Mean World

Draft Board 2011

2011-04-27T10:38:00.003-04:00

You might have already noticed this, but I love the NFL draft. If any single event is going to lead to additional blog entries, this is it.

I was going to create a cheat sheet - a draft board, if you'll allow my delusions of grandeur - to keep track of players during the draft. I was opening up TextPad to start my list, and it occurred to me that a place already existed where I could document this cheat sheet. A magical place that would save this cheat sheet forever, allow me to search for it and evaluate it years later...

Enough preamble. Here's my personal ranking of the players based purely on the order that I'd like to see the Eagles draft them. If you're wondering how this relates to your favorite team, it doesn't. While Cam Newton will probably go #1 to Carolina tomorrow, he doesn't crack the Top Twenty in this list, because there are a lot of players I'd like to see the Eagles draft before him.

Just as a note, I'm stealing the analysis from Mel Kiper and Mike Mayock. I don't pretend to have watched any tape on these guys and evaluated them independently.

1) Patrick Peterson - CB, LSU
The best corner in the draft fits a glaring need for the Eagles. He has ideal size and speed (6', 4.3) and is dangerous as a return man as well. He'd be the perfect complement to Asante Samuel.

2) Nick Fairley - DT, Auburn
I don't really care about the reports that this guy is sliding down NFL draft boards. He's a disruptive force, a real penetrator from the DT position that the Eagles have lacked since Jerome Brown.

3) Prince Amukamara - CB, Nebraska
Also reportedly sliding because he lacks top-end speed. Asante Samuel lacks top-end speed too, but the Eagles system employs a lot of off coverage, or press-and-release, both of which are right in Prince's wheelhouse.

4) Robert Quinn - DE, UNC
I know, another first-round DE would make Eagles fans groan. But he simply has too much talent to pass up. Spotless character and medical histories make him even more appealing.

5) Jimmy Smith - CB, Colorado
Craziness, right? A lot of mock drafts have this guy sliding to the second round. But his size/speed ratio (6'2", 4.4) is off the charts, and a tall CB is the Eagles #1 need by leaps and bounds. I can honestly only find four guys I'd rather see the Eagles draft than Smith. Who cares if he's smoked a little weed? The character concerns are overblown, and if somehow slides to #23, the Eagles should run the podium with his name.

6) Tyron Smith - OT, USC
The Eagles would be fortunate to draft the best tackle in the draft, another need position.

7) Marcel Dareus - DT, Alabama
Is not an ideal fit for the Eagles' scheme, but he's such a dominating force that I'd be willing to take a chance on him. Probably will be drafted #2 overall, so this is a moot point.

8) Corey Liuget - DT, Illinois
Although DT is not a huge need for the Eagles, the number of good DTs in this draft is astounding. And again, while their current DTs are solid but unspectacular, a true penetrator that can wreck blocking schemes would make the entire defense look better.

9) Anthony Costanzo - OT, BC

10) Nate Solder - OT, Colorado

11) Gabe Carimi - OT, Wisconsin
Any of these three linemen would be an instant upgrade at RT, and are flexible enough to play guard if needed.

12) Cameron Jordan - DE, Cal
A DE with size who could instantly replace Juqua Parker. Has the frame to play DE on running downs and DT on passing downs.

13) Aldon Smith - DE, Missouri
Once you get past the initial comparisons - another undersized DE? - Smith is too good a player to pass up.

14) Von Miller - OLB, VT
He's way better than this ranking, and will be long gone by the Eagles pick. But he's best suited for a 3-4 OLB.

15) Derrek Sherrod - OT, Miss St
Both Kiper and McShay rank him a bit below the other group of OTs, so what the hell, I did too.

16) Muhammad Wilkerson - DT, Temple
A very talented player who's probably more suited to a 3-4 DE, but I'd happily plug him into the DT rotation.

17) Adrian Clayborn - DE, Iowa
It's not saying much, but I watched him destroy Penn State for years, and I'm delighted his time in the Big Ten is over.

18) Mike Pouncey - C, Florida
Maybe he's not as good as his brother, but he doesn't need to be an All-Star to be an improvement. Has the flexibility to play guard as well.

19) Julio Jones - WR, Oklahoma
Much, much better player than a #19 ranking, but if the Eagles draft a WR in round #1, it likely means they won't re-sign DeSean...and that's not the scenario I'm hoping for. Should be long gone by the Eagles' pick anyway.

20) AJ Green - WR, Georgia
Like Jones, has way more talent than a #20 ranking would suggest, I just don't see a place for him on the Eagles.

21) Brandon Harris - CB, Miami
Did I mention that the Eagles really need a CB?

22) Ryan Kerrigan - DE, Purdue
Undersized again, may end up as a 3-4 OLB. But he's a very productive, high-motor player who would be helpful right away in a rotation.

23) Akeem Ayers - OLB, UCLA
A play-making LB would be a welcome addition to the defense.

24) Da'Quan Bowers - DE, Clemson
I really don't want another DE with injury problems, but at this point is worth the risk.

25) JJ Watt - DE, Wisconsin
Doesn't fit the scheme as well as I like, he's an ideal 3-4 DE. But he could play DE on run downs and DT on pass downs.

26) Cam Newton - QB, Auburn
Zero chance, barely even worth a comment. Still, it would be fun to have this guy learn from Mike Vick. And it sure would be easy to trade Kolb for a 2012 pick if he was on the roster.

27) Aaron Williams - CB, Texas

28) Ras-I Dowling - CB, Virginia
Two words: Dmitri Patterson.

At this point, I find myself ranking guys like Mark Ingram and Blaine Gabbert, who won't be around when the Eagles pick and would be no use to them anyway. So I'll stop here and pray that the Birds can somehow grab two of these 28.

Thanks and Good Night

2011-03-21T22:55:00.002-04:00

Writing a farewell post, on a blog that no one reads, smacks of self-importance. But I prefer closure over an open and unfulfilled commitment, and besides, I've rarely shied away from self-importance. But even closure isn't necessarily permanent...I often had to break up with a girlfriend a couple times before it really stuck.

When I first started blogging, I was excited to share my opinion. Even if it wasn't a wide audience (note the understatement), the simple act of documenting an opinion forces an intellectual rigor that goes beyond casual conversation. When I'm standing around the water cooler, it's easy to rattle off statistics that I think are correct and quotes that I'm pretty sure I heard from a reliable source. But when I write an opinion down and post it publicly, where it will live forever, I'm much more likely to check facts and attribute sources. This rigor is conducive to forming smart opinions, instead of just regurgitating someone else's talking points. More than once I discovered, in the process of checking my facts, that my underlying assumptions were wrong.

While this enforced rigor was valuable, it also more and more revealed how unqualified I was to have an opinion. For instance, I wish we'd acted sooner in Libya to thwart the murder of civilians, but I appreciate Obama's reluctance to act without international support, especially after two long wars and nation-building efforts. Ok, that sounds nice, but is there any value at all in that opinion? Have I spent any time in foreign service, diplomacy, or international politics? Have I studied Arab culture? Have I researched historical precedents and drawn conclusions from their consequences? (The answer to all these questions, in case you're wondering, is 'no'.) So then, why should I add my opinion to the impossible clutter of valueless twittering available today?

Also through documenting my opinions, it became painfully clear that they had exactly zero predictive power, whether discussing politics, sports, or the stock market. When I'm not writing down predictions, I tend to 1) make a lot of them, and 2) remember mostly the ones I got right. But when they're all documented, it's obvious that a monkey with a coin would have a good chance to equal me. It was interesting to note that I generally fared no worse than professional political wonks, sportswriters, and stock-pickers...but that's still not good enough to be valuable.

On top of that, it began to feel extremely repetitive. There's a limit to how many times I can bash the fiscal irresponsibility of big government, the playcalling of Andy Reid, or hypocritical money-grabbing of Al Gore. There came a point where it was all familiar territory, where I felt anyone who'd read my blog over the years pretty much knew what I was going to say on a given topic before they even read the post. And that simply isn't fulfilling.

I realized that the only way I'd feel good about blogging is if I actually created content, instead of just repeating unqualified opinions. But that takes time and effort that I wasn't willing to invest. I could have DVRed every Eagles game, re-watched every play, diagrammed the personnel groupings and made notes on every player's performance. That's content - it provides value to the reader. Of course, Sheil Kapadia already does this. So for me to duplicate his effort, when he's already getting paid for it, seems utterly pointless (not to mention, it sounds like hard work.)

With no impressive skills, no unusual life experience, and no motivation to develop original content, there's really no reason for me to continue blogging. I'm fond of my writing ability, but only moderately so. On just about any topic, I can think of several writers who are wittier, better informed, and use analogies like...someone who is better at analogies than me.

So I'm done. I definitely got something out of this blog for a while, but that time has passed. Thanks for reading, and good night.

Classic Andy Reid

2011-02-03T09:21:00.003-05:00

You knew it too, right?

You knew that somehow, some way, Andy Reid would try to prove once again that he's smarter than everyone else. That a conventional move would never do for this Eagles organization. That they would find a way to do something so unusual, so shocking, so over-the-top stupid that even their own players are speechless.

When McDermott was fired, I wasn't impressed with the available crop of DC candidates. But as time passed, I became familiar with Mike Trgovac, who seemed like a perfect fit. A coordinator in Carolina for 6 years (including the year they beat the Eagles in the NFC Championship game), he ran a 4-3 defense, and would provide exactly what the Eagles needed: a fresh and experienced voice from outside of the organization.

Another intriguing option was Winston Moss, a younger (not nearly as young as McD) and hungry linebackers coach on the Packers who is ready to step up and become a coordinator. He's had experience in the 4-3 also, and worked with Jim Johnson early in his coaching career.

The longer the "search" dragged on, the more convinced I was that the Eagles were going in the direction of one of these two guys. They couldn't talk to either one until after the Super Bowl, so it was the perfect explanation as to why they seemed to be taking so long to find a coach. And I was relieved, because I thought as long as they're getting a defensive coach from a Super Bowl team, they couldn't possibly screw it up too badly.

But, of course, I misunderestimated Big Red again. His capacity to make clownish decisions is unparalleled in the NFL, since everyone else who makes decisions this poorly has already been fired. Andy decided to promote his offensive line coach to defensive coordinator.

So let's recap: On a team that won its division with a Top-5 offense, you're going to turn over control of the defense to a guy who hasn't coached defense in 25 years. You gave up on a young, inexperienced coordinator so that you could try to win the Super Bowl with someone even less experienced. Fucking brilliant.

Lost in this disaster are two great hires: Howard Mudd as the new OL coach, and Jim Washburn as the new DL coach. These two may be the best line coaches in the NFL. If only their bosses deserved similar praise, I might have a reason to feel excited about this team.

Eagles Coaching Moves

2011-01-17T10:58:00.003-05:00

Are the Eagles making the right coaching moves as the season wraps up, or are they just making their problems worse?

First, they sack defensive coordinator Sean McDermott. I've killed him numerous times during the season, and his faults are worth repeating in this post-mortem...there were too many unsound blitzes, especially on third-and-long. Too many times I watched defensive linemen helplessly attempt to keep up with wide receivers. Really, the Eagles blitzed a little too much in general. Teams would routinely beat them with screens, rollouts, or max-protect schemes to take advantage of the one-on-one matchups down the field. Part of the effectiveness of the blitz is surprise, and if the other team is never surprised, it is less effective. So did McDermott have some improvements to make schematically? Of course he did.

But he is a very young coach who was forced to fill a legend's shoes when Jim Johnson unexpectedly died. Too often I thought he was being overly creative with his schemes, possibly to prove that he belonged in the same breath as Johnson. But if he's a bright and hard-working as Andy constantly claimed, then surely he would have learned from his mistakes and made corrections in the fall, right? And any improvement in the personnel would surely make him look even better. The Eagles started 7 players who were seventh-round picks or undrafted free agents on defense in the playoffs, and still held the Packers to 21 points.

Why not have this conversation, instead of firing McDermott?

Andy: I think you blitzed a little too much this season. I'd like to see more coverage, especially on third-and-long. And when you do blitz, it has to be fundamentally sound.
Sean: Will do, boss.

If McDermott's unwilling to accept that criticism, or too stupid to implement those changes, then the real indictment goes to the guy who hired him. He's either a smart, hard-working guy who can learn from his mistakes...or he's an idiot that should have never had control of the defense to begin with.

It would be one thing if a brilliant 4-3 coach was available, but there isn't. The Eagles are scraping the bottom of the barrel, interviewing colossal coaching failures like Jim Mora Jr. and Dick Jauron to take McDermott's place. Seriously? With a lockout looming, the new coach won't even have a full offseason to implement his new scheme.

They've also fired defensive line coach Rory Segrest. I don't know enough about DL technique to give you an informed opinion about his effectiveness, but there is some logic to this move. Two Eagles castoffs - Chris Clemons and Jason Babin - had 10+ sacks with new teams. Of course, I thought Babin was a keeper and should have been re-signed, so that's more of a personnel failure (Andy) than a coaching one. Clemons was useless in Philly, though, so maybe the coach just wasn't able to get enough out of him.

Overall, this season was more about personnel failures. Trading Sheldon Brown for nothing and replacing him with an ineffective fourth-round draft pick. Oops! Having huge holes on the offensive line and spending zero out of thirteen picks to shore them up. Oops! Releasing Will Witherspoon, who played terrifically for Tennessee this year, and replacing him with a terrible Ernie Sims. Oops!

But if we are going to talk about coaching failures, how about the 16 points scored in a playoff game? The ridiculous ineptitude with the challenge flag? The constant FG attempts when the Eagles needed a TD instead? The bone-headed insistence on deep-drop play-action when teams blitz every down? The abandonment of a Pro Bowl running back on a weekly basis? Big Red needs to stop finding scapegoats and take a real hard look at his own stubborness. The worst gameday coach in the NFL needs to make changes to himself, not to his staff.

Yes he's crazy. Kill him anyway.

2011-01-13T16:17:00.002-05:00

Need to catch up on a few day's worth of topics...

Read an article with an interesting logical argument: If you think Gabrielle Gifford's shooter committed murder because he was insane, and not because he was pushed to violence by overheated political rhetoric...then surely you'd support an innocent verdict by reason of insanity? I enjoyed the attempt, because I relish a good syllogism as much as the next guy, but there's a rather large flawed assumption at the base of this reasoning. Just because I call someone crazy, nuts, fucked-in-the-head, and/or insane, I'm not restricting myself to the legal definition of insanity, ie: Cannot tell the difference between right and wrong. Someone who can tell the difference clearly, but acts evil anyway (especially when there is no self-benefit involved), is a clear wacko. Yet they wouldn't qualify for an insanity defense. Committing murder for pleasure or fame is crazy, but the killer still needs to die. Case closed.

Meanwhile, Sarah Palin's response to this incident would be funny if it wasn't sad. Sad because someone so hypocritical, illogical, and ignorant as Palin is going to have immense support to be our next president. From a country that elected W twice, I would expect nothing more. In one breath she absolves herself of any responsibility for the violence, saying that "Acts of monstrous criminality stand on their own. They begin and end with the criminals who commit them". But in the next breath, she condemns the media for inciting violence. She also ignores her own recent stance against the Ground Zero Mosque (more accurately known as the Two Blocks From Ground Zero Muslim Community Center), where she insists that all Muslims bear the burden of crimes committed by a few. Anyone with even an inkling to vote for Palin should be placed under psychiatric care immediately.

Obama, on the other hand, struck the perfect tone in his speech at the memorial service in Tuscon. While he has done everything in his power to expand government and bankrupt the country, exactly as I warned he would, it is a welcome change to have a presidential leader that doesn't embarrass himself and his country every time he opens his mouth. Of course I'd rather have a fiscally responsible president than a good orator, but Bush was neither. At least Obama has one thing going for him.

Finally, I read about the ongoing ecological disaster that is China, and I was sickly pleased by it. Not because I enjoy environmental destruction (I don't, honest!), but because I feel bombarded by media stories which accentuate American decline and offer China's economic rise as a counterpoint. China's even more fucked up than we are, they're just starting from such a poverty-stricken low point that their growth rate looks impressive. And it emphasizes - again - that environmental legislation in America will do very little, if anything, to solve worldwide ecological problems. We'll either find technological solutions to generate clean power, or we'll be forced into behavioral change by a crisis. Anyone who tells you we can cap-and-trade our way to a clean environment is either outrageously ignorant or a money-grabbing charlatan.

NFL Prediction Scorecard

2011-01-05T09:35:00.003-05:00

At the beginning of the season, I did a team-by-team preview that included predictions about the finishing order of all NFL teams. I pointed out how, in spite of steady 50% turnover rate in the playoff field over the last decade, media pundits routinely picked the same teams. Turnover ranged from 12% to 25% - I was unable to find a single NFL 'expert' on espn.com, nfl.com, or cnnsi.com who predicted a statistically reasonable amount of change.

Oddly, this was the most stable playoff field in seven years, with only 5/12 (42%) teams changing. Still, that's a lot close to 50% than the 20% favored by safe-picking pundits.

So, enough stalling, how did I do?

I predicted 7/12 playoff teams correctly, a meager 58%. Doesn't sound like much, until you start comparing it against the other experts.

From nfl.com:

Vic Carucci: 6/12, didn't think the Patriots (14-2) would make it in.
Gil Brandt: 7/12, liked the Texans and the Cowboys to make conference championships
Bucky Brooks: 8/12, he kicked my ass, so I won't point out that he whiffed on the Patriots also.
Pat Kirwan: 6/12, had the Bengals (4-12) in the Super Bowl.
Jason La Canfora: 7/12, rode the Titans to the AFC championship.
Michael Lombardi: 5/12, Chargers in the Super Bowl.
Steve Wyche: 6/12, Cowboys in the NFC Championship.

Meanwhile, Don Banks only picks division winners, so his numbers don't compare neatly. He got exactly 1/8 right, but four of his division winners made it in as wildcards, so it's a better than a 12.5% performance, but I'm not sure how to measure it.

So what does this mean? Even in a year where the playoff turnover was less than the historical average, I still fared better than your average paid NFL pundit. Exactly one picked more teams correctly than me, and most picked less.

Shameful

2010-12-29T10:27:00.003-05:00

There's no other word for that inexcusable performance last night, a 24-14 loss to the Vikings. It was the Eagles first loss by double digit points this season, and it came at home, in December, to a 4-10 team.

Shameful.

There are plenty of goats after a game like that, so I can't call them all out, but here's a few of the biggest:

Mike Vick - Looking suspiciously like Vick 1.0, he was careless with the ball, missed wide-open receivers, and ran at the first sign of pressure. One of his greatest strengths earlier in the year was his ability to make the first rusher miss, step up in the pocket, and deliver a strike. Instead, he pulled the ball down and tried to take off.
Andy Reid - As usual, Reid was steadfast in his attempt to get Vick killed. Not even four big hits on the first five plays could convince Big Red to put the ball in McCoy's capable hands. And even though the Vikings blitzed on nearly every defensive snap, the Eagles never countered it with standard blitz-beating strategies like quick slants and screens. It was deep drop after deep drop, with five- or six-man protection, and no amount of failure was going to convince him that his pre-game plan was wrong.
Sean McDermott - The offense was so bad, it's easy to overlook the putrid performance of the defense, but I'm not about to let it slide. For all of Collinsworth's effusive praise about rookie Joe Webb, he didn't throw to the second receiver in his progression one time the entire night. Against a one-read-and-run QB, which Joe Webb is, and most young althetic QBs are, you play a zone defense. This forces him to scan the field patiently, and gives your defenders a chance to read his eyes. Webb didn't look off a safety once, he stared down his primary receiver on every single throw...but it wasn't a problem since the Eagles' safeties were blitzing anyway, leaving one-on-one matchups behind them. On the third-and-11 play which broke the Eagles' backs, the Eagles blitzed two DBs. Percy Harvin, one of the fastest and most elusive players in the NFL, was covered one-on-one by seventh-round rookie linebacker Jamar Chaney. Sure, Webb made a nice throw...but any QB in the NFL should be able to make a one-read throw to a WR in mismatched single coverage down the middle of the field. McDermott made it easy for Webb all night, by getting cute and overblitzing when base defense would have won the game handily.
DeSean Jackson - On two of Vick's accurate throws, which were few and far between anyway, Jackson made no attempt to come back to the ball. Both times a defender behind Jackson closed faster than the receiver, who was simply standing still, and broke up the pass. I challenge you to find one play in Jerry Rice's career where he allowed a defender behind him to beat him to the ball. Jackson's an interesting case, as his rookie contract comes to an end, because he has game-breaking talent and clearly changes games. But he's not giving 100% on each play, and routinely pouts when the ball isn't coming his way. He's not on the diva level of T.O. or Ochocinco, but $30 million in his pocket wouldn't figure to improve his motivation.

The good news, if there is any, is that the Eagles earned a bye last night. With the #3 seed now locked up, and no possibility of movement in either direction, expect Kevin Kolb and a cast of misfits to stumble around the field on Sunday. That will give Vick, Samuel, and the host of hobbling Eagles an extra five days' rest before their first-round matchup against the Packers or the Giants.

Reid-iculous

2010-12-20T10:35:00.003-05:00

I don't want to take anything away from the Eagles' historic victory in New York yesterday, but I can't let Andy Reid, and the officials, off the hook completely.

Third-and-eleven in the first quarter, Manning throws to Hakeem Nicks, who uses the ground to help secure a catch. The replay from Fox showed it clearly wasn't a catch. Unbiased observer Peter King agreed. But no challenge from Andy Reid, and the drive ends with seven points for the Giants.

The DeSean Jackson 'fumble' at the end of the third quarter - replay again showed he was clearly touched down, and it should have been challenged and reversed. The red flag stayed in Reid's pocket, so instead of first down at midfield for the Eagles, the Giants get the ball and score. Another seven points flushed away by Big Red, and possibly could have been a 14-point swing if the Eagles finish the drive.

Those are on Reid, because he had the power to challenge and didn't...but it's the refs who are blowing the calls initially. And neither of those was worse than the Maclin 'fumble' at the end of the first half. It looked like a clear incompletion to me, especially if you're judging it by this standard. Fox brought in Mike Perreria, the former head of officials for the NFL - as qualified and unbiased an observer as you'll find - and he said the pass should be ruled incomplete. And yet, the referee emerged from the replay booth and said the call of catch/fumble was confirmed by the video. The Giants scored on the next play. Seven more points.

Did the Eagles defense do a good enough job? No, of course not. There's no excuse for letting Eli Manning light you up for 31 points, but 21 of those points were the direct result of bad calls - not the normal homer-whining bad calls that happen in every game, but nationally-recognized headscratchers, fourteen of which could have been rectified by Andy Reid's little red flag.

I couldn't be happier about the victory - I won't forget about that punt return, and singing the Eagles fight song with my kids afterward for decades - but we can't afford boneheaded decisions every week, especially in the playoffs. I don't even need to be on the sidelines - if Andy would have just conferenced me in for the game, the Giants would have scored 14 fewer points, because I was screaming for the challenge flag on those two plays (and only those two plays) well before the next play was run.

Big Game This Week

2010-12-15T16:14:00.002-05:00

Playoff scenarios:

Eagles win: Their magic number to clinch the division is one with two games left to play. They have a legit shot at the #2 seed and a playoff bye.

Eagles lose: Suddenly, the road to the playoffs is a lot longer. The only way to take the division is to win out, and the Giants need an improbable loss to the Redskins. The wildcard comes down to two teams from this bunch: Saints (10-3), Eagles (9-5), Bucs (8-5), Pack (8-5.) The Eagles lose any tie with the Packers. They would probably lose to the Saints on conference record, unless the Saints lose their last two. And they'd likely tie the Bucs on conference record, so the deciding factor would be common opponents.

Remaining schedule:

Saints: at Baltimore, at Atlanta, TB - These are three good teams...they've already lost to Atlanta once, and they did lose to TB last season...but it's hard to imagine them doing worse than 2-1. At 12-4, they'd finish ahead of the Eagles, who can be 11-5 at best with a loss to the Giants. Even if the Saints lose twice, they'd likely have a better conference record.

Packers: at NE, NYG, Chi - A brutal schedule with a wobbly Rodgers or a healthy Matt Flynn at QB. They'll almost certainly finish 9-7, though 10-6 is possible.

Bucs: Det, Sea, at NO - The Bucs are 8-0 against losing teams, 0-5 against winning ones, so it's easy to predict them for a 10-6 finish.

Realistically, the Eagles will have to win out if they lose this weekend, just to squeak into the playoffs as the #6 seed. That makes this game against the Giants huge, and it's going to be a tall order to defeat a division rival on the road two weeks in a row.

RDR Gets Some Love

2010-12-14T14:14:00.002-05:00

It's the end of the year, which means lots of "Best of" articles and "Top Ten" lists. I guess these are supposed to remind us that we're turning a page in our lives, even though the delineation between Dec 31st and Jan 1st is completely arbitrary.

But before I drift off into some boring rant involving Julius Caeser and Pope Gregory XIII, I'll focus on the topic at hand: Video Game of the Year.

Predictably, Red Dead Redemption is the consensus choice, in spite of my less-than-flattering review. (Note the misspelling of the title: Redepmtion. Thanks for the heads up, careful readers.) Using words like "verisimilitude", these video game reviewers extol the artistic virtue of the scenery, the careful storytelling, and the moral compass of John Marston.

And while all of these characteristics are indeed interesting, they don't by themselves make the game fun to play. A Monet masterpiece, a Beethoven sonata, a Shakespearean sonnet - all amazing art, but definitely not best experienced with an XBox controller in your hands. If I played a pixellated avatar exploring a museum, I wouldn't call it Game of the Year. While I certainly appreciate a game reviewer's desire to elevate the medium, and with it their own importance, I cannot agree that art alone makes a good game. You have to want to play it, not just look at it.

In Eagles news, the defense has been weakened significantly by the losses of Stewart Bradley and Brandon Graham. And in spite of spending (wasting) a third-round pick on Daniel Te'O-Nesheim, they signed an aging castoff Derrick Burgess instead of relying on the rookie's contributions. Says all you need to know about that blown pick.

Best of the Best

2010-12-13T08:52:00.002-05:00

There are 32 NFL teams.

Playing QB for an NFL team is one of the most desired jobs in the world: with it comes an immense salary, instant fame, endorsement deals, and the ability to knock up one supermodel and then dump her for another supermodel...all with a Justin Beiber haircut.

Yet, there aren't 32 guys in the world who can adequately play QB at an NFL level. Check out some of these stat lines from yesterday:

Jake Delhomme: 12 completions, 20 attempts, 86 yards, 0 TDs, 1 INT
Jimmy Clausen: 14-24-107-0-1
Matt Flynn: 15-26-177-0-1
Drew Stanton: 10-22-117-1-2 (win)
Kyle Orton: 19-49-166-0-3
Josh Skelton: 15-37-146-0-0 (win)
Jay Cutler: 12-26-152-0-2
Mark Sanchez: 17-44-216-0-1
Chad Henne: 5-18-55-1-0 (win)
Brodie Croyle: 7-17-40-0-0

Not included in this mess is Carson Palmer's 3INT day or Matt Hasselbeck's 4 pick effort.

Only three of those losers were playing because of injury, the other seven were actually their team's first choice at the position.

I don't follow other sports as closely as football, but the difference between the #1 QB and the #20 QB seems to be much more drastic than top-line players in other sports. As you can see, the 20th-best QB in the world is incompetent. Consistent mediocrity would be a huge improvement.

Yet, the 20th-best scorer in the NBA still scores a ton of points. The 20th-best forward in the NHL will score 30+ goals. The 20th-best striker in soccer is a tremendous, brilliant player. The 20th-best first basemen will still field his position adequately and hit .250. Why is there such an immense dropoff between #1 and #20 for NFL QBs?

It makes you really appreciate the teams, like the Cowboys and Eagles last night, that have two good QBs on their roster. And it makes you understand, whether you agree with it or not, why the NFL is so desperate to protect its quarterbacks from injury.

No one wants to pay to see Drew Stanton face off against Matt Flynn.

Random NFL thoughts

2010-12-07T14:56:00.002-05:00

Interesting stat flashed during the Dallas/Indy game last week: when Wade Phillips was the head coach of the Cowboys, they had a 2-to-1 pass-to-run ratio. Since Jason Garrett took over, they were exactly 1-to-1. (In that game, they ran 42 times and dropped back to pass 32, so it's in favor of the run now.) The media, of course, want to attribute the Boys' 3-1 record under Garrett to his "tough" attitude - he forces players to dress in a suit when travelling - but odds are that it's the changes on the field, not in the airplane, that are making a difference.

Oddly enough, Jason Garrett was the OC under Phillips, so I'm not sure why he didn't run the ball more from the start. Was Phillips demanding more pass attempts? Did Garrett actually try to sabotage Wade, knowing the head job would be his? While I can't put my finger on why they suddenly started running the ball, I do know that it's translated directly into wins, and this much-tougher team gets two shots at the Eagles in the next four games.

Big Red, on the other hand, is more dedicated to passing the ball than ever. Even with a 14-point lead, even with three minutes to go in the game. Against the Texans, he dialed up 43 passes and only 20 runs. LeSean McCoy is among the league leaders in yards per carry, but Andy just keeps passing. He pleads with the refs for Vick's protection, while he's stubbornly unwilling to protect Vick with his playcalling. Maybe he's anxious to start the Kevin Kolb Era, Volume Three.

Meanwhile, Baby Belichik was fired in Denver, ending an ignominious coaching debut. I've called him out numerous times for his horrendous decisions, even calling him the Worst Coach in the NFL. Sadly for the Chargers, Chiefs, and Oakland fans, he's no longer a part of the NFL. A quick recap of his bigger blunders:

Inheriting the #2 offense in the NFL, he traded away the starting QB, WR, and TE within two years. He changed the zone-blocking run scheme that was so successful and quickly dropped to the bottom of the league in rushing.
Firing Mike Nolan after the team ranked #7 in defense last season. Because of his abrasive personality and control-freak nature, McDaniels couldn't handle a strong, successful coach on his staff. He dumped Nolan and his defense currently ranks 27th.
Drafting Alphonso Smith - This was the worst choice in a draft I dubbed disastrous the day after it happenned. Trading away the first-round pick that the Seahawks used on Earl Thomas, the Broncos gave up on Smith earlier this year, dumping him to Detroit for a fourth-string TE.
Trading Peyton Hillis for Brady Quinn - Hillis ranks #10 in the NFL in rushing yards, with 11 TDs. Denver's best RB is ranked #23 and has 4 TDs. Quinn's been a disaster, unable to even secure the back-up role.

