAS CITY (+2) over Minnesota
Blech. If you're betting on this game, you probably should seek help, because you have a pretty serious problem. Both of these teams are reeling... but I think the Vikings loss after being up by 20 at home might have lingering effects.

CHICAGO (-6) over Carolina
Not so much because I think Cutler won't get sacked another 5 times and probably turn the ball over thrice, but I like this matchup from the perspective of the Bears' D. I think Cam Newton has another tough week against a more sophisticated defense than he's seen so far.

Pittsburgh (+3.5) over HOUSTON
I'm sorry, but I will NOT get sucked in to believing this Houston club is for real for yet another year. Steelers have some issues, but rarely play bad games back to back under Coach Tomlin.  I'll happily take the 3.5 points. At some point in the game, I predict Troy Polamalu will deck Andre Johnson coming across the middle, knocking the all-world wide receiver a little silly. While Johnson lies on his back and Polamalu stands over him apologizing, a still fuzzy Johnson wonders why the dude standing over him looks a little and sounds a lot like his sister. (Note... if I ever manage to be fortunate enough to write about the NFL in a capacity that allows me to actually interact with the players, I will be deleting that last line and denying any and all reference to its existence).

Atlanta (-4.5) over SEATTLE
Atlanta has been exposed to a certain degree, but still are good enough to take down the woeful Seahawks. Atlanta really should use this game to rediscover their ground game. Without it, an offense predicated on play-action becomes much easier to defend. By the way, didn't Roddy White used to play for the Falcons? Man... if only they had that guy on their team still then... huh? Oh.... I see... sorry...

NY Giants (-1) over ARIZONA
Do the Giants have any idea whatsoever how cosmically fortunate they are? I don't know what to make of this team... they looked awful in the first two weeks (despite winning against St. Louis, that offense looked terrible), but looked like a different team against the Eagles. I still have my doubts about Eli and this Giants offense, but they are benefiting in a major way from the schedule right now. After this game two of the next three are against weaker opponents (Seattle and Miami, with the feisty Bills sandwiched between) and they'd better take care of business in those games, because after that they must run this gauntlet: @NE, @San Fran, Philly, @NO, GB, @Dallas, Washington, @ Jets, Dallas. Good luck G-men.

SAN DIEGO (-7) over Miami.
Do I think this should be a no-brainer? Yes I do. Do I think this line should probably be about 4 points higher? You betcha. Would I be surprised in the least if the Chargers allow 2 kick returns for TDs, miss a late field goal and lose the game outright? Not even a little.

GREEN BAY (-12.5) over Denver.
The Packers sputtered a little over the first few weeks, but I think are going to start hitting their stride. This week their stride goes right over the decrepit carcass of the Denver Broncos. Hey, at least Kyle Orton won't have to suffer the humiliation of playing in front of his own fans. Might actually be good for him.

New England (-4.5) over OAKLAND
Yes, the Rrrrrrrrraidah's running game scares the bejeezus out of me, and yes I worry about the Pats secondary, but two things come in to play in this pick: one, the Pats match up better defensively in this game: they have a decent D-Line against the run, and have done well against the run so far this year... and the Raiders are not nearly as gifted a passing team as SD and Buffalo. And two, nothing would scare me more, were I an opposing team, than the thought of Tom Brady and the Pats offense coming off a four-interception loss to a division rival. I think the Pats put up close to 40 and win in a bit of a shoot-out. Plus, Tom Brady was so pissed after the game last week he cut his hair. You're screwed, Oakland.

NY Jets (+3.5) over BALTIMORE
NOTE: I hate the Jets with a burning passion that emanates from deep within the bowels of my very existence... I loathe picking the Jets... but I try to be as objective as possible when putting out these picks columns... so... objectively here's what I think: I have a theory that the Ravens are the ultimate Jekyll and Hyde team... Great week one, awful week two, great week three... it's time for the Hyde version of the Ravens to surface. There are lots of people who really like Joe Flacco... but one thing I'm noticing is that he is mistake prone against complex or pressure defenses. I think the Jets ride their defense again and force a couple of turnovers. They keep it close and cover... maybe winning outright. There... now where's my Ipecac? I need to puke.

TAMPA BAY (-10) at Indianapolis
If Kerry Collins starts this game, I think 10 points is too much to lay and I'm taking Indy. But I've never seen anything from Curtis Painter to make me think he's capable of scoring more than 14 points against a good team on the road. And I think the Bucs will put up 28 or so... so I'll take the Bucs.

The fallout begins...

Somebody needed to take the fall.

In the wake of the Red Sox' historic collapse it was clear that there would be major repercussions. This morning Fox Sports is reporting that Tito Francona will be the first (but not likely last) victim of that backlash. It's unfortunate, but I think this had to happen.

Reflecting on the last month of the season for the Sox, I've come to the stark realization that this collapse wasn't just historic by sheer numbers of games lost and size of the lead given up... it's much much worse because of the payroll and talent level of this team. This isn't the '78 Sox who squandered a lead... this is a team built to win the World Series now, with no expense spared. A team with an enormous payroll and all-stars up and down the lineup. But this was also a team that lacked depth, cohesiveness, and fortitude. Other than a couple of gritty scrappers like Pedroia and Youkilis, this is a team that seems almost aloof in its approach. It lacked that fire of intensity and sense of urgency. This is a team that looked and played scared down the stretch. And while ultimately the fault lies with the players who did not perform, you can not minimize the impact of the leadership and management on a team of superstars. Those people need to be held accountable.

Let me start by stating that in my opinion, Terry Francona is a very good manager. He was the perfect manager to handle the gritty "dirt-dog" teams of the early and mid 2000s... he was well liked and well respected by players... he had a great sense of how to handle the brutal Boston media, and how to shelter his more quirky players from the harsh spotlight. He was always calm, cool and collected. He was a likable guy by any account. But, he was not always the most effective game-manager... especially when it came to making the hard choices with veterans. Tito has always had a habit of playing favorties with some of his veterans... of staying too loyal and giving too much rope. He played too much with his lineups... he overused effective relievers. His game management skills have often come into question.

These issues were more glaring, in my view, this year more than any other. From the get-go this team had talent, but also had some holes. a 2-9 start left the team pressing from the start of the season. The rocky start affected some players' confidence... and for some, like Carl Crawford, the handling of those early struggles caused irreparable harm. I think the handling of Crawford is one of the big reasons that Tito is not going to be managing this team any longer. It was clear early on that Francona lost faith in Crawford, and began juggling him all over the lineup. Crawford is a marquee player... and like any marquee player he has an ego. To his credit, Crawford has never let that ego out into the focused beam of the public microscope. But deep down, it has to hurt your confidence when a player who has been one of the best in the game, and the premier player on his team, suddenly finds himself badly struggling and being shuttled between 7th and 9th in the lineup. This should never have happened, and Francona needs to take the blame for that. Crawford is a top-of-the order player. He has been his whole career. You can't take a guy like that, still in his prime, after having so much success and do what the Sox did to him. I said this in a previous article, but the Sox should have slapped Crawford into the number 2 or 3 slot and left him there, struggles or not. This isn't the friggin Royals or A's lineup. This lineup had more than enough talent and depth to have been able to make up for his struggles while he worked his way out of them. Dropping him like they did, and then moving him up and down so capriciously based on one or two performances in either direction would wear on anyone, let alone a star player who's never had to deal with a lack of confidence in his entire career.

This is one of Francona's biggest weaknesses: managing the lineup. The Sox used more lineup combinations than any contending team in baseball and more than any team I can remember over the last 10 years. Baseball players more than any other professional athletes are creatures of habit. When you play every day over the course of 162 games, having a routine you can count on day in and day out offers a real mental stress release. Players want to know their roles... they want to understand their routines and know what to expect every day. With the Sox, players were left guessing day to day about the lineup. Other teams don't do this. The Yankees have employed essentially the same lineup day in and day out for years. And as a result, despite injuries and age, they remain a consistent hitting team not prone to prolonged offensive slumps. Players are given a chance to work their way out of slumps while having a modicum of confidence in their role and their spot in the lineup.

Hitters also alter their approach depending on their spot in the lineup. It's the nature of baseball... top of the order guys tend to take their approach to hit for average and high OBP. Middle of the order guys tend to try to hit for power, drive the ball and get runs in. Bottom of the order guys feel their role is just to contribute any way they can. When you begin moving guys around the lineup you may cause them to change their approach, which is never good for a regular player in the middle of the season. I've always wished Francona would settle on a lineup and go with it. The lineup this year should have looked like this:
Ellsbury (L)
Pedroia (R)
Crawford (L)
Youkilis (R)
Gonzalez (L)
Ortiz (L)
Scutaro (R)
Drew/Reddick (L)
Saltalamacchia / Varitek (sw)

You put this lineup out there every day. You stick with it, and you only change it in one or two spots if needed, and make those changes long-term. There's no reason this couldn't be done. Players will go through slumps. It's hard enough to work out of a hitting slump without having your confidence shellacked by being dropped down to the bottom of the order.