Some guys think they have all the answers. McDaniels didn't have any, and now he can wear his sweatshirt on the couch on Sundays.

Run the freaking ball, part 253

2010-11-30T19:36:00.003-05:00

1:59 to go in the first half, trailing by one, second-and-goal from the four-yard line. As a football team, you have two goals in this situation:

Score, and
Leave as little time as possible for the other team to score.

To achieve both these goals, you run the ball. Three runs and a touchdown is likely; even with the other team expecting a run, you will often gain four yards in three tries. Even if you just run twice and then settle for a field goal, you lead by two and leave only 45 seconds for the other team.

But wait, what's this? The Eagles are lining up in a spread formation, empty backfield. You can't run from that formation! Hold on, it's gotta be a QB draw with Vick...a little predictable, sure, but at least it's a run, right?
Nope, Vick drops back to pass and the ball is intercepted. The Bears score a TD of their own, and go into halftime with an eight-point lead. That's a 10-to-15-point swing in what turned out to be a 31-26 loss.

There is no logical explanation for this decision - it is beyond boneheaded. This is not a situation of 'you say toh-MAY-toh, I say toh-MAH-toh' preferences, it's indefensible buffoonery. And yet, these types of decisions happen every week, and not just in Philadelphia. I truly cannot comprehend how such a bottom-line business, where winning is the ultimate barometer, can consistently produce such inefficient decision-making.

If you want to be tricky and pass there, because you think you can fool the other team, then line up in a run formation and play-action pass. Do not come out with an empty backfield - that's not fooling anyone! It's a careless risk with almost no upside, since three runs are likely to accomplish the goal anyway, with more time off the clock and little chance of a turnover.

Yes, the defense sucked hard, and yes Vick looked shaky, but Andy Reid owns this decision and the chance it cost his team to win.

Meanwhile, on the defensive side of the ball, Boy Wonder called blitz after blitz with man coverage behind it, on a field that was little more than painted sand. Eagles defenders slipped and fell repeatedly, leading to big plays for the offensively-challenged Bears. Chicago played zone, rushing just four linemen most of the night, and didn't give up big chunks of yardage as a result. Did the Eagles ever adjust to the field conditions? No, they just kept blitzing and playing man, falling down, missing tackles, and giving up points.

There has to be a reason that NFL coaches routinely make such bad decisions and fail to adjust to obvious problems. It just doesn't make sense.

I read an interesting article on risk-aversion, thinking I might find an explanation there. But in fact, the results are the opposite of what I expected. Stock traders were used as test subjects in this case, and the study found that under stress, traders tended to be risk-averse when ahead on a trade. But when they were losing, stress make them more likely them to take foolish risks.

Foolish optimism is even more prevalent in the sleep-deprived, and NFL coaches fall into that category. So that helps explain why they might think it's a good idea to pass at the goalline, or continue to call high-risk blitzes that are failing. But it goes directly against the hyper-conservative fourth-down calls that I've been preaching against for years.

In any business as competitive as the NFL, where there are only 30 head coaching jobs available, and success is easily measured...the most efficient decision-makers should rise to the top. But that hasn't been the case.

Time to sign Vick

2010-11-18T13:43:00.002-05:00

Here's a quote from my review of the preseason game against the Bengals:

The Michael Vick Experiment is clearly a failure, but the Eagles remain steadfastly in character as they refuse to admit it. He's so incredibly careless with the ball, the Birds will be unable to win a game if he's forced to start. The most expensive backup QB in the NFL is also one of the worst, and he's all ours.

In that game, Vick finished 1-5 for 6yds and two interceptions. He looked slow and inaccurate, and made poor decisions.

The difference between that game and the one he played against the Redskins on Monday is unbelievable. I've never witnessed such a turnaround - from looking washed up to the NFL's best player in 10 weeks.

But there can't be any doubt now. Better mechanics have led to improved accuracy. He won't always play as well as he did Monday, but the fact that he's capable of embarrassing an opponent will change the way teams defend the Eagles. Defenses will give the running backs and receivers room to operate underneath, dropping both safeties deep to prevent the big play - both from Vick's arm and his legs. The press man coverage that Green Bay used to stifle the smaller Eagles receivers? Forget about it, because as soon as those corners turn around, Vick can take off and run for twenty yards. The Eagles will see a steady diet of two-deep and three-deep zones, which means simpler preparation, easier reads, and more consistent success. Vick doesn't have to be an All-Pro every week, if he plays great one out of every four, mediocrity will suffice for the other three. Not to mention the increased merchandise sales and prime time appearances for a team with the NFL's most exciting player.

I'd offer Vick a 5-year, $80 million contract with $40 million guaranteed. You could even twist my arm into an extra year (6/$100 million) as long as the guaranteed money remains at $40 million. I wouldn't bother with a special personal conduct clause, because he's not any more at risk of doing something self-destructive than any other 30-year-old millionaire athlete. He's more at risk for a career-ending injury than a repeat of dogfighting.

And if Vick's smart, he'll sign it immediately. He's a huge injury risk, and there might be a lockout next season...so why turn down $40 million today for (maybe) $50 million two years from now?

Which means, of course, that Kolb would get traded in the offseason. I like the way the kid has handled himself, and I've been hoping for him to succeed, but there's no denying Vick's superior performance. Kolb may be a good NFL QB, but it'll have to be somewhere else. End the speculation about the future and sign Vick now.

All-day Sucker

2010-11-10T20:30:00.001-05:00

Is it March yet?

Too Many Rules

2010-11-10T19:31:00.002-05:00

Austin Collie caught the ball. He took two steps forward, was in the process of taking a third, and hunched forward to protect his ribs. He was hit by Quintin Mikell on his shoulder, and bounced sideways into Kurt Coleman. Because his head was lowered, his helmet struck the helmet of the second player. He was knocked unconscious by the force of the blow and dropped the ball.

Instead of ruling it a catch and a fumble, the officials decided the pass was incomplete. (This is normally reviewable.) Because the pass was ruled incomplete, Collie was determined to be a defenseless receiver, and any contact to the helmet is illegal, which resulted in the flag. (Penalties are not reviewable, so it no longer matters if it was actually complete or not, because the 15-yard penalty and automatic first down cannot be overturned, even if the penalty is based on an assumption that replay can prove incorrect.) The penalty was initially called on Mikell, who neither contacted Collie with his helmet, nor contacted Collie's helmet. (It was later changed to Coleman.) The head referee explained his reasoning after the game, and claimed the penalty was justified, even though replays clearly showed he was wrong. The NFL reviewed the film, and supported its officials saying they had "called the play correctly", but their actions spoke louder than their words, when they refused to fine either Eagles defender.

Confused yet? You're not the only one.

The NFL created this mess because it has too many rules. The NFL has to stop trying to legislate every possibility, and instead provide broad standards that can be interpreted through the common sense filter of officials. Get rid of the endless technicalities, and allow the referee to determine which roughness is unnecessary. By attempting to make every decision black-and-white, and take all the judgment out of officiating, they've created a complex set of contradicting rules which serve no purpose well, and often make little sense. Instead of promoting safety and fair play, they add to the arbitrariness of football outcomes, while confusing everyone involved.

And fines for dangerous hits shouldn't be the province of NFL executives at all. Set up a board of players with the power to levy fines, and let them police themselves. If the players aren't willing to stand up for their own safety, it's not the NFL's business to try and legislate it.

Win Some, Lose Some

2010-11-01T17:08:00.002-04:00

You have to wonder what was going through McNabb's head on Sunday.

After giving up two draft picks to get him, and after winning as many games in their first seven as they had all last season, the Redskins unceremoniously benched McNabb for Rex 'Turnover Machine' Grossman. Rex, of course, turned the ball over on his very first snap, and Detroit returned his fumble for the game-sealing TD.

His play had been mediocre, and (typically) frustrating in third-down, red zone, and two-minute situations, but...Rex Grossman? If he's the answer, I don't want to know the question.

Even more unbelievably, Shanahan today claimed he made the decision because McNabb is out of shape and doesn't have the cardiovascular endurance to run a two-minute drill.

I've never been a McNabb defender, but something's not right about this statement. McNabb lost 30 pounds in the offseason, and is in the best shape of his life. He was also the Redskins' leading rusher on the day (45 yards.) So to imply that he's unfit, and somehow couldn't physically handle the rigors of the last two minutes of a football game (after playing the first 58) is preposterous.

McNabb has shown nothing but prickly sensitivity to public comments during his entire career. Shanahan couldn't possibly believe that personally attacking him in the media would help the Redskins. While I've long respected him as a coach, and long mocked McNabb, this is clear evidence that Shanny's ego is out of control.

Also clear is that the Eagles made the right decision by trading him - a decision I supported, even within the division. Both Kolb and Vick have looked great by comparison.

The Eagles also announced today the benching of Ellis Hobbs at CB, with special teams gunner Dmitri Patterson again, why did the Eagles trade Sheldon Brown? With no depth on the team to replace him, and no plan in the draft to target a CB, that decision looks curiouser and curiouser.

Every time Andy makes a good move, he couples it with a boneheaded one. Some things never change.

I love it when a plan comes together

2010-10-20T09:10:00.002-04:00

I've killed Big Red numerous times for being one of the worst game managers in the NFL. I've killed him for being inflexible, for failing to help his offensive line, and for putting too much pressure on a young QB. So it's only fair to give him credit for the game he called on Sunday.

It truly was a thing of beauty. There was a clear plan aimed at the Falcons' best pass-rusher, John Abraham, to throw him off-balance and slow down his attacking style. They targeted him with misdirection runs, rollouts, and chips from multiple players. There was a good mix of run and pass and a concerted effort to throw the ball downfield. The result was that the patchwork OL gave up only a single sack, and the offensive moved the ball up and down the field. It was a gameplan designed perfectly, and executed well, and the final result was a 31-17 victory against a 4-1 team.

And it came at a perfect time, lifting the Eagles record to 4-2 before two sure losses...at Tennessee and home against the Colts.

The Eagles are 0-3 against Jeff Fisher's Titans since Andy Reid took over, and only 5-6 the week before the bye (I thought this was much worse - they were 3-6 at one point before winning the last two seasons.) The Eagles have never matched up well against this team, and were actually embarrassed by them the last time they played. Even if Vince Young is hurt, I don't give the Birds much chance.

And then after the bye, the Colts come to town - and Peyton Manning is also undefeated against the Birds. Sean McDermott couldn't shut down powerhouses like Shaun Hill and Alex Smith, so he doesn't have a chance in this matchup against Manning.

But for now, I'll enjoy the glow - tied for the first in the NFC East, and the best record in the conference. I'm just too realistic to expect it to last.

Adventures in Coaching

2010-10-11T18:46:00.002-04:00

In the offseason, Andy Reid told us that Moise Fokou looked impressive, that he was expecting a big leap between years one and two, and that the Eagles had finally found a "physical player" at SAM who used his long arms to fend off blockers.

Two days into training camp, Fokou had lost his job to 220lb Akeem Jordan, who's never been confused for a physical player. Fokou was eventually demoted to third-string SAM, spent some time at DE, and seemed to barely make the roster.

After Akeem Jordan spent most of the Washington game on his back, being run over by linemen, tight ends, and fullbacks...the Eagles presented us with a new answer to an old problem: Moise Fokou.

It seemed to work, at least for a week. The Eagles did an excellent job against Frank Gore, holding one of the league's best backs to just 52 yards on 18 carries. Which begs the question...what the hell was Big Red doing in the first place, demoting a guy who is a necessary cog in the run defense?

In other defensive news, it's starting to look like Sean McDermott is overmatched as a defensive coodinator. The Eagles continue to be burned on poorly-designed, poorly-timed blitzes, as the opposing offenses know exactly what's coming and how to counter it. On third-and-21 - a distance the 49ers hadn't converted since 1997 - the Eagles blitzed a corner while leaving a DE in coverage. The Niners rolled protection away from the blitz, and Brandon Graham wasn't able to stay with a WR in coverage (duh), leading to a long completion and a first down. The Niners completed at least three other first downs against a safety blitz, and would have had a touchdown on a fourth occasion if Nate Allen hadn't tipped the ball. Meanwhile, Bradley has been put into a bad position numerous times, lining up over the center to 'sugar' a blitz...only to have to turn and run down the seam with a talented TE. This was exploited by GB, Washington, and now the 49ers. Since Bradley's only played in three games, that means opposing teams are 3-for-3 in defeating this play.

Meanwhile, Andy continues to be clueless on fourth down. On 4th-and-9 from the SF33, the Eagles punted to the 18, netting a glorious 15 yards. If the Eagles go for it, they'll only convert about 20% of the time, but so what? Is giving up that 20% chance for a score really worth 15 yards? On another 4th-and-1 situation from the SF35, he did go for it (nice!) but called a terrible play. On the third 4th-and-2 from the SF34, Andy tried a field goal, which naturally failed. Instead of coaching by feel, he needs to rely on numbers instead. Just go for it all three times.

The Eagles were exceptionally lucky, recovering four out of five fumbles in the game...regardless of 'hustle' or 'wanting it' or whatever, recovering fumbles is a 50/50 proposition. So to get four out of five is unusually fortunate. The good luck offset the bad coaching just enough to get a win, but obviously this won't happen every week.

Chalk one up for Big Red

2010-09-27T11:32:00.002-04:00

I was nonplussed when the Eagles first signed Michael Vick. I thought they were crazy to rely on him as a back-up this season. I doubted Andy's decision to bench Kolb and name Vick the starter for Jacksonville.

But it sure looks like I was wrong, and Andy was right.

Vick's 2-0 as a starter now, and has put up a passer rating of 100 in three straight games. He's shown an ability to both sustain drives and hit big plays down the field. In spite of the continued struggles of the offensive line, no defense wants to play the Eagles, because Vick can hurt an opponent in so many ways.

I saw some discouraging signs yesterday, with inaccuracy on crossing routes and at least two throws off his back foot. He got the job done, and hopefully these signs were not the start of a long-term trend. It's something to keep an eye on, though.

Meanwhile, the Redskins stumbled against the lowly Rams yesterday, a week before they come to Philly. Interestingly, the Skins struggled mightily in the red zone, kicking three chip shot field goals. Additionally, they were 1-for-10 on third downs. Compare that to the Eagles: they scored two TDs on two trips into the red zone, and converted 38% of their third downs.

In a small sample size like this, coincidence is a strong possibility. But it's something else I'll be watching as the season progresses. At the end of the year, if the Skins are still talking about missed third-down conversions and red zone struggles, perhaps McNabb was the culprit all along.

If only...

2010-09-20T07:39:00.003-04:00

My dad was a Steelers fan. It would have been easy to follow in his footsteps. I could be following a team that plays smart, disciplined football and brutally physical defense. A team with six Super Bowl victories and a young coach who will only improve.

Instead, I'm an Eagles fan. My team has a stubborn coach, a turnstile offensive line, and a defense giving up 30 points a game. The Eagles couldn't contain Jahvid Best, playing in his second NFL game, while the Steelers shut down Chris Johnson, who's coming off a 2000-yd season.

But true fandom doesn't work that way, unfortunately. My best football memories involve guys like Herman Edwards, Mike Quick, Reggie White, Andre Waters, and Randall Cunningham. The green-and-silver is in my blood...so instead of six championships, I have sit-ups in T.O.'s driveway, and a puking QB.

Yesterday was sickening. I DVRed the game so I could watch it again and really break it down, but I'm not sure I can stand to see it a second time.

The good news, and you have to look hard for it, is that the rest of the NFC East lost yesterday. So my Eagles are in first place. And while it may seem foolish to point that out after only two weeks, I know this may be my last chance.

Kolb comes back next week, and I don't know how he'll survive behind that line. A good coach would pound the ball, throw a lot of screen passes, and roll him out of the pocket to try and keep him alive. But we're talking about Andy Reid, so get ready for more chuck-and-duck.

Eagles Week 1 Review

2010-09-15T10:14:00.002-04:00

I know it's Wednesday, but I wanted to review the game again before I wrote about it. I re-watched every Kevin Kolb snap, and I'll break down each one.

I'm not going to analyze Vick's plays, because Michael Vick isn't the future. The Eagles didn't dump McNabb and pay Kolb $12 million so that Vick could be the starter. There's no QB controversy among the Eagles decision-makers, so I won't contribute to the fabrication of one.

1-10-PHI32: 5yd penalty, illegal formation. This was a designed TE screen. Here's a quote from a TMQ article three weeks ago: Andy Reid's play calling has long been predictable -- the whole league knows, for instance, that on the first snap of a possession, he likes to call a weakside screen. Way to mix things up, Andy.
1-15-PHI27: 5yd completion to Maclin on a short hitch. He appeared to be the first read on the play, and was open. Accurate throw.
2-10-PHI32: Incomplete to Celek. Celek correctly read zone coverage so stopped his crossing route in a soft spot. KK read man coverage, so he led Celek. Looked more like a mental mistake than inaccuracy. Great protection on the play.
3-10-PHI32: Packers only rush four, but Matthews comes on a delayed blitz. The OL and RB do not recognize the delayed blitz so Matthews is unblocked. All the routes were deep, and there was no outlet receiver. I didn't see anything KK could do here except get sacked.

1-10-PHI46: 1yd rush by McCoy. Jamaal Jackson tried to get to Nick Barnett, but he couldn't make the block.
2-9-PHI47: 11yd rush by Maclin. Good blocking all around, but it's a big gain because Packers LB Jones dives inside, anticipating another run by McCoy. He's unblocked on the play, but his false step allows Maclin to get around him.
1-10-GB41: 6yd rush by Vick.
2-4-GB35: 8yd rush by McCoy,
1-10-GB29: -1yd rush by Vick.
2-11-GB30: 10yd penalty, offensive pass interference, Celek. Although the outcome of this play is irrelevant, a couple things worth noting here. First, Jamaal Jackson incorrectly calls out the Mike on the play, which sets the OL to the wrong side, and leaves a rusher unblocked to the left. Kolb rushes a throw, off his back foot, although the decision to throw the seam to Celek, covered by a LB, against what looks like a cover 2 shell, is perfect.
2-21-GB40: Incomplete pass, could have been intercepted. Looks like horrible play design, more than a bad decision. First, it's play action...on second-and-21, does anyone believe the Eagles are going to run? Second, it's man coverage, and somehow Maclin finishes his route close enough to Jackson that Maclin's defender nearly makes the pick. KK threw to Jackson, who had beaten his man. The throw was a little high, but the fact that another defender was close enough to break on the ball means that either Maclin ran the wrong route, or the play was designed badly.
3-21-GB40: More Vick running.

1-10-PHI28: 3yd rush by McCoy. Could have been much more, but Matthews makes a nice open-field tackle.
2-7-PHI31: 6yd completion to Maclin, another short hitch.
3-1-PHI37: 1yd rush by Vick.
1-10-PHI38: 1yd rush by Weaver (this is the play he's hurt.) Jackson again misses a second-level block on Barnett.
2-9-PHI39: Another delayed blitz, another sack. This time it's combined with a twist stunt up front. Jackson, Cole, and Herremans all missed blocks on this play.
3-19-PHI30: Deep incompletion to Jackson on the outside - another near interception. This one's all on Kolb. There was no pressure on him, and he should have thrown to Avant over the middle. Bear in mind that many coaches might protect a young QB here by running a draw or a screen, because 3rd-and-19 is nearly impossible to convert. The Eagles didn't protect Kolb, but put him squarely into a tough situation, and he made a bad decision that nearly cost the team.

1-10-PHI22: 10yd holding penalty against Peters. 9yd rush by Mike Bell is nullified.
1-20-PHI12: Incompletion on a slant to Jackson. Good read, good protection, KK steps into the throw but it's slightly behind the receiver. The defender, who was beaten, is able to dive and knock it down. If KK makes a better throw, this is a big gain.
2-20-PHI12: 6yd completion to McCoy. It's impossible to tell from the camera angle if there were any receivers open downfield, but Kolb didn't see anyone, so he rolled right and bought a little time before dumping it off.
3-14-PHI18: The Packers only rush three, but all three defeat blocks. McGlynn whiffs completely on Raji, Matthews gets around Justice, and Peters forces his man inside so that Kolb cannot step up into the pocket. The big mistake Kolb makes on this play is either failing to recognize Matthews behind him, or thinking he can outrun him. There is time for him to throw a short pass to Celek or simply throw the ball away, but instead he is caught from behind and gets a concussion on the play.

Kolb does play three more snaps, but the Eagles admit after the game that his confusion about packages and plays led them to believe he might have a concussion, so I'm giving him a free pass on those three.

So what I saw from Kolb is this: in his first half of work as the Eagles starting QB, against the #2 defense from last year, with Vick subbing in and out, and his offense consistently getting penalties while failing to block for him...he screwed up three throws. I didn't see a guy who lacked confidence, or failed to set his feet, or wasn't up to the task. He should have completed the slant to Jackson and the crossing route to Celek. He shouldn't have thrown to Jackson on 3rd-and-19.

Is it hard to remember a first half where McNabb screwed up three throws and tried to run away from someone he couldn't?

I'm not saying Kolb did a great job, he clearly didn't. But let's not give up on him either.

Full kudos to Vick for coming in and leading the Eagles back into the game. I have enough faith in him after that performance to believe the Eagles can beat Detroit this week. But I'm not ready to give up on Kolb yet.

Weenie Coach Alert, More Red Dead

2010-09-10T18:47:00.002-04:00

It drives me crazy to watch coaches mismanage games, and Brad Childress is one of the top offenders (Marvin Lewis and Andy Reid are right up there, too.)

Trailing by five points, with 5:40 remaining in the game, the Vikings face fourth-and-eleven from the Saints 44 yard line. Conventional wisdom, based on years of practice, is to punt the ball. But why? Conventional wisdom is absolutely wrong here, and I first-guessed this during the game, screaming at the tv to go for it.

There's about a 25% chance to convert 4th-and-11, so 75% of the time, the Saints will take over between their own 34 and 44 (depending on how many yards, if any, are gained on fourth down.) By punting, you give the Saints the ball 100% of the time between their 1 and their 20. (There's a small chance they could return the punt for a TD, or block it for a TD, but I'm ignoring this because it's basically offset by the small chance you could throw a INT for a TD if you went for it.) So the tradeoff here is: 25% chance of extending your possession, vs. 30 yds of field position.

The Vikings punted, of course. The Saints got the ball on their own 12, ran for three first downs, and the game was over without the Vikings ever taking another snap. So in the case where your defense gives up three first downs, you're basically throwing away your 25% chance to extend the drive for nothing.

But what if the Saints get only two first downs? Well, if you went for it and failed, then they'd have a chance at a field goal and extending the lead to eight. But so what? You could still tie with a TD. And even if you punted to preserve the 30 yards, you'd be getting the ball back with about a minute left and no timeouts. You will score much less than 25% of the time in this situation...Is that worth throwing away your 25% chance to make it on fourth down in Saints territory? Hell no.

Now, if you stop the Saints with zero or one first down, then you get the full benefit of those 30 yards. But still...are you going to score often enough to offset the 25% chance you gave away by punting? Is your increased scoring potential, combined with your chances of holding the Saints to one first down or less, greater than 25%? I don't have enough data to do the math, but I seriously doubt it. And even if it did, what happens when, like Thursday, your defense doesn't do the job?

The bottom line, forgetting all the math that coaches can't do in the time it takes to make a quick decision anyway, is this: When trailing in the fourth quarter, you should never punt on fourth down in the other team's territory. Sure, if you're down by one with 11 minutes to go and you have fourth-and-25 from the 49, you can make an exception. But this general rule is pretty easy to remember, and should only be broken in strange circumstances.

What happens is that Weenie Coaches, like Childress, who want to stay in the NFL (who wouldn't?), will do anything to avoid responsibility for losing. It's much better to lose, and blame it on the players ("I punted because I had faith in my defense to stop them"), than risk accepting personal blame for the loss...even if that risk provides a greater chance to win. Bill Belichik's fourth-and-two call is a running joke in the NFL now, in spite of it being statistically correct! If he'd simply punted and lost, the media and fans would blame the defense, not the coach, since the coach obeyed conventional wisdom.

I'm going to call out Weenie Coaches whenever I can, because the game of football will be a better one if we can chip away at the conventional "wisdom". Brad Childress is only the first of 2010.

Meanwhile, I checked out the Zero Punctuation review of Red Dead Redemption, and found that it's strikingly similar to my own (though considerably more humorous.)

NFL Preview

2010-09-09T15:15:00.005-04:00

Another NFL season starts tonight, and that can only mean a whole batch of wrong predictions.

Every year, the NFL turns over 50% of its playoff teams. This isn't a well-kept secret at all, but still NFL prognosticators mostly pick the same teams to win as the year before, with a couple groupthink 'sleepers' sprinkled in. They aren't trying to be accurate, they are trying to avoid embarrassment...so instead of insight, you get a minor edit to the previous year's standings.

Don Banks only picks the division winners - 5/8 of his picks won last year, and two others were in the playoffs - for a turnover ratio of 12.5%.

ESPN has a whole host of experts making their predictions. Matthew Berry and Jeff Chadiha have 3 new teams out of 12 (25%), while John Clayton and KC Joyner have only one new team (8%), and Tim Graham has two out of 12 (17%). I stopped counting after that. And even though all three of the last Super Bowl champions had 20/1 or worse odds at the start of the season, most pick favorites like the Colts. The darkhorse candidate is the Ravens, who are 18/1, and a full 33% of the expert panel picked them - hello, groupthink.

NFL.com has another panel of experts, and while it's more of the same (no one predicted as much as 50% turnover, the average of the past dozen years), groupthink is even more evident as the Packers were unanimously chosen to make the Super Bowl.

Well, one thing you never have to worry about with me is a fear of embarrassment. I will fearlessly (and wrongly) predict the finish for each team, with a careful eye on that 50% turnover threshold. Teams with WC after their names are my picks for the wildcard.

AFC East

Miami Dolphins - The first of my new playoff teams is the Dolphins. Brandon Marshall is a huge addition who will benefit from the improved play of Chad Henne.
New England Patriots - WC - A series of bad drafts are starting to catch up to them. The Patriots are the oldest team in the league, and their age will show on defense and the offensive line. [Edit: Not even close on this claim, the Patriots are old on offense, but spring chickens on defense. And after injuries to projected starters Ty Warren and Leigh Bodden, their defense is one of the youngest in the Belichik era. That's what I get for not fact-checking.] Brady to Moss is still deadly, but they can't win enough games on their own to take the division.
New York Jets - Don't forget this team was 9-7 last season, with two gift-wrapped wins from teams resting their starters. And by dumping Thomas Jones and Alan Faneca, they've actually regressed in their biggest area of strength.
Buffalo Bills - I like the Bills to be better than most people think, but that's still terrible.

AFC North

Baltimore Ravens - The Ravens defense will regress toward mediocre, but their offense could be scary good.
Cincinnati Bengals - Undefeated against their own division last season, that means they were only 4-6 against the rest of the NFL. If you don't expect them to sweep the Ravens and Steelers again, and I don't, it'll be tough for them to reach the playoffs.
Pittsburgh Steelers - The best player on their OL is a rookie, which doesn't say much for the other guys. Missing their QB for four games won't help, either.
Cleveland Browns - The last year of the Mangenius reign won't be a good one.

AFC West

San Diego Chargers - They aren't as good without their left tackle and #1 WR, but this division is still weak.
Oakland Raiders - The whole attitude of this team should change without JaAwful hanging around their neck. Campbell isn't a top-15 QB, but he's a pro who will show up and work, and that will rub off on the rest of the roster.
Kansas City Chiefs - I like the additions of Thomas Jones and McCluster, but I still don't see much talent in the trenches.
Denver Broncos - John McDaniels is creating the playbook for destroying a talented team. Trading away great players and blowing high draft choices is a recipe for a last-place team.

AFC South

Indianapolis Colts - At some point, the Colts will falter. I will not be in front of that trend. I'll ride this horse until they lose.
Tennessee Titans - WC - The best RB in the league, one of the better OLs, and a developing QB. If the defense can just be mediocre, the Titans are a playoff team.
Houston Texans - Experts have been predicting the Texans to break through into the playoffs for the last three years. Like the Colts, I'm tired of trying to get in front of that trend. I'll bet on them to continue underachieving until they prove otherwise.
Jacksonville Jaguars - I'm trying to find something I like about this team. Oh yeah, MJD. MJD and...well, nothing. They're bad on offense and worse on defense.

AFC Playoff teams (recap):
Dolphins, Ravens, Chargers, Colts, Patriots, Titans. 4/6 made the playoffs last season, so we'll need better-than-average turnover from the NFC to hit 50%.

NFC East

New York Giants - The Giants underperformed in a lot of areas last season...OL, RB, DL, DB...and I think they'll regress toward the mean in all of them. Antrel Rolle was a solid addition, and if they get anything from Kenny Phillips it will be another huge improvement. I also like Hakeem Nicks to take a leap forward. The Giants have also performed better as an under-the-radar team than a preseason favorite. It all adds up to a division championship.
Dallas Cowboys - Can the Cowboys handle success and the weight of preseason expectations? Will their injured OL and first-year LT hold up all year? Can they really have only three CBs on their roster? I think they'll be good, but narrowly miss the playoffs.
Philadelphia Eagles - The Eagles are extremely young, averaging 25.5 years (I'm excluding the P/K in that number.) Their OL had some injury issues this preseason, but the group that will start the first game was 8-1 last year. They have playmakers on both side of the ball, enough that they'll have a shot to win any game they play. But their youth also means inconsistency, and a chance to lose any game. 7-9 or 8-8 is realistic, with a real chance to contend again next season.
Washington Redskins - I thought McNabb would thrive in Shanahan's offense, but instead he's just looked like McNabb in the preseason. Along with the Haynesworth disaster, I wonder if this team has enough playmakers, on either side of the ball, to be very dangerous.

NFC North

Green Bay Packers - Like most prognosticators, I struggle to see how anyone can stop this offense. They gave up 50 sacks last season, and still were one of the most productive in the league. I don't like the defense, but they'll do just enough to complement the offense.
Chicago Bears - WC - As terrible as the Bears looked at time last season, and as badly as they were ravaged by injuries, they still managed to win seven games. With just a little regression toward the mean on the injury front, and the addition of Julius Peppers, they'd have to win nine or ten.
Minnesota Vikings - Brett Favre and the Williams Wall are another year older...injury problems are a real possibility for all three. With Sidney Rice already down for half the year, at least, they are missing one of their deadliest offensive weapons. The loss of Chester Taylor is also underrated, especially if AP is dinged for a few games here and there, like usual. A disappointing 8-8 season seems a lot more likely than a repeat of last year.
Detroit Lions - I like the Lions to be much improved this season, but I liked every other team in the division better.

NFC West

San Francisco 49ers - I'd love to pick someone else in this division, because everyone is picking the Niners...but who? This division is so bad, that Alex Smith has a legit chance to lead a team to the title. The defense will continue to improve, and the OL will get better as the season progresses.
Seattle Seahawks - There's not much to like about the Seahawks, which says a lot about the two teams below them. I don't see much talent on the OL, and I don't see anyone who can rush the passer. Other than that, well, they're not good at other positions either. There is no one on this roster, on either side of the ball, that is a real playmaker.
Arizona Cardinals - The Cards have grossly mismanaged their QB situation, and have given away quality players like Antrel Rolle, Anquan Boldin, and Karlos Dansby. They'll be lucky to win five games.
St. Louis Rams - I like Bradford, but the defensive cupboard is bare, and the OL is shaky. And wide receivers? Not on this roster, bro. Better luck next year.

NFC South

Atlanta Falcons - Matt Ryan will continue to improve and Michael Turner will have a monster year. The big questions are on defense...do they have enough pass rush, and enough talent in the secondary? I'll guess 'yes', because I need another new team in the playoffs.
New Orleans Saints - WC - I expect the offense to be dominating again, although there isn't as much depth on the OL this year, so an average amount of injuries could cause major problems. Also, it's highly unlikely their defense will lead the league in turnovers and defensive scores again, especially without a healthy Darren Sharper. This points to a regression on both sides of the ball.
Carolina Panthers - Matt Moore is fine, and the running game is excellent. The defense, though, is not good at all.
Tampa Bay Buccaneers - Still a couple years away from being competitive.

NFC Playoff teams (recap):
Giants, Packers, Falcons, Niners, Bears, Saints - only 2/6 repeats from last year, so we slip under the 50% wire.

Now let's watch some football.

Farewell, Sisters Andrews

2010-09-05T19:31:00.006-04:00

Finally, they're gone.

The Eagles can now see the end to the shameless whining and excuse-making of Stacy Andrews, who likes hard work and football about as much as his goofy brother. Traded for a 7th-round pick to the Seahawks, and replaced in the starting lineup by the hard-working but barely mediocre Nick Cole, his expensive tenure in Philly will soon be forgotten. And yet, the gulf of talent between the two is reassuring instead of daunting. When Nick Cole screws up this season, and he'll screw up often, at least we'll know that he cares, and he'll try hard to improve. And if he's incompetent, there's a couple more journeymen behind him who will work their asses off to take his spot. There won't be excuses or youtube videos, just football.

With the signing of DT Jeff Owens to the practice squad, that means the Eagles have all 13 draft picks on their roster*. That's an awful lot of turnover for an 11-5 team. But it's comforting, especially when you consider the Redskins cut four of their first six draft picks from April. And I would not say the Eagles kept the rookies around simply out of arrogance or pride. They drafted talent, and each one of these guys earned their spot.

*Two exceptions, sort of: Ricky Sapp was placed on IR, and Chad Scott was traded for rookie Jorrick Calvin. Since Calvin made the active roster, I'm ok with counting him.

Cut down day

2010-09-04T08:46:00.002-04:00

The Eagles must trim their roster to 53 today. Unlike last year when I struggled to find players good enough to make the 53, the Eagles will be faced with several tough cuts today. Rookies like Jeff Owens, Jamar Chaney, Kennan Clayton, and Kurt Coleman have played too well in the preseason to survive on the practice squad, so the Eagles may be forced to make room for them on the active roster.

An interesting trade with the Cardinals last night brought in guard/tackle Reggie Wells. This spells the end for either the underperforming King Dunlap, or the undermotivated and whining Stacy Andrews. While I couldn't agree more with his contention that the Eagles are misusing him (few teams would sign an All-Pro tackle to a huge contract and then move him to guard), this Andrews sister never displayed the physicality or smarts required to play consistently for the Eagles - and that's no one's fault but his own. Now would be a perfect opportunity to cut ties with this disturbing family completely. Especially if Adam Schefter is correct about interest from other teams and the Birds can recover a draft pick from this fiasco.

Finally, PSU opens their season today with an embarrassing exhibition against DivI-AA Youngstown St. I'm sure this will thoroughly prepare them for a road trip to Alabama next week.

Game Review: Red Dead Redepmtion

2010-08-30T14:06:00.002-04:00

Created by Rock Star Games, Red Dead has been described as GTA set in the Wild West. Since I've never played the GTA series, I can't tell you if this description is accurate. But I know critics loved it, and more importantly, the boys at Penny Arcade liked it...and well, I got to borrow the game for free, so I decided to give it a try.

Normally, I don't review a game before finishing it. Because I pretty much always finish a game that I've started. I'm sure I'm forgetting a few games in my decades-long haze of relentless, somnambulant mediocrity, but I honestly can't recall a game I failed to finish since the legendarily awful Devil May Cry 4.

Which may lead you to believe that I'm going to kill this game, that I hated it more than those mindless drivers who aren't competent enough to steer a car through traffic using their full attention, but still insist on texting their friends at the same time. But that's not the case at all...it's amazing to look at, with a stunning variety of actions available, including (but not limited to) breaking wild horses, driving stagecoaches, riding in a mining car, driving cattle, and playing horseshoes. The world is full of interesting characters and thoughtful dialogue. Weapons include guns, knives, and my obvious favorite - the lasso.

If you played this game for four hours, or eight, or even twelve - as much or more than most reviewers did, I'm sure - you'd be infinitely impressed. I spent my first few days almost wide-eyed at the depth of the gameplay and environment. But sadly, I quickly came to realize that nothing I did mattered.

There's no progression that I could find, so doing one of the many sidequests is essentially pointless. There's no xp, no increase of skills, no bars to move or bubbles to fill...so why am I chasing down another outlaw, exactly? Why am I collecting flowers for a crazy old man's dead wife, or finding a lost horse for an equally crazy stablehand into beastiality? I may get some money, but I still haven't found a use for the stuff yet. I may get honor and fame, but again, so what?

The story should be compelling, but the main character is intentionally shrouded in such mystery that I simply don't care. It boils down to one question: Will this outlaw-turned-bounty-hunter with unnamed motivations, hired by secret conspirators for unknown reasons, accomplish his unclear goal? Wow, I can barely wait to find out. I'm on the edge of my...zzzzzzzzz...

And finally, this is hardly the worst sin in the game, but it's possibly the most annoying. Every town has a tavern, and every tavern is full of prostitutes who endlessly proposition you...AND YOU CAN'T HAVE SEX WITH ANY OF THEM. Talking and offering money don't work, apparently it's not within character of this undeveloped mystery man to have sex. Wow, am I ever identifying with this guy. Even if you lasso, hogtie, and carry them to your room...no sex. Dropping them onto a train track with an oncoming engine doesn't change their attitude in the slightest. (BTW - when the train hits, there's a cartoonishly unrealistic splash of blood with no body parts remaining, blah.)

So I'm stuck with a character that I can't customize (except for changing his outfits, woooo!), who is doing things for reasons I can't comprehend, and has no meaningful choices or consequences to his actions. It's a beautiful setting, an amazing engine, and endless amounts of voice-acting and extensively developed side quests...and none of it means anything. I'm not the least bit compelled to keep playing, which is a shame, for all of the care that obviously went into the design of the game.

Time to panic about the Eagles' offense?

2010-08-30T10:20:00.002-04:00

Kolb was 0-7 on third down. The OL can't block anyone. Jackson's injured, Maclin's dropping passes, and red zone execution is awful. So we should be seriously worried, right?

Maybe. I don't know, look around the rest of the division. The Cowboys have looked even worse, in spite of an extra week of pre-season preparation. The Giants are listless and piling up injuries.

I might be more susceptible to panic if only the Eagles were struggling, but I find it hard to believe that all three of these teams will be lousy. Elsewhere in the NFC, the Vikings are in flux, and the Bears are stressed. Meanwhile, teams like Buffalo, Cleveland, St. Louis, Tampa Bay, Denver, and Detriot have shown a lot of promise.

That pretty much says it all.

History has proven over and over again that preseason team performance, even if you extrapolate the starters' performance against other starters, isn't predictive of regular season results. This should be a no-brainer, as the starters play only one full game, maybe a game-and-a-half worth of snaps in the preseason. And every year we see NFL teams - good and bad - perform much differently on a week-to-week basis. We can't accurately predict how NFL teams will finish the season after the first real game of the year, so how can we predict how they'll do after a game's worth of practice?

Sure, the Eagles will struggle at times, but we knew that before the preseason. They're one of the youngest teams in the league, trying out a new starting QB. They might have problems on the OL, especially with Jackson injured...exactly as we saw last year. But the Eagles have playmakers on both sides of the ball, and *cough* good coaching, and over the span of sixteen games, those characteristics will be worth more wins than losses. Same with the Cowboys, Giants, Vikings, and...well not the Bears, I just threw them in my example because I have Jay Cutler as my fantasy QB and he makes me nervous.

The excellent news for the Eagles is that they've survived the preseason without any injuries of note, which can't be said for the rest of their NFC East rivals.
The bottom line is this: don't read too much into the preseason. It's the only game going in the NFL right now, and we've been starved for football for so long, that we want it to be relevant...but it isn't. After the first week, half the league will be 1-0, the other half will be 0-1, and the four games before that won't mean a thing.

Eagles vs. Bengals: What Did We Learn?

2010-08-22T09:02:00.002-04:00

You know that worst-case scenario you have in mind for the Eagles this season, the one where every off-season move proves to be a mistake and they struggle to win games against mediocre teams?
That scenario looks a lot more realistic after the Bengals' game.

The interior offensive line, ignored in the draft and free agency in spite of a series of injuries and failures at the end of last season, was awful. Mike McGlynn, Stacy Andrews, and Max Jean-Gilles were routinely whipped by no-name players. They were mentally and physically beaten, so the prospects for their sudden improvement are dim. If Herremans and Jackson don't get back quickly, the Eagles season could be over before it really begins. Backups A.Q. Shipley and Dallas Reynolds fared no better against the Cincinnati second-string.
Sheldon Brown continues to be missed, and I continue to be confused why he was traded. Was he really that much of a cancer in the locker room, that an above-average CB with three years on his contract was dumped for a fourth-round pick? With nothing but Ellis Hobbs and Joselio Hanson waiting in the wings to replace him? Hanson got the start with Samuel injured, and was torched again. This time he was victimized by T.O., a washed-up diva.
Kevin Kolb made a couple nice throws, but he had a serious case of happy feet after a protection breakdowns early in the game. There were are least two occasions where he was fourteen yards behind the line of scrimmage and running backwards as he threw. That Eli Manning-style footwork is not going to make anyone forget about McNabb.
The Michael Vick Experiment is clearly a failure, but the Eagles remain steadfastly in character as they refuse to admit it. He's so incredibly careless with the ball, the Birds will be unable to win a game if he's forced to start. The most expensive backup QB in the NFL is also one of the worst, and he's all ours. Marc Bulger or Jeff Garcia could have filled in for a year, and surely could do better than 1-5, 6yds, and two picks.

Eagles vs. Jaguars: What Did We Learn?

2010-08-15T08:25:00.002-04:00

This statement sounds self-evident, but I'll say it anyway: preseason games never live up to expectations.

The starters only played a handful of snaps, many of the key reserves also took early seats, and we were left watching an entire half of camp bodies like Dobson Collins, Boo Robinson, and Zipp Duncan.

One of the few roster battles that gained some clarity was wide receiver. Riley Cooper made a strong case for the fourth spot, catching a long bomb on his first play in the game. Chad Hall showed he can be effective as a returner, and also made plays as a receiver and tailback. Kelley Washington was solid in special teams, almost blocking a punt. Hank Baskett is now a longshot to make the final cut.

While there weren't many players that stood out either way, here are a few that cauhgt my eye:

Looked Good:
Kurt Coleman - Coleman was everywhere on the field, making sure tackles and occasionally delivering a big hit. He was also victimized on one of the long TD passes as he failed to get enough depth, but that's a correctable rookie mistake. With Quentin Mikell in the last year of his contract, you wonder if the Eagles have an eye on Coleman as his replacement.
Brandon Graham - He didn't get a sack, but he showed great speed on the edge rush. I don't think he'll have a huge impact this year, rookie DEs rarely do, but he can make a contribution. Will definitely supplant Juqua Parker as a starter by next season.
Martell Mallet - If Mike Bell remains injured, he might make this team and contribute. Sure, it was the Jaguars second- and third-team defenses, but he showed decisiveness and enough burst to get through the hole. Not a superstar, but he won't embarrass himself with 10-15 carries a game in the NFL. Buckley is still ahead of him because of this special teams contributions.
Austin Howard - Didn't play as much as I would have liked, and the Jaguars don't have any DEs of note, but he delivered a couple pancakes and otherwise held up well against the pass.

Looked Bad:
Joselio Hanson - Committed a penalty and still managed to give up a touchdown against first-round washout Troy Williamson. I'll say it again: it was a really, really bad idea to trade away Sheldon Brown.
Geoffrey Pope - Also victimized on a deep route by an also-ran receiver, Pope's one of those bubble guys who doesn't figure to make the cut.

Other Notes:
Jackson and Herremans came off the PUP list today, which means there's a chance they could both be ready for opening day...Nick Cole started practicing again as well, but after McGlynn's solid performance against Jacksonville, he may have to fight to keep his second-string center gig...Kolb looked more mobile than I expected in the game, more mobile than the 250lb McNabb was last season...I heard a Washington beat writer describe McNabb's opening performance as 'uneven' an 'inconsistent', he better get used to writing that...two name mis-spellings in my last post, JaMar Chaney and Ken (not Paul) Lawrie were the victims.

What to Watch Tonight

2010-08-13T14:51:00.002-04:00

Eagles fans everywhere will be watching Kevin Kolb tonight, naturally. We'll be keeping a close eye on first-time starting center Mike McGlynn, who's been elevated because of injuries to Jamal Jackson and Nick Cole. Are Steward Bradley and Ellis Hobbs recovered from injury? Is Nate Allen the second coming of Wes Hopkins or Macho Harris? Has Asante Samuel learned how to tackle? Is Stacey Andrews the Pro Bowl lineman of two years ago, or will he be getting his Phelps on with his brother?

But alas, all of these questions will be answered (at least for tonight) by the end of the first quarter. The starters aren't expected to play any more than that. But there's plenty of interesting battles for the bottom of the roster to keep fans awake into the fourth quarter.

RB - Eldra Buckley vs. Charles Scott vs. Martell Mallet - Buckley is the best special teams player who has run like a truck in traning camp, and he's the only one with NFL experience in this group. But the coaches like Mallet's hands, and Scott's a sixth-round pick. Both of them will have to do something special to supplant Buckley, or convince the coaches to keep an extra RB. Expect Scott to see time at FB and HB.
WR - Riley Cooper vs. Kelley Washington vs. Hank Baskett vs. Chad Hall - So far through camp, Cooper has looked like the Eagles fourth-best WR. But he'll need to prove he can play in a game to claim that spot. Washington and Baskett are probably fighting it out for fifth, and their performance on special teams is likely the deciding factor. Hall is a small, quick, punt-return type (think Danny Amendola) who has to show something special to make the team.
TE - Clay Harbor vs. Cornelius Ingram vs. Paul Lawrie - Harbor has looked better than Ingram so far in camp, and has a real chance to win the second TE spot. Lawrie is a darkhorse - as the best blocking TE on the roster, he might stick if Ingram doesn't regain his explosiveness after two knee surgeries.
OL - King Dunlap vs. Austin Howard - Dunlap's shown little improvement in two full seasons, while the undrafted rookie (Howard) has impressed respected Eagles watchers Merril Reese and Ray Didinger. I'm anxious to get my first look at the kid, to see if he's really an answer at the back-up tackle spot.
DL - Daniel Te’o-Nesheim and Trevor Laws - If these two are as good as they've looked so far in camp, they both should dominate against the Jags' backups. I don't think either one is in danger of being cut, so it's not really a battle, but in order to make an impact this season, they should be winning one-on-one battles consistently tonight.
LB - Omar Gaither vs. Jamar Cheney vs. Tracy White vs. Keenan Clayton - Cheney and Clayton are young, fast rookies that have a chance to unseat versatile veterans Gaither and White. Both are probably fighting an uphill battle, since Gaither and White are trusted special-teamers, but tonight is their first opportunity to make a statement. I'm also curious to see how the Eagles play Moises Fokou - he went from starting SAM to back-up DE just a few days into training camp, after being praised all off-season for his film study and workout dedication. Not sure if he's fallen out of favor, or if the coaches are just looking for more ways to get him on the field.
DB - I don't see any battles here, with 5 CBs (Samuel, Hobbs, Hanson, Lindley, Patterson) and 4 Safeties (Allen, Mikell, Demps, Coleman) that should make the team, barring injury. Lindley and Coleman are both promising rookies who have looked better-than-advertised so far in camp. We'll see tonight how they hold up in game situations.
P - Wait, punter? Yes, punter. Ken Parrish vs. Sav Rocca - Parrish can kick-off as well, which gives him an edge, because the Eagles would like to save David Akers' leg for field goals.

Movie Review: Salt

2010-08-11T12:50:00.005-04:00

It should come as no surprise to anyone, especially an idiot like me who forked over $9 to watch it, but Salt sucks.

The problem isn't that it's a formulaic action movie, I watch and enjoy those all the time. Critically declaimed^* flicks like XXX, Resident Evil, and AvP weren't more intelligent or better acted, but they were far more entertaining. Salt managed to bore me at a breakneck pace. There was lots of action, lots of explosions, plenty of slow-motion, cutaway fight scenes, and a ponderous score to accentuate the gravity of Salt's gymnastic ass-kicking. Yet none of it was even remotely interesting, cool, or funny.

Ok, there's a dungeon scene at the beginning where Angelina Jolie is chained up in just her panties and a bra. That was both interesting and cool. I'll have to keep a closer look out for Leonardo di Caprio, because I'm sure that scene was stolen straight from my dreams. But after that, nothing.

By making agent Evelyn Salt such a mystery (sort of), the writers offer no opportunity to identify with her. We're not sure why she's doing anything, so it's hard to care if she succeeds or fails. Without knowing if she's an evil double-agent, or a secretly good triple-agent, it's impossible to root for or against her. Without an emotional attachment to any characters, I couldn't suspend my disbelief and look past the ever-growing pile of plot preposterousnesses⁺.

And for chrissakes, the lead role is Angelina Jolie. This black thing is the sexiest outfit she wears in the entire movie (aside from the quick dungeon scene, of course.) Every other outfit is even less revealing. Jolie has done a few serious projects (which I haven't watched) and for all I know she might have legit acting creds. But she's not making $20 million a film becaue she's the next Meryl Streep, she's making that coin because she's one of the sexiest women in the world...and you'd never know from watching Salt. She's never asked to look or act sensually, so even as pure eye candy she can't elevate a wretched script to watchability (see: Wanted.)

So don't go see Salt. Don't Netflix it. Just forget it ever happened, as I will twenty minutes from now.

^*Of course "declaimed" isn't a word. But what's a good antonym for acclaim in the phrase "critically acclaimed"? Critically berated? Jeered? Vituperated? None of them have the same ring as "critically declaimed". Hey, if Sarah Palin can make up words, I can too.

⁺No, that one's not a word either. But say them both out loud: "pile of plot implausibilities" vs. "pile of plot preposterousnesses"...it's not even a fucking contest.

Cleaning out Old News: Book Reviews

2010-08-10T09:16:00.004-04:00

I feel like I might start blogging again, but there's too much old chaff rattling around inside my head for me to focus on a new idea. So I need to do a little housekeeping, dust off the boxes in the attic and clear out the cobwebs.

In other words, another excuse for another half-assed post. But I know you're used to it. If you complain, I'll just delete your comment anyways. And then apologize, assure you I still love you, and lay enough guilt on you to make you believe it was all your fault.

Onto the books:

Superfreakonomics was definitely worth a read, although I didn't like the structure as much as the first one. The sequel was less organized around themes, rambling instead from topic to topic. While some of the facts were definitely interesting, I'd read about many of them before. Without coherent themes to bring them together, some sections of the sequel dragged along ponderously in comparison to the original. However, there were two topics that fascinated me: child safety seats and (of course) global warming.

I've long suspected that child safety seats for children older than toddlers were over-regulated and largely useless. While I'd love to take intellectual credit for this, I suspect it's more a product of my proclivity to see useless over-regulation everywhere. But regardless, it's enlightening to discover not just that these seats are useless, but that we've introduced costly legislation and created a culture of worry without a single scientific study. When the authors looked for data about crashes involving children in seats vs. children wearing seatbelts, they didn't find contradictory or conflicting data, they instead found no data at all. Even more striking was the attitude they encountered when they wanted to run their own tests...crash test centers around the country were almost unanimously unwilling to allow them to rent, and employees there were reluctant to help. When they did find someone who would run the tests, they were forced to place security deposits on the crash dummies because the center was convinced that seat-belt crashes would destroy the dummies...without a single shred of evidence. Almost everything you believe about car seats for children over two, and everything our legislation is built upon...is essentially a media campaign waged by car-seat manufacturers and politicians looking for an angle with mommy voters. So even though the car seats had already been tossed from my car, several years before the law allows, the scientific justification to my preconceived counter-notions is welcome.

The global warming section was fascinating as well, and instead of the usual debunking of doomsayers, the authors found a group of inventors who have developed several possible technological solutions to cool the globe, for a fraction of the annual marketing budget of Al Gore's Global Warming Foundation. These inventors aren't your average crackpot, but respected geniuses who in many cases founded corporations and became fabulously wealthy as a result. In their 'retirement', they founded a company that seeks to solve worldwide problems through innovation. One of the simplest, most elegant, and completely natural solutions involves spraying ocean water ten feet into the air, where the salt spray can form the base of additional cloud cover over our oceans. The authors went to Al Gore with the solution, and unsurprisingly, he was unmoved, unconvinced, and utterly unwilling to try. When someone has forcefully and repeatedly predicted environmental armageddon, logically he should be open to cost-effective, environmentally neutral solutions. (If he believed in his dire picture of the future, he should be willing to try anything.) But of course, actually solving global warming wouldn't make Al Gore famous or (more) rich, when he can instead win Nobel Peace Prizes and make millions in consulting fees by playing Chicken Little.

The Big Short is about the recent financial crisis, and the minority of people who saw it coming. Not loud-talking permabears, but money managers who made large financial bets against the subprime mortgage market and turned huge profits doing it. I had planned to try to explain it all in a blog post, but truthfully the author does a much better job than I could. Chances are good I would forget something, use the wrong terminology, or accuse the wrong investment bank (although that's a really wide target.) But even a cynical guy like myself was stunned to read about the wanton disregard for law, ethics, responsibility, and common sense displayed by the criminals and ignoramuses who ruined our economy. Of course, they all got filthy rich in the process, with the punishment falling disproportionately on taxpayers, homeowners, and shareholders. I highly recommend reading this book while the magnitude and consequences of the financial crisis are still fresh in your mind. You will understand what happened, why it happened, and why it will happen again. Amazing read.

Best Served Cold is the new release from Joe Abercrombie, the fantasy writer I raved about after his debut First Law Trilogy. Sadly, he fails to live up to his own standard with this follow-up. The plot is maddeningly deliberate and unimaginative (mercenary is betrayed, swears revenge against the seven conspirators, and kills one at a time), and is hindered by a lack of complex and likable characters. None of the avenging group show more than a moment of morality, none develop emotional attachments to each other, and none display any qualities that I strongly identified with. This is a strange departure from his first trilogy, which was every bit as dark and bloody as this one, yet managed to develop compelling characters that were easy to root for (or against.) Although it was a lame read, I'm willing to give him another chance before I write him off as a one-hit wonder.

Finally, I just finished Take Your Eye Off The Ball: How To Watch Football By Knowing Where To Look. It's basically a guide for fans who want to know more about the preparation and strategy that go into building an NFL roster and creating a gameplan, and how to see those results coming together (or not) on a Sunday afternoon. It was informational, and at least moderately compelling because my wife has decided to read it as well. It wasn't quite the Bible I was hoping for - I would have preferred and even more in-depth look into blocking schemes, defensive line techniques, and gameplan development - but then again, I've been listening to the author for three years on Sirius NFL radio, so I found at least half the book repetitive. I also didn't care for the weird little Question/Answer blurbs with the author's picture that seemed to appear on every page, but overall it was a useful read. I'll be attempting to apply the knowledge when I watch the Eagles this season, and perhaps even blog about the results. I'd definitely recommend it, although not all of the content will be interesting to all fans.

The Wisdom of Children

2010-06-21T14:11:00.006-04:00

Over the weekend, my son and I are watching the US Open, and this (much condensed) conversation occurred:

Announcers: ...the personal problems of Tiger Woods...

Son: What problems does Tiger Woods have?

Me: Remember when Tiger had that car accident? He drove into his neighbor's tree? Well, he crashed because his wife was trying to kill him with a golf club as he drove away.

Son: Is she in jail?

Me: No, Tiger won't put her in jail, she's the mother of his children, and he deserved it anyway. She found out that Tiger had 18 girlfriends, and you're not supposed to have girlfriends when you have a wife.

Son: (in disgusted disbelief, naturally) Eighteen? Why would anyone have 18 girlfriends?

Me: Some men like to have a lot of girlfriends, and that's ok...as long as you aren't married. If you want to have a wife, you can't have girlfriends anymore. It's one or the other, you can't have it both ways.

(Long pause)

Son: Unless you keep the girlfriends secret.

The conversation continued as I attempted to disabuse him of the notion that secret girlfriends are ok when you're married, but I guess some concepts are just coded into male DNA.

I also read today about overmedication for acid reflux, which should surprise no one, especially me, who's been diagnosed with acid reflux and prescribed omeprazole as a result. I am, as a rule, skeptical of any medication I put into my body, so I've been taking it sparsely. Even though I eat smaller meals and drink less caffeine, I do still occasionally suffer heartburn over several days which requires a little help to knock out.

In spite of the fact that I've been prescribed one pill for every day of the year (30 pills, 12 refills, must be used by 01/01/2011), and that CVS calls me every month to remind me that I haven't refilled my prescription, and in spite of numerous other reflux-diagnosees insisting that I should take my pill every day, I resisted. Not because I have any medical knowledge, but because of the unintended consequences that often arise from medication, and how they are often just as bad - or worse - than the problems they were prescribed to fix.

So it was with great satisfaction that I read today that these medications, if taken regularly by people with no symptoms, actually caused heartburn when they tried to stop. Not to mention the increased incidence of infection, because gastric acid kills ingested bacteria, and less acid leads to...well, what do you think?

Perhaps I'll be dead someday because I refuse to take a medication the way in which it's prescribed. But I continue to believe that the less medication I take, the better, and I'll try just about any other solution first.

Finally, as a PSU fan, I feel I should have some comment on the expansion of the conference and the inevitable conference title game that will result. But what is there to say? All of the arguments that university presidents and athletic directors use to decry a playoff system - tradition, extra games that will distract players from their studies - have been blatantly ignored, once again, in another obvious money-grab. As fans of college football, we continue to be screwed by rich institutions who don't want to share postseason revenue with the NCAA (as any sanctioned playoff system would require.) The next time you read an article "debating the merits" of a football playoff, understand that it's pure bullshit, meant to distract you from the mega-rich digging even deeper into your pockets. There are no merits that matter here, just who's getting the money. (You might have noticed that I drew the same conclusions about global warming, so feel free to ignore me as a one-note horn.)

BTW - if there are any Big 12 fans out there that have an obsolete Huck the Fuskers t-shirt for sale, cheap, I'm totally looking to buy one.

Ban and Regulate

2010-06-07T15:47:00.002-04:00

So it seems like BP has started to get the disastrous oil spill in the Gulf under control.

The natural, emotional, and ultimately irrational response to this oil spill is to ban off-shore drilling or at least, increase the regulations. Surely, we have to do something to prevent further disasters, right?

At first blush this sounds reasonable, but let's think through the consequences before reacting self-destructively. Each drop of oil that isn't drilled in America will have to be imported on an oil tanker. The chance of a tanker spilling is 10 times higher than the odds of a deepwater well failing. So while the BP disaster is fresh on our minds, it's still better than the combined ten tanker disasters we haven't yet suffered when we ban or restrict off-shore drilling.

The real problem with capping this well is that it's five-thousand feet below sea level, where the extreme pressure, temperature, and darkness create near-impossible conditions to attempt repairs. At two-to-three-hundred feet, this catastrophe would have been contained quickly, as human divers descended to that depth with repair equipment designed to much lower tolerances. But 85% of the coastline at that depth is protected by...environmental legislation! Believe me, BP would much rather build cheaper and safer oil rigs off the coastline, or in Alaska, than trying to drill 5000 ft below sea level, but our restrictions have forced them to find oil in harder-to-reach places. Along with legal resistance to building nuclear plants and natural gas pipelines, our insatiable demand for energy incents oil companies to take huge risks. If you were horrified by the BP oil spill, just wait and see what happens in the next few decades, as corporations expand their extreme energy operations.

The time when we could be picky about how we get our energy has already past. As a society, we must choose quickly whether we are going to drastically reduce our energy consumption, or drastically expand the ways in which we produce it. Since I doubt Americans would welcome an era of austerity accompanying forced energy conservation, we need to reduce regulations on energy production to save our environment, not expand them! More nuclear energy, more natural gas drilling, and expanded oil exploration in coastal areas will do more to prevent disasters like the Gulf spill than any legislation.

It's not as if additional regulations would have prevented the BP oil spill anyway. They used cheap parts, failed to acquire licenses, and then bribed the regulators with drugs and sex. Additional legal restrictions are just additional opportunities for corruption, and will not protect anyone but the lawmakers and lobbyists who pick at the bloated corpse of our government.

Sometime before 2050, solar power is going to become cheaper than oil, and I look forward to that time as much as any greenie (definitely more than the "environmentalists" trying to sabotage the solar panels in Mojave project.) But until that point, we need to do more to produce energy in the cheapest, safest way possible, and not cave to political, pseudo-environmental NIMBY bullshit. Short-term thinking and reactionary regulation have failed us before, let's not go down that same road again.

Flyers making history

2010-05-19T08:28:00.002-04:00

I don't blog about the orange-and-black much, (ok, I don't blog much period) but what they've done so far this postseason is definitely worthy of comment.