Handling the lineup is one thing, but another job of the Manager is handling the clubhouse... and by all accounts this Sox clubhouse had become fractured and somewhat dysfunctional. This is of course the risk you take when you endeavor to employ a roster of highly paid (overpaid?) athletes. I think there are some bad attitudes and pervasive negativity from certain elements of the pitching staff (ahem, John Lackey I'm lookin' at you). From the outside this team was becoming unlikable to both fans and media alike. Far, far gone are the wild and hairy days of Damon, Millar, Pedro and Manny. Terry Francona was the perfect manager for that bunch. Loyal, approachable and reasonable, he was the steady hand at the helm of a party boat. The captain that everyone loved and respected. This team is not that group. Not close to it. And Francona doesn't seem as well equipped to handle it. Now, say what you want about the players needing to be accountable for this behavior, but the reality is that with the contracts and expectations of this team, its makeup is going to remain largely intact, with perhaps the exception of the pitching staff. So if the current manager is not the right person to effectively handle the clubhouse... how can you justify not moving on?

Additionally, I think Tito's handling of the bullpen this year, and the pitching staff in general, was sub-par. This is partially his fault and partially the fault of Theo Epstein (but we'll get to him in m moment). Tito falls in love with certain relievers, and has a tendency to stick with them, overuse them, and not realize when it might be good to give them a 4 or 5 day break. He did this with Daniel Bard, who was dominant for the first 3/4 of the season, but was so overused he couldn't have gotten me out by the end of September. I won't be the least bit surprised to hear about his needing some sort of off-season procedure or therapy on that over-used right arm.  By the end, Francona was too hesitant to use fresher arms like Albers or Atchison in pressure situations, and made some odd matchup choices (often throwing Bard out against fastball hitters when a pitcher with softer stuff with movement would have been the better choice, in my opinion). Alfredo Aceves was an absolute steal, and a gem in the bullpen. But he's got starter stuff and has been a starter, and frankly should have been made a starter permanently when it was clear the Sox had lost Bucholz effectively for the season. Instead Tito kept throwing Wakefield and Lackey out there, start after start, spotting teams 5 and 6 runs right off the top. His loyalty to Wake was admirable, but disastrous considering the stakes for this team. It was clear by about mid-June that Wakefield simply didn't have it this year, and might not ever be viable as a starter again. It seems that Terry Francona was the only person not to notice this. Aceves should have been inserted as a starter back then. But then again, depth in the starting rotation was a problem almost from the beginning for this team, which is really the fault of the GM, speaking of which...

If the Red Sox are going to throw Terry Francona under the bus for the total failure of this team, the guy under one of the other wheels should be Theo Epstein. For whatever reason, Theo has been the target of perpetually miserable Sox fans for years. They point to his shaky deals, like JD Drew and Julio Lugo and Edgar Renterria... but somehow conveniently forget about Curt Schilling and Kevin Millar and Bill Mueller and the countless other key cogs and savvy moves he made to assemble two championship teams. I've defended him every step of the way, and I still think he's a clever, savvy and worthy GM. However, at some point he needs to step up and take responsibility for this team's collapse... and more than anything else for the pitching staff he's assembled, and the lack of pitching depth in the minors. The biggest failure to me was an evaluation he made at the beginning of this year. Coming in to the season the Sox were looking at a pitching staff of Lester, Beckett, Lackey, Bucholz and Matsuzaka, with Wakefield as a possible long reliever / spot starter. At first glance most pundits saw this as a pretty formidable staff. Lester was an ace in waiting, Beckett was a proven vet who seemed to be over his injury problems, Lackey actually had a better year, statistically, then most realize, Bucholz had one of the league's lowest ERA's and was a revelation, and Matsuzaka, while maddeningly inconsistent, was still capable of dominating at times and looked pretty good as a no. 5 starter. However a deeper look should have revealed concerns right away. Matsuzaka hadn't been a consistent, viable starter in over two years. Lackey looked to be out of sorts in Fenway, a place where he had little success in his career prior, and just never seemed comfortable on the mound with the Sox. Beckett had not been healthy and had not pitched well in a couple of years, and Bucholz had but one year of success. I saw potential problems with this staff from the beginning. I felt the Sox should have, and could have made a run at Cliff Lee. They did not and instead went after Carl Crawford for about the same money. This was a calculated move on Theo's part, but not well thought out in my opinion. Crawford was a top-of-the-order bat... the Sox already had 2 of those guys. He was an outfielder, and the Sox did need an outfielder, but I think there would have been some decent options there outside of Crawford.  And lastly, outfield is a position that can be filled by depth in the minors or with a fair number of players available via trade or free-agency. Quality starting pitching, however, especially in this past pre-season, was woefully thin.  It was Lee, and then a huge dropoff. Theo didn't ask the question "what if this rotation falls apart... what if Beckett is injured again, or Bucholz can't duplicate his season, or Lackey continues to struggle, or I'm forced to accept that Dice-K just sucks... what do I do then?" He didn't ask that question. I know this because if he did, and spent any time thinking about it, Cliff Lee would have been a member of the Red Sox. Because behind that starting rotation the Sox had next to nothing. In the minors they had Felix Dubront, a talented lefty with control problems who might never be major-league ready; Kyle Weiland, a possible up and comer still a few years away, and not much else. The minor league system has maybe one or two potential highly regarded pitching prospects. Theo should have seen that pitching depth was going to bite him at some point.

Compounding the problem was Theo's handling of the trade deadline. One of the things I will never understand is this: At the trade deadline the Sox had a possible deal for Rich Harden. They backed out after reviewing his medical issues. The scuttlebut was that they then went out and traded for their next option in Eric Bedard (also with medical questions... actually recovering from an injury and still weeks away from being a viable contributor at the time). My question is this: Given the state of the Sox starting pitching at the time, with two starters out for the season and two more who were absolutely atrocious, why was this an either / or scenario? Why not get both Bedard and roll the dice with Harden? That way you have two potential options, even if one winds up injured. Given the needs, the Sox should have been looking for two pitchers anyhow. Are you telling me they didn't have the pieces to make both those trades happen? Hogwash, of course they did. And they should have. Another miscalculation by Theo.

So all tolled, I think both Francona and Theo share a large part of the blame for the Sox' performance by the end of the season... but I think the Sox' future is still in good hands with Theo (who I believe will learn from this mistake and really go all-in for pitching depth in this upcoming off-season). And while Terry Francona has been the best manager the Sox could have had over the last decade, and his contributions to managing a challenging clubhouse full of diverse personalities should never be underestimated nor forgotten, I think this team needs a new voice... a new presence and direction.

It sucks that you have to go out this way, Tito... you deserve better. Much better. But someone has to take the fall... and I think it's probably for the best for everyone that you're moving on.

It should never have come to this...

Three minutes. That's what it came down to.

162 games over 5 months... cold, rainy spring games... long, hot summer extra innings affairs and unending weeks of consecutive games in September and in the end, it all came down to three minutes.

Those three minutes were all the more abrupt and dramatic for me because the heavy rain and storm activity knocked out my satellite for the better part of the late innings and I was left to watch updates online, only to have the signal return with 2 outs in the bottom of the ninth in Baltimore. Now... those of you that know me know I'm hardly a religious person. I find Adrian Gonzales' laying the blame at the feet of "god" comical. But... then again... something absolutely, completely, and stunningly improbable happened last night. What happened last night over the course of the final games for the Red Sox and Rays, respectively, was so statistically unlikely that I can promise you it will never, ever happen again.

Forget the September collapse. Forget the awful pitching... the injuries... tough schedule... all that noise.  Last night was two games, four teams, and after 7 innings in both games everything seemed pretty well decided. The Sox were ahead 3-2 going in to the 7th inning against one of the worst teams in the American League, in a game they HAD to win, with their best pitchers at the ready. And even if they managed to blow it, the Rays were losing 7 - 0 in Tampa going in to the 8th inning. And then the skies opened up in Baltimore and everything there stopped. So I switched over to watch the Rays game, as the Scranton Yankees decided to walk half the Rays' lineup and then groove a pitch to Longoria, the only real threat in the lineup (with 2 outs and a base open... I'm just furious about this... Joe Girardi would never have pitched to him in this same scenario in mid-June... as if I needed another reason to hate the Yankees)... and just like that it was 7-6. And then the signal was lost.

For a few moments I debated just going to bed. It was late, and there was talk of the delay in Baltimore going on for some time. But I knew there was no way I'd have ever managed any sleep, so I occupied myself with some long-overdue writing and waited for the little dancing "DirecTV" logo to stop bouncing around my screen and for the game to return. By this time the Sox had resumed play and had gone through the bottom of the 7th, 8th, and top of the 9th. I flipped my browser to mlb.com and saw that the Rays had tied it with 2 out in the ninth. My heart was slowly sinking... but still, the Sox pitching staff seemed to realize the importance of this game and were reaching back for whatever they had left. Aceves dug deep to work around two hit batsmen in what seemed like his 200th inning of relief in the past two weeks. Bard actually returned from the dead to pitch a 1-2-3 8th, and then it was Papelbon, who has truly been a lights-out closer this year, and despite his blown save earlier in the month and the fact that he had pitched quite a few innings over the past few games, you felt like this was one of those moments where he could get whatever he needed.