First, they needed to win the last game of the season to even squeak into the playoffs. They couldn't win in regulation, or in overtime, so their whole season came down to a shootout. Historically awful in shootouts, with a 15-27 record at the time, they managed to pull out a win. They finished tied with Montreal, and by virtue of a tiebreaker, got the seventh seed.

After beating up the listless Devils in the first round, they had the fortune of playing the sixth seed Bruins next. Having lost their top two scorers and best penalty-killing forward in the first series, my expectations were as low as possible for the second round. Three games in, the Flyers seemed to be playing to my expectations. Then suddenly they found their game again, and became only the third team in NHL history, and the first since 1975, to win a series after falling behind 3-0. The seventh game itself was a microcosm of the series, with the Bruins grabbing a 3-0 lead in the first period, only to watch the Flyers come back and beat them 4-3.

Then it was on to Montreal - the eigth seed - who had just beaten the #1 seed (Capitals) and last year's champs (Pittsburgh) after falling behind 3-1 in both series. This was the first-ever matchup in the playoffs between the #7 and #8 seeds. After two games, they've outscored the Habs 9-0. They've tallied a franchise-record 13 straight goals, and Michael Leighton, picked up off waivers earlier in the year, became only the second Flyers goalie to post back-to-back playoff shutouts.

I'm not counting out the Canadiens yet, you'd have to be a fool to count them out after two comebacks from down 3-1, but the Flyers are only two games away from the Stanley Cup Finals. They are 16-0 when taking a 2-0 lead in a best-of-seven series...so while you can't write them in yet, I do like their chances.

From a shootout victory on the last day of the season, to a likely berth in the Stanley Cup Finals, the Flyers have already made history. Even if they lose the next four and go home, they've already accomplished something we're unlikely to see again for a generation.

Post-draft minicamp: What to watch for

2010-04-29T13:01:00.002-04:00

Tomorrow kicks off the Eagles first mini-camp of the off-season. These camps are rarely exciting, and even less revealing, but nevertheless there are some interesting stories to keep an eye on:

Ricky Sapp - A first-round talent snatched up in the fifth round, Sapp has a chance to make an immediate impact on the team. The question is: will the Eagles give him that chance? I'd put him on the field as the strong-side LB, then let him rush from the DE position on third downs. He played the Joker in college, so he has experience dropping back in coverage, and shouldn't be nearly as lost as their latest conversion project, Chris Gocong. At 252 lbs, he's not going to be an every-down DE, so his best chance to get consistent playing time is at SAM.
Stacy Andrews - We're going to quickly find out if Andrews needed additional time to come back from his knee injury, or if he was one of the worst free agent signings in Eagles history. With no OL draft picks, the Eagles are clearly betting on the former. Of course, they were betting on him and his brother last year, and you see how that worked out.
Mike McGlynn - Depending on the Andrews situation and how quickly Jamaal Jackson returns from his injury, McGlynn could see major playing time at center early in the season. The Eagles like him and think he's ready, but he's shown very little so far in his career. It's make-or-break time for McGlynn.
Trevor Laws, Quintin Demps, Macho Harris - These three players were expected to make major contributions last year and all were disappointments (actually, Macho did ok for a fifth-round pick thrust into the starting lineup, but he certainly wasn't a strength of the defense.) They all needed to get stronger, and this will be our first chance to see how hard they hit the off-season weight program. If they do not carve out major roles with their performance in the preseason, they are all likely to be cut.
Clay Harbor and Riley Cooper - I expect to read at least one story saying how good these two looked in the minicamp, quicker than expected, etc. I don't see a big impact from either as a rookie (Cooper is destined to be a special-teams gunner and 5th WR) but both could be quality long-term additions.

Andy Reid is smarter than everyone

2010-04-25T10:10:00.002-04:00

If there's one thing we've learned about Big Red over the years, it's that he doesn't change. His core set of beliefs have served him well - he is indisputably the best coach in Eagles history - and he will never waver from those beliefs, even when presented with evidence to the contrary.

The perfect example is the Eagles third-round pick, Daniel Te'o-Nesheim. An undersized DE with a sixth-round grade, he fits the profile exactly of previous Eagles busts like Chris Gocong and Bryan Smith. Fourth-rounder Keenan Clayton fits the mold of former flame-outs Barry Gardner and Quentin Caver. Both of these players were there for the taking in the sixth round, neither fits a need, and neither will make an impact with the Eagles.

But instead of a pick-by-pick bashing of the Eagles, I'm going to just redo the first three rounds of the draft how I would have done it (without all the goofy trades). In a few years, I'll compare my draft below with Big Red's picks and we'll see who turns out better. I'm going to take picks from my recommendations post whenever possible.

1st round (24) - Kyle Wilson CB, Boise St.
2nd round (37) - Name Allen FS, South Florida (we agree on this one!)
2nd round (55) - Charles Brown OT, USC
3rd round (70) - Navarro Bowman LB, PSU
3rd round (87) - Brandon Ghee CB, Wake Forest

I'm not going to dig into the lower rounds, because frankly I've lost track of what picks the Eagles had originally before all of their draft day trades. I did like the selection of Ricky Sapp and Riley Cooper, and maybe those guys wouldn't have been available if the Eagles don't trade for a dozen extra fourth-round picks, but I'd rather have second- and third-round talent. I really want to be wrong, but it sure looks like the Eagles outsmarted themselves again. By staying put and taking the best players available, they would have added quality at positions of need, instead of reaching for positions they didn't.

Brandon Graham?

2010-04-23T07:50:00.002-04:00

When the Eagles traded up to #13, I breathed a sigh of relief. Mike Mayock and I were positive that the Eagles were about to land their man, and we were right.

The only problem is that we believed their man was safety Earl Thomas, not defensive end Brandon Graham.

The good news about Graham is this: he led the FBS (Div 1A to us old-timers) with 26 tackles for loss last season, including 10 1/2 sacks. He was a second-team All-American selection. He threw the 225lb bar up 31 times at the combine, and ran a 4.71 40. Tremendous numbers, all.

He is a relentless pass-rusher with outside speed and an inside spin move that is reminiscent of Dwight Freeney. He was disruptive and sometimes unblockable in college. He was the MVP of the Senior Bowl, proving that he was at his best when facing the best competition.

The bad news is that he's a 3-4 OLB, not a 4-3 DE. What the Eagles needed was a 290-lb anchor on the left side of their line, not another undersized pass-rusher that will be knocked five yards downfield by NFL tackles on every running play. And the Eagles gave up two third-round picks in a deep draft to acquire him.

Rookie DEs average under 4 sacks in their first season in the NFL. Because Graham is undersized, he won't be a first- and second- down player. So they gave up two thirds to move up 11 spots and grab a situational pass-rusher. Instead of drafting Earl Thomas (who was selected with the very next pick) who would have been on the field for every defensive play, they get a guy who's looking at 20 snaps a game and will be extremely lucky to pile up a half dozen sacks. Call me underwhelmed.

The Eagles could have stayed right at 24 and picked Kyle Wilson, who I thought was a perfect fit at a position of dire need. Given the choice between Brandon Graham or Kyle Wison and two third-round picks, I'd take the latter every time. I sure hope I'm wrong, and Graham turns into a dominant pass-rusher that makes me forget all about Earl Thomas and Kyle Wilson, but I doubt it. Then again, my only hope for a Big Red firing is that he continues to bungle personnel moves, so maybe there is a silver lining to this trade.

Meanwhile, Baby Belichik out in Denver took the plunge with everyone's favorite man-crush, Tim Tebow. I'd love to make fun of him more, but my heart's not really in it today. Hard to throw stones when my team is standing in a glass house.

Andy, pick one of these guys

2010-04-19T16:17:00.003-04:00

The Eagles are in an enviable position this (extended) weekend, with 5 picks in the first three rounds. With the first three picks, I'm expecting two DBs, probably a corner and a safety. Here's a list of players I'd like to see in Eagles green this fall:

Earl Thomas - Safety, Texas - Often listed as a hybrid corner/safety, which is exactly what the Eagles need on the back end of their defense. Loose hips, good ball skills, and an ability to blitz make up for his lack of ideal size. May not make it to 24, I'd like to see the Eagles trade up if he drops into the 18-20 range.

Kyle Wilson - Corner, Boise St. - A physical, press corner and sure tackler, would make a perfect complement to Asante Samuel. Another player who may not drop all the way to 24.

Nate Allen - Safety, South Florida - If the Eagles don't get Thomas at 24, Allen would be a nice consolation prize at 37. Again lacks ideal size for a safety, but has elite cover skills, which the Eagles value over size anyway.

Kareen Jackson - Corner, Alabama - Solid and disciplined, could be selected at 24 or 37.

Chris Cook - Corner, Virginia - At 6'2", many NFL scouts see him as a safety, but he's fluid enough to cover wide receivers. I'd love to see the Eagles target him with the 55th pick.

Sean Weatherspoon - Linebacker, Mississippi - I know Andy Reid has never taken a LB in the first round, but this is the kind of guy who might shake things up. Able to line up at all three LB spots and play effectively in space, Weatherspoon is an ideal fit for what the Eagles need from their LBs. Initially, I thought there was no chance he'd be available at 24, but he is reportedly sliding down some draft boards so could be there when the Eagles pick. Unless Earl Thomas or Patrick Wilson was staring me in the face, I'll run to the podium and select Weatherspoon.

Daryl Washington - Linebacker, TCU - An outside LB with good speed and the frame to bulk up to 250. Might be a nice fit at SAM, where the Eagles are weakest, with one of their second-round picks.

Sean Lee - Linebacker, Penn State - Another versatile LB who has been effective both blitzing and in space, he would be a nice addition for the Eagles in the second round. As a PSU fan, I've watched him for three years, and I'd take him on my team anytime.

Jason Pierre-Paul - DE, South Florida - No idea where this guy will be picked, because he's such an intriguing player. Only played a single season of football, he was a basketball player who made the switch late in his career. At 6'5", 270, he has the size and athletic ability of a Jerome Kearse, but almost no experience to draw on. He has displayed a relentless motor and passion for the game, which many believe will propel him to reach his limitless potential. Could be a top-10 pick or a second-rounder. Not really in the Eagles mold, but if he's staring them in the face at 24, they'll have to think hard about passing.

Derrick Morgan - DE, Georgia Tech - The ACC defensive player of the year, might be the best all-around 4-3 DE in the draft. With half the league playing 3-4 defenses now, there's an outside chance he could fall to the Eagles. If he's there, I suspect they run to the podium and select him.

Everson Griffin - DE, USC - A huge DE (over 300 lbs) who displayed unbelievable pass rush ability for someone his size. Not really in the Eagles mold for DEs, but maybe they are sick of having teams run all over their undersized defense, and will go against the grain with this selection. He'll definitely be able to set the edge, and can pressure the QB as well. Would be a surprise pick at 24, but could possibly fall to 37, where they'd have no choice but to take him.

A lot of mock drafts have the Eagles selecting an offensive lineman in the first round, and I can't argue with the sentiment. The problem is that there are no tackles rated near the bottom of the first round (Rodger Saffold from Indiana is the lone exception, depending on who you listen to, and he's the fifth-best OT prospect.) And Reid has only picked one OL with his first pick, and that was Shawn Andrews, who played tackle. Mock drafters who select G Tony Iupati or C/G Markice Pouncey for the Eagles are simply not doing their homework. For interior lineman, the Eagles have had tremendous success picking them later in the draft (Todd Herremans 5th, Jamaal Jackson undrafted, Nick Cole undrafted, Max Jean-Gilles 4th), and I don't see Iupati or Pouncey as special enough to break that pattern. They are both solid, and if the Eagles pick one I won't necessarily complain, but there will be better value at other positions.

Another contingent of draftniks has the Eagles trading way up to grab #1 safety Eric Berry, or trading as high as #10 to select Earl Thomas. While I believe the Eagles love both, I don't see this as a wise move. This year's draft has a group of players between 20 and 45 who are very strong. The Eagles are unlikely to trade both their picks from this range to select a single guy. For instance, I'd much rather have Kareen Jackson and Nate Allen than just Eric Berry. The most likely scenario for a trade-up would be something similar to last season, when they gave up a fifth-rounder to move up two spots. At most, they'll give up a third to jump to 18, but I'd be shocked to see them give up a second in any deal.

The first round starts tonight at 7:30, and I can't wait.

Morality Police

2010-04-16T10:38:00.002-04:00

Sexual assault is a serious crime. It's not something to be sneered at or brushed aside. But sexual assault requires a victim, and when that victim refuses to press charges, and the DA in the case announces there was never enough evidence to build a case anyway, then the accused is innocent, because there was no crime.

Regardless of what actually happened in that night-club bathroom, and who might have been paid off afterward, we must presume Ben Roethlisberger's innocence...if we wish to be protected by the laws of the land, we must respect when they exonerate others.

I am not a Steelers fan or a Ben apologist. I don't think he's exceptionally bright, and he doesn't always make good decisions. But I'm sick of the "where there's smoke, there's fire" finger-wagging of Generation Scold. Ben's going to be punished by either the NFL or the Steelers, and by all accounts he'll continue to apologize and take his punishment without complaint. He'll lose millions of dollars in game checks, and be publicly admonished by every talking head and sports talk-show host, and he hasn't even been charged with a crime, let alone convicted. Does this bother anyone else?

When famous athletes have sex with lots of women, even 20-year-olds in nightclub bathrooms, why should any of us be surprised? Why should we sit in judgement over them, demanding both public humiliation and financial loss? When 60% of the population is cheating on their spouse, how pathetic is it that we punish others for their promiscuity? How well would an average Joe resist the beautiful temptations that follow money and power, when most of us can't resist the mediocre charms of a dumpy co-worker or Facebook friend?

As far as I'm concerned, Ben should fuck every hot 20-year-old in the country if he can. As long as he's staying within the bounds of the law, there's no reason to avoid college bars at 2am. When liking pussy becomes a crime, they're going to have to build a lot more jails...but until then, Ben can be my QB anytime.

McNabb to the Skins

2010-04-05T11:58:00.004-04:00

So many thoughts, I don't even know where to start.

First, the compensation was exactly right. Here's what I said it would take to get a McNabb deal done: I would gladly take two draft picks: a second-rounder to start along with a conditional pick...let's say it starts as a fourth and can move up to a second if he leads his new team to the playoffs. What did the Eagles get? A second- and a fourth-rounder that could become a third. So, pretty much dead on.

Second, trading McNabb to the Redskins speaks volumes about what the Eagles front office actually thinks about #5. You don't trade a Pro Bowl player to a division rival, unless you're absolutely sure he's in decline and you can beat him twice a year. Hypothetically, if McNabb and the Skins go 5-1 against the Eagles over the next three seasons, you can be sure that either Reid or Roseman will pay the price with his job. So in spite of all the accolades that they've heaped upon McNabb, they are not scared of playing against him at all.

Third, I've said numerous times before that McNabb's weaknesses were magnified by both Reid's system and his playcalling. He's not the kind of QB that excels at dropping back, scanning the defense, and making a quick, decisive, accurate throw. His strengths - mobility, cannon arm, a decent deep ball - will be accentuated by the system that Mike Shanahan is running in Washington. John Elway, Jake Plummer, and Jay Cutler all were much better QBs (both W-L and statistically) under Shanahan than without him. They were all strong-armed, mobile QBs like McNabb. And other than Elway, they couldn't read a defense or make accurate throws. Shanahan will pound the rock, and call that half-roll play-action off the run, and allow the QB to make one read over just half the field. It doesn't require exceptional accuracy or timing, both of which McNabb lack. He could have three more Pro Bowl seasons in Washington, and that will expose Reid for the stubborn and predictable offensive mind that he is.

Fourth, if Kolb is ready - and that's a big if - the Eagles are set for another decade of playoff participation. There's hardly an old guy remaining on the team, and the Eagles hold more 2010 draft picks in the first four rounds than any other team in the NFL. The Eagles can continue to restock a defense with young players in one of the deepest drafts in years.

The Eagles could have avoided all this by not drafting Kolb three years ago. Seemingly on the precipice of a championship, they traded out of the first round and passed on a number of players who could have helped the team right away. Instead, Andy's man-crush got the better of him, and they decided to draft for the post-McNabb future. Once Kolb played a little and looked decent, they were stuck...they couldn't sign both to long-term contracts, so they had to pick. In Reid's offense, I like Kolb better, so this is the right choice. But trading McNabb to Shanahan and the Redskins is a dangerous gamble. The Eagles are either going to cement their reputations as shrewd talent evaluators, or Big Red will be run out of town. It's a win-win for me, and I can't wait to see how it plays out.

Eagles pull another head-scratcher

2010-04-02T15:19:00.003-04:00

Sheldon Brown and Chris Gocong for...a fourth, a fifth, and Alex Hall?

Sheldon is 31, coming off an up-and-down year, and has made some complaints about his contract...so it's not like he has tremendous value. But he was a solid starting CB who would have made the Pro Bowl if not for a couple lousy games (where he played through a significant hamstring injury.) And he was under contract for two more years, so frankly, I don't care if he was complaining.

Still...you look at how Lito Sheppard performed last season (he was just released by the Jets) and it makes you wonder, maybe the Eagles know a lot more about their own corners than the rest of us. I certainly thought Lito would be a solid player for the Jets if he could stay healthy, but that wasn't the case. Could it be that the Eagles blitz package, combined with a coached tendency to sit on routes, creates INTs for the DBs, making them look better than they really are?

Even if Sheldon is not as good as he thinks, I don't see the point of dumping him for a fourth-round pick. He was a solid tackler, a team leader, and a decent player making an affordable salary. Still, I'll withhold judgment for now, since the Eagles have a solid track record in picking the end of a player's productivity.

But it does leave a rather large hole in the secondary...after Asante Samuel, who generally hurts himself at least once a game attempting a "tackle", they've got Ellis Hobbs returning from a neck injury (and who didn't play as well as Sheldon last season anyway), Joselio Hanson (who was awful after his suspension), and then a couple practice-squad types. Not exactly a lot of depth. If the Eagles made this move because they're about to complete a trade to the Raiders for Nnamdi Asomugha, well then I'd say it makes a lot of sense.

But if there's no trade on the horizon, then it sure looks like another brick in the rebuilding project the Eagles have suddenly become. If you're already giving up on 2010 because you're planning to give Kolb the reins, then maybe it makes sense to cut your losses with aging vets like Sheldon and get what draft picks you can for them. You certainly wouldn't bring back McNabb to shepherd a bunch of fresh-faced kids through an 8-8 season, right?

As for Gocong, I think he makes a lot more sense as an OLB in a 3-4 scheme, so he should find some success in Cleveland. He seems like a hard-working guy that just never fit in to what the Eagles were trying to do: pretty much what I said the day the Eagles drafted him.

A Nod to Tebow

2010-03-19T18:25:00.002-04:00

I'm admittedly a Tim Tebow-hater. I am rooting for him to fail, so that he doesn't have a platform to spout his ultra-religious views. Besides, it's pure joy when someone as universally loved as Tebow falls on his face, and legions of genuflecting fans are left heartbroken.

But even though I want him to fail, and I've predicted that he'll never play QB in the NFL, his recent pro day has shaken my conviction.

Both his footwork and his throwing motion are vastly improved, in only a six-week period. Of course, he was throwing against air - he wasn't playing in the fourth-quarter of a high-pressure game with bodies flying around him - but still, his improvement was called "ridiculous" by respected college scout Mike Mayock.

The history of QBs changing their throwing motion is stacked against Tebow. I can't think of a single example of a quarterback who was able to drastically alter their mechanics while maintaining accuracy...but during Florida's Pro Day, Tebow looked more accurate than he did during his college career. It's normal for QBs to make tweaks, but sometimes even minor changes can cause problems, since throwing motions are instinctual, formed the first time a boy picks up a stone and tosses it at a stop sign.

The workout wasn't perfect - according to Todd McShay, there were four times he reverted to his waist-high, windmill delivery - but when NFL coaches see that much improvement over a six-week timespan, they'll be very excited to get him into their systems and give him a year or two of practice to solidify the new mechanics.

He's still got work to do, and he certainly isn't going to be an impact player as a rookie, but I now definitely believe he'll be drafted by the end of the second round...as a quarterback. It will not surprise me if he plays, and wins games, as a QB in the NFL. His arm strength and athletic ability, combined with an unbelievable determination and work ethic, will earn him a chance to prove himself.

Let's just hope it's not with the Eagles.

Bye Shawn

2010-03-17T17:04:00.002-04:00

Shawn Andrews, the brohawk-sporting, nonsense-tweeting, Phelps-rapping Big Kid, is today (finally) an ex-Eagle.

A one-time Pro Bowler and first-round pick, Andrews has missed three full years of his career due to injury. The last two were caused by back problems, exacerbated by depression, lack of motivation, and overall flakiness. Football players with eccentric personalities are one thing, but Andrews is an unstable knucklehead that is no longer worth the big contract extension he signed. Comedically, I'll miss him, but from a football standpoint, the Eagles are well rid of his distraction.

In other news, they've traded a fourth-round draft pick and Chris Clemons for Darryl Tapp, and underperforming DE from Seattle. It's a depth move with possible upside, but nothing to get overly excited about. Tapp is a former second-rounder who has not lived up to his potential...the Eagles obviously believe that a change of system and change of scenery will help him improve. I hope they are right, but I won't be holding my breath for a breakthrough.

Additionally, RB Mike Bell has signed an offer sheet, and will become an Eagle if the Saints to do not match the offer. I don't know why they decided to sign him instead of Justin Fargas, but I do think Bell is a decent player. They definitely needed a veteran RB, and he's a bigger back that should complement McCoy, but Bell is not a difference-maker. 3.8 ypc last year, and a career short-yardage conversion percentage that is slightly below average.

Eagles off-season: DBs

2010-03-10T17:07:00.002-05:00

I was going to do DL first, but they signed Marlin Jackson today, so by reviewing the defensive backs instead, I can incorporate that news into this post.

The secondary was one of the more interesting positions on the team last year...they were near the top of the league in INTs, but gave up huge plays and too many points. Sheldon Brown looked like a Pro Bowler one week and a rookie the next. Asante Samuel was a Pro Bowler, but he couldn't knock over a house of cards. The safety position was an absolute mess, as Macho Harris, Quintin Demps, and Sean Jones rotated through a carousel of incompetence. Ellis Hobbs got injured, and Joselio Hanson didn't play very well after his suspension.

Samuel and Brown have excellent anticipation and ball skills, but they don't have great cover ability. If the Eagles' blitz scheme generates the pressure it is designed to, they will garner interceptions at an All-Pro rate...but if they are forced to cover for long stretches while the blitz falters, they will continue to be exposed. Hobbs is a solid third corner with the same gambling mentality. Hanson disappointed last season, and hopefully the Eagles will challenge him with a draft pick.

Marlin Jackson played both safety and corner for the Colts, but the Eagles are looking at him as a safety. He has a chance to be the opening-day starter at FS, but he will contribute in the nickel and dime packages regardless. He has good size (6', 200) and good speed, and will be a contributor if he can recover from back-to-back ACL injuries, one to each knee. It's the kind of low-risk, high-reward signing the Eagles favor in free agency...but if he doesn't recover as quickly as anticipated (see: Andrews, Stacy) he may not contribute at all.

Jackson cannot be the only answer. I was hoping they would sign Antrel Rolle, but instead he went to the division rival Giants. Kerry Rhodes would have helped the team, but apparently they weren't willing to give up a fourth-round pick for him. Ryan Clark was a free agent, but didn't even make a trip to Philly. Darren Sharper is still available, but it's highly unlikely the Eagles will bring in a player at his age. That leaves the draft as the only way to improve the position. A lot of draftniks have the Eagles taking Taylor Mays in the first round, but I'd prefer Earl Thomas, who's smaller and slower but has much better cover skills. I'll have more info on potential picks as we get closer to the draft...but it's vital that the Eagles address the safety position in the first three rounds.

Overall, the DBs need a good bit of work. One high-round pick and one mid-round pick must be added, at least, and could be supplemented by another second-tier free agent. How the Eagles address this weakness will go a long way toward determining their success in 2010.

Eagles off-season: WR and TE

2010-03-09T19:18:00.002-05:00

Remember when the Eagles kept seven receivers on the opening-day roster last season? Of those seven, plus the one on the practice squad at the time, only four remain with the team today: Jackson, Maclin, Avant, and Curtis. With Curtis scheduled to earn something like $5 million this season, he's either going to be the highest-paid fourth WR in NFL history or he'll be cut (I'm surprised it hasn't happened already.)

With Jackson, Maclin, and Avant cemented in their roles, the Eagles aren't looking for a big-time free agent or high draft pick at this position. They could use a tall red zone target, as usual, which is why we may see the return of Hank Baskett. With a mid-to-low-round draft pick to compete for a spot against practice squadder Jordan Norwood, this position will be rounded out.

At TE, it's similarly cut and dried. Alex Smith was not tendered, so expect the three TEs to be Celek, Ingram, and Dorenbos. I wouldn't expect much action at this position in free agency or the draft either.

Free agency - What are they thinking?

2010-03-07T10:08:00.002-05:00

With Big Red reiterating once again that McNabb is his QB for next season - a 33-year-old in the last year of his contract - you would have expected the Eagles to fill a few roster holes with free agents and make one more run for the Super Bowl, right? But no - Julius Peppers and Chester Taylor were signed by the Bears, safety Antrel Rolle went to the division rival Giants, safety Kerry Rhodes is a Jet, and Aaron Kampman joined the Jags.

But never fear, the Eagles did make a move to improve their team in free agency - they released their best linebacker from last season.

Surely, this means that Andy Reid is blowing smoke, and McNabb is going to be traded any day now, right? With an uncertain labor situation in 2011, I could understand going with a young team in 2010 while Kolb gains experience. But ignoring veteran free agents who could help the Eagles this year makes no sense if you're going to ride the old horse one more time.

I sure hope the Eagles have a plan, because all I've see so far is a smug belief that standing still will somehow close the gap with the Cowboys.

Eagles off-season: OL

2010-03-04T11:54:00.002-05:00

Well, with free agency approaching tomorrow, it certainly doesn't appear like I'll get through all the position groups before then. I'm having fun with this series, though, so I'll probably continue it through the opening of free agency. So instead of inaccurate predictions, you'll get uninformed analysis instead. Seems like a wash to me.

The Eagles OL was mediocre last season, and then devolved into a complete disaster the last two games. Part of it was the injury to center Jamaal Jackson, but some of it was simply physical dominance on the part of the Cowboys. The OL disintegration played no small part in the Eagles firing of their strength and conditioning coach shortly after the season.

With the Andrews sisters both drawing high salaries without any performance to back it up, I wouldn't be surprised if they both end up cut. But even if they remain on the roster, you can't count on them for anything. Without them, the OL looks pretty shoddy, both in starting quality and depth. Peters, Herremans, and Jackson (if healthy) make up a pretty solid left side. Peters needs to improve his performance, but I think another year in the Eagles program will accomplish that. But the right side - Nick Cole and Winston Justice - is simply mediocre. Cole is a RFA who should get a 1st-round tender, and he's a passable starter, but really should be a depth player. The Eagles best back-up tackle is King Dunlap, who's shown absolutely nothing when he's on the field, and their best back-up guard is Max Jean-Gilles, who hasn't developed at all beyond a promising rookie season.

When you consider that Jamaal Jackson won't be cleared to practice again until mid-August with his torn knee, it really starts to look rocky. The Eagles need several players to shore up this position.

I'd start with Hank Fraley, just released by the Browns today. A 10-year vet who started as the Eagles center for several seasons, he can step right in and play until Jackson is ready. He'll also provide depth at both guard positions. While I love the Eagles pick-up of A.Q. Shipley out of PSU, I'm not ready to count on him right away. A veteran presence who knows the offense is the perfect fit.

On top of that, we need a tackle in the draft. Someone who can at least challenge Dunlap for the back-up job, and hopefully beat him out for it. The Eagles have had success with mid-round draft picks on the OL, and it's definitely something they should consider again, unless one of the top tackles falls into their lap in the first round.

Eagles off-season: RBs

2010-03-03T14:58:00.002-05:00

When Big Red felt like running the ball last season, the combo of Weaver and McCoy worked very well. With Westbrook gone, can we count on a similar performance in 2010?

Weaver is a RFA, and he'll be tendered a one-year contract if the Eagles can't work out an long-term deal by tomorrow. I'm pulling for the latter, because Weaver is a perfect fit for this team. He blocked, ran, and caught the ball better than expected, and demonstrated that a FB can be an effective offensive weapon.

McCoy looked good at times last year, but he still has a long way to go. I saw him miss too many blocks in pass protection and he didn't always run decisively enough. He should also beef up a little - ten pounds of lean muscle would be good - to increase his effectiveness between the tackles and improve his durability. All of these issues are common in rookie RBs, so it's nothing to panic about. Still, the team would benefit greatly from a veteran presence to share the load with Shady.

Eldra Buckley performed well when given the chance, but he didn't flash a lot of talent. A solid special-teamer and goalline back, but nothing more. I'd bring in a rookie to compete for his roster spot.

I have no comment on the two practice-squad guys, Dwayne Wright and Martell Mallett, since I haven't seen them play.

I'm not comfortable heading into the season with only those backs, and I don't believe the Eagles are either. I'd address the position twice: once through a veteran FA signing, and again through a mid-to-low-round draft pick.

Chester Taylor is the back the Eagles should target. A solid, veteran back who runs well but blocks and catches even better, he'd be the ideal complement for the lightning-quick McCoy. Taylor does not have breakaway speed, so I doubt anyone will break the bank to sign him, which means the Eagles could sign him to a reasonable contract. If that falls through, Thomas Jones is my second choice. Rumors abound that the Eagles may target Darren Sproles, but I'd prefer a workhorse back instead of a second slasher. Still, it's hard to argue with his explosiveness.

With Weaver, McCoy, and a veteran FA, the RB corps would be set for 2010. The last roster spot could be up for grabs between Buckley, Mallett, and the low-round draftee.

Eagles off-season position review: QBs

2010-03-02T19:24:00.002-05:00

The new NFL season begins at the end of this week. Restricted free agents must be tendered by Thursday, and unrestricted free agent signings can start on Friday. I'd like to review each position on the Eagles roster before then, but I'm not sure I'll actually follow through.

We'll start with the quarterback position. Three players in the last year of their contracts, McNabb, Kolb, and Vick.

First, dump Vick. That's the easy one. A conditional pick, starts out as a fifth with the potential to move up to a two. Carolina, St. Louis, and the Raiders are likely fits...although Arizona would be wise to consider it as well, since they have no backup to Matt Leinart.

Second, I'm ready to trade McNabb. I watched the playoffs, and the QB troika of Brett Favre, Peyton Manning, and Drew Brees reminded me just how far #5 is from an elite QB. He has his moments, and can pile up stats with the best of them, but the inaccuracy and indecision always catch up to him in the playoffs.

But the question is: who can we trade him to, and for what? I would gladly take two draft picks: a second-rounder to start along with a conditional pick...let's say it starts as a fourth and can move up to a second if he leads his new team to the playoffs. At that price, I think the Eagles could find several dance partners - Buffalo, Cleveland, San Francisco. Carolina at least...possibly St. Louis, Denver, and Minnesota (if Brett retires) as well. But two things to keep in mind: the Eagles are unlikely to trade him to a contending NFC team, which rules out Carolina, Minnesota, and San Fran. Meanwhile, Donovan is unlikely to want to play for a crappy team, so he wouldn't sign a contract extension with Buffalo, Cleveland, or St. Louis...and without a contract extension, no team will give up two draft picks. So while I want to see him traded, and probably several people in the Eagles' front office do too, it's not going to be simple to get a deal done.

So where does that leave Kolb? I'd dearly love to sign him to a long-term deal, but as long as McNabb is on the roster, it will have to be an incentive-laden contract. You can get away with as much as $3 million base salary for a back-up QB, and then pile on incentives for playing time, passing TDs, etc. Kolb may not go for that, however, which would put the Eagles in a really tough spot. They might be forced to trade Kolb, if they can't find a partner for McNabb, because he'd be a lot less picky about who he signed an extension with. Kolb would be happy to be a starter on a crappy team at this point in his career.

If we can find a partner, McNabb should be traded for a couple picks and Kolb signed to a long-term deal. If not, see if Kolb will accept an incentive-heavy deal and let him back up #5 for a couple more seasons. The last resort would be trading Kolb and signing McNabb. Under no circumstances should the Eagles enter the season with both McNabb and Kolb playing the last year of their contract - that would be disastrous.

In any case, we'll likely need to sign a veteran back-up for 2010, and draft a mid-round QB to develop.

One goal short

2010-03-01T12:55:00.003-05:00

I underestimated the US Hockey team. I didn't think they were good enough to win a medal, but they took Canada to overtime in the final game. These Olympics were an incredible stage for hockey, as teams of All-Stars competed against each with a passion consistently absent from All-Star games. I've never seen better hockey than the two US-Canada matches, and the idea that the NHL might not approve an Olympics break again in four years is beyond farcical. You couldn't have a better advertisement for a struggling sport than what was on display in Vancouver.

In between hockey matches, I've been playing Dante's Inferno. Sadly, I'm not impressed. It looks fantastic as you journey through Hell, accompanied by Virgil and his recitation of lines from the immortal poem. You battle legendary creatures on a quest to save your love (Beatrice) from Lucifer's eternal embrace. But with all this going for it, the game still falls well short of what it should be.

Imagine a battle against Death himself, with his Scythe as the prize. Sounds epic, doesn't it? But what if I told you this battle occurs two minutes into the game, while you're still mashing buttons trying to figure out what's going on? That there is no suspense, no buildup to this epic moment, but instead you are whisked into it before you've learned anything about the character, invested in a single skill, or discovered your first combo move? Suddenly, it's a lot less than epic.

The form holds throughout the game. You're whisked from boss fight to boss fight, and while you're battling Charon, Cerberus, the Judge of the Damned, and Cleopatra, your world is reduced to a tiny sliver of Hell and a series of repeated moves. There's no mystery, no suspense, and thus no climax. It's just a series of 'epic' battles with some puzzles and routine slaying in between.

The interface is annoying, as well. It breaks the basic contract of "left-stick move, right-stick rotate camera" that almost all platform games conform to. In Dante's Inferno, the RS instead causes the player to dodge...and while I appreciate how integral that function is to the game, and how important it is to be able to dodge quickly, I get really annoyed when I can't turn my fucking head. I want to look around and experience the environment, especially one as well-crafted as this, but instead I only get to see the viewpoint that the developers thought I should see (which in certain corners, is nothing at all.) This half-assed camera treatment, along with the word Exalted! appearing on my screen when I perform several combos in a row, reminds me far too much of the worst video game I've ever played. Additionally, the interface is extremely contextual, and you're reminded constantly of these contextual changes by little buttons that appear above your target...reminding you that now is the time to mash 'B'.

Finally, several memories of Dante are not built with the game engine, but instead remembered through cartoonish animation - it must have been a stylistic choice, but it doesn't work at all. If you want me to become immersed in your gaming world, you need to avoid 1) cartoon memories, 2) floating button reminders, and 3) the inability to move my fucking neck. When you lovingly craft the nine planes of Hell, with walls of screaming souls, raining fire, and monstrous bosses...player immersion seems like a logical goal, right?

This game would have worked so much better if it was slightly open-ended...you should drop into Hell with no idea how to find Beatrice, and you need to make discoveries and alliances in addition to slaughtering your way through. (Surely, Hell must be political.) When you're linearly dragged from tiny area to tiny area, you never get a sense of scope, discovery, or accomplishment. And contextual clues about the interface should work into the game believably - instead of knowing it's time for a finishing move by seeing a flashing tombstone reading RT hovering above an enemy's head, how about bleeding wounds, staggering, or even something artificial but less obtrusive - like a status bar? I don't want to be constantly reminded that I'm sitting on my couch with a controller; I'd like to believe for a few minutes that I'm actually a scythe-wielding hero beating back the legions of Hell. Sadly, Dante's Inferno rarely affords me that opportunity.

Still, it's mildly entertaining, and I can't help but smile as I re-live one of the first pieces of classic literature that I actually enjoyed. And there's been some hints that the entire adventure has been set up by Lucifer himself, as part of a nebulous plan to break the seals which imprison him in Hell. So there's a chance yet for some suspense and an epic confrontation, but so far the game has been a huge disappointment.

Westbrook Gone

2010-02-23T14:35:00.002-05:00

I wasn't planning to blog about the Eagles today, since free agency and the draft are just around the corner and will spawn a half-dozen blog entries over the next couple of months. But the release of Brian Westbrook is worth a mention.

As much as he's contributed to the franchise, this is the right move. Between the concussions and his bad knees, I wouldn't be surprised if he was done in the NFL completely. My guess is that he won't pass a physical with anyone else, and won't show any explosiveness in workouts, and will retire. If he's really desperate to play, I could see the Eagles re-signing him after training camp to a one-year deal, assuming they don't draft or sign someone they like better.

And no, I wouldn't sign LT to replace him, and I don't think the Eagles will either. At this point in his career, he's nothing more than a goalline back. If he's willing to accept that role (and a minimum salary), then he'd be a nice addition, but my guess is that he will expect the carries and the money of the player he used to be, not the player he is.

Curling update:
Pathetic. Both US curling teams choked away close games. After a great showing in Torino, they've stumbled to a 2-7 record for the men and a 2-5 record for the women, both missing the medal round. Now I just need to find a nearby curling club so I can work on my game, instead of only watching every four years.

US Hockey update:
If you didn't see that US-Canada game, I'm sorry. If I could show one hockey game in the last decade to a non-fan to try to sell them on the sport, I'd pick that one. Gritty physical play from the US, combined with great goaltending, stole the game from a more talented, and sometimes dominating, Canadian team. Both teams played with passion and desperation for the entire 60 minutes.

The US sits in first place after the preliminary round, which guarantees nothing, but puts them in a great position to medal. A favorable draw has them facing either Switzerland or Belarus in the quarterfinals (they beat the Swiss 3-1 in the prelims), and then (if the seeds hold) either the Finns or the Czechs in the semis. While both teams are capable of beating the Americans, they are not the equals of the three powerhouses (Canada, Russia, Sweden) that are on the other side of the draw. The US might still be the fourth-best squad in the tourney, but thanks to stealing the game against Canada, they won't face any of the top three again before the finals.

Gaming update:
With AC2 behind me, I've got to decide between Bioshock 2 and Dante's Inferno next. Since I'm cheap, the decision will come down to which one hits the Used section at Gamestop first.

Assassin's Creed 2: Game Review

2010-02-18T16:31:00.002-05:00

Assassin's Creed 2 shares many of the same strengths and weaknesses with its predecessor. It's incredibly deep and rich, but suffers from the same extremes of difficulty (zero for most of the game, punctuated by spurts of tediously demanding perfection) that the first one did.

First, it looks amazing. The architecture and dress of 15th-century Italy is lovingly represented in fantastic detail. There are moments where you'll reach the tip of a steeple and simply pan the camera in every direction to soak in the amazing view. Since I've never been to Venice, it was a real pleasure to run around and experience the City of Canals "firsthand".

Second, the designers directly addressed one of my complaints from the first game - lack of character development. A character can be improved through weapons and armor and healed with medicine - these items can be looted or bought with looted gold. An additional area of development and source of income is your personal villa, which starts out shoddy but can be invested in and rebuilt throughout the game. While I certainly appreciated these additions, they turned out to be pointless. Once mastery of the counter and disarms moves are achieved, you can slay hordes of enemies without a scratch. Towards the end of the game I never bothered to draw my sword - it was more fun (and slightly more challenging) to disarm each enemy and kill them with their own weapon. Another problem with the "customization" is that can all be accomplished easily on the first playthrough, crushing the replay value.

Third, the expanded lore of the second volume does not disappoint. While a bit corny, I give the authors tremendous credit for the sheer ambition of their vision. I don't want to rewrite everything you can read on the wiki, but they attempt to explain the creation (and possible extermination) of mankind, the origins of religion, the rise to power of many historical figures, the construction of architecturally-similar pyramids all around the ancient world, the Mayan doomsday calendar, and unexplained events (like Tunguska), all woven together with the threads of everyone's favorite conspiracy-theory organization, the Templars.

Overall, an impressive game that could have been even more. Worth buying (used) and definitely worth playing once.

Here's a video from the game, called The Truth, which you piece together by uncovering glyphs throughout the game and deciphering puzzles. It shows two humans who are escaping from their masters, known only as Those Who Came Before, with a mind-control device known as an Apple of Eden.

Public Enemies

2010-02-15T13:04:00.002-05:00

I don't normally review movies I've watched on DVD, but once in a while a movie does something good enough or bad enough to deserve a comment. Public Enemies falls into the latter category.

I'm not sure how you take a compelling story about a memorable public figure and turn it into a bland, forgettable movie, but the makers of Public Enemies found a way.

Dillinger could be both brutal and restrained, cold and compassionate, fiercely loyal and self-serving. He would plan robberies with exacting detail, sometimes using elaborate ruses to accomplish his goal. And yet he was exceedingly reckless in his personal life, unable to lay low and remain anonymous, even when his life depended on it. Above all, he was a charming public figure who cultivated his reputation more carefully than his cash.

And yet this movie barely touches on his complexities, and in spite of the usual performance by Johnny Depp, he comes off shallow and bland. Instead of empathy, pity, admiration, or disgust - all of which could be valid responses to Dillinger's character - I only felt apathy.

Read these sentences I'm lifting from Wikipedia:

Among Dillinger's more celebrated exploits involved his pretending to be a sales representative for a company that sold bank alarm systems. He reportedly entered a number of Indiana and Ohio banks and used this ruse to assess security systems and bank vaults of prospective targets. Another time, the gang pretended to be part of a film company that was scouting locations for a "bank robbery" scene. Bystanders stood and smiled as a real robbery ensued and Dillinger and friends escaped with the loot.

Don't those scenes sound like they were made for a movie? Neither one made the cut, however, instead replaced by several straight-up gun-toting bank robberies that lacked drama. Dillinger on several occasions returned money to bank customers who were making deposits or who handed him their wallets out of fear, yet this rates a single passing mention in the movie. Dillinger broke into several police stations to steal bullet-proof vests and BARs, but this wasn't mentioned either. The public-service announcements during movies about Dillinger in his gang were often treated with cheers for Dillinger and boos for the agents chasing him, but not in Public Enemies, where the moviegoers somberly and dutifully look to their left and right to see if the at-large criminal is sitting next to them.

The worst bending of the truth was the outright fabrication of Dillinger's last words - he either said nothing or "You've got me" depending on the report, but he most certainly didn't have a romantic message for his jailed girlfriend. In addition to the Woman in Red, he was accompanied to the movies by the prostitute he'd been dating.

It reminds me of the movie 300, which couldn't let a timeless story stand on its own, but felt the need to dress it up with fighting rhinoceroses, ogres, and speeches about freedom. Public Enemies adds pointless dramatization to an already great story while neutering it at the same time.

Four years and counting

2010-02-15T08:53:00.002-05:00

As the Winter Olympics kick off, and I'm Googling the curling tv schedule, it occurred to me that I started blogging almost exactly four years ago.

Although this feels like a milestone of sorts, I'm not going to do a self-important summary of my blogging highlights (clip show!) After all, I've only posted 337 times, less than a year's work for some people, and both the frequency and quality have declined over the last year. When I started out, I felt like I had a lot to say...but I'm at the point now where every post perilously courts the danger of repetition. There's only so many times I can debate the alarmism of global warming, point out the hypocrisy of religion, or seethe with disgust at self-serving politicians. (No links - I thought about it, but that would be too much like the clip show I am avoiding.)

So instead I'll get back to the Winter Olympics, and while not technically repetitive (four years ago I mostly focused on my weird fascination with curling) - the topic is droll nevertheless.

Aside from hockey and curling, I can't stand the Winter Olympics. There's something exclusive and elitist about the whole party, but I'd be a hypocrite to say that bothered me. The two biggest problems for me are 1) I haven't done any of that shit, and 2) watching races "against the clock" are really lousy television.

We're at dinner last night in a bar/restaurant (interesting menu, decent food, but overpriced) with a TV showing the luge competition, and my son asks: Why do some guys go faster down the hill than the others? That's when I realize: I don't have a fucking clue. I reply sagely "It's all technique, son" without having any idea what I'm talking about. I've never luged, I never will luge...I don't know what the hell I'm watching for as spandex-clad dude after spandex-clad dude zip down a icy tube on their back. They're all going fast enough to die, and without the little ticking clock at the bottom of the screen I sure couldn't tell you who had the best technique or the fastest run, or why the angles of one guy's runners are better than another angle...the same goes for bobsledding, biathalon, mixed alpine races...I guess I'm grateful I live in a place where winter's not long and snowy enough to invent all this crazy shit to kill time between golf seasons.

And then there's the clock...imagine watching the 100-yard dash one person at a time. Or all that shit with Michael Phelps two summers ago if he was in a pool by himself racing against a timer. I'm not a big Summer Olympics guy either, but it's a lot more compelling to watch people race each other. Downhill skiing with 30 simultaneous participants, or 30 bobsleds tearing down a mountain at the same time...I'm sure it's not practical, but it might be worth watching.

But all of that is moot starting tomorrow, when the US curlers lose to Germany, and the US hockey team defeats Switzerland. In case you're wondering, I'm predicting a medal for neither club...the hockey team is at best fourth in the world behind Canada, Russia, and Sweden...and quite possibly worse than the Czech Republic, the Finns, and Latvia as well.

Tim Tebow Schadenfreude

2010-02-01T16:01:00.002-05:00

I thought I despised Tim Tebow before.

But now, as you may have already heard, He's about to appear in an anti-abortion Super Bowl commercial. The ad, which will cost between $2.5 and $2.8 million, discusses the story of His miraculous birth.

You see, his 37-year-old mother was in the Phillippines on a mission, when she was diagnosed with placental abruption. Doctors normally recommend abortion in this case, because it poses not just a danger to the child (15-20% mortality rate in third-world countries like the Phillippines) but also a danger to the mother (5% mortality rate.) Additionally, nearly 50% of the babies are born underweight and premature, with other complications at more than double their normal rate of occurrence. But she decided against abortion, and she was blessed with the Eminently Marketable Tim Tebow for a son!

Of course, these stories have a built-in survivor bias, because you never hear from the dead babies and dead mothers who made the same choice and prayed just as hard as Pam Tebow did. The mothers who orphaned living children and widowed living husbands, foolishly risking their own lives to obey the rules of a nonexistent supreme being, are conveniently silent about the consequences of their choice.

But ok, I'm going to put aside my non-belief for a moment. Just for the sake of argument, let's take every word in the Bible as the pristine truth.

When Jesus was alive, he was a part of the Roman Empire, a republican government that closely mirrors our current government in many important ways. Did Jesus make a single trip to Rome, to lobby the senators for more Christian laws? Did he take donations and save them up to try and curry favor with politicians? Did he instead lobby local politicians - like Pontius Pilate or the Pharisees for political change?

You may not have read the Bible as closely as I have, but instinctively you know the answer to these questions. Jesus gave money to the poor and encouraged others to do so; he witnessed on a personal level and encouraged his disciples to do the same. He never made any effort to influence politicians or laws.

And yet, Focus on the Family has saved up $2.5 million for a 30-second Super Bowl ad with Tim Tebow's face on it. Think Jesus would approve? Think he would have denied food to starving children so that he could air a television ad hoping to affect political change?

And Our Media Hero is right at the head of the whole hypocritical scheme, translating his success as a football player into a platform for his evangelical beliefs.

So it is with great delight that I watched him suck at the Senior Bowl. If you can't follow that link (sub required, I think), it grades Tebow's week as a D+.

We have not spoken to a single talent evaluator who believes Tebow can develop into the kind of quarterback Mark Sanchez, Matthew Stafford or Joe Flacco is right now. The learning curve is just too steep in almost every area. We cannot find a way to give him any higher than a third-round grade, and even then we envision him as nothing more than a Wildcat or short-yardage quarterback who could move to H-back. Overall, Senior Bowl week could not have gone worse from an on-the-field standpoint.

This means that he'll soon (hopefully) fade into obscurity, since no one wants to hear a tight end proselytise.

State of the Union

2010-01-27T15:53:00.002-05:00

Keep this in mind when watching Obama tonight...while unemployment currently stands at 10% in this country, the jobs market is showing signs of bottoming and the historical timeframe for when jobs start to come back (2-3 years after the start of the recession) is right about now. So when Obama proposes to spend more of your tax money, and your children's tax money, on some nebulous jobs bill (which unless it includes corporate tax cuts, instead of targeted lobbyist back-scratching, will be useless) he's making the purely political calculation that anything he does will be viewed as successful because of the coincidental timing of the business cycle.

Of course, any jobs turnaround will be delayed and muted by his bloated and still-mostly-unspent stimulus package...but if the stimulus package is mentioned at all, he'll take credit for turning the economy around...which again was more coincidental business cycle timing. (If I'm wrong, and his stimulus did fix the economy, then how to explain that we were already turning the corner before a single dime was spent, and we're now well on the way to recovery with 2/3 still unspent?)

At the same time, he's going to make a big deal out of a budgetary "spending freeze" proposal. While racking up a $1.4 trillion deficit, including a $850 billion stimulus package, Obama is going to propose "saving" the country $250 billion dollars - over 10 years, or $25 billion/year. If you're increasing the size of government by $1.4 trillion, while reducing it by $25 billion...well, you understand the general direction of his policies. He'll say the word "freeze" about a dozen times because he wants the idea to sink into your head that he's somehow keeping to campaign promises of reducing the deficit and spending responsibly, but his actions tell a totally different story.

To understand the true meaning of a freeze, however, you need to look at the exceptions. By saying he will freeze nondefense discretionary spending, Obama is excluding so-called mandatory spending, as well as defense, which he has interpreted as defense, homeland security and veterans spending. Without looking at any of the fine print, the freeze’s narrow parameters have already excluded the vast majority of annual spending. - Read full article here.

So when you're watching tonight, don't fall (again) for the charm and silver tongue that hoodwinked you into voting for him. Look at his actions and understand the meaning behind his empty words.

I don't want to sound like a Rush Limbaugh anti-Obama demagogue...I'm willing to change my opinion when he changes his actions. Stop running up huge deficits and increasing government power (ie: restricting our freedom) by sending more and more of our money to Washington. Then you'll have my full support.

Tim Tebow update: Hard to believe, but Tebow's mechanics are coming into question this week at Senior Bowl practices. He's having trouble with accuracy, velocity, and resetting his feet when his first read breaks down. His windup at times brings the ball below his waist - by comparison, watch some old Dan Marino clips and see how often that ball dropped below his shoulder. The time and space Tebow requires to throw the football simply won't be available to him in the NFL. One scout called him "Larry Csonka playing quarterback". That pretty much says it all.

The True Measure of a Man

2010-01-23T09:53:00.003-05:00

Suddenly, things aren't going Obama's way anymore.

Elected into office along with a Democratic supermajority in the Senate, and a majority in the House, it seemed like Obama had a clear mandate to add $1 trillion to our budget deficit with wasteful earmarks and politically-targeted payouts.

Then, when the economy started to turn, he got credit for this stimulus nonsense, even though 2/3 of it still hasn't been paid out yet.

But now that Scott Brown's victory has killed his health-care package, Obama's acting like a petulant child by lashing out at banks and demanding punitive taxes on for-profit institutions that had the gall to make money while the rest of us weren't.

Robin Hood redistribution isn't the answer. The executives of Goldman Sachs and other large banks are paid by their shareholders to make as much money as possible. It is their job, and if they don't do it well, the shareholders will replace them. You are welcome to think that their compensation packages are too big, and I'd agree with you, but that doesn't mean they should donate more than the current 41% tax rate of their bonuses to the government! (Gregg Easterbrook, who I've written about before, favors a 100:1 maximum spread for employees of the same company, so that the CEO cannot make more than 100 times the lowest-paid employee. This is an interesting thought experiment worth some consideration, although I'm scared to death of the slippery slope of government-mandated compensation.)

If the banks and the bankers did something illegal to bring about the crash, then punish them. Prosecute everyone who leveraged beyond SEC limits, who failed to disclose all required information on loans, or who used off-shore accounts to hide underperforming assets. They'll get no sympathy from me.

But, on the other hand, when you're part of a government that deregulated banks to the point where they could leverage their assets at a 50-to-1 ratio, package mortgages into complicated derivative packages and sell them off to other institutions, short the very assets they were selling to their clients, and then provide a predictably easy monetary policy which encouraged these practices...you can't now turn around and demand recompense from those who played along with your rules and made a lot of money.

And then, when you bail them out at 100%, don't force any concessions from their creditors, and don't attach any strings to how they spend the bailout money...don't act astonished when they take that money and line their pockets - legally - with it. A punitive tax will not make up for your lack of foresight, and it absolutely, positively, will not create jobs, which is what this country really needs.

The answer remains the same as always. Encourage investment by reducing taxes and spending.

Drop every corporate subsidy and tax exemption from the tax code so that everyone is on a level playing field, then cut the overall rate from 35% to 25%. The lower rate would encourage more business in the U.S. while simplicity would allow for businesses to cut costs. 35% remains the second-highest corporate tax rate in the world, at a time when we need more jobs.
Get rid of SarbOx, off-shore drilling restrictions, and 40-year-old nuclear power regulations. Homegrown energy = jobs and security.
Permanently lower the capital-gains tax and dividend tax. Incent stock market investment so that businesses have more capital to expand and hire, while investors keep more of their money.
Simplify the personal tax code, removing most deductions and reducing the marginal rates across-the-board. This is for my Keynesian friends, so I don't get pigeon-holed as a supply-sider. But really, I'm in favor of more money for everyone - except the government.
Slash government spending. As politically uncomfortable as this idea is, it's coming whether we like it or not. You saw from this latest crisis how quickly things can go bad. When our bloated government finally collapses under the weight of its debt, it will happen just as quickly. Everyone will think the problem is 30 years away, right up until the moment it happens. The first step is to kill every dollar of the stimulus that hasn't yet been spent.
You want healthcare? Bring back the public option, which was really the only good idea in your panoply of ill-conceived notions. Containing costs through competition - that's the answer, not thousands of pages of lobbyist-approved regulations.

No more Robin Hood bullshit, Mr. Obama. No more taxing-the-rich-because-they're-rich socialism. No more back-room deals with the state of Nebraska or insurance company lobbyists. No more juvenile pouting and petulance because your precious healthcare package was shot down. It's time for some Change We Can Believe In.

Eagles: One and Done

2010-01-10T08:31:00.002-05:00

In the aftermath of two straight Texas trouncings, I'm going to step back and try to evaluate this Eagles team objectively. So if you're looking for emotional condemnations of McSuck and Big Incompetent, you'll have to wait until next season.

Here's what the Eagles are: 11-1 against non-playoff teams, 0-5 against playoff teams. And of those games, three against the Cowboys, the Saints, and the Chargers, only one was competitive. The other four games exposed mighty flaws - an inability to stop the run, an inconsistent pass rush, an offensive line that can't block, and consistent mistakes from the linebacker and safety positions.

Some of it was certainly due to injuries; health at this time of year is an underreported indicator of success. The Eagles were missing five projected starters (the Andrews sisters, Stewart Bradley, Jamaal Jackson, Quintin Demps) for the game while the Cowboys were missing zero. Technically, I could count Kevin Curtis as a sixth projected starter, but I'm assuming by this point in the season he would have been passed by Maclin on the depth chart anyway. Cornelius Ingram, who might have developed into an important role-player in 2TE sets, was also out for the year.

Generally, injuries are random and unavoidable, but look again at that list: three of those players were known risks (Andrews, Andrews, Ingram) who were coming off season-ending injuries! Additionally, the positions of safety and tackle were intentionally weakened by the Eagles when they chose not to resign key veterans to those positions. So a lot of the 'randomness' in this case was predictable and easily avoided, or at least prepared for.

The personnel department has a lot of work to do between now and April. 2-3 new defensive starters are needed for next year, at LB, S, and DE. The OL needs more depth, at least, and possible replacements for one or both of the Andrews. Another RB to replace Westbrook and another WR or two to replace Curtis and Brown. A young QB to be scouted and drafted to fill the developmental 3rd QB spot. 1-2 corners must be brought in also, to replace Sheldon down the road and provide some immediate depth.

It's important to remember that the Eagles were 11-5 and in the playoffs, a position that 20 NFL franchises envy. But beating up on bad teams, while failing miserably against good teams, is only a mediocre accomplishment. I refuse to make too much of it. This is a team that went from having the best roster in the league to a middling team with a lot of holes.

And oh yeah, the coach and QB suck. There, I feel better.

New Year's Day Bowl Wrap

2010-01-02T08:53:00.002-05:00

For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith -- and this not from yourselves, it is the gift of God -- not by works, so that no one can boast. For we are God's workmanship, created in Christ Jesus to do good works, which God prepared in advance for us to do.

Leading 44-17 with just over 8 minutes to play, the Gloriously Wonderful Tim Tebow, sporting eyeblack reading EPH 2:8-10, lined up under center and threw deep. After completing the pass, and extending his own personal record for yardage in a BCS game, the Bible-Verse-Wearing Tim Tebow clapped his hands together like a 'gator, and encouraged the crowd to cheer loudly for this lack of sportsmanship. Three plays later, the team of Son-of-a-Preacher-Who-Spends-His-Summers-Ministering-To-The-Less-Stupendous Tim Tebow was in the end zone, celebrating a 51-17 lead and the complete humiliation of an inferior opponent.

Jesus would be proud.

Meanwhile, weasel coach Brian Kelly sat triumphantly in Notre Dame headquarters, watching his former team immolate while altar boys massaged his feet and lit his cigars with burning $100 bills.

And finally, the collective media fellatio of Tim Tebow comes to an end. Now He can move on to the NFL, where He'll attempt to reach his potential as a mediocre fullback. Tebow's not a QB; he doesn't have anything resembling NFL mechanics, and for all the talk you'll hear about Vince Young and the Wildcat and His potential as a QB, the NFL player He most closely resembles is Jim Kleinsasser. Never heard of him? He's been in the NFL for 10 years, as a FB/H-back/TE for the Vikings, and Tebow could absolutely fill a similar role. But He'll never be a QB, so let's just stop pretending now.

Do I sound bitter? I am. The undeserved accolades and hypocritical hero-worship of Tebow have been so incredibly over-the-top for years, that I feel nothing for Him but scorn. Pehaps it's unfair to direct it towards Him, instead of the media machine that created Him, but nevertheless I'm rooting for someone to find Him facedown in a pile of His own vomit, with needles in His arms and a giant purple dildo shoved in His ass.

Penn State nearly pulled defeat from the jaws of victory, almost serving as a case study for why you shouldn't attempt field goals from inside the five yard line. But the most noteworthy thing about that game were the horrible field conditions. It's embarrassing to play a game on that chewed up grass and mud with millions of dollars in sponsorship, ticket sales, and TV contracts at stake. Granted, it would have been fun as hell to be a player, but if you're looking for an entertaining contest between skilled athletes, the High Interest Rates Bowl did not deliver. As long as we're going to host these sham bowls on neutral sites, we could at least choose decent fields with modern-day drainage systems and a grounds crew that covers the fucking field with a tarp during pre-game thunderstorms. But PSU won, beating a quality SEC opponent, so I can't complain too much. They still won't get any national love...but then again, they don't have a baby-faced white QB with biblical bullshit on his face.

Interesting graphic during the game showing JoePa's five undefeated seasons, more than any other coach at a major school. What they didn't mention: One national championship in those five seasons. But who needs a playoff, right?

Another Big Ten team should have won against the SEC, but Northwestern just couldn't stop making mistakes...and in spite of throwing five picks and missing multiple kicks, they ended up just two yards short. Still, a nice day for the Big Ten as OSU handles Oregon as well.

Playing Defense

2009-12-29T15:57:00.003-05:00

A few posts back I asked Is anyone playing defense in the NFL this year? That led me to compile a few stats.

While the NFL has devised complex formulae like QB rating to measure offensive production, it weirdly has no such metric for defense. Instead, defenses are ranked on gross yardage per game, which is far from a true measuring stick. So I started (and unsurprisingly, half-completed) a journey to find a comparative metric of effectiveness for defense.

We begin with points allowed, since you win by scoring more points than your opponent, not by gaining more yards. A defense that gives up yards, but not points, is much more effective than a defense which gives up a lot of points. But again, the NFL does not maintain a 'defensive points allowed' stat, but lumps in all points allowed together - including punt/kick returns and fumble/INT returns. Obviously, it's foolish to include these scores in any measure of a defense's effectiveness, since they aren't even on the field when they happen. So that was step one - removing seven points for each return TD from the total points allowed. Note: Seven is a bit arbitrary, since extra points could be missed after return TDs, or two-point conversions could have been tried, but it should be close enough to be a representative number.