I was getting anxious now as I was watching the game in Tampa slide into extra innings... waiting for the "bottom" of the inning signal on the TB-NY game in the marquee above the Sox-O's live-game view I was watching to mercifully flip to "top"... hoping it would do so before a number was added to the Rays' score. I watched in silence as the interminably slow pitch-by-pitch app showed the pitch results... A strikeout for the first out. A strikeout for the second. Papelbon seemed dialed in. And in the Rays game the Yanks had runners on the corners and no-one out. For the first time since the Rays had tied their game up, I felt hopeful. Confident even. And even while the Yanks were squandering their offensive opportunity, Papelbon had gotten to two strikes, and I was starting to feel a little cheated that I was going to miss the final out.

And then the signal returned. And three minutes later I was sitting in the dark. Alone. In silence.

Three minutes. That's all it took for Papelbon to give up the lead on three consecutive hits by the 8, 9, and 1 hitters on one of the worst teams in baseball. Fastball after fastball after fastball... 7 of the last 9 pitches. The final pitch a splitter that didn't split. And that was it... game over. The supposed best pitcher on one of the supposed best teams in baseball couldn't retire the 8 and 9 hitter on a bad team in a game they had to win. And that was it.

I barely had time to absorb the game when ESPN flipped over to the TB game. I was in the middle of deciding whether I wanted to even bother watching... I had a sense of the inevitable but felt, for some silly reason, that the odds of the Rays winning were higher if I were watching. As i was having this thought the game appeared in front of me... and Evan Longoria was up. And before the pitch even left the hand of Scott 'what the hell am I doing back in NY' Proctor, I knew what was coming. I was ready for it. And as the ball curled around the left field pole over the approximately 18 inch high fence in what has to be the most ridiculously designed foul-pole feature in baseball and the Sox season came to an end, I let out a sigh, and turned off the TV. I sat in the dark for a good 15 or 20 minutes, trying to absorb what I'd just witnessed... the incalculable improbability of all those things happening... the almost eerie confluence of rain delay, lost signal, and nearly simultaneous conclusion... all of it made me wonder if I were just dreaming it. I tried to force myself awake and then realized for certain that I already was. The shock gave way to exasperation as I recalled all of the games we gave away in the last month... all of the games we threw Wakefield out there, knowing he'd get shelled, in what seems now like a fool-hearty attempt at a so-so milestone. All of the games we left Lackey in too long. All of the runs we left on base... All of the things that in retrospect, it seems like we could have done that would have managed us just one more win... and before I left the couch and headed off to bed at around 12:30 in the morning I was left with one simple, lingering, burning thought...

It should never have come to this.

NFL: Week 3 accounting

Lots of publications and columnists do weekly "picks" columns, picking games against the spread, many doing so with short explanations of those picks... occasionally they're even witty and humorous. But what I rarely see (in fact I can't think of any column that actually does this) is the columnist holding himself accountable to those picks by going back and reviewing the picks at the conclusion of the weekend's games. I'm apparently too dumb to know better... I made some statements and predictions about this weekends games and now it's time to face the music. So let's review my picks and my thoughts on the games. (Games I picked correctly I'll highlight in green, games I borked I'll put in red.

And we'll start with the most important one, obviously (this will be a two-part column, really... I will spend quite a bit of time focusing on the Pats - Bills game because... well, because this is a Boston sports blog, and I was at the game. Feel free to skip that part and go to the rest of the article if you wish):


Bills 34, Patriots (-8.5) 31
I was both wrong and right on this prediction. I said that it would either be a Pats win by double digits, or if the Bills kept it close, they'd pull it out. And that's exactly what happened. The Pats let the Bills back into this game with uncharacteristic mistakes, bad bounces, and atrocious defensive play (a little help from the refs is worth mentioning, but I don't want to distract from the fact that the Bills won and deserved to so I'll only make minor mention of it later on). I actually was in attendance at this game, and I will say a couple of things first: One, the Bills are a good team. Better than I or anyone else thought. They are balanced on offense and make plays they need to make, and Chan Gailey calls a terrific game (the third down screen pass in the second half on their own side of the field was a brilliant call). Two: it's been a loooooong time since Bills fans have had much to cheer about, and that was obvious. The stadium was absolutely thunderous, and the place stayed filled for a long time after Lindell put the winning kick through the uprights. The crowd was in a celebratory mood... this was their superbowl, and they reveled in it. Good for them. Now... the game itself... there are several reasons I think this game was won by the Bills, which I think are worth mentioning:

1. The loss of Aaron Hernandez hurt. Brady threw for almost 400 yards to essentially 2 targets: Welker and Gronkowski. He tried Ochocinco a few times, but after the horrible drop (which we'll come back to) he stopped going there even. Deion Branch was mysteriously invisible. Even Tom Brady needs a third option. It was clear in the 4th quarter that Welker and Gronk were going to be double-teamed, but Brady was forcing it in to them anyhow, mostly successfully because, well, he's friggin Tom Brady. But even Tom Brady can fall victim to his own confidence, and two of his interceptions were direct results of this. The worst of those being the ball in the endzone that he tried to force in to Gronk over the top of two defenders when he really didn't have much separation. George Wilson made a great play and picked off the ball. Without that viable third option, the Bills were able to key on these two and at the end of the game, there were a great many plays left on the field while Brady tried to get the ball to these two guys.

2. The Pats either can't or won't run the ball effectively. I think it's more of the latter, frankly. When they did run the ball they averaged over 4 yards per rush. But let's be honest, the Pats are clearly a passing team. They have arguably the best QB of all time, and some great receiving options (when healthy)... but once the Pats got up 21-0 in the second, they neeeded to turn to the ground game and slow the game down. They needed to be able to pick up chunks of yards and clock on the ground. The Bills frankly had far too many possessions for a team down 21 points, and the Pats had far too few attmepts on the ground (26) for a team up by three touchdowns. They need to run the ball more often and more effectively, especially when they get ahead... and I think the have the parts to do this. They just won't. I think that needs to change, at least some.

3. Inconsistent refs. OK... so I had initially written a whole section on the poor officiating I saw in this game... but no matter how much I might feel that way and might even be right to an extent, there's no way doing so comes off as anything but bitter whining and sour grapes. So I'm not even going to bother... I will only say this... it seems to have come up again this week with Mike Vick bitching about not getting calls other QBs get, and while I think he's more or less out of line with his approach and think he's just going to get negative backlash, he has a certain point. There are two areas of officiating that I think are horribly inconsistent, and the problem with them is that they are calls with serious ramifications. Those areas are Pass Interference, and Roughing the Quarterback. I DARE you to watch 6 games in a week and NOT come up with at least 5 plays that are called completely differently in different games by different crews, even though they are all more or less the same. We've gotten to the point where you can only hit the quarterback above the waist and below the neck, with your head up. within a half second of him throwing the ball, and then you must not drive him into the ground even if you are coming at full speed. I'm honestly shocked we don't see more penalties a game for this. Additionally, star QBs are more likely to get those calls than others. The rule itself stinks, but what's worse is the consistency of its enforcement. I honestly have no idea when this call is going to be made... I'm usually just guessing. And Pass Interference has become the great mystery of NFL officiating. Nobody quite knows all the rules and nuances of this element. It's the most inconsistently called penalty in all of football, which is bad enough, and made worse by the rules of enforcement. Spotting the ball at the spot of the foul is absurd, and only serves to allow QBs to make desperation heaves down the filed, knowing full well there's about a 50 / 50 chance of getting a PI call. This rule needs to be changed, so that it is better defined and enforceable by a 15 yard penalty, period. Too many games have been decided by this vague rule and ref's capricious interpretation of it. OK... moving on...

4.  Pats' Defense has serious issues. I went in to this week hoping that the big numbers being put up against them were more a product of getting up early in games and playing "bend but don't break". Well, the Pats defense bent, and then broke like a dead tree in a hurricane.  You can look at the stats and say the Pats were good on 3rd down (Bills converted 4 of 11)... but then you have to realize that the Bills only had 11 3rd downs in 13 drives! The Pats could not cover the Bills' receivers one-on-one, and were burned several times... the middle of the filed is still wiiiiiiide open. I think Fred Jackson is still open across the middle as we speak. The Pats have serious depth and talent concerns in the defensive backfield, and they still are not generating a pass-rush. The defense was a failure across the board yesterday, and I'm now officially concerned about it. I don't care if it's scheme or talent at this point, this team will not go far in the playoffs with this defense as currently deployed.

5. Ochocinco's dropped touchdown. This one may not seem as obvious, because the Pats did wind up with a touchdown later in that drive, but that was 3 minutes later, and left only enough time for the Bills to drive and score. Had Ochocinco caught a ball that was dropped right in his hands as if Brady were hovering directly over him, the Bills would have gotten the ball back with 7 minutes or so left... leaving enough time for Brady to go down and score even if the Bills get points on the ensuing drive. This was bigger than I think most people realize.