Next, I subtracted seven points from the defensive points allowed (DPA) for each TD scored by the defense. Based on the momentum swings of defensive scores (~83% of teams with a defensive score win the game) I should probably award more than 7 points, but assigning a point value to momentum is total guesswork, so I'm just sticking with the actual points on the scoreboard. So if a defense gives up a TD and scores a TD in a game, it would equate to giving up 0 points...not perfect, perhaps, but logical. There are some weird edge cases here that I wasn't able to distinguish, for instance the INT by a Redskin defender who then fumbles, and the resulting fumble is picked up by a Saints WR and returned for a TD...in this case the Redskins defense is rewarded for the INT and Saints defense is rewarded for a fumble return TD, when in fact neither should be. However, these cases are few and far between, and do not significantly impact the rankings, so I'm simply ignoring them.

Next, I subtracted 1.2 points from the DPA for each turnover that was not returned for a TD. This is because it provides an extra possession for the offense, which has a 1/3 chance of scoring on each possession. 60% of offensive scores are TDs (that number's a lot higher than I expected, anyone else? feel free to double-check my calculation here), so the average points scored on a possession is (.6*7 + .4*3) or 5.4...divide by 3 to get 1.8 for the number of points each turnover is worth to the offense. I'm arbitrarily reducing this number to 1.2, because turnovers that happen on 3rd or 4th down don't award an extra possession (and occasionally result in worse field position), and also turnovers at the end of a half or game do not always happen with enough time left for the offense to take advantage.

Finally, I reduced the DPA number by 3.2 for each safety the defense records, since there are two points on the scoreboard plus the additional 1.2 for an extra possession. Again, this may not be perfect, as the defense will receive credit for any safeties recorded by special teams, but I'm ignoring this too.

There are still more imperfections with my calculations, because defenses can be put in bad spots by poor special teams play or offensive turnovers. Witness the Eagles' defense starting at the 50 yard-line or worse on about a half-dozen possessions last week...can you say that 7 points surrendered by a defense starting on it's own 20-yard line is equivalent to a defense that surrenders 7 points after an 80-yard drive? But I don't have stats for average starting field position, and even if I did I'm not sure exactly what I'd do with it. But still, this adjusted defensive points allowed is a pretty good measure, and reveals some mildly surprising insights:

The Jets are having a tremendous defensive season, a full 2 points better than their nearest competition. If I could figure out how to account for bad field position, I suspect they'd separate even further, since Sanchez has been a turnover machine.
The Patriots, Panthers, Steelers, and Cowboys have been quietly playing very well. The 8 return TDs against the Steelers, as well as some memorable late-game meltdowns, have obscured their overall strength.
The Redskins at 20? This shocked me, as their defense has been overhyped all season. Most football talking heads agree the defense has played well while the offense sucked, but these number tell a different tale. Although, again, this isn't helped by the offense's turnovers.

Observations from the Broncos' Game

2009-12-28T12:10:00.002-05:00

Adventures in officiating - Seriously, that was terrible. How did that initial Eagles TD get reversed? What camera angle did you see that definitively showed the ball moving forward? I didn't see one. And the penalty calls? They sucked both ways. Horrendous illegal contact/PI calls on both teams, along with multiple instances of blatant offensive holding that were ignored. And what's with the 15-yard penalty on Macho? It's a perfectly clean block post-interception. That penalty changed the game; instead of having the ball on the 50, the Eagles get it on their own 1, and a shanked punt ends up starting the Broncos' comeback. I wish the competition committee would simplify the rules, because the game is so difficult to referee right now...but even within the current, complex web of judgement calls, the officials did a terrible job. Here's a tip: if you aren't sure, just shut your mouth. We didn't need 18 penalty calls...I'd much rather see a few missed penalties than the choppy pace enforced on the Eagles and Broncos by that overzealous crew.
Phil Simms, Broadcasting Genius - "The Eagles have a middling defense when they don't blitz." Huh? Blitzing is a key component playing defense, and the Eagles blitz more than most teams in the league. There isn't any blitzing in the Pro Bowl, and it's reflected in the final score. If my car was "middling" with only three wheels, I'd say I had a pretty good car. Overall, the Eagles held the Broncos to 241 yards, 33% third-down conversion, and a measly 3.9 yards-per-pass-attempt. Considering the bad punts, three turnovers, and five straight 3-and-outs by the 'offense', the Eagles defense played great. I wish I remembered more of his banalities and outright falsehoods, it would have made great fodder. His commentary was nearly as bad as the officiating.
McConsistentcy - Donovan went three consecutive series without throwing a single catchable pass. Total number of called runs during that series: two. Andy Reid needs to come up with another solution to McNabb's weekly funks other than dialing up more and more passes.
B-Dawk - Didn't have an impact on this game, but I still love him. Wish he was still an Eagle instead of Macho.
Where has Chris Gocong gone? - I killed the Eagles when they drafted him, and then I recanted when he became a solid starter. Now he can't even get on the field. I can't say whether it's justified, but it sure seems the coaching staff has decided where the blame lay for that inability to stop opposing TEs...on a thinly related note, I'm excited to think the Eagles might draft an athletic, play-making LB in the first round this April...it's their only glaring need, and someone like Navarro Bowman could be staring them in the face at the end of round 1...if you pair him with a recovered Stewart Bradley and Witherspoon, LB could be a strength instead of a weakness...

Go Bears! If the awful Bears somehow pull out a win tonight, the Eagles will be playing for the #2 seed in Dallas next week.

Week 15 Wrap

2009-12-22T09:07:00.002-05:00

Cover-your-face awful. At least it's not real money. And in just two years now, the world will end and there will be no record of my terrible picks anyway. 4-8-1 this week for a season total of 59-53-2.

Jacksonville +3.5 vs. Indianapolis - Colts 35, Jags 31 - LOSS. I didn't expect Manning to play the entire game, and still only lost by half a point.
Dallas +7.5 at New Orleans - Cowboys 24, Saints 17 - WIN. Naturally, the only pick I got right is the one I wanted most to be wrong about.
Buffalo +7.5 vs. New England - Patsies 17, Bills 10 - WIN. Sometimes the half-point is your friend.
Arizona -12 at Detroit - Cards 31, Lions 24 - LOSS. Entering Week 15, teams returning a pick for a TD were 26-0. The Lions made it 26-1.
Kansas City -1.5 vs Cleveland - Browns 41, Chiefs 34 - LOSS. The Browns have scored 199 points all season. Two games, against the Lions and the Chiefs, account for 78 of those points, or 39%. The other twelve games, they've scored an average of 10 points.
Philadelphia -8 vs San Francisco - Eagles 27, 49ers 13 - WIN.
Baltimore -11 vs. Chicago - Ravens 31, Bears 7 - WIN. I admit - I was one of the many people who believed Jay Cutler would make the Bears a playoff team. Instead, he's turned them into a laughingstock, and might just get the coach and GM fired.
Denver -14 vs. Oakland - Raiders 20, Broncos 19 - LOSS. JaAwful entered the game and threw the winning TD with 35 seconds remaining in the game. Seriously, I'm at a loss for words.
San Diego -7 vs. Cincinnati - Chargers 27, Bengals 24 - LOSS. Nice showing by the Bengals. Not enough to win, but enough to cover. Fuckers.
Green Bay +1 at Pittsburgh - Steelers 37, Packers 36 - PUSH. That might have been one of the best regular-season games I've ever seen. Amazing throw by Ben, and a great catch by Wallace at the other end. Is anyone playing defense this season in the NFL? Anyone?
Seattle -7 vs. Tampa Bay - Bucs 24, Seahawks 7 - LOSS. Wow, just...wow. I've called out Jim Mora as a bad coach, but I thought it would take a little longer than this for him to ruin the team. Letting a one-win team beat the shit out of you in your own house - that's inexcusable.
Minnesota -9 at Carolina - Panthers 26, Vikings 7 - LOSS. Is Jared Allen tired or something? How could the DL of the Vikings allow Matt Moore to beat them, when the Panthers were starting two backup tackles? And don't give me this Brett-Favre-in-December bullshit...the Vikings couldn't run, and let Matt Moore throw all over them. That's not Favre's fault.
Washington +3 vs. New York Giants - Giants 45, Redskins 12 - LOSS. Poor Jim Zorn. After this disaster, would you even hire him as an OC? Maybe he can catch on as a QB coach with the new Seattle staff and try to rebuild his career.

Eagles in the playoffs

2009-12-21T10:43:00.003-05:00

Minnesota's loss gives the Eagles a legitimate shot at a #2 seed and a first-round bye. They'll win the tiebreaker based on conference record, so they only need to pick up one game in two weeks left. As always, it's key to secure that bye, but especially this season as the Eagles most-likely opponent in the wildcard round will be an NFC East team.

Of course, the way Dallas played on Saturday means the Eagles could very easily slide to #5 or #6 if the Cowboys win out. That could set up a revenge game at Arizona, which is no cakewalk either. Much, much better to win these last two games and get a bye.

Some notes on the Eagles game against the 49ers

Not the time to go for it - As a pure odds play, going for it on fourth-and-1 from their own 29 yardline is actually correct. But when you look at the 49ers offense, you have to understand that they simply can't score unless you help them with great field position. So why risk it? Against a powerhouse offense - like the Saints - I would love this move, but it doesn't work against a weak sister like the Niners. Then later in the game, you punt on a fourth-and-two from the 49ers 37...where's the consistency?
Stop the Vick madness - Shuttling Vick in and out of the game is silly, and I wish it would stop. It cost the Eagles at least one timeout, which would have helped a lot (and maybe been worth another four points) at the end of the half. If you're going to use Vick, and I wouldn't bother, then send him in for one full series in each half. Allow him to develop some timing and get into the flow of a game, without disrupting the rest of the offense. But honestly, what do you think scares defensive coordinators more right now, McNabb-to-Jackson, or Michael Vick?
Disappearing Shady - Nine carries for 48 yards? Hasn't he earned more touches than that? I like Weaver as much as anyone, but he shouldn't have twice as many carries (17) as Shady. He's not a threat to break long runs.
Throw, Alex, throw - Even though the Eagles were in nickel defense the whole game, and Frank Gore was averaging 6 yards/carry, Niners coaches called a total of 16 runs for him. Meanwhile, their awful QB was tossing three picks. Sounds like someone took a page out of the Reid/Mornhinwheg playbook.

Let's clean this up, Birds, and make a run. The Flyers aren't offering any post-football hope this year, so give me at least a Superbowl appearance to hold me over until the draft.

One word on Mike Tomlin's much-ridiculed onsides kick...it was absolutely correct and bordered on brilliant. Green Bay was clearly caught by surprise and the play executed within a half-yard of perfection. If he kicks deep, Green Bay can eat up the rest of the clock and win the game with a FG...considering how terrible the Pittsburgh secondary has played, both yesterday and late in games generally, how can football announcers and writers believe this is the best option? Instead, he kicks short, nearly recovers the ball...and when it fails, Green Bay scores with enough time left for Pittsburgh to drive the field themselves. You'll read all week how Ben 'bailed him out' with that great throw at the end, but Ben would have never had that opportunity without Tomlin's decision.

Week 15 Picks

2009-12-17T13:03:00.004-05:00

I could quit while I'm ahead, but instead I'll take this three-week opportunity to dive under .500 for the season. I'm going to switch up the format a little bit, I was never comfortable with the old way that I did it.

Jacksonville +3.5 vs. Indianapolis - The Jags are a good bet to keep it close anytime against the Colts. Factor in a short-week road game, and the probability that Manning and his fellow starters won't play the whole game, and I'm loving the Jags.
Dallas +7.5 at New Orleans - The Cowboys have played well in the last two games, and in spite of two close losses, they have not displayed the signs of their classic December swoon. In fact, I think they'll come out firing Saturday and take a lead, and might even win the game. I hope I'm wrong - I'd love to see Dallas lose by 40 - but my money's on the 'Boys.
Buffalo +7.5 vs. New England - The Pats have recently beaten the tar out of the Bills, but this isn't the same Patriots team.
Arizona -12 at Detroit - Not a big fan of double-digit road favorites, but the Cards are 5-2 on the road this season, and coming off an embarrassing loss. On top of that, the Lions don't have a defense that can even slow down Warner and Co.
Kansas City -1.5 vs Cleveland - Ratings Bonanza Game #1. It's almost a shame that one of these teams will get a win, but KC clearly has more playmakers, so I'll take the Chiefs at home.
Philadelphia -8 vs San Francisco - The Niners were the beneficiaries of seven - count 'em - seven turnovers last week, and scored a grand total of 24 points. That's some pathetic offense...exactly what the Eagles defense needs to get healthy.
Baltimore -11 vs. Chicago - Not exactly what the Bears envisioned when they traded for Jay Cutler: being 11-point underdogs to a 7-6 team. The Ravens have better RBs, better WRs, a much better OL, and a better defense. And frankly, the way Cutler has been playing, they have a better QB too. That doesn't leave too many reasons to pick the Bears.
Denver -14 vs. Oakland - It's both funny and meaningful that the Raiders have turned to Charlie Frye instead of JaMarcus Russell, but it doesn't mean that Frye gives them a realistic chance of winning. Just imagine how different this season might have been for the Raiders if they gave Jeff Garcia the starting job in training camp.
San Diego -7 vs. Cincinnati - The Bengals are 6-0 in their division, 3-4 against everyone else. Struggling with the bizarre 'tragedy' of Chris Henry, I can't see them playing well enough to beat the Chargers at home.
Green Bay +1 at Pittsburgh - I want to believe the Steelers aren't as awful as they've looked, and that they'll come out and beat the Packers this Sunday. Apparently, a lot of other people want to believe the same thing, as incredibly a team on an 0-3 run (against KC, Oakland, and Cleveland, no less) is giving points to a team on a 5-0 run. But I'm going against my gut and sticking with the numbers.
Seattle -7 vs. Tampa Bay - Ratings Bonanza Game #2. Two teams who were non-competitive last week face off in the Great Northwest. The Seahawks are the lesser of two evils.
Minnesota -9 at Carolina - The Vikings are a really bad matchup for a team with a struggling OL. Even worse, the Panthers haven't been able to stop the run. I'm predicting a bounceback week for AP: 150+ yards, and a big Vikings win.
Washington +3 vs. New York Giants - I don't have a real good feel on this game, so I'll go with the home team.

Note: A bunch of games had no line this week, including Miami/Tennessee, Atlanta/NYJets, and Houston/St. Louis, so I didn't pick them.

Sometimes, people surprise you

2009-12-16T16:06:00.004-05:00

One of the on-line writers that I read religiously is Gregg Easterbrook. His weekly Tuesday Morning Quarterback column is one of the most intelligent commentaries on football that I've read, it's well-written, and it's fun. One of the notable ideas I've picked up from his column is the Joy of Not Punting.

An odd note about Easterbrook: in spite of the obvious football-themed nature of his column, he goes on long ramblings about other topics as well, often political. And he's a raving liberal. Suffering from an acute case of liberal guilt, he believes in such concepts as a progressive tax code, nationalized health care, and a carbon tax. As a result, I've been tempted to stop reading his column completely, or (less dramatically) just skipping over the political sections. But I finally decided to designate Easterbrook as one of two liberal authors (Daniel Gross is the other) who I read (holding my nose, sometimes) with the express purpose of challenging my pre-existing beliefs.

So anyway, that is a long-winded way of explaining why I was surprised to see him openly criticizing both Al Gore and the nonsensical 350 or die crowd. I'll reprint his comments below (the whole article is here), because I wanted to give him credit for thinking outside of the standard liberal/conservative mold. He's living proof that it's possible to think beyond the blue/red dichotomy which dominate voting patterns and actually develop opinions on issues that are fact-based and not Rush Limbaugh/Michael Moore-based. And although we'll never agree on much politically, my respect for him has climbed dramatically.

As the Copenhagen climate summit grinds on with -- big surprise! -- nothing specific agreed upon, here's my summary of what you need to know about the global warming issue...[Easterbrook self-promotion removed]

• There is indeed a strong scientific consensus regarding climate change. The deniers simply aren't honest about this.

• The consensus is that in the last century, air has warmed by about one degree Fahrenheit while the oceans have warmed a little and become slightly acidic; rainfall patterns have changed in some places, and most though not all ice melting has accelerated.

• That consensus is significant, but hardly means there is a crisis. Glaciers and sea ice, for example, have been in a melting cycle for thousands of years, while air warming has so far been good for farm yields. The doomsayers simply aren't honest about how mild the science consensus is.

• Predictions of global devastation -- climate change is a "profound emergency" that will "ravage our planet" -- are absurd exaggerations, usually motivated by political or fund-raising agendas.

• Climate change has serious possible negative consequences, especially if rainfall shifts away from agricultural regions.

• Global poverty, disease, dirty air and lack of clean water in developing world cities and lack of education are far higher priorities than greenhouse gas emissions.

• Smog and acid rain turned out to be far cheaper to control than predicted; the same may happen with greenhouse gases.

• The United States must regulate greenhouse gases in order to bring American brainpower, in engineering and in business, to bear on the problem.

• A carbon tax, not some super-complex cap-and-trade scheme that mainly creates jobs for bureaucrats and lawyers, would be the best approach.

• If the United States invents technology to control greenhouse gases, no super-complex international treaty will be needed. Nations will adopt greenhouse controls on their own, because it will be in their self-interest to do so. Smog and acid rain are declining almost everywhere, though are not governed by any international treaty; nations have decided to regulate smog and acid rain emissions on their own, because it is in their self-interest to do so.

As for the e-mails hacked from a greenhouse research center in the United Kingdom, e-mails are private correspondence. Copying them without permission is at the least unethical, and perhaps a crime. If you saw private letters on someone's desk, photocopied them and posted them on the Web, you would be considered a person of low character. Whoever hacked the climate e-mails is at the very least an unethical person of low character, and one should be wary of the agendas of unethical people.

That said, many climate scientists are rigidly ideological and believe dissent must be shouted down. This is partly because of money and privilege. The United States and European Union spend about $6 billion annually on climate change research, and every penny goes to alarmism, because it can be used to justify government expansion. Being a climate doomsayer is a path to cash and tenure -- even to celebrity, as making wildly exaggerated claims got Al Gore a Noble Prize plus stock in companies now winning government subsidies triggered by alarmism. The doomsayers are lauded by foundations, go to parties with Brad Pitt and Angelina Jolie and attend taxpayer-subsidized conferences in Nice. They've formed a guild with intense focus on maintaining guild structure. The 1962 Thomas Kuhn book "The Structure of Scientific Revolutions" is best-known for introducing the "paradigm shift" concept. Kuhn's larger argument was that science is not an abstract truth-seeking realm, rather, subject to fads and what is now called political correctness, and one in which many scientists are concerned foremost with safeguarding their sinecure by toeing the line.

Plus the alarmists need to divert attention from the inconvenient truth that 20 years ago, Gore and James Hansen of NASA began to say that without immediate drastic action against greenhouse gases, there would soon be global calamities. Nothing was done -- and no problem so far. That is no reason to be complacent -- warming-caused problems may be in store. But for the self-interested alarmists, this is a reason to shout down their critics.

Wild Wild Win

2009-12-14T12:16:00.002-05:00

Huge win for the Eagles last night, hanging on for a 45-38 victory over the Giants. They're now in first-place in the NFC East, and only need one more win to lock up a playoff spot. Most likely they'll end up as the #3 or #4 seed, since Minnesota would have to lose two more games (@Car, @Chi, NYG) and the Eagles would have to win out to get a first-round bye. A few observations from the game:

It's a worrisome trend to see receivers continue to get behind Eagles' corners on double moves every week. Clearly, opposing coordinators have figured out that they like to read the QB and jump routes. You can get away with that against bad QBs and receivers with stone hands, but against Drew Brees, Brett Favre, and Kurt Warner in the playoffs? I shudder to think.
Speaking of the defense, I'm prepared to give them a pass for last night's game. The tackling was atrocious and unacceptable, but it sure looked like both sides were struggling with the cold, wet, slippery conditions. It's always harder to play defense in those conditions because you're reacting. Since the tackling is usually very good (Asante Samuel aside), let's see what happens next week before we get too panicky.
Loved the big plays, of course, but that 91-yard drive in the fourth quarter was truly a championship drive. Six rushes, six passes, 7 minutes off the clock. Balance works, Andy. Glad to see you've rediscovered this 'secret', I'll try to enjoy it now before you forget to run the ball again next season.
Where was Akeem Jordan? He was active for the game, but I didn't see him make a play all night. Did he even get on the field?
A blocked extra point? Come on. Something went terribly wrong with that blocking scheme, as Max Jean-Gilles was holding on for dear life against two defensive lineman. Someone's got to help him out there.

In addition to the win, the Eagles have the Cowboys to thank for their first-place position. Remember just two weeks ago, when football writers were handing the division to the Cowboys, seemingly oblivious to historical trends? Well, the Eagles are 2-0 in December and the Cowboys are 0-2, and I, at least, am not surprised.
I will give credit where it's due, however, and say that the Cowboys losses this season are not the product of a bumbling, turnover-prone QB and a scared coach, but instead are simply close losses to good teams (a desperate division rival on the road, and the Chargers on an 8-game winning streak.) If you even casually looked over the 'Boys schedule, it was pretty obvious they built a lot of wins against lousy teams and would have to work harder to beat the quality opponents lined up for them in December. With upcoming games @NO, @Was, and Phi, it's entirely conceivable they could go 1-4 or even 0-5 to finish the season without 'collapsing.'
Up next for the Eagles are the 49ers, travelling across the country on a short week (they play tonight.) This sets up well for the Eagles, and should definitely give the defense a chance to redeem themselves against an inexperienced QB.

It's December, so I'm complaining

2009-12-07T13:26:00.003-05:00

Unsurprisingly, my recent four-week hiatus from blogging corresponded with a new video game purchase, namely Dragon Age: Origins. I won't bore you with a complete review, but if you've ever enjoyed a story- or character-based RPG, you'll love DA:O. I'm on my fourth playthrough, and still experiencing a few things for the first time.

Instead, I'll bore you with a thoroughly tired topic: the idiocy of the BCS. This year's college football season produced a remarkable five undefeated teams to vie for the "national title". But instead of a playoff system to determine the champion, we'll simply eliminate three contenders by vote, and instead award the opportunity to a couple of schedule-padding, big-money programs.

Even more comical is the fate of undefeated programs TCU and Boise State, thirsting for national recognition and a chance to prove themselves as legitimate programs, who will instead play each other in a totally meaningless third-place money-grab.

Again, let's go through the exercise of an eight-team playoff as I've proposed in the past, with the 6 BCS conference champs and two at-large conference champs. The playoff-eligible teams would be, in seeded order:

Alabama
Texas
Cincinnati
TCU
Boise St.
Oregon
Ohio St.
Georgia Tech

Is there be any doubt at all that the team emerging from this tournament unscathed would be a true national champion? Instead of the BCS clusterfuck, which insists on having a "championship" game that excludes three undefeated teams, we'd have an honest competition and a deserving winner. But who'd enjoy that?

Assassin's Creed II is up next, I'll probably pick it up after Christmas. But the one I'm really looking forward to comes out in February:

Week 8 Wrap

2009-11-01T19:22:00.003-05:00

A respectable 8-5 week, bringing my season record to 55-45-1.

Houston -3.5 at Buffalo - Texans 31, Bills 10 - WIN. I was right that the Bills would intercept Schaub, and I was right that the Texans would win anyway. Not bad.
Cleveland at Chicago -14 - Bears 30, Browns 6 - WIN. I say it every week, but it bears repeating: Mangenius.
Seattle at Dallas -10 - Cowboys 38, Seahawks 17 - WIN. The Seahawks have no horses on defense.
St. Louis +4 at Detroit - Rams 17, Lions 10 - WIN.
San Francisco +13 at Indianapolis - Colts 18, 49ers 14 - WIN.
Miami +3.5 at NY Jets -3.5 - Dolphins 30, Jets 25 - LOSS. The Fins score 30 points with only 104 yards of offense, thanks to a couple kickoff returns for TDs.
New York Giants +1 at Philadelphia - Eagles 40, Giants 17 - LOSS. Am I ever glad I got this one wrong.
Denver +3 at Baltimore - Ravens 30, Broncos 7 - LOSS. This is the way I expected the Broncos to play all season. What took them so long?
Jacksonville +3 at Tennessee - Titans 30, Jags 13 - LOSS. Another Lock of the Week loss, as the mysterious Jags get blown out by a winless team starting a terrible QB. I like Jack Del Rio, but someone in Jacksonville should lose their job after this season.
Oakland +17 at San Diego - Chargers 24, Raiders 16 - WIN. The Raiders decided to show up this week, so I guess next week they lose by 40.
Carolina at Arizona -10.5 - Panthers 34, Cardinals 21 - LOSS. This time, the other QB imploded. Six turnovers for Warner.
Minnesota +3 at Green Bay - Vikings 38, Packers 26 - WIN. Favre is amazing. I killed him for coming back this year, but he's playing like one of the better QBs in the NFL, no question.
Atlanta +10.5 at New Orleans - Saints 35, Falcons 27 - WIN. Crazy game, and the Falcons damn near pulled off the upset. The Saints are really, really good though.

Eagles-Giants Observations

2009-11-01T15:40:00.003-05:00

Did you notice?

How really, really bad Eli Manning looked? Plagued by inaccuracy, bad decision-making, and throwing off his back foot under pressure, the only thing about him that resembled a highly-paid QB was the name on the back of his jersey.
On second-and-six, the Eagles stop the Giants run for a 1-yard loss. A five-yard penalty on the Giants is accepted by Andy Reid, giving the Giants second-and-11 instead of third-and-7. What's the point of this? NFL teams convert 3rd-and-7 less about 30% of the time; is four more yards worth an extra chance to get the first down? The Giants scored on the next play, so I suppose it's moot, but this is a mystifying decision.
Leading 33-7 and running the ball effectively, Andy Reid continues to dial up the pass, leading to a sack-fumble.
McNabb fumbled twice, both times failing to recognize the blitz pre-snap or feel the pocket collapsing around him. Yes, he passed the ball much better, but these mistakes will kill the Eagles in close games.
Trailing 40-17 with 9 minutes in the fourth quarter, Tom Coughlin dials up a 47-yard FG attempt instead of going for it! If the Giants go for it and make, they have a small chance of winning (three TDs and two 2-point conversions tie the game.) But instead, they try to reduce the deficit to 20, effectively giving up any chance of winning. Naturally, they missed.

Week 8 Picks

2009-10-30T13:50:00.002-04:00

The Eagles have a huge game against the Giants this weekend, and they haven't been playing especially well leading up to it. An inaccurate QB, injured RB, and pass-happy coach - any of this sound familiar? - don't help the situation. But are we witnessing a setup for another November/December playoff run, or the beginning of McNabb's decline?

Houston -3.5 at Buffalo - I don't like Houston on the road, especially against a defense which is turning the opposition over like Buffalo. But the Bills are a terrible team, who've won the last two weeks in spite of being badly outplayed. I wouldn't be shocked if Buffalo squeaks out another ugly win, but I'll put my money on the better team and take my chances.
Cleveland at Chicago -14 - You know you're a bad team when you're a two-TD underdog to a team that just lost 45-10.
Seattle at Dallas -10 - Too many injuries for the Seahawks. They'll play better than last week, and make it a game for a while, but the Cowboys pull away in the end.
St. Louis +4 at Detroit - If the Rams don't win this week, they'll become the second 0-16 team in two years. They'll play with a desperation that the banged-up Lions won't match.
San Francisco +13 at Indianapolis - I'm not confident of this pick...the Colts are capable of blowing anyone out, but the 49ers are a well-coached team, so I'll take the double-digit points.
Miami +3.5 at NY Jets -3.5 - I don't think Chad Henne and the Dolphins respond well to their bitter come-from-ahead loss against the Saints. The Jets defense will create turnovers and will be the difference in the game.
New York Giants +1 at Philadelphia - This line has moved two points in the Giants' direction, and I tend to bet against moves like that. But there's too much evidence in the Giants' favor: Four wins in a row in Philadelphia, rarely losing three in a row under Tom Coughlin, and no Brian Westbrook.
Denver +3 at Baltimore - Undefeated and I get three points? Yeah, I'll take that.
Jacksonville +3 at Tennessee - Winless and giving three points? And Vince Young is playing? The Jags are my Lock of the Week.
Oakland +17 at San Diego - Who knows if the Raiders will bother to show up this week? They played this division foe tough enough to win in week 1, so I'll take the chance they do it again.
Carolina at Arizona -10.5 - Bad matchup for Delhomme, against the #1 rush defense. He'll have to pass a lot, which means 3+ picks for the Cards.
Minnesota +3 at Green Bay - It doesn't seem possible that the Pack could be swept by the Favre-led Vikings, but I can't give points in a game this tight.
Atlanta +10.5 at New Orleans - The Saints are unbelievably hot, and I think they'll win, but Atlanta's a good team, and will show up for this division battle.

Week 7 Wrap

2009-10-25T16:00:00.005-04:00

It seems I've definitely levelled off. Although I still have a winning record for the season, I was a loser again this week (5-7-1) and a disturbing 16-24-1 for the last three weeks.

Indianapolis at St. Louis +14.5 - Colts 42, Rams 6 - LOSS. Did I really pick the Rams? That has to be a mistake.
Minnesota +5.5 at Pittsburgh - Steelers 27, Vikings 17 - LOSS. I had this locked up til that crazy tipped-screen-pass-returned-for-a-TD in the last minute.
New England -15.5 at Tampa Bay - Pats 35, Bucs 7 - WIN.
San Francisco +3 at Houston - Texans 24, 49ers 21 - PUSH.
Green Bay -9 at Cleveland - Packers 31, Browns 3 - WIN.
San Diego -5.5 at Kansas City - Chargers 37, Chiefs 7 - WIN.
New York Jets at Oakland +7 - Jets 38, Raiders 0 - LOSS. Sure makes those Eagles look good, eh? Hey Andy, the Jets ran for over 300 yards against the Raiders...good gameplan, genius.
Buffalo at Carolina -7 - Bills 20, Panthers 9 - LOSS. The Panthers outgained the Bills by a 2-1 margin, but lost handily thanks to more turnovers from Jake Delhomme.
Bears at Cincinnati even - Bengals 45, Bears 10 - WIN. Just like I predicted...a 35-point blowout for the Bengals. Ok, maybe not, but I'll take the win.
New Orleans at Miami +7 - Saints 46, Dolphins 34 - LOSS. I sure was looking smart when Miami was up 24-3. Not so much after the Saints scored the last 22 points of the game.
Arizona at New York Giants -7 - Cardinals 24, Giants 17 - LOSS. The Giants were 17-2 against the Cards in their last 19 games in New York. But pussy coaching from Tom Coughlin and bad decision-making from Eli Manning cost them in the end.
Philadelphia -7 at Washington - Eagles 27, Redskins 17 - WIN. The Eagles looked bad, but the Redskins were worse.