6. Bad penalties (earned). There were two that loom particularly large: In the second quarter Brady hits Gronkowski up the seam for a beautiful 35 yard pass, setting the Pats up at the Bills 35. An illegal hands penalty on rookie Nate Solder brings it back to the Patriot 20, (a 40 yard swing) where now it's 2nd and 19. The Patriots would ultimately punt. The worst one, however, was in the 3rd quarter. After taking a 10 point lead midway through the third. the Pats hold the Bills to 3-and-out, and on the ensuing possession the Pats were driving into Buffalo territory looking to deliver a knockout blow. A 9 yard pass to Welker sets the Pats up 2nd and 1 at the 32, and a good 5 yard run by BenJarvis Green-Ellis looked to have the Pats with a 1st and 10 at the Buffalo 27 as the 4th quarter began. But a holding call on Logan Mankins put the ball back at the Bills' 42, with a 2nd an 11, and two plays later the Pats punted. The game may have in fact turned on that play. The Pats O-Line is one of the best in the game, but in my mind, yesterday they cost the Pats both points and time of possession at critical times.

7. The Bills are just a good team, and made good on their chances. That's really what it came down to. I thought the Pats were the better team before this game and I haven't changed my mind on that. This Bills were being embarrassed early, and they can't continue to get behind by 20+ points every game or eventually they will get stung. They have issues on defense too, as they've now given up nearly 400 yds passing in back to back games, and also generated zero pressure on Brady. They won this game, and deservedly so, but I think they're going to have plenty to work on after watching their defense get carved up on film. The Bills did, however, show what they are made of. They are tough and resilient. The have talent at the skill positions that most people aren't aware of, and they play 4 quarters. It's all you can ask of a team of over-achievers. I think they have depth issues, and they are now terribly thin in the defensive backfield with Aaron Williams hurt yesterday.  This team will struggle if injuries begin to set in... but yesterday, they played in a game where they had the ball last, the entire field to go, and a chance to win it or give it over to Brady. They did what they had to do and never gave Brady that chance. They earned the win, and their fans celebration. And hey, maybe someday the day will come for Bills fans when they can win a game in week 3 of the regular season and not act like they just won the superbowl, World War III and the MegaMillions all at once. Pfft.  (yeah, I'm still a bitter Pats' fan... deal with it).

With that game aside, let's get to the rest of the games...

Titans (-6.5) 17, Broncos 14
I said the Broncos would struggle running the ball, and they did. Only 59 yards on 23 carries. After this game I heard a good deal of chatter praising Matt Hasselback and the Titans, but I'm sorry, the Titans were not very good in this game either. And we're past the "holdout" excuse phase for Chris Johnson. His limited effectiveness has got to start being a concern for Titans fans. Broncos are just not a good team, but they cover here.


Saints (-4) 40, Texans 33
Everyone still wants to buy into the Texans... but this team still can not cover anyone. And against a Drew Brees team, that's going to be trouble every time. Texans actually played well early on, but Brees and co. finally get over on the Texan's secondary. Saints look to be building some good balance on offense with Ingram and the running game. 


Lions (-3.5) 26, Vikings 23 (OT)
I was surprised by this game... I didn't think the Vikings would even be competitive, but in fact they really should have won this game. Lions looked out of sorts early but turned it on late, with Stafford looking more and more like the blue-chipper we thought he would be. Vikings secondary is awful (this is starting to sound repetitive, isn't it? what's with secondaries in the NFL this year?), and Donovan McNabb continues to look washed up.

Browns (-3) 17, Dolphins 16
Another dog of a game that I would never have picked as I did if I had known Peyton Hillis was going to be out. And speaking of that... Hillis out with... strep? I take back the "Chuck Norris" analogy I made in a previous post. The "Chuck Norris" version of Peyton Hillis' arms would have played with strep, and yodeled the national anthem. Yes, I am one of the bitter fantasy players bitten by Hillis' last minute status change (while in Ralph Wilson stadium, where once it fills up, you will never get any broadband connectivity on your phone due to saturation). Dolphins not a very good team right now. Don't do anything particularly well, and several things not very well. 


Giants 29, Eagles (-7) 16
Most shocking score of the day, in my opinion. "Dream team" needs to wake up. They look pretty beatable right now, and the defense is just not very good. Giants looked cooked halfway through their game against St. Louis. No offense to speak of whatsoever, and Eli looked like he couldn't carry Tom Brady's books, never mind be in his class. But then again the last time I remember saying that to myself was about 4 or 5 weeks into the 2007 season. Dammit. I hate the Giants.

Packers (-3.5) 27, Bears 17
If Cutler makes it through the next 5 games with all his appendages still attached, he should consider himself lucky. I gave Cutler a good deal of grief for his body language and obvious irritation with his teammates, but honestly at this point if he wanted to throw rotten eggs at his O-line, I'd happily hand them to him. Mike Martz needs to realize that teams know he doesn't run the ball, at all... ever... period. You'd think after a while he'd do it just cause defenses are pretty much playing zone blitz on every down, knowing there will be no running attempt to slow the aggressive pursuit. Nope. He'd rather his QB get killed than be wrong.

Panthers (-3.5) 16, Jaguars 10
How do you make an already uninteresting game completely unwatchable? Play it in monsoon conditions. I'll be honest, I didn't look at one single second of film or replay on this game. I know only what I read in the Box Score, so I won't make any attempts at analysis or even humor other than to say I'm glad I guessed right.

Raiders 34, Jets (-3) 24
I told you I suspected this Jets team was a good deal of smoke and mirrors... and the mirror cracked. The Jets compiled a lot of garbage time desperation yards at the end of the game that make the stat sheet look like this game was closer than it was. It wasn't. Jets are supposed to be ground-and-pound, but when they ran it -was more like kibbles-and-bits. They are built around their defense, but allowed the Raiders to run wild, to the tune of 234 yards on the ground. Ouch. Jets were never really in this one, and Mark Sanchez is not the guy you want bringing your team back from a deficit late. Weirdest stat of the game, though... Raiders failed to convert a single third down (0-8). 


49ers 13, Bengals (-3) 8
I said going in that I trusted Andy Dalton more than I trust Alex Smith. I saw nothing in this game to make me change that opinion. Here's the only two things I found interesting about this game: 1. the Bengals managed to score 8, but without a touchdown. 2. The Jacksonville / Carolina game played in the worst possible conditions had more offensive excitement than this game. Crap game. Moving on... 


Chargers (-14.5) 20, Chiefs 17
The Chargers held the woeful Chiefs to 252 TOTAL yards of offense, and yet still had to fend of the Chiefs at the end of the game. You might have won this game, Chargers, but you should probably spend the week feeling like you lost. Why can't this team perform consistently early in the season? Doesn't Norv Turner have to answer to this at some point?


Steelers (-10.5) 23, Colts 20 
I was worried about this game and said so at the time. I think the Colts will start being more competitive in their games going forward... and honestly, at this point, I'm not sure I trust that the Steelers are an elite team right now. They have some real issues on both sides of the ball. 


Seahawks 13, Cardinals (-3.5) 10
Cardinals are out of excuses. This is a bad Seattle team that the Cardinals needed to dispense of convincingly to be taken seriously as contenders... so back into the "also-ran" pile you go, 'Zona... Seattle deals their "andrew Luck" chances a serious blow... poor coaching on the part of Pete Carroll to win this game. Terribly short-sighted.

Ravens (-4) 37, Rams 7
Completely flummoxed by both these teams... The Ravens are the most schizophrenic team in football right now... I assume they'll get their doors blown off next week by the Jets. Rams just don't have anyone for Bradford to throw to... or hand it to, either at the moment. They need serious help at the skill positions, but I don't see where that's coming from, so I expect them to continue to struggle. 


Buccaneers (-1.5) 16, Falcons 13
I said in my picks column that I thought the Falcons didn't look like the same team to me, and they might be overrated. This game displayed perfectly why I thought that... the Falcons can't run the ball, and as I've been saying since before the season started, much of the Falcons success in the passing game is predicated on play action, set up by a strong threat of the running game. That threat simply doesn't exist right now and defenses are not putting extra defenders in to stop the run. Matt Ryan isn't nearly the same QB when forced to make reads downfield or go to check-downs. It's not his strength and that was clear on Sunday. The Bucs played bump and press coverage on the Falcon wideouts and showed no respect fot eh Falcons running game, which gained a pathetic 30 yds total. The Bucs turned Ryan over 3 times (2 fumbles and a pick) by playing 6 DBs most of the night and giving Ryan nowhere to throw the ball. He held on too long and was strip sacked twice. The Falcons are in a bit of trouble here... they allowed the Bucs to control the ball (over 35 minutes possession) and keep the Falcons offense off the field. Were it not for 2 pretty ugly Freeman interceptions this game isn't as close as the final score. The Bucs on the other hand played excellent D, and ran the ball well. Freeman had an up and down game, but did enough to keep his team safely ahead. I like the look of this team going forward.