Week 7 Picks

2009-10-24T12:17:00.002-04:00

In spite of last week's smackdown, I'm coming back for more. Looking for my first winning week in the past three.

Indianapolis at St. Louis +14.5 - It's really hard to pick a home team to lose by more than two TDs, even if it's the Rams.
Minnesota +5.5 at Pittsburgh - A lot of times I would take the Steelers, at home, in a big game. But they've been killing me this year, so I'll take the undefeated team with the points.
New England -15.5 at Tampa Bay - Though Tampa is technically the home team, this game will be played in London. I can't imagine that a winless team will be excited to travel across the pond for a matchup with the Pats, so I think they'll come out flat and get crushed.
San Francisco +3 at Houston - The Texans can't seem to get over that .500 hump, and I expect the Niners to be both well-prepared after a bye week.
Green Bay -9 at Cleveland - The Browns are terrible.
San Diego -5.5 at Kansas City - I haven't been impressed with the Chargers, and Norv Turner is a lousy coach, but this is their season. They have to show up and play a big game, or their playoff chances are pretty much done.
New York Jets at Oakland +7 - The odds can't be good that the Raiders put together a good performance two weeks in a row, but the Jets haven't been playing well, so maybe the Raiders can keep it close.
Buffalo at Carolina -7 - Yes, I was burned by the Ryan Fitzpatrick-led Bills last week, but I'm not buying in. The Panthers run all over them at home.
Atlanta +4 at Dallas - The Falcons are playing a lot better right now, and the Cowboys haven't beaten a winning team in a while.
Bears at Cincinnati even - The Bengals have a better running game and are playing better defense than the Bears right now. Should be a very tight game - the kind the Bengals have been winning and the Bears have been losing.
New Orleans at Miami +7 - Look for a very similar game to the Colts/Dolphins, where Miami controls the clock running the ball, and the Saints score quickly through the air. Should be a close game.
Arizona at New York Giants -7 - The Giants' pass defense was exposed last week, but I don't trust the Cardinals on the road, on the East Coast, or against a good team.
Philadelphia -7 at Washington - The Eagles play well in prime time, and the Redskins are struggling. Yes, these NFC East games are usually low-scoring slugfests, and the Redskins beat them twice last year, but I'm still taking the Eagles.

Eagles trade for a LB

2009-10-21T11:32:00.002-04:00

Poor Joe Mays.

Nicknamed 'Headbuster' by his teammates for his hard-hitting, the linebacker who was handed the starting job when Stewart Bradley went down has so far been replaced this season by Omar Gaither, Jeremiah Trotter (fresh off the couch after a two-year layoff) and now Will Witherspoon, just traded from the Rams and expected to start in the middle of this defense Monday night.

Witherspoon is a good player - he's the best LB on the team right now - but it really says something about the Headbuster when he's not just third on the depth chart, but constantly being bumped for guys they're bringing in from the outside.

It highlights yet another roster miscalculation by the Eagles - first-guessed in the preseason by this blogger - that they are suffering from a lack of depth at key positions (MLB, OT) and scrambling to find answers.

Although it's panicky, I do like the Witherspoon move. He's an instant upgrade talent-wise, although he's a better fit on the weak side instead of the middle. And I'm not sure how long it'll take him to learn the system, but there's no question the Eagles are stronger at LB after this trade. They had to give up promising young WR Brandon Gibson, who I see as an eventual starter in this league, and a fifth-round pick. But since the Eagles seem to have completely given up on Joe Mays, they had to do something to improve.

Week 6 Beatdown

2009-10-20T09:49:00.003-04:00

This is the week I've been waiting for.

The crushing loss that undoes a season's worth of winning. The 'just one more' that you should have resisted, and quit while you were ahead. But I kept on going, and 4-10 was my reward:

Houston +5 at Cincinnati - Texans 28, Bengals 17 - WIN
Detroit +13.5 at Green Bay - Packers 26, Lions 0 - LOSS
Baltimore at Minnesota -3 - Vikings 33, Ravens 31 - LOSS - The Ravens 17-point comeback falls short, but not short enough to pay off.
New York Giants +3 at New Orleans - Saints 48, Giants 27 - LOSS - Think the Saints are any good?
Cleveland at Pittsburgh -15 - Steelers 27, Browns 14 - LOSS - 15 > 13
Carolina at Tampa Bay +3 - Panthers 28, Bucs 21 - LOSS - The promising young QB came back to earth
Kansas City at Washington -6.5 - Cheifs 14, Redskins 6 - LOSS - This would have been a lot funnier if the Eagles hadn't lost to an awful AFC West team as well.
St. Louis at Jacksonville -10 - Jags 23, Rams 20 - LOSS - I was so conflicted about who to pick in this game, I almost copped out and picked the under instead. The O/U? 42.5
Arizona at Seattle -3 - Cards 27, Seahawks 3 - LOSS
Philadelphia -15 at Oakland - Raiders 13, Eagles 6 - LOSS
Tennessee at New England -9.5 - Pats 59, Titans 0 - WIN - In the second half, with New England winning 52-0, Tom Brady was still in the game, throwing a TD pass. That's why I don't genuflect at the altar of Bill Belichick.
Buffalo at New York Jets -10 - Bills 16, Jets 13 - LOSS - That Rex Ryan/Mark Sanchez magic wore off pretty quick, eh?
Chicago at Atlanta -3 - Falcons 21, Bears 14 - WIN - When do the Falcons and the Saints play? That might be a decent game.
Denver +3.5 at San Diego - Broncos 34, Chargers 23 - WIN - Brian Dawkins 6-0, Eagles 3-2. Coincidence?

Sunday Shame

2009-10-19T06:46:00.002-04:00

We've certainly seen that before.

It was the Bengals game from last year, without stumbling into a lucky tie. 54 called passes and 13 called runs even though the Eagles never trailed by more than 7 points. No matter how inaccurate the QB was, or how many passes the receivers dropped, Reid kept throwing, and throwing, and throwing.

It was the Giants game from two years ago, where a RB averaging 8 yards/carry was ignored in favor of exposing an inexperienced OL to non-stop pass blocking.

It was the same problems on defense - inability to cover the TE - magnified by the mysterious personnel decision of bringing back Trotter after two years off, while one of the best cover LBs in the history of the NFL (Derrick Brooks) has no job.

It was every game McNabb has ever played, failing to recognize obvious blitzes pre-snap, holding the ball too long, and bouncing passes to open receivers.

For all of the brilliance of Reid and McNabb, and I must remind myself constantly this is the best coach and QB the Eagles have ever had, they stubbornly refuse to learn from their mistakes. As a fan, it is painful to watch.

I give credit to the Raiders, who badly outcoached and out-executed the Eagles. They played their best game offensively and defensively of the season, and JaAwful looked JaMediocre at times, which is pretty damned good for him. I also give credit to the officials, who mysteriously disappeared for most of the game, failing to call an offsides penalty when the Raiders actually made contact with the Nick Cole before the snap, missing the most obvious running-into-the-kicker penalty I've ever seen, and ignoring three pass intereference penalties which were not ticky-tack questionable, but involved receivers reaching up and trying to catch a ball with one hand while the other was held down by a DB.

But in spite of the Raiders' great day and the officials bad one, the Eagles have no excuse for losing. A few more catches instead of drops, a few more called runs, a little more recognition on defense, and the Eagles escape with an ugly win instead of crushing loss. If they simply beat the Raiders, who have set NFL records for futility over the past six seasons, they are tied for the lead in the NFC East and tied for the second-best record in the NFC. Instead, they're just another 3-2 team with a terrible loss on their resume and no more easy games left on their schedule.

One thing we can count on for sure, though: We'll see this game again.

Week 6 Picks

2009-10-15T20:34:00.003-04:00

Houston +5 at Cincinnati - The Texans aren't great on the road, but since the Bengals have been involved in so many close games, I feel a lot safer with the points.
Detroit +13.5 at Green Bay - I like Green Bay to win, but Detroit should be able to keep it within two TDs.
Baltimore at Minnesota -3 - It wouldn't surprise me if a pissed off Ravens team came out swinging after two tough losses...but how can I pick against AP when Cedric Benson just torched them for over 100 yards?
New York Giants +3 at New Orleans - Sean Payton is dangerous with an extra week to prepare, but I like getting points on a 5-0 team, especially one with a QB playing in his hometown for the first time.
Cleveland at Pittsburgh -15 - Giving 15 points in a division game is usually a recipe for disaster, but if the Browns only had 23 yards passing against the Bills...
Carolina at Tampa Bay +3 - Two reasons to pick the winless Bucs: I don't like giving points with a 1-3 road team, and that Josh Johnson kid can play.
Kansas City at Washington -6.5 - The Skins are lousy, but they'll show a little heart this week and beat the hapless Chiefs.
St. Louis at Jacksonville -10 - Wow, this one is hard. I either have to give 10 points with a team that just lost by 41, or I bet on the Rams. Really bad choices, but I'll go with a bounceback game for the Jags.
Arizona at Seattle -3 - The Seahawks are a much better team with Hasselback in the lineup, especially at home.
Philadelphia -15 at Oakland - The Eagles have never won in the Black Hole, and they haven't played well on the West Coast in recent years ***Correction: The Eagles are 6-0 in their last six games at Seattle, San Francisco, and San Diego***...but these Raiders don't even try. I can't wait to watch JaAwful against this defense.
Tennessee at New England -9.5 - A terrible pass defense against Tom Brady, that doesn't sound like a good formula for the Titans.
Buffalo at New York Jets -10 - I'll consider picking the Bills again after Dick Jauron is fired, not before. They lost to the Browns.
Chicago at Atlanta -3 - With Michael Turner running again, the Falcons will be touch for the Bears to handle.
Denver +3.5 at San Diego - I'm doing it, I'm going to start treating Denver like a 5-0 team. And even Josh McDaniels can outcoach Norv Turner.

Week 5 Wrap

2009-10-13T08:48:00.002-04:00

My worst week so far, barely keeping my head above water.

Cleveland at Buffalo -6 - Clowns 6, Bills 3. Loss. The winning QB was 2-17 for 23 yards and a pick. The Bills are finished, Dick Jauron is finished, and everything that T.O. touches turns to shit.
Pittsburgh -10.5 at Detroit - Steelers 28, Lions 20. Loss. That late pick six hurt. Run the damn ball!
Dallas -9 at Kansas City - Cowboys 26, Chiefs 20 (OT) Loss. Even the Raiders didn't need OT to beat the Chiefs.
Minnesota -10 at St. Louis - Vikings 38, Rams 10 Win.
Oakland at New York Giants -15.5 - Giants 44, Raiders 7 Win. Remember when I said that drafting JaMarcus Russell was a huge mistake that the Raiders would regret? And no, Brandon Jacobs still didn't score any points for my fantasy team.
Tampa Bay at Philadelphia -15 - Eagles 33, Bucs 14 Win. Thank goodness for technology - stuck on the golf course on Sunday behind a parade of crippled sloths, I was able to watch the NFL Sunday Ticket on my iPhone. That Josh Johnson kid looks pretty damned good for playing in his second game. Nice decision-making under pressure to go along with his athletic ability.
Washington +4 at Carolina - Panthers 20, Redskins 17 Win.
Cincinnati +9 at Baltimore - bonus play: Over 42.5 - Bengals 17, Ravens 14 Win/Loss. The NFL's 3rd-ranked offense scores 7 points against a fired-up Bengals defense.
Atlanta at San Francisco -2.5 - Falcons 45, 49ers 10 Loss. The Niners won by 35 last week, and lost by 35 this week. Good luck figuring this shit out, I certainly can't.
Jacksonville at Seattle NL - no line, no pick. Seahawks 41, Jags 0. Jags win by 20 then lose by 41. Makes perfect sense.
Houston at Arizona -5.5 - Cards 28, Texans 21. Win. Weird, this game was decided by a turnover in the fourth quarter...who could have possibly seen that coming? (Hint: check my previous post.)
New England -3.5 at Denver - Broncos 20, Pats 17. Loss. I guess I need to wake up and start treating these teams like what they are...Denver is undefeated and the Pats are mediocre. Preconceptions have been killing me on these two.
Indianoplis -4.5 at Tennessee - Colts 31, Titans 9. Win.
NY Jets -1.5 at Miami - Dolphins 31, Jets 27. Loss. What does this game tell us? Are the Fins for real under Chad Henne? Was the Jets defense a mirage?

7-7 this week, 38-23-1 for the season.

A quick thought about NFL disparity...when's the last time there were so many truly terrible teams in the NFL? That old adage about Any Given Sunday is being put the rest this year, as teams like the Bucs, Raiders, Chiefs, Titans, Redskins, Bills, Browns, Lions, Rams, and Panthers are completely incapable of beating anyone but each other. (Note: the Jags and Niners, who lost by 41 and 38 respectively this week, are not even included in this club.) That's 1/3 of the league which has no chance of winning each week.

Week 5 picks

2009-10-09T10:17:00.002-04:00

The Eagles and I are back in business this week. Let's hope I fare as well as the Birds after a bye (10-0).

Cleveland at Buffalo -6 - I'm really tempted to pick the Browns after the Bills' sorry performance against Miami. But I'm counting on the Bills to show some pride and bounce back at home. If they don't, they're headed toward a 2-14 implosion of a season.
Pittsburgh -10.5 at Detroit - The Steelers have burned me twice this season, but I'm sticking with them. I usually love double-digit home dogs, but I can't envision a scenario where the Lions win, and I can't pick an underdog unless they have at least an outside shot of winning.
Dallas -9 at Kansas City - I've already heard a couple 'experts' hedging about this game as a possible upset. I'd love to see it, but...no chance. KC can't rush the passer or cover anyone, which means Romo won't be forced into mistakes, which means the Cowgirls win.
Minnesota -10 at St. Louis - Couldn't be a better setup for a home dog...getting double-digit points against a team coming off an emotional Monday Night win! Everything screams St. Louis, which means the Vikes cover easily.
Oakland at New York Giants -15.5 - JaAwful loses the battle of first-round washouts to David Carr. And maybe, just maybe, Brandon Jacobs scores some points for my fantasy team this week.
Tampa Bay at Philadelphia -15 - I still have nightmares about the last time these teams played, when the Eagles were a heavy favorite but lost to a 61-yard FG as time expired. Or maybe it was 91 yards, I can't remember. I know it was really fucking long and never should have gone in, but it did. I wouldn't bet on a repeat, though.
Washington +4 at Carolina - Here's an interesting stat: The Redskins haven't played against a team with a win yet (0-0 Giants, 0-1 Rams, 0-2 Lions, 0-3 Bucs, 0-3 Panthers.) Yes, the Redskins suck, but I can't give four points with a winless team.
Cincinnati +9 at Baltimore - Sure, the Ravens got screwed by the refs last week, but here's a little secret no one's talking about: their defense just isn't what it used to be. I don't know who wins, but I expect a close, high-scoring affair. So here's a bonus play: Over 42.5
Atlanta at San Francisco -2.5 - This should be a fascinating game. The Falcons have a better QB, the 49ers have a better defense. The deciding factor: as good as the Falcons have been over the last two seasons, they haven't won many games on grass.
Jacksonville at Seattle NL - no line, no pick. Wouldn't it be great to see the Jags get to 3-2 and be back in the playoff race after being left for dead at 0-2?
Houston at Arizona -5.5 - My first thought upon seeing this game: Wow, the O/U should be 50! I was close, it's 50.5. There won't be much defense on either side, but you can count on Houston to have a couple foolish turnovers in a big road game, and that will make the difference.
New England -3.5 at Denver - I'm going to keep picking against Denver until I'm right.
Indianoplis -4.5 at Tennessee - How often can you take an undefeated team giving only 4.5 points to a winless team? I think the Titans have a chance for a desperate, last-stand, familiar opponent type of game, and apparently the oddsmakers agree. But as Parcells famously said: You are what your record says you are. The numbers speak for themselves: 4-0, 4.5, 0-4.
NY Jets -1.5 at Miami - I'm supposed to be impressed that Miami hung 38 on a horrid Buffalo team? Give me a break, Chad Henne vs. Rex Ryan is no contest at all.

Week 4 Notes

2009-10-05T10:46:00.002-04:00

I left on Thursday last week to visit lovely Chicago and watch my alma mater stumble past the Fighting Illini. Got back late last night, and was having too much fun over the weekend to bother posting my picks. But here are my thoughts on the Week 4 results:

What's up with the NFC East? - The Best Division in Football is a respectable 6-3 against non-division opponents this season. The catch? All six wins came against winless teams (Chiefs, Bucs, Panthers, and Rams) and one of the losses came against a team on a nineteen game losing streak! That puts the NFC East at 6-1 against horrible teams, 0-2 against good teams.
Man up and go for it - The Saints went for fourth-and-goal from the one, failed, and two plays later scored on a sack-fumble. The Bengals went for it on fourth-and-11 in OT, instead of punting for the tie, and kicked the winning field goal a minute later. The Chargers punted on fourth-and-two with less than a minute to go in the first half, down 21 points, and went on to lose a close game.
Alas, we hardly knew ye - I'm a big believer in coaching continuity, and allowing coaches several years to develop a winning program. But Dick Jauron looks clueless in Buffalo, and he needs to go. You give up 38 points to an 0-3 team starting a new QB in his first NFL game...there's no excuse for that. Eric Mangenius and Jim Zorn will be right behind him, on his way out the head coaching door. Wade Phillips deserves to go too, but he may end up staying by default. What good coach wants to work for Jerry Jones?
Weapon X - Kudos to coaches McDanies and Nolan in Denver, who have found a way to keep Brian Dawkins on the field without him getting exposed in coverage. Some pretty good coaches on the Eagles couldn't figure out how to do it, and now he's making big plays for a 4-0 team halfway across the country.
Hail to the Redskins - Have you ever seen a worse 2-2 team? This is a completely failed organization, from the owner to the coaches to the players themselves. Where are the bright spots, the developing young stars? If Dan Snyder really wants to win, he needs to hire a Bill Cowher/Mike Shanahan/John Gruden type and get out of the way for ten years. Let the new coach/GM clean house next season, and cut all the awful overpriced free agent signings during the uncapped year, then rebuild slowly through the draft. There's no quick fix for thie team.
ILL...INI - Memorial Stadium in Champaign is one of the most cramped and poorly-designed stadiums I've ever seen, and I've been to the Vet. It took me 25 minutes to get to the bathroom and back during halftime. The Romans designed a better sports arena two milennia earlier.
Sorry, Pat and Geno - I'm a Philly guy, but I'd trade a cheesesteak (provolone, with) for Giardonno's deep dish sausage pizza anytime. It's not even close. Another weekend food highlight: Crawfish Etoufee from Moe Joe's. Wash it down with a glass of Dead Guy Ale from the tap, and you've achieved the perfect meal.

Week 3 Wrap

2009-09-27T16:53:00.004-04:00

Another 11-5 week. 31-16-1 for the season. I know if I were to actually start betting, my winning percentage would plummet.

Washington at Detroit +6: Lions 19, Redskins 14. Win
Green Bay -7 at St. Louis: Packers 36, Rams 17. Win
San Francisco at Minnesota -7: Vikings 27, 49ers 24. Loss
Atlanta at New England -4.5: Pats 26, Falcons 10 Win
Tennessee +3 at NY Jets: Jets 24, Titans 17 Loss
Kansas City at Philadelphia -9: Eagles 34, Chiefs 14. Win
NY Giants -7 at Tampa Bay: Giants 24, Bucs 0. Win
Cleveland at Baltimore -13.5: Ravens 34, Browns 3. Win
Jacksonville +4 at Houston: Jaguars 31, Texans 24. Win
Chicago-3 at Seattle: Bears 25, Seahawks 19. Win
New Orleans -6.5 at Buffalo: Saints 27, Bills 7. Win
Pittsburgh -4 at Cincinnati: Bengals 23, Steelers 20. Loss Told you to bet against my Lock of the Week.
Denver at Oakland +2: Broncos 23, Raiders 3. Loss JaMarcus Russell: 12-21 for 60 yards, 2 picks. $35 million guaranteed, 3 yards/attempt.
Miami +6 at San Diego: Chargers 23, Dolphins 13. Loss Give the Chargers credit, but Pennington's injury was the difference.
Indianapolis +2.5 at Arizona: Colts 31, Cards 10. Win
Carolina at Dallas -9: Cowboys 21, Panthers 7. Win

Week 3 Picks

2009-09-25T16:04:00.003-04:00

It's Saturday already, so let's get right to it:

Washington at Detroit +6: Detroit won't go 0-16 again, so maybe this is their week.
Green Bay -7 at St. Louis: The Rams, on the other hand, might go 0-16.
San Francisco at Minnesota -7: I like the 49ers, and I think they'll win their division, but this is a terrible matchup for them. They rely on running the ball, and no one runs against the Vikings.
Atlanta at New England -4.5: I swore I wouldn't pick the Pats again after they burned me twice, but I can't help myself. It's just not time yet for Matt Ryan and Roddy White to take the mantle from Tom Brady and Randy Moss.
Tennessee +3 at NY Jets: The Titans are too good to be 0-3, and the Jets aren't good enough to be 3-0.
Kansas City at Philadelphia -9: Too many injuries in this game, I don't want any part of it. The Eagles tend to bounce back really well after a big loss, but they also suck the week before the bye. In the end, the Eagles defense is too much for the Chiefs.
NY Giants -7 at Tampa Bay: I love home dogs, but not this one. The G-Men play too well on the road, are better coached, and have a lot more talent.
Cleveland at Baltimore -13.5: Eric Mangini is officially on the hot seat!
Jacksonville +4 at Houston: Call it a feeling...but when the Jags were good and the Texans were terrible, Houston always gave them a run for their money. Now that the roles are reversed, I'm smelling an upset.
Bears -3 at Seattle: The injuries are mounting in the great Northwest, and Jim Mora still coaches like...Jim Mora.
New Orleans -6.5 at Buffalo: I almost pulled the trigger on Buffalo, since the Saints are primed for a letdown after that huge road win against the Eagles. But Trent Edwards over Drew Brees? I can't do it.
Pittsburgh -4 at Cincinnati: This is my Lock of the Week, which means you should bet your house against me.
Denver at Oakland +2: The Raiders managed to really look bad, even in their win last week. But I can't pick the Broncos to be 3-0. I probably should, but I can't.
Miami +6 at San Diego: Too many injuries for the Bolts, and Miami is desperate for a win.
Indianapolis +2.5 at Arizona: This is a gift from the football gods...Peyton Manning and the points, take it to the bank.
Carolina at Dallas -9: The Cowboys, in recent years, have followed up troubling early-season losses with big wins against mediocre teams. I'm smelling a pattern.

Week 2 Wrap

2009-09-22T07:55:00.003-04:00

I haven't counted yet, but I think I'm over .500 for the second week in a row!

Falcons 28, Panthers 20 - My pick: Atlanta -6 Win The Panthers did bounce back and keep it competitive, but the Falcons were just too much for them in the end. It's scary when I'm right.
Vikings 27, Lions 13 - My pick: Minnesota -10 Win
Bengals 31, Packers 24 - My pick: Green Bay -9.5 Loss
Texans 34, Titans 31 - My pick: Tennessee -6.5 Loss The Titans are 0-2 with two close losses and suddenly look like a team missing the playoffs.
Raiders 13, Chiefs 10 - My pick: Kansas City -3 Loss The Chiefs outgained the Raiders 414-176 and still managed to lose somehow.
Jets 16, Pats 10 - My pick: New England -4 Loss Gotta give the Jets a lot of credit...they poked the bear with a stick, and then beat the shit out of it.
Saints 48, Eagles 22 - My pick: New Orleans even Win More on this game below.
Redskins 9, Rams 7 - My pick: St. Louis +10 Win
Cardinals 31, Jags 17 - My pick: Arizona -3 Win
49ers 23, Seahawks 10 - My pick: San Francisco +1 Win
Bills 33, Bucs 20 - My pick: Buffalo -5 Win
Bears 17, Steelers 14 - My pick: Pittsburgh -3 Loss When's the last time Jeff Reed missed two FGs in a game? I can't remember either.
Ravens 31, Chargers 26 - My pick: Baltimore +3 Win
Broncos 27, Browns 6 - My pick: Cleveland +3 Loss Mangenius strikes again.
Giants 33, Cowboys 31 - My pick: New York +3 Win
Colts 27, Dolphins 23 - My pick: Indianapolis -4 Push

That's a record of 9-6-1 for the week, 20-11-1 for the season. If you'd actually been betting with me, you'd have made some decent money. Of course, I haven't been betting on these picks, so I can't expect you to.

More on the Eagles game:
A lot of the 'analysis' of this game has demonized the Eagles defense and praised Drew Brees. Brees might be the best QB in the game right now, and the Eagles defense didn't play as well as they could have, but the real story of this game was turnovers and poor special teams play. The Eagles turned the ball over twice inside their own 25 and shanked two more punts to start Saints drives at the 50. I don't care how your defense plays, giving an offense like the Saints four drives at the 50 or better will make it tough to win.

For the game, the Eagles outgained the Saints, had the same number of first downs, and converted the same percentage of third downs. Brees did exactly what a great QB should do - take advantage of the opportunities he was handed - but don't buy the nonsense about him 'picking apart' the Eagles. Hidden yards and turnovers were the difference.

I was disappointed with the defensive gameplan. I expected pressure up the middle combined with press coverage, but instead we got a lot of 4-man rush with soft zone behind it. They also played a lot of base defense, when I would have treated Shockey and Bush like receivers and lined up in nickel most of the game. Hopefully McDermott learns from this film, and won't make the same mistakes if we face the Saints again in the playoffs.

Picking Week 2

2009-09-17T10:26:00.004-04:00

Ah, if I'd only been terrible in Week 1, I could have quit in disgust. But with an 11-5 record, I'm compelled to continue. Lines are taken from ESPN, and are current as of today.

Carolina at Atlanta -6: I was really tempted to pick Carolina for a bounceback game here...usually veteran teams who were embarrassed the week before come out with a good game the next week. And Atlanta doesn't have nearly the defensive horses that the Eagles have, either with the pass rush or secondary, even though they played well against Miami. But Atlanta was undefeated at home last year against division opponents, and are quite simply the better team. Also, the line started at 7 and has moved to 6, which means there's a lot of people buying that bounceback theory for Carolina, and it's usually wise to bet against the crowd.
Minnesota -10 at Detroit: Detroit gave up 150 yards rushing to Mike Bell, and now have to face Adrian Peterson. Their rookie QB plays his first home game against one of best three defenses in the NFL. This is a recipe for disaster.
Cincinnati at Green Bay -9.5: Green Bay is better at pretty much every position, other than QB (which is a wash.)
Houston at Tennessee -6.5: It's still September, which means Houston sucks. I could see them playing well and keeping this game close, but Tennessee is a much better team that is tough to beat at home.
Oakland at Kansas City -3: I was planning to take Oakland until I saw the line has moved from 4.5 to 3. Both of these teams looked better than expected in a loss, so I'll stick with the home team. KC plays well in Arrowhead, especially against division opponents.
New England -4 at NYJets: The Jets are a hot pick this week, with the line moving from 6.5 to 4. There's nothing the Pats love more than putting the smackdown on the hot team that everyone thinks will replace them. I don't love the Pats defense this year, but they'll be more than enough for a rookie QB.
New Orleans even at Philadelphia: I don't want either side of this line, to be honest. New Orleans has played the Eagles tough recently, but all those games were in New Orleans. The Saints don't travel well and don't play well on grass, but the Eagles are historically lousy in September, especially at home. I'm picking against my Eagles twice in a row, because I trust Drew Brees a lot more than Kevin Kolb.
St. Louis +10 at Washington: Yeah, the Rams are bad. But they were bad last year and still beat the Skins. I think Washington has a good chance of winning, but the Rams should keep it close.
Arizona +3 at Jacksonville: Arizona's terrible on the road and are due for a down year, but I can't bring myself to give points with the Jags. I see the Cards squeaking out a close victory with a drive by Warner at the end.
Seattle at San Francisco +1: The 49ers play the Seahawks very tough, and should win this game at home, even though I like Seattle's chances to win the division.
Tampa Bay at Buffalo -5: This will be an interesting game, to see how the Bills respond to their calamitous Monday Night loss. It wouldn't surprise me if Buffalo started slow, with a bit of a hangover from the previous game. But Tampa's terrible on defense and will end up losing by a TD.
Pittsburgh -3 at Chicago: The Bears OL couldn't block Green Bay's 3-4 defense, and Cutler responded by throwing 4 picks. The best 3-4 defense in the business is rolling into town, and will take the Bears apart.
Baltimore +3 at San Diego: Should be a close game, so I'll take the points.
Cleveland +3 at Denver: Possibly the two worst head coaches in the league face off in a game that neither team deserves to win. I don't want to take either team.
NY Giants +3 at Dallas: I can't figure out why Dallas is a 3-point favorite. The Giants are a complete team, while the Cowboys still have no defense (450 yards allowed vs. Tampa.) After watching Cadillac Williams run all over the 'Boys, I have to like the chances of Brandon Jacobs.
Indianapolis -4 at Miami: The Dolphins are taking a step back this season and will finish with 6 or 7 wins. They have nothing on offense, and won't outscore Peyton Manning.