Cowboys (-4) 18, Redskins 16
Ugly game that neither team should walk away from feeling too good about. For the Cowboys, a win is a win, but this team is supposed to be far too talented on offense to be kept out of the endzone completely. If you're Washington, you have to feel like if you managed to keep the Cowboys out of the endzone, you probably should win that game. Romo was ok. Actually considering he played hurt I'll upgrade that to "good". And I'm sorry Redskins fans, Rex Grossman is still Rex Grossman, and you still are very weak at the WR position. 


Record for the week (vs. the spread): 5-11
Ugh. Ugly week of picks. In my defense, 10 of the 16 games were decided by 6 points or less. That's crazy, and a bettor's nightmare. Hopefully next week will not be as unpredictable.

NFL Week 3 picks

Week 3 of the NFL is upon us. One of the things that always amuses me when reading through the various sports websites and publications, like EPSN, Boston Globe Sports, Sports Illustrated, is how certain the gaggle of various sports-writers, bloggers and pundits are that they have things more or less figured out with teams in the NFL. Which is of course ludicrous. After two weeks, the only things you can really know with any degree of certainty are the things you pretty much knew coming in to the season. For example, we know the Packers are still really good, we know The Pats offense will score 30 + points about every game, we know the Jets will win games pretty much on the backs of their defense, we know Adrian Peterson is a stud running back, we know the Seahawks are going to have an historically bad offensive team, we know the Jaguars have issues at QB, we know Jay Cutler is a petulant little punk with a monster arm, but a poor attitude and barely a lick of football sense... We know these things because we knew them before. But after two weeks, do we really know other things that I hear being asserted over the past week?

Do we really know the Bills might be for real? They've won two games, it's true, but one was against what appears to be a horrible Chiefs team, and the other was a game they trailed in, at home, against a pretty mediocre team, for most of the game, winning only after a furious comeback while still allowing almost 400 yards passing to Jason frikkin Campbell. I'm not sold.

Are we really sure that Cam Newton is that good? Sure, he's thrown for 400 yrads in consecutive games, but  his team lost both games, he had a QB rating of 72 last game despite the yardage, and he's thrown more pics than touchdowns. Don't get me wrong, the kid is better than I expected, by a lot... but I'm not sure he's as good as the praise that's been heaped on him. He's made some pretty egregious mistakes... which I would expect from a rookie, but he's not being treated like a rookie by the media.

Are we really sure that Tony Romo has quieted his critics? I've been hearing that all week. Well, I'm a critic, and I've not been quieted. Even bad quarterbacks occasionally have good games... even playing hurt. Romo deserves all the credit in the world for coming out despite cracked ribs and actually throwing his team to a win... but none of that erases the myriad of boneheaded poor decisions and horrible mistakes, almost always at the worst possible times. I've seen more of that than anything else from Romo... so my opinion on him, at this point, remains unchanged despite the gutsy effort last week.

OK... enough of that... on to the picks (home team in CAPS):

TITANS (-6.5) over Broncos.
Good win for the Broncos last week, even though Dalton played well for Cincy. But this is a different week against a different team. The Broncos struggle running the ball and struggle against the run. I suspect Chris Johnson finally shakes the rust from his holdout and goes off against Denver.

SAINTS (-4) over Texans.
Everybody's back on the Texans' bandwagon again. I've seen this movie before. I'm pretty sure I remember how it ends. This line seems too low to me... Saints win big.

Patriots (-8.5) over BILLS.
Yes, that's a total homer pick. I admit it.  But there is some logic in it... First, I need to see more from this Bills team before I pick them to be within 10 points of the Pats, even at home. Second, if the Bills are within 9 points near the end of this game, I think they stand a real good chance of winning because it means the Pats have let them hang around and they are playing with momentum on their home field. Might be too much to overcome. Because of that I expect the Pats to try and put this game away early... I think the Pats either win by 12 or more, or they lose, period.  Pats are the better team, in my opinion, so I pick the former.

Lions (-3.5) over VIKINGS.
How is this line this close? Vegas usually values home field as worth 3 points to the home team, in general... so if Vegas feels two teams are more or less even, the home team is normally favored by around 3. So what Vegas is saying here is that the Lions aren't quite a touchdown better than the Vikings... which is odd if you've watched either of these teams play this season. Lions win big.

BROWNS (-3) over Dolphins.
Browns finally remembered how they were successful last year, and started feeding Peyton Hillis steady doses of pigskin last week. Dolphins are a team without an identity. Browns cover easily at home.

EAGLES (-7) over Giants.
Don't let the final score fool you, The Giants won the Crap-cademy award last week for "Worst performance by an offense in a winning role". If the Rams could have stopped playing like Patrick Star for the balance of three quarters, they would have won in a route. Eagles win this game with or without Vick.

Packers (-3.5) over BEARS.
Don't like this pick... Packers pass D has been atrocious, and the one thing Cutler and the Bears can do is throw the ball. That said, the Packers also do a nice job of confusing opposing QBs into making mistakes. I could easily see Cutler throwing for 450 yds, 4 picks and the Bears lose by 20, while Cutler spends the end of the game on the sideline looking like this. I'll take the Pack.

PANTHERS (-3.5) over Jaguars.
Battle of rookie QBs. This game sucks. I have no idea what to expect, so I'll go the safe route and take the home favorite.

RAIDERS (+3) over Jets.
What, you didn't think I was going to take ALL favorites, did you? Jets are a bit of smoke-and-mirrors right now. Should have lost the Dallas game at home, and looked pretty bad on offense for much of that Jacksonville game despite the lopsided score, which was mostly thanks to the play of the defense. Close game that I think the Raiders will win, at home, on the strength of their running game.

BENGALS (-3) over 49ers.
Vegas thinks these two teams are even. I agree. They are both equally mediocre. Two weeks into his career and I already trust Andy Dalton more than I trust Alex Smith. Woe are the Niners. I'll take the home team to cover.

CHARGERS (-14.5) over Chiefs.
I'd have taken this line before the Chiefs lost Jamal Charles. They are terrible on offense, worse on defense, and heading into San Diego to face an angry Chargers team that shit all over itself once again in Foxboro. Can I take this line as a halftime bet?

Steelers (-10.5) over COLTS.
I'm not thrilled with this pick. At some point I think Collins and the Colts offense are going to click a little. Not to the point where I think they are better than a 6-10 team, but still, they will go off on someone. I just don't see it being here, against the Steelers.

Cardinals (-3.5) over SEAHAWKS.
I really believe this Seattle team has what it takes (or what it lacks) to go 0-16. And that can't happen if they win this week. Andrew Luck, you'll only have to head up the West Coast for your new NFL home... hope you like Silver and Blue. And by the way, don't laugh when I say this... but if the 'Hawks do suck enough to land Luck next April, with Pete Carroll, Luck and a few other pieces, this team could be a contender as early as 2013. I'm serious.

RAMS (+4) over Ravens.
The Rams are not as bad as that game against the Giants Sunday night. They just aren't. And the Ravens looked... exposed against the Titans. There's something not quite in sync with that offense. I like the Rams at home here.

BUCCANEERS (-1.5) over Falcons.
Toughest game on the schedule to pick. But I liked the way the Bucs pulled it together last week to come back against the Vikes. I think they ride that momentum. The Falcons don't look like the same team to me this year. I think they might be a little over-rated.

COWBOYS (-4) over Redskins.
Not buying this Redskins team. Rex Grossman has been in this league a long time, and has never proven that he can maintain a high level of play. Can't imagine that's suddenly changed. Cowboys will be pumped for their home opener... Romo throws 3 picks while hunching over in pain after every throw, but Grossman throws 3 right back in each ensuing possession. "The legend of" Romo wins it with a long bomb he throws while spitting up blood all over Brian Orakpo, and then is carried off the field by his teammates... on a stretcher. The crowd goes wild as Jessica Simpson jumps out from the stands and hurls herself onto Romo, killing him instantly. Cowboys list Romo as "questionable" for Lions game the following week.

Yank's strategy: What to do... what to do...

The Red Sox enter the final six games of the season holding a two game lead in the wild-card. The math is in their favor, but they still need to win at least half of those games to feel any sort of comfort about getting to the post-season.

They will begin this last stretch in the Bronx to face the Yankees, who have been white-hot and earlier this week clinched the American League East title and are a lock for the top seed in the playoffs. It will be very interesting to see how they play this upcoming series. Conventional wisdom would tell you that the Yanks would love nothing more than to bury their hated rivals and keep them out of the playoffs. However, there are other factors at work, and I'm not so sure they will take that approach.

If last night, when the Yanks emptied their bench and went to the back of the bullpen depth, was any indication, they've decided to cruise into the playoffs as healthy and rested as possible. For a team that has a lot of key parts on the wrong side of 30, this is probably the right decision. So if you are Joe Girardi, what do yo do this weekend? Do you play your starters and keep the foot on the gas in an attempt at burying the Sox? That would make Yankee fans happy I'm sure, and the players will vote for that as well, to be certain. But knocking out the Sox means a couple of things: first, you've used some key players and pitchers in situations where you really have nothing to play for and would probably be better served resting them. And second, if you eliminate the Sox that means you have in all likelihood opened the door for the Rays. And frankly, the Rays are a far better team than the Sox at the moment, and pose a far greater threat. Despite handling the Rays with little trouble this past series, the Rays have better and deeper pitching, and their offense is hotter than the Sox right now. So would you rather (potentially) face a beaten and depleted Sox team that has a real confidence problem, especially in the bullpen, or a younger, healthier, hungrier, deeper Rays team? I'm not so sure burying the Sox NOW makes the most sense.