Week 1 Wrap

2009-09-15T13:49:00.002-04:00

Let's check the results:

Pittsburgh 13, Tennessee 10 - My pick: Tennessee +6 Win
Atlanta 19, Miami 7 - My pick: Atlanta -4 Win
Baltimore 38, Kansas City 24 - My pick: KC +13 Loss - Horrible turnover by KC leads to a garbage-time TD in the last minute for a cover. A bit unlucky, as the Chiefs played tough and hung close.
Philadelphia 38, Carolina 10 - My pick: Carloina +2 Loss - I couldn't be happier about being wrong.
Denver 12, Cincinnati 7 - My pick: Denver +4 Win
Minnesota 34, Cleveland 20 - My pick: Minnesota -4.5 Win
Jets 24, Houston 7 - My pick: Jets +4.5 Win - Any time you get points against both the Bengals and the Texans in the month of September, it's a true gift.
Indianapolis 14, Jacksonville 12 - My pick: Jags +6 Win
New Orleans 45, Detroit 27 - My pick: Saints -13 Win
Dallas 34, Tampa Bay 21 - My pick: Cowboys -6 Win
San Francisco 20, Arizona 16 - My pick: 49ers +6.5 Win
Giants 23, Washington 17 - My pick: Giants -6.5 Loss - Screwed by another garbage time TD, and half a point!
Seattle 28, St. Louis 0 - My pick: Seattle -8.5 Win
Green Bay 21, Chicago 15 - My pick: Packers -3.5 Win
New England 25, Buffalo 24 - My pick: Pats -10.5 Loss
San Diego 24, Oakland 20 - My pick: Chargers -9 Loss

Amazingly, I finished the week 11-5 against the spread. Now I have to keep picking until I embarrassing myself.

Meanwhile, the Eagles have placed Shawn Andrews on IR to make room for Jeff Garcia. File this one in the 'roster blunder' category for the Eagles. Every year they do something plainly stupid to leave themselves thin at a key position. Two seasons ago it was punt returner, last year it was fullback, and now it's tackle. The current 'swing' tackle, or back-up at either tackle position, is the human turnstile known as King Dunlap. Even though Andrews was coming off a back injury and has a history of mental instability, the Eagles gambled by moving his brother to guard and not re-signing Jon Runyan. And now they're left short at a crucial spot. If either tackle gets hurt in the next game or two, it's going to create a huge problem. If they had simply left Stacy at tackle and Shawn at guard (where they have much better depth), there'd by no problem with Shawn's injury. They also stubbornly refuse to cut one of their seven receivers and sign a veteran tackle like Runyan or Langston Walker. I sure hope this decision doesn't come back to bite them.

Eagles Wrap-up

2009-09-13T19:49:00.002-04:00

I definitely didn't see 38-10 coming. Here's the Good, the Bad, and the Jake Delhomme from this game:

Good

Sean McDermott - A tremendous job calling his first game on defense. He picked up right where Jim Johnson left off, generating tremendous pressure while often rushing just five by overloading a specific area of the line. And he even mixed in an occasional straight coverage play - the second INT by Sheldon was a three-man rush. Of course he was helped out by the horrid play of Jake Delhomme, but it's hard to argue with the results.
Omar Gaither - He looked right at home back at MLB, strong against the run and reacting quickly to the pass.
Winston Justice - Had an exceptional game at right tackle...the lone sack he gave up was during garbage time when Kevin Kolb held the ball way too long. He was also a factor run blocking.
DeSean Jackson - That punt return TD was a killer. It was a key moment in the game, and clearly deflated the Panthers.

Bad

Kevin Kolb - Held the ball way too long, missed reads, and threw the ball inaccurately. But other than that, he was ok.
Quintin Demps - Two games in a row with boneheaded penalties. You simply can't trust this guy to be on the field anymore.
Julius Peppers - Possibly the most overhyped, overrated player in the NFL. Getting paid $14 million this season, and had no impact on the game until garbage time against a backup QB. He didn't forget his sack dance, completely embarrassing himself as his team was losing by 28 points.

Jake Delhomme
Are you kidding me? A 5-year contract extension after a 6-turnover performance in the playoffs? He rewarded that decision with a 5-turnover day that ended midway through the third quarter.

Now, a note on the McNabb injury...the Eagles play the next two games at home against New Orleans and Kansas City, followed by their bye. With a cracked rib, McNabb should sit the next three weeks and let it heal. Even with the Kevin Kolb we saw today, the Eagles can manage a 1-1 record in the next two games, and that's good enough. The last thing we need is for McNabb to further hurt himself.

Cultural Devolution

2009-09-11T13:20:00.003-04:00

I've already blogged about The Big Sort in America, the trend of like-minded people clustering together to form partisan neighborhoods with similar political beliefs. This naturally encourages close-mindedness as people are less exposed to anyone with a different socioeconomic status or value system. Counter-intuitively, the wide availability of information on the internet contributes to close-mindedness, as people simply filter their news to read only the blogs and reports of writers with similar belief systems. Instead of a free exchange of ideas to keep our democracy healthy, we're reinforcing our pre-conceived notions and increasing the distance between "us" and "them" within our own country.

So I started to think back on my own life, and I realized I was fairly close-minded before college. My beliefs at that point were mostly shaped by those of my family and friends, as most young people will be. It wasn't until I was exposed to a broad range of ideas, backgrounds, and socioeconomic strata at college, and I was allowed to explore and interpret those ideas on my own, that my mind truly expanded and began to form into the person I am today. Without that exposure, I'd likely be far less questioning, confident, and intellectual.

So it was quite disturbing when I read about the potential disintegration of universities in the near future, whose bloated corpses will be picked apart by the internet. If you buy the author's thesis, and I find it difficult to dispute the economic logic behind it, then soon we'll have even less sharing of ideas. Kids can stay in their own sorted neighborhoods to get their degrees online. Home schooling is already on the rise from K-12, and with everyone staying home for college, those minds will have another four years to form barriers against outside ideas.

It's terrifying to think we've already reached the zenith of democracy, and have begun a slow decline back toward fascism. But democracy can only work when there's an ability to see the Big Picture, to look at a problem from someone else's point-of-view and agree on a solution that works for everyone. If instead we devolve into a nation of close-minded isolationists looking out solely for themselves (doesn't seem like a big step down, does it?) then democracy becomes nothing more than the tyranny of the majority.

Week One

2009-09-09T13:49:00.002-04:00

The new football season is nearly here (tomorrow!) I've decided to try to pick against the spread again, knowing well that I have been unsuccessful in every attempt to do so previously. Still, there's something fun about being so consistently wrong.

Tennessee(+6) at Pittsburgh Pittsburgh is a great team who could very well be on their way to another Super Bowl. But anytime I can get six points on a 13-3 team, I can't resist.

Miami at Atlanta(-4) Miami's 11-5 record was a mirage based on a dreadfully easy schedule. Atlanta's 11-5 record was not.

Kansas City(+13) at Baltimore I don't like either side of this line. KC will be competitive this year, though, and Baltimore tends to start the season slowly.

Philadelphia at Carolina(+2) Carolina isn't going to be a good team this season, but then again the Eagles might not be, either. In either case, a 12-4 home dog is generally a good bet, and the Eagles are notoriously slow starters.

Denver(+4) at Cincinnati Denver will be god-awful. But Cincy won five games last season, and I can't give away four points with a bad team.

Minnesota(-4.5) at Cleveland Ironic Game of the Week. Brett Favre got Mangini fired in New York, and then beats him in his first game with a new team. The Browns' defense will be trying to tackle Adrian Peterson all week in their nightmares after this one.

NY Jets(+4.5) at Houston The Jets will be fired up to play their first game for new head coach Rex Ryan, while Houston generally sleepwalks through September. Not a good combo for the Texans.

Jacksonville(+7) at Indianapolis I don't like either side of this line. The Jags tend to keep it close against Indy, however.

Detroit at New Orleans(-13) New Orleans will punt twice in this game, maybe.

Dallas(-6) at Tampa Bay Tampa might get three wins. This isn't one of them.

San Francisco(+6.5) at Arizona I think the 49ers finish the season with a better record than the Cards. I'll take 6.5 and the better team any day.

Washington at NY Giants(-6.5) I don't buy Washington as a drastically improved team, and the Giants handled them last season.

St. Louis at Seattle(-8.5) I'd like to believe that the Rams will be better under their new coach, but they have no talent at all on defense. Nothing.

Chicago at Green Bay(-3.5) Aaron Rodgers vs. Jay Cutler might be a wash, but Green Bay has better WRs, a better OL, and a better defense.

Buffalo at New England(-10.5) With a week to go before the season opener, the Bills have fired their offensive coordinator and released their starting left tackle. And they haven't beaten the Pats in years. I'd take New England if they were giving 20.

San Diego(-9) at Oakland While the rest of the league faces NFL competition, San Diego opens the season with a tune-up against Divison 1-AA Oakland.

Spiting your face

2009-09-06T08:14:00.002-04:00

Imagine this conversation:

Andy Reid: So, are you interested in trading for AJ Feeley or Reggie Brown?
Bill Belichick: We like them both, but we'll just wait til you cut them.
AR: We won't cut them, they're too valuable to us to let go with no compensation.
BB: Oh really? What are you going to do, keep 4 QBs and 7 WRs? Hahahaha

Why yes, actually. That's precisely what they'll do. And if it means they only have two TEs on their roster, and that Michael Vick can't practice with the team, well, that's perfectly ok, because the Eagles proved they were right!

Other than that, very few surprises. They kept King Dunlap instead of Dan Klecko, as I suspected they might. Dmitri Patterson got the nod over Jack Ikegwouno, and Moises Fokou got a spot instead of Matt Wilhelm. Most likely, a couple guys I thought might make it - namely Rob Myers and Ikegwouno, will be signed to the practice squad today.

My take on the 53

2009-09-05T08:49:00.002-04:00

Final cuts are today, so I'm almost out of time to guess at who the 53 players to make the Eagles active roster should be.

QB (3) - McNabb, Kolb, Vick. The Eagles could put Vick on the reserve-suspended list and keep Feeley instead, but then Vick couldn't practice with the team. And he needs a lot of practice.
HB (3) - Westbrook, McCoy, Buckley. Finally, the Eagles have a straight-ahead runner who can convert third-and-short. I hope.
FB (1) - Weaver.
WR (6) - Jackson, Curtis, Maclin, Avant, Baskett, Gibson. I'm sneaking Amendola onto the practice squad if I can, because Curtis isn't on the team next season.
TE (3) - Celek, Curtis, Myers. Matt Schobel is a year overdue for a visit with the Turk. Myers is keeping a spot warm for (hopefully) Ben Watson after trading Feeley to the Pats.
OL (9) - Peters, Herremans, Jackson, Andrews x2, Justice, Jean-Gilles, Cole, McGlynn. Andy Reid usually keeps 10 linemen, so I'll probably be wrong here, but I can't find a tenth guy who's earned his way onto the team. With two rookies and King Dunlap eligible for the practice squad, this seems like a good position to go a man short.
DE (6) - Cole, Babin, Howard, Parker, Abiamiri, Clemons. I'm tired of Clemons and his non-production, but I guess he serves a role on special teams. I'm trying to trade him if I can't get a TE for Feeley. Goodbye Bryan Smith, we hardly knew ye.
DT (4) - Bunkley, Patterson, Laws, Klecko. I dropped an OL to keep Klecko, but he's definitely earned a spot. I'm very comfortable cutting King Dunlap to keep him.
LB (6) - Gocong, Gaither, Jordan, Mays, Wilhelm, White. After the first four spots, there isn't anyone that's earned a place on the roster. But someone has to play, right? I'd keep Wilhelm just because he has experience, which is in short supply on this LB corps. White is purely a special-teamer, and his spot could be taken by Tank Daniels...it's a toss-up between those two.
CB (5) - Samuel, Brown, Hobbs, Hanson, Ikegwouno. No one's played well enough to earn that fifth CB spot, so I'm defaulting it to the highest draft pick. Jack's got the most talent, and since he's basically a rookie after being injured all last year, his mistakes are most forgivable.
S (4) - Mikell, Demps, Harris, Jones.
Special (3) - Akers, Rocca, Dorenbos.

Practice squad candidates - Amendola, Fanaika, Tupuo, Fukou, Dunlap, Gaines.

There weren't many players I'm sorry to see go. The hardest player to cut was Kyle Eckel, and he hardly registers a blip on the talent radar. But he's a hard-worker with versatility and was very helpful to the team last season. He's easily done more to earn a spot than the sixth LB, but I need that last guy for special teams.

There's a very disturbing trend this year for the Eagles - almost always as I go through this process, there are promising players at each position that I'm struggling to choose from. Instead I found several spots where no one had stepped up and I was forced to pick from a collection of equally bad underperformers. It may not seem like a big deal if the fifth CB or the fifth LB isn't very good, but competition at the bottom of the roster makes the whole team better. I don't want to overreact to the preseason, but this is shaping up to be a long year for the Birds.

Post #300

2009-09-04T16:36:00.002-04:00

I actually took notes during the game last night. Here are some random thoughts and observations:

King Dunlap...really? Beaten on consecutive plays by Vernon Gholston, he looks less and less like an NFL tackle every time I watch him. What's the downside to signing Jon Runyan to a 1-year contract to be our swing tackle?
When Eugene Bright dropped that pass, I wrote in my (virtual) notebook..."He's gone." Today, the Eagles released him.
Eldra Buckley is running well and looks like he'll win the third tailback job. It's wonderful to have a big tailback to pick up short yardage. He can't pick up the blitz, though.
I really like the way Macho Harris plays. At 5'10" I didn't think he had a prayer to be an NFL safety, but he's a tackling machine who always seems to be around the ball. After last night, I'd be less surprised if he wins the starting job over Demps.
Moise Fokou looks lost out there. He can't cover a TE and he can't stay in his gap against the run. I'm not happy with our LB play at all this preseason.
The run defense was really bad, but it looked a lot better when Mays was in the game.
Tony Curtis might really help this team. As a #2 TE, he'll provide solid blocking and a sure-handed redzone target. Exactly what we need. Now trade for Ben Watson, please.
Dmitri Patterson and Sean Jones combined on a terrible defensive play to give up a long pass. Neither one found the ball in the air.
Jason Babin...is there any way he won't make the team? Two more sacks, and once again the only Eagle getting pressure on the QB. With him on the opposite side of Trent Cole, we might have something.
Several good throws and a few bad ones from Kevin Kolb. I still don't have a strong opinion on this guy, he just looks average.
I told you yesterday that Danny Amendola is fun to watch, and he lived up to the billing. He seems like a kid that could contribute as a sixth receiver/return guy, but we couldn't cut Baskett and Brown, right? Maybe we can get him through to the practice squad.
Dan Klecko made some plays, but it's probably too little, too late. A hard-working guy that I'd be proud to have on the team, but we're probably only keeping three DTs this season, and he's clearly the fourth-best tackle.
Vick looks a lot like McNabb. Can't read a blitz or react to it, likes to run backwards 20 yards before being sacked.
Lorenzo Booker played ok, but he's got no shot to make the team. Similar in style to Westbrook and McCoy, but with much less talent.

What to watch for tonight

2009-09-03T09:58:00.002-04:00

Wow, June. The URL to my blog wasn't even in my browser history anymore.

Anyway...

The most boringest preseason game of them all happens tonight, with almost every starter for both teams sitting on the sidelines. But there are still several areas of interest, with two starting jobs undecided and the bottom of the roster to be filled out. Here's what I'll be watching:

Wide Receiver - I'm rooting for Brandon Gibson. He's a big kid with speed...projected as a second-round draft pick after his junior year, he did "the right thing" by going back to school as a senior. But several bad QBs and eleven losses later, he had dropped off the radar of most NFL teams and ended up in the sixth round. But there's no mistaking this kid's talent. I think he's got a chance to stick around Philadelphia for years. But what I don't know is: who am I rooting against? Keeping Gibson would mean the end of Reggie Brown or Hank Baskett. Has either one done enough in their career to engender the strange sense of loyalty I feel toward them? Not really, I've just been waiting for them to reach their potential for so long I've developed a personal stake in it. But there's got to be some receiver-starved team out there (Baltimore, Tampa, Jets) who's willing to part with a conditional fifth-round pick for one of these guys. And I haven't even mentioned Danny Amendola, the short kid from Texas Tech, who has the quickness and speed to be a return specialist. He's fun to watch, but don't get used to it. He'll be lucky to make the practice squad, just too many good WRs here (when's the last time I said that about the Eagles?)
Joe Mays - His size and attitude make him an ideal fit for the MLB in the Eagles' system, but his pass coverage has been terrible. The Eagles want badly for him to win this job, but unless he shows up big tonight, expect Gaither to get the nod by default. I don't think Moise Fokou was ever a serious challenger.
Quintin Demps - I loved this kid out of college, and he has all the physical skills, but I'm not sure his head is screwed on straight. He's no Brandon Marshall, but he's mistake prone and has recently become mopey about not locking up the starting job. Waaaaaaaahhh. Victor Macho Harris appears to be his main competition, but I can't see a rookie winning this job. What the hell happened to Sean Jones? He's been invisible, but I'm not sure if that's a problem on his part or just a lack of opportunity.
Offensive line - No, we still won't have any idea if the Week One starters are healthy or if they can block anyone. But you'll have an opportunity to watch last year's draftees Gibson and McGlynn, along with this year's phoenetically challenged picks Paul Fanaika and Fenuki Tupou. McGlynn looks like the new back-up center with Cole switching to guard, Fanaika and Fenuki are practice squad material, and Gibson's probably gone.
Defensive end - Jason Babin should make this team, if preseason play has anything to do with it. Of course, I thought Jerome McDougle earned his way onto the team last year and I was wrong about that (he turned out to be worthless with the Giants also.) That means someone from last year has to go - and it's probably either Bryan Smith or Chris Clemons. Honestly, I haven't seen a thing from either one of them, so I don't care which one gets the axe.
Running back - The final RB spot seems to be up for grabs between Eldra Buckley and Kyle Eckel. I like what I've seen from both of them in a spot/special teams role. Buckley's a better ball-carrier but Eckel has more versatility. Either one could fill a short-yardage role. Hopefully one of them has a big game tonight and makes this an easy decision.
Kevin Kolb - It's time to start looking like an NFL QB, kid. Right now. If you're lucky, you'll get one more injury- or performance-induced shot this year, and you better be prepared to make the most of it. Big Red's patience is running out.

That was more fun than I thought. I may write up a review of the game tomorrow - but in the afternoon, after golf.

More of the same

2009-06-11T08:54:00.002-04:00

Climate change is constantly sensationalized by the media. Check out this glaring example, an article titled Climate change blamed for Caribbean coral deaths.

The first eight paragraphs discuss all the bad stuff that can happen when coral reefs degrade, and mention only a single cause of this degradation: climate change. Yet, if you read through to the ninth paragraph (very few readers finish an article, either on-line or in print), you get this gem: The degradation of Caribbean reefs is not entirely linked to climate change, with disease killing about 90 percent of Elkhorn and Staghorn Corals in the 1970s. Ninety percent!

Now skip ahead to the very last paragraph, where one of the researchers is finally quoted: We suggest that the last period of decline is partly due to climate change, but also due to several other human impacts such as over-fishing and coastal development... If you read those two paragraphs, which mention disease, over-fishing and coastal development as major causes of reef damage, how can you responsibly ignore those and title the article exclusively about climate change?

Read the article yourself (it's short.) I'm not cherry-picking quotes to make my point. This is another clear example of global warming sensationalization. If you just read the headline and a few paragraphs at the start, you come away with the distinct impression that climate change is the sole, or at least the biggest contributor to this damage, when quotes in the article itself belie this conclusion. And while we continue to focus on phantoms like man-made global warming, we don't pay enough attention to problems that are much easier to fix and are proven to have a bigger impact on our environment.

We need balanced and reasonable approaches to solving problems, not doomsaying and histrionics. Just like the abortion issue, where sensationalization by pro-lifers actually leads to a loss of life, sensationalization of global warming actually damages the environment.

Fallout 3

2009-06-08T15:54:00.003-04:00

This is a really good game.

I've been playing it for close to a month now (note the coincidental timing with my lack of blogging) and there's still lots more for me to explore. It's a role-playing game set in a post-apocalyptic Washington D.C. The gameplay itself is typical, with lots of bad guys to kill, quests to complete, treasure to loot, and items to craft. But what sets the game apart is incredible size and depth.

To give you an idea of the size of the world, the first time I played the game through, I reached the maximum level of 20 and completed the main quest without exploring even half of the locations on the map. Now I'm on my second playthrough, seeking out the locations I missed the first time, and there are still a couple dozen places I've yet to visit.

The world itself is rendered beautifully, with painstaking attention to detail. Addtionally, the depth of the backstory and the characters you interact with make it easy to become immersed in this gloomy world. Even the voiced-over dialogue is moderately thoughtful...good enough that it doesn't constantly remind you that you're playing a video game.

Another amazing aspect of the game is the amount of both historical and pop culture references throughout. There are plenty of "easy" references in a futuristic post-apocalyptic wasteland, to Mad Max, Starship Troopers, and the Transformers. But there are hundreds of more subtle, buried references to subjects as diverse as Cool Hand Luke, the Shining, Sifl and Olly, and a 1793 painting called The Death of Marat. Of course, the vast majority of these are lost on me, so they don't improve gameplay on their own. But reading all this stuff when browsing the Fallout 3 Wiki gives me a real appreciation for the amount of time and caring the designers put into the game. And it's even educational sometimes too...for instance, I learned the story behind the origination of Arlington National Cemetery.

And finally, saving the best for last, in Fallout 3 you can create a Railway Rifle. It fires railroad spikes at lethal speeds using steam power. Fatal head shots result in the victim's head being torn from the body and stuck to the nearest wall (or ceiling, if you crouch and aim up) by said spike. And the gory dismemberment is accompanied by a delightful whistling sound as the steam is released. In spite of a limited number of components to repair my Railway Rifle, and a short supply of ammo, I find myself overusing this weapon for the sheer aesthetic pleasure of it.

Fallout 3 easily one of the best games I've played. Still, it could take a few lessons from the Witcher. The moral choices in the game lack any subtlety, and are all strictly black-and-white (enslave or set free, kill or negotiate, dentonate a nuclear bomb in the middle of a town or disarm it, etc.) What's worse, the 'bad' choices often have miniscule rewards, so there's very little reason to vary behavior unless you're strictly role-playing. And of course, the inability to seduce even a single female character, including the one wearing nothing but a neglige that you lead across the Wasteland to safety, is a frustrating omission.

Onward Christian Soldiers

2009-06-02T15:47:00.004-04:00

Honestly, sometimes I wish there was a Hell. Watching all you Christians burn next to me would make an eternity of torture bearable, maybe even entertaining.

A mentally unstable Christian, inspired by the Army of God's Defensive Action Statement, is calling his murder of an abortion doctor 'justifiable homicide'.

Of course. Never mind the Ten Commandments, never mind that Jesus lived for 33 years without managing to kill a single person. Never mind that the killer had to walk into a fucking church - the House of your God - to execute the abortion doctor.

Oh, but he's just a wacko, right? It wouldn't be fair to judge all Christians by his actions. One bad apple, etc.

Maybe you just put the gun in his hand and told him where to point it. Endlessly sensationalizing the issue - equating unborn fetuses to live babies, equating abortion with murder, and demonizing doctors - implies consent for this violence. Everyone who has an 'abortion is murder' bumper sticker (or tolerates church-mates who do), everyone who identifies himself as a single-issue voter, everyone who pickets and demonstrates against doctors or the heartbroken women who've agonized over the abortion decision - you all have blood on your hands. You have created a culture of confrontation that tries to prevent abortions through bullying. That makes you a killer, and if you truly believe in an all-powerful spirit with a propensity for eternal burning, you better start begging for forgiveness right now.

Maybe instead of demonizing law-abiding doctors and would-be mothers, you should inject a bit of rationality into your political positions. Push for earlier and more sex education, readily available birth control, you know - strategies that have actually been proven to reduce unwanted pregnancies, unlike the bullshit abstinence programs that teenagers simply lie about. Strategies that focus on bringing fewer unwanted babies into this world, not more. Strategies that can prevent the tragedy of unprepared parents neglecting or abusing a child they are unwilling or unable to care for.

Or would you prefer a more personal approach? Go to an inner-city middle school, and tell all the seventh-grade girls that if they have an unwanted pregnancy before they graduate, you will adopt the baby if they carry it to term. You might save half a dozen lives this way.

Of course, then you'd have to actually do something constructive. You'd have to work. You'd have to support and love and raise children. It's not as easy as getting a bumper sticker at church, voting Republican, and waiting for some mentally unstable jackass to do your dirty work. But it would save lives, and that's what is really important, isn't it?

Yeah, I didn't think so. See you in Hell.

NFL Draft Review

2009-04-28T13:42:00.002-04:00

I loved the Eagles' draft.

Maclin was one of the two elite playmaking WRs in the draft, and should have been off the board by pick #10. Instant impact as a returner, and should see the field in a handful of personnel groups as a rookie. Finally the Eagles have a WR who can catch a slant and take it 80 yards - something that every decent West Coast offense has.

Shady McCoy was another great value in the second round, and he fills a glaring need. Considered by many scouts to have the best lateral quickness and short burst acceleration in the draft, these natural abilities combined with his receiving skills make him a perfect fit for this offense. He'll contribute as soon as he learns to block, which is not something he was asked to do often at Pitt.

Cornelius Ingram is a pass-catching TE from Florida who was on track to be a second-round pick before he blew out his knee. Possibly the most athletic TE in the draft, he should be healthy enough to participate in the team's first mini-camp. This was another need, and Ingram has a chance to be an impact player, not just a back-up.

The trade for Ellis Hobbs was low-risk/high-reward, and the front office should be commended for it. Two fifth-rounders are a miniscule price to pay for a starting CB, but New England didn't need him anymore after drafting a CB in round two. He's only got one year left on his contract, so the Patriots realized his value was only going to get lower if they held on to him. The Eagles get a proven player for a year, and some insurance against Sheldon Brown going in the tank.

I'm not going to pretend to know anything about the other 5th-7th round picks, because I don't. But the first three selections were great values at areas of need. All three have a chance to make an impact this year.

Not every team was so successful.

The Detroit Lions bought a $42 million lottery ticket at the top of the first round, selecting Georgia QB Matt Stafford, in spite of an 80% failure rate for junior QBs. The Jets then traded three players and three picks to Cleveland for the right to pay another junior QB tens of millions in signing bonus. Denver and the Raiders made a mess of their drafts as well, locking up another three seasons for the Chargers atop the AFC West. Basic decision-making skills were ignored by experts in their field who analyzed every available player for months, while the perenially good teams made solid decisions across the board.

Is it September yet?

Jeremy Maclin

2009-04-25T18:44:00.003-04:00

Beyond Crabtree and Maclin, there isn't a WR in this draft I'd waste a first-round pick on.
Unless someone of great value falls into their lap...

Well, that's exactly what happened. A player that should have gone in the top 10 dropped right into the Eagles' lap, and they jumped up to get him (for only a 6th-round pick.) With Ayers, Moreno, and English already gone, Maclin was easily the best player on the board and the best fit for the Eagles.

Still need a RB bad. Someone like Cedric Peerman in the 2nd? I can't imagine that either Brown, Wells, or McCoy will be available when they pick.

No-brainer

2009-04-24T16:16:00.002-04:00

Reports are surfacing that the Cardinals have reduced their demands for Anquan Boldin to something in the neighborhood of a second-round pick. If these reports are true, Boldin goes from a "nice-to-have" to a no-brainer pick-up. Even more so because the Giants will snatch him if we don't, and I don't want to play the guy twice a year.

I start with a second, a fifth, and Reggie Brown. I'd go as high as a second and a fourth, and maybe I'd even do a second and a third. Imagine coming out of this weekend with Knowshon Moreno and Anquan Boldin...that's a good draft all by itself.

I give the Eagles a lot of rope, because they've demonstrated success with their personnel decisions in the past. But if they don't get this done, and the Giants get Boldin for anything less than two second-round picks, I won't be making any excuses. You really want to win a Super Bowl? Make this move now, Joe Banner. If you don't, you suck.

Eagles Draft Preview

2009-04-23T10:12:00.003-04:00

So what will the Eagles do with their first-round pick on Saturday? Analysis on each of the options:

Trade it for Anquan Boldin - My guess here is that the package would include a 5th-rounder and Reggie Brown as well. I'd take this outcome happily, as Boldin is going to have a bigger immediate impact than anyone the Eagles could pick at 21, but I'm not wetting myself over the prospect. Playcalling and McNabb's accuracy are the two biggest problems with this offense, and a stud WR won't fix either one. Still, once the Giants trade for Braylon Edwards, there's going to be a lot of pressure for the Eagles to match them.
Knowshon Moreno, RB, Georgia - Easily the best RB in the draft. Not a game-changing talent, but a solid, complete back who can block and catch passes as well as run effectively. Could complement/replace Westbrook more capably than any other prospect. He's a top-15 talent who could very well be gone by the time they pick, but only a few teams above the Eagles need a RB bad enough to take one in the first round.
Robert Ayers, DE, Tennessee - Another DE? Yes. The Eagles have a glut of 'pretty good' ends, but they could really use a great one to bookend with Trent Cole. Ayers has more potential to be that guy than anyone. Matured late, so there's not a lot of tape on him, but he was dominating at the Senior Bowl. Give him two years and he'll be the clear starter, with Pro Bowl possibilities. Another top-15 talent, but without huge sack production or mind-blowing measurables, he may slip to the Eagles. The number of teams switching to 3-4 defenses may help him slide as well.
Brandon Pettigrew, TE, OkSt - As the best TE prospect in the draft, he's receiving a lot of attention in mocks as a potential Eagle. Frankly, I don't see it. He had one - one - TD catch his senior year on a team that scored a billion points. I'm not taking a TE in the first round unless he dominated in college, and I don't think the Eagles will either.
Donald Brown, RB, Connecticut - As far as a fit with the Eagles' offense, he's the second-best back. Could probably trade down 5 slots and still get him, if there are any takers.
Larry English, DE, Northern Illinois - An absolutely dominant pass-rusher in college with strong measurables. At 274 lbs, he's got the size to play DE on first and second down and could possibly switch inside on third. Needs to spend some time in the weight room (only 24 reps) but that's easily fixed.
Darius Butler, CB, Connecticut - With DeSean Jackson assuming full-time #1WR duties, don't expect him to be returning kicks as often as he did last year. That would make Butler a possibility, who not only has the skills to become an elite corner, but would make an immediate impact in the return game as well. Sheldon's Brown insane rumblings (the guy is 30, never been to a Pro Bowl, has 14 career picks, and thinks someones going to pay him more than $5/year? dream on) only increase the chance of a high pick being used on a corner.

Notice the position conspicuous by its absence on this list - WR. Beyond Crabtree and Maclin, there isn't a WR in this draft I'd waste a first-round pick on. There are lots of top-of-the-second-round talents like Kenny Britt, Hakeem Nicks, and Percy Harvin that would be useful, but don't expect the Eagles to reach for any of them early. Unless someone of great value falls into their lap, expect them to take a mid-round WR who can contribute in the return game (Derrick Williams, maybe?)