That said, it is also true that the Sox handily won the season series against the Yanks, and when healthy appear to match up well with them. If the Yanks don't go for the throat and knock the Sox out, they might find themselves facing a far different team in the ALCS should it come to that. By then, assuming they get that far, the Sox will have a healthier Beckett, and likely a healthier Bedard... Youkilis could be back (although with an apparent hernia that will require off-season surgery, it won't be quite at 100%... but still), Bucholz should be healthy enough to serve the critical 6th - 7th inning role and the bullpen may be a bit more rested and recovered. If they can get anywhere close to healthy again, and get some confidence back with an ALDS win, this Sox team is as dangerous as any in the AL, still. And I'm not sure the Yankees want to be facing that wave of momentum come that time, when they had a chance to bury them and didn't take it.

So taking all those things into consideration, what would you do if you were Joe Girardi? My guess is that Girardi takes the approach of publicly stating he will make the best deisions, regarding lineups, for his team with a focus on being ready for the playoffs... but in reality I think in at least the first game you will see the Yanks with their "A" squad on the field. What happens next will depend on two things: the outcome of the game itself, and the outcome of the Rays game against Toronto. If the Sox win tonight and the Rays lose, I think Girardi will decide that it's almost assured the Sox will take the wildcard, and that discretion is the better part of valor... he will sit the stars more or less for the rest of the series. I think the same will be the case if they beat the Sox and the Rays win... at that point it's likely the Sox will be caught by the Rays regardless, so again, the stars will be rested.

However, should the Sox and Rays both win, or both lose, keeping the gap at 2, he will make one more attempt at putting the Sox away. Either way, I don't think the stars play much, if any, of the final game of this series. That's my take on it anyhow. I will be interested to see if I'm right... and how Girardi plays it will lend some insight as to how he feels about the teams in the chase right now.

Now, that whole post made me quite ill just writing it, so I'm gonna go throw up.

State of the Nation... Sept. 21st

If the Bruins and Celtics are in the playoffs, spring is my favorite time of the sports year... The hype and pomp of the NFL draft gets into full swing near the end of April, the Sox are just getting into the swing of the new season, and with any luck the Bruins and Celts are putting together their playoff runs.

After that, early fall is my favorite time of year. Baseball is coming down the home-stretch, the NFL season is getting through its first quarter, and the Bruins and (usually) Celtics are getting geared up for their camps and upcoming seasons. So here we are, the 3rd week of September, and we Boston sports fans are in the thick of it... and this season the emotions run the full spectrum: fevered excitement, tense anxiety, all-too-familiar anguish, and renewed celebration. So with that, I'm kicking off the first in a series of regular features here on TitleHub: the State of the Nation, where I'll  break down in abridged (for me) fashion the current issues and insights on the four major Boston franchises.

Red Sox:

I won't over-state the obvious: The Sox are in major trouble. Any of you not living under a rock are already pretty well aware of it. And anytime a team collapses like this, the first thing most people will do is rush to find blame. I, of course, am no different than most people... so naturally I have spent a great deal of my time lately trying to assess where the blame lies... but unlike most people, I try to do so in a fair and balanced manner, taking all aspects of the situation into account before rushing to judgment. Obviously the biggest problem on this team lies with pitching. Due to injuries and failure to reach expectations, what we have isn't remotely close to good enough. Some are finding fault with Terry Francona's management of this situation. They feel he's been too patient with abject failures like John Lackey, or too loyal to ineffective guys like Tim Wakefield. Or too reliant on bullpen stalwarts like Daniel Bard, ultimately to his detriment... and to a point they are right. Lackey should not be starting games for this team any more. And neither should Wakefield. They both give up too many runs, and what's worse, they give them up almost immediately, putting enormous pressure on a fairly injured and inconsistent lineup to either come from behind or jump out to a big lead every night. This causes the offensive players to press... and it's good for no-one when that happens. Frankly it looks to me like Bard needs about 2 weeks off. He's clearly gassed rigt now and his confidence is shaken. A wise Francona would have "found" a strained forearm or something to land Bard on the 15 day DL and just let him rest and recompose... instead he's being thrown out there time after time again and again in pressure situations, and the results have been obvious. Francona is managing like a desperate, drowning man and I think it's cost him a couple of games, frankly... but then again... I'm not sure what else I'd like him to have done, in hindsight. The fact is that he has to get this team into the playoffs. Just has to... with this payroll and these expectations, not getting there is going to be seen as an utter failure and it's going to be an interesting off-season if it happens. So he has to take his best shot to win every game, every night. And the other fact is that injuries have forced him into using what he has... because frankly he HAS to. I hate seeing Wakefield and Lackey take the mound... I know it's going to mean spotting the opponents 4-6 runs... be they the Yankees or the Mariners... but then again, I'm not sure what the other options are. Wieland isn't ready. And frankly I'm not sure he will be anytime soon. Bucholz is coming back but at best he'll be a long reliever in the playoffs... he just hasn't been stretched out enough to start, and there isn't enough time to get there. Dice-K is on IR, and was a nightmare when he was healthy. Some are calling for Alfredo Aceves to make a couple of starts down the stretch... and I'd mainly agree except that at this point doing so would throw an already shaky bullpen into further chaos. At this point you NEED Aceves in the bullpen because he's the guy they call on to stop the bleeding in the 5th, 6th and 7th innings every 3 or 4 days when one of these other stiffs is getting whacked around. With Aceves, you can bring him in after Lackey is done giving up 5 runs on 9 hits in 4 1/3 innings and let him settle things down so the offense can have some hope of catching up. It doesn't always work and the offense has shown a lack of ability to come from behind when it needs to lately, but still, if you throw Morales or Albers or Dubront out there you run a real chance of letting the game get completely out of hand. I think Aceves would be a great option for a starter, but he's far too valuable in the 'pen to try that move right now. Terry Francona has made some questionable moves lately, but again, I give him some leeway here because to a degree his hands are tied... he has to make due with what he has. 

Others will put the blame on Theo Epstein for over-paying for Crawford (who by the way still has that "deer-in-the-headlights-i'm-in-over-my-head-here look... which is simply not acceptable at this point in the season) and not focusing enough attention on building solid bullpen depth and viable starting pitchers in the minor-league conduit... and again, to a degree they're right. He did over-pay for Crawford. By a lot. Even if Crawford was putting up .300 / 25 / 100 numbers he'd have overpaid... but I don't blame him for that. Like it or not, complaining about overpaying is for fans of teams without the revenue stream of a Red Sox or Yankees team. We have one of the highest revenue-generating teams in all of MLB. We can afford to overpay. And given that we can afford to overpay, I think the bulk of you fans who bitch about overpaying, would be more pissed if the Sox didn't overpay for talent when the clearly could, if it meant making the team a perennial contender. So I'm done listening to the bitching about that. The Sox can overpay, and so occasionally it's incumbent upon them that they do. That's the reality of baseball in 2011. Deal with it. The Crawford move was a good one at the time... he was the best player available at the time, and played a position of need (outfield)... and signing him also kept him out of the hands of rival teams like the Angels and Yankees. It was worth the risk. Where they flubbed it was in over-reacting to his slow start, letting the media sway their handling of him (I believe this), and shuttling him all over the lineup for the bulk of the season, undermining his confidence and never letting him get comfortable with his offensive role. They should have slotted him in the number 2 slot, let Pedroia hit 3rd, Gonzales 4th, Youk / Ortiz 5th / 6th depending on the matchup, and left it there... let him work out his issues at least knowing what his spot and role in the lineup was. The way Francona and the Sox handled him for most of the season, I think, was a horrible mistake.

That said, I think that despite his woes this season, the signing of Crawford was meant as a long term investment, and those who are calling for him to be traded are frankly deluded. Only a fool would buy high and sell low so soon after making an investment... and Theo is anything but a fool. Crawford is here for the next couple of years at least, and I think will prove to have been worth the investment eventually. 

As far as the bullpen and developmental pitching issues... well, I'm split on this. I think coming in to the season Theo did a pretty good job of building the bullpen... signing Aceves was a stroke of genius, and Albers was a great pickup. Jenks was an abject failure, but was a low risk move to begin with. For 75% of the season this was one of the better bullpens in baseball... it's only fallen apart now because the starting pitching has been so poor they are getting overworked. It's the starting pitching where I have to give Theo a failing grade... both on the major-league roster and at the minor-league level. Coming in to this season we had one bona-fide ace in Lester, one young pitcher who looked to be making "the leap" in Bucholz, one former great who hadn't been anything approaching his former self in years, two overpaid, back of the rotation clunkers in Lackey and Dice-K, and one over-the-hill knuckleballer without a clear role. That's a lot of uncertainty for the starting rotation on a team with world-series aspirations. At the very least Theo should have brought in a solid no. 3 starter... and frankly I think they could have had Cliff Lee for the money they paid Crawford... I'd take that deal in a minute. And what's worse, the only thing the Sox had approaching a blue-chip pitching prospect was shipped away in the Gonzalez trade. Don't get me wrong... having seen Gonzalez now for a full season, I'd make that trade again tomorrow and throw in Bucholz if they asked for him... but the problem is that the minor league system is conspicuously devoid of viable major-league starting pitching prospects. This falls at the feet of Theo Epstein. I've long been and will continue to be an ardent Epstein supporter, but I think he dropped the ball on this one, and as a result we're now pinning our hopes on Erik Bedard rounding into some form of decent no. 3 starter in enough time to rescue the season and have any hopes of doing anything in the post-season.... and that's just a scary thought.

That said, I think ultimately the Sox will get in to the playoffs. Had the Rays not drawn the red hot Yankees this week, I think they might have had a shot... but they aren't going to take more than 1 game against the Yanks... and I think Lester and Beckett will win their starts, and the Sox will carry a 4 or 5 game lead into the final week of the season. That should be enough. And once there, if Bedard can round into a decent no. 3, and Bucholz gets healthy enough to throw 3 or 4 innings in critical situations, I think people will start to feel like they might have written off the Sox a bit too early. Color me still fairly optimistic... or blindly stupid... whatever. 

(Yikes... that was not abridged at all... sorry). 

Patriots:

We're two weeks into the Patriots 2011 season and so far we've learned that Tom Brady might be just now reaching the top of his game... and that's downright friggin scary. We've learned that Bill Belichick can still coach better than anyone in the game (duh). We've learned that the defense is a work in progress... it's not nearly as good as it's going to be in a few weeks, and not nearly as bad as some of the numbers might suggest. We've learned that the Boston media, and the national media at large, seem to be stumbling over themselves to manufacture stories surrounding the two newest, and most mercurial, members of the Patriots: Chad Ochocinco and Albert Haynesworth... shame on you, media. SHAME. At worst, these two guys are showing up, working hard, contributing (occasionally at a high level) and generally doing everything asked of them. Would that all 32 teams had more players like that. Leave them the hell alone already, till they actually do something worthy of controversy. Cripes sake. 

Man... I know it's only 2 games in... and I know it's a long season... but watching those two games, against two good to very good defenses, it was like watching 1s against 3s in the pre-season. It's not even fair, and that's not supposed to happen in the NFL. 

This defense is going to be better than the one on the field in 2007, and I think the offense is more diverse and less predictable than the 2007 version. As scary as it sounds... this team might end up being better than that 2007 team. And frankly I can not wait to see if I'm right about that. 

In more relevant news from the past week, the Pats ultimately put Dan Koppen on IR today, effectively ending his season. Based on the initial diagnosis, it seems like they didn't have to make that move. But I think watching Dan Connolly ably man the center position over the past game an a half, they decided that the safer play for Koppen, long term, was to let him rehab his ankle at an easy pace, and not rush him back to play in the last 2 or 3 games, and risk more significant injury. Offensive line play is all about repetition and continuity, and the Pats will be hard pressed to try and get that back with Koppen in time to be effective this season. I think it's probably the right move at this point. 

The Pats also put Myron Pryor on IR, which is a shame... Pryor looked pretty good in the action he saw this season, and I think had a chance to be a big contributor. This just puts added pressure on the D-Line depth, but as is so often the case with the Patriots, depth is something they definitely have on the D-Line... and not just depth... quality depth. So few teams have the luxury of saying that. 

Bruins:

Tomorrow night the Stanley Cup Champion Boston Bruins (yup... I will not tire of writing that for at least another 6 months) take the ice for their first pre-season game in preparation of defending the Cup this season. The champs are back on the ice, and the feelings of excitement and jubilation that had somewhat subsided over the summer are beginning to make their way back to the ice-surface. The Bruins return their championship club largely intact. They lose inconsistent winger Michael Ryder and underperforming defenseman Tomas Kaberle, but bring in hard-shooting veteran defenseman Joe Corvo to pair with Zdeno Chara into one of the most fearsome hard-shooting power-play point tandems in hockey. None of these moves should have any major impact on the Bruins, who will essentially allow 2nd year wunderkind Tyler Seguin to possibly take over Ryder's spot on the second or third line. I also expect Jordan Caron to take the next step to being a regular contributor. 

Of course the Bruins will continue to have the NHLs best goalie, Tim Thomas, back between the pipes, with perhaps one of the best backups in hockey (Tuuka Rask) ready if called upon. There's not a reason in the world Bruins fans shouldn't expect this team to be one of the elite teams from start to finish, and have a real shot at being the first team to successfully defend the cup since the '98 Red Wings. I'm so excited I might wet myself. Seriously... I'm leaking a little...  need to go... be right back... 

Celtics:

I'm not inclined to write anything about the Celtics or the NBA in general until someone on either side starts acting like a grownup. And since that doesn't look like it's going to happen, this will be a short bit... 

The NBA lockout is just like the NFL lockout was... only absent people who actually give a shit about fixing it. See all you NBA fans next September, when the NBA realizes that the NFL is the only sport that can actually survive a prolonged lockout without serious repercussions... (maybe they should talk to the NHL or MLB about that). 

Quick Slants: NFL week 2

Week 2 of the NFL season is in the books, and already some things are starting to come in to focus. Good teams with hiccups in Week 1 straightened themselves out (Steelers, Saints, Falcons), bad teams we already knew were bad kept proving it (Seahawks, 49ers, Manning-less Colts), some surprise winners from Week 1 came back to earth with a thud (Jaguars, Bears, Bengals), and elite teams, while showing cracks, continue to be elite (Packers, Patriots, Jets). So with that as the backdrop, here are my completely random and off-the-cuff thoughts about the action from Week 2:



The Steelers were nowhere near as bad as they played against the Ravens in Week 1...

...and oh, by the way, the Ravens are nowhere near as good as they played in Week 1...

Yes, the Seahawks are bad, and some people will fail to give the Steelers any credit for beating them... but this game was over before the 'Hawks boarded the 10 hour flight from Seattle. It was never close, and the Steelers did what they were supposed to do. Not going to fault them for dominating any team in the NFL.

I can't remember seeing so many long-bomb type plays made successfully as I have the first two weeks of the season.

The Dolphins played their first two games on the road last year, and won them both... they played their first two games at home this year, and lost them both. I don't know what this means... but found it interesting anyhow.

Can you really throw for over 400 yards and have a bad game? Cam Newton made throw after throw against a good Packers defense, but he also made some horrible decisions and really bad off-balance throws that frankly cost the Panthers the game... yes he's the reason they were in it to begin with, and I won't take anything away from what he's done so far... but the goal here is to win games... and he made some bad mistakes that helped keep that from happening.

Yes, Cam Newton became one of just a handful of quarterbacks to throw for 400+ yards in consecutive games... but then again, that list includes Billy Volek and Matt Cassel... so... ya know... take it as you will.

... lastly, and most importantly, about Cam Newton: He's better than you thought he was going to be... way better... come on... admit it.

I know the Jets dominated the scoreboard against the Jags... but I watched that game, and I honestly thought the Jets offense still looked... ummmm... unimpressive, for lack of a better word, for most of that game. Turnovers and good field position made for some short fields, and Sanchez made a few good throws... but man, still some real concerns about his decision-making and a couple more bad interceptions. Against a good team, that's going to come back to haunt them.

So Tony Romo leads one comeback against a below-average 49ers team (admittedly in courageous fashion with some pretty passes late, all while fighting through a cracked / broken rib) and suddenly he's shed the well-earned reputation of a QB that makes bad decisions in critical spots? I'm not buying it...

Mike Vick is either going to learn to be a pure pocket passer, or find his NFL career cut short again, a result of taking too many shots like he did Sunday night behind a pretty poor offensive line...

... and speaking of the Eagles... money spent isn't always money well spent. In building their "dream-team", they almost completely ignored their Offensive and defensive lines... and both were exposed Sunday night. For the money they spent on Nnamdi Asomugha, who they frankly didn't really need, they could have built experience, depth and talent on their lines. Hell, Brian Waters could have been had for a song... the Pats snatched him up for nothing and he's starting on the best offensive team in football.

Was I one of the people who knew that Kenny Britt was likely going to have a huge fantasy year with a decent throwing QB and complete absence of any other viable receiving option? Yes... yes I was...

While he played better than last week, Donovan McNabb is still done... and at this point, so are the Vikings I'm afraid...

I've said this before... I don't care how great an arm Cutler has... he keeps pouting on the sidelines or visibly dressing-down his receivers or linemen with his facial expressions, there's going to be a mutiny in Chicago, or at the very least a mid-week injury report that lists Cutler as "Probable - facial bruising / broken nose".

Josh Freeman is way more poised than a QB of his age and experience should be...

... and speaking of Freeman, watching that game against the Vikings I couldn't help but think McNabb was watching Freeman from the sidelines as if he was in a time-machine, watching himself from about 10 years ago.

I'll be honest... even if Peyton Manning was healthy, I'm not sure this Colts team is better than 8-8... maybe 9-7.

Talk about Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde... the Ravens looked as bad against the Titans as they did good against the Steelers. At this point I have no idea what to make of them... I feel like Jerry Seinfeld in the episode where George loses his glasses but claims to see perfectly when squinting... "You're eating onions, you're spotting dimes... I don't know what the hell is going on!"

I've changed my mind... the toughest division in the NFL isn't the NFC South... it's the AFC East... speaking of which...

There's a part of me that's this close to buying in to the Bills as a decent team, and maybe even a playoff contender... but a few things keep me from making that leap: Ryan Fitzpatrick still has a tendency to float that ball and over-throw his receivers; they play in the toughest division in the NFL (see how I did that?); the allowed 454 total yards to the Raiders, 323 of those on the arm of Jason Campbell... so I don't even want to think of what an offense like the Pats' is going to do to them; their offense looks pretty predictable and I think teams will be able to jump plays as they get more film on them.  That said, don't sleep on the Bills... they are scrappy and will probably be in most games this year. They could surprise you.

And speaking of buying in... I'm all in on the Lions... that team is for real. Don't think I'm bold enough to say with confidence they could beat the Packers for that division, right now? Try me...

Can anyone outside of the immediate Denver or Cincinnati viewing area tell me a single thing that happened in the Bengals / Broncos game?

I'm demanding that Peyton Hillis' arms should be the given the "Chuck Norris" treatment... For example, "When the boogeyman goes to sleep at night he checks under the bed for Peyton Hillis' arms", or "They once made a 'Peyton Hillis' arms' toilet paper, but it wouldn't take shit from anyone". You can come up with your own...

I still don't know how Ben Roethlisberger didn't rupture every tendon in his knee. Are we sure his skeleton wasn't artificially replaced with Adamantium, a-la Wolverine... that dude just doesn't get hurt like normal people...

Note to self: when running full speed, avoid planting foot on slippery, movable first-down markers at all costs. (I know this should probably be self-evident... but... )

Before the 2009 draft the Patriots traded Matt Cassel to the Chiefs for their 2009 2nd round pick... which turned into safety Patrick Chung. Ok, it's only two-plus years later but I feel pretty confident in saying "advantage Patriots".

Someone please pass the memo along to the Raiders, 49ers, and Vikings: that line about "prevent defenses only prevent you from winning"... it's not just a clever play on words.

Is Pats defense defensible?

It was another win for the Patriots yesterday, and another other-worldly performance by Tom Brady and the Pats offense. But of course, the win was not without concerns, especially on the injury front and the defensive side of the ball in general. I won't go as far as Greg Bedard in today's Boston Globe, where he called the Patriots "lucky Tom Brady continues to throw for a gazillion yards." and that "they’re fortunate to have two tight ends in Rob Gronkowski and Aaron Hernandez that can’t be matched up with down the field." I'm never one to attribute to luck that which is clearly the output of hard work and skill at the highest level. They Patriots weren't "lucky" to win. The interception by Wilfork wasn't "good luck", for example... it wasn't even a poor throw by Rivers. It was an outlet to the flat that is made hundreds of times a week, Wilfork just made an outstanding, athletic play. That and the continued dominance of Brady and his offense make attributing any Pats win where they score 35 + points and win by 10 points or more to "luck" a bit of hyperbole. 


Having said that, two games into the season it's clear that the Patriots have some serious issues to address on defense. In my view, those problems are up the middle, where lack of depth and skill at both safety and inside linebacker are starting to be revealed. As a result, the Pats are having a hard time establishing any real defensive identity. They spent a good deal of money and effort in the off-season upgrading their defensive line, to add bulk in the middle and a bona-fide pass-rush. I think they have the personnel, up front, to be a monster D-Line, that can pressure the QB and stop the run, but ability to take advantage of those skills and apply that pressure means being able to aptly defend the middle of the field, and it seems the Patriots coaches don't have confidence in this aspect of the game, at this time. As a result, what you're seeing is that while the Pats have been regularly employing four down linemen on the line (occasionally three in long down and distance passing situations), they have not been running LBs like Mayo and Fletcher and Ninkovich off the edge or up the middle to pressure QBs. Instead they have been playing a zone along with the safeties. And teams are noticing this. Something I noticed in the last quarter of the Miami game, as well as a large chunk of the San Diego game, is that opposing offenses were exploiting that zone by sending backs and tight-ends on up-and-out routes, or flat routes that are drawing linebackers out to the flat, and vacating large portions of the underneath-middle of the field. They are then sending slot receivers across the middle about 7 - 10 yards out. With the corners playing deep and outside, this leaves undersized safeties trailing speedy wide-receivers across that middle; not only an easy completion, but an opportunity for Yards After the Catch with the middle of the zone opened up. Or, teams are sending backs to the flat, looking that way to draw the LBs in and then hitting TEs or WRs lined up inside on seam routes. 


The Pats have been using Patrick Chung, their one high-skill safety, to often defend opponent's skilled TEs or receiving backs man-to-man. He's done an admirable job (notably keeping all-pro TE Antonio Gates without a catch while spending much of the game assigned to him). It's an obvious asset that Chung has the skill to handle this responsibility, but it also takes Chung out of the "read and react" safety position that was once played with aplomb by Rodney Harrison. With Harrison accompanied by capable safeties like Eugene Wilson and James Sanders, the middle of the field was kept pretty well defended. The Pats don't have that second capable safety and are too often asking Chung to be almost a third or fourth cornerback. I see the safety position as a huge problem for the Pats right now that has a trickle-down effect on the rest of the defense, and the style of defense they can employ. 


Now, many Pats fans have made the claim, in defense of the Pats defensive performances of the past couple of weeks,  that they are deploying a "bend but don't break" defensive mentality. Let them get the yards from 20 to 20, but defend the red-zones and minimize points. And to a point they are correct... but I don't think its in the intentional way they seem to think. I think the reason for the Pats success inside the 20 defensively has to do with the same reason they struggle outside of it: and that is, the middle of the field. Inside the 20, space is compacted and you can't vacate the middle as readily, or with as much space, as you can between the 20s. With the field shortened, the Pats can play to their strengths: strong D-Line play, solid CB play on the outside, and now the LBs and safeties have much less ground to cover in that middle-zone... as a result they become much harder to score on, and have a chance to make plays using the best of their skill-set. They've done this in two consecutive weeks now. 


But there are a couple of major problems with this style of play: first, no matter how good your defense plays inside the 20s, the odds are always in favor of the offense in those situations. Eventually they will give up points. Points they wouldn't have to if they were better defensively between the 20's. And second, any team in the NFL will tell you that the best way to defend Tom Brady and the Patriots offense is to simply not allow him on the field. Brady and this offense are based on rhythm... the more they are on the field, the better they get... they get into that quick-set no huddle and dictate the pace of play and DARE you to keep up. And the best way to prevent that is to put together long drives of short-to-medium yardage plays, and most importantly, convert on third down. If you do that enough in a game, you will score points AND keep Brady off the field, giving your team a chance to steal a win in the final minutes. And one of the most glaring problems with the defense yesterday was that they just could not get off the field on third down. The Chargers deployed this strategy beautifully this past Sunday... they had the ball longer than the Pats, put together long, sustained drives, and kept Brady off the field for long stretches of play, especially in the 3rd and early 4th quarter, and converted a staggering 10 of 12 third-down opportunities. Had they managed to not be victimized by a combination of poor play calling (the 4th and goal play call), poor decisions (the second Rivers interception was gawd-awful, and the Tolbert fumble after hitting the hole and running backwards), and outstanding individual efforts by the Patriots (the Wilfork interception, and the play by Mayo, diving over a defender to swat the ball out of Tolbert's hands), they would have been in excellent position to have kept this game close and maybe even win it. 


And that's my fear... that the Pats are going to have trouble with a smart team that plays well in the middle of the field. You're not going to beat this team straight-up trying to outscore them in a slug-fest. Brady is just too locked in right now. If I were a coach of an opposing team I would revolve my entire game-plan around that philosophy: clear out the middle and send slants, crosses and seam routes to take advantage of that middle... put together long drives... mix in runs, mainly around the edge, and chew up clock. Keep the game close, then turn up the defensive pressure in the second half and try to steal the game late. 


I'm not sure the Bills are the team to succeed with this. They are scrappy, and they will try this approach, I promise you, but their team is built around speed on the outside with players like Stevie Johnson and Roscoe Parrish and CJ Spiller. Fred Jackson is a great between the tackles runner but I think the Pats hold up well against him. And the Bills defense is not great... so while I think the Bills will be scrappy and will put up a fight, I don't see them having the horses to keep the Pats off the board for less than 35 - 45 points, and I just don't see them putting up that many points themselves. 


I think pretty much the same of the Raiders the following week, frankly. They don't have anywhere near the type of controlled offense they would need to beat the Pats. Looking ahead, though, the Jets and Steelers do... and I think it will be by that Jets game in 3 weeks that the Pats will need to have fixed their safety problem and start allowing that D-Line to play a more sustained attacking style... otherwise we'll be looking at the wrong end of a 28-24 score.