This is a preview of a new feature I'll be doing as the season goes on. It's the good and bad game (or games, possibly) from each week of the NFL season.
Week 1 is absolutely stacked, so this should be one of the tougher weeks. We kick off the NFL regular season September 8th on NBC with Packers-Saints in Green Bay. The two latest Super Bowl winners. Even though they had a quick exit in the playoffs, the Saints did not drop off that much in 2010 from their championship season of '09. This game is my overall winner for Week 1, but since there are games on Sunday and Monday, we can't leave those out.
Honorable mention goes to CBS's marquee Sunday afternoon matchup of Ravens-Steelers. It's the Steelers and the Ravens. Need I say more?
My loser for the week is the Monday Night Football doubleheader of Patriots-Dolphins and Broncos-Raiders. I just can't get too excited about either of these games.
Honorable mention loser goes to FOX's "Game of the Week" or whatever the hell it's called. Giants-Redskins. I'm sorry, I know it's the 10th anniversary of 9/11 and all and the connections between New York and Washington D.C. that come with it, but still, is that the best you can do, FOX? Rant ends here. Have a good one.
21 August 2011
08 August 2011
NFL on FOX 2011 Announcing Teams Announced
Wow, where have I been? Well, I am still alive and with football season approaching (thankfully), we can now look forward to broadcast schedules and the like. FOX has recently announced their announcer pairings and slots (as I like affectionately call batting order) for the 2011 season. And, unfortunately for viewers, the results are not spectacular.
1.) Joe Buck, Troy Aikman - No change from last year. Or the year before that and the year before that and the year before that, I think you get the picture.
2.) Kenny Albert, Daryl Johnston - No change from last year for FOX's "B" crew, either. And they will still have the (dis)pleasure of Tony Siragusa, who offers nothing in the way of insightful analysis. Oh well.
3.) Thom Brennaman, Brian Billick - Same team, different slot. They've moved up a slot from last year, which is probably no matter. Brennaman will spell Buck during the baseball playoffs. Whee!
4.) Dick Stockton, John Lynch. Stockton was the "C" team announcer last year, who was paired with Charles Davis, who has slipped to 8th in the FOX batting order (and probably for the better). Lynch has moved up 2 slots from last year.
5.) Chris Myers, Tim Ryan - Ryan was the 5th slot analyst last year, but was paired with Sam Rosen, who unfortunately has slipped to 7th. Myers was the 7th slot announcer last year. This and FOX's 8th team (read below) may be the bottom of the barrel of NFL announcing teams for 2011 just because of Myers.
6.) Ron Pitts, Jim Mora Jr. - Pitts was the 6th team announcer last year, but Mora Jr. is a new addition. I see potential in this team.
7.) Sam Rosen, Chad Pennington - Whoo boy, gotta feel sorry for this team, as I feel they should be slotted much higher, but it's not up to me. The recently retired Pennington has always struck observers as one of the smartest and more cerebral quarterbacks, so he will potentially become a welcome new face to the NFL on Sunday.
8.) Gus Johnson, Charles Davis, Tim Brewster - Last and least is this crew, and (probably) thankfully they won't even work every NFL week (FOX rarely airs 8 games a Sunday).
So are the announcing pairs really that bad? Or are we lowering our standards for them and we'll get blown away by their performance this year. Who knows. NFL on FOX has a doubleheader Week 1 (September 11) with Falcons-Bears and Giants-Redskins the marquee matchups. (Does it surprise you that two NFC East teams that did not make the playoffs last year will be worked by the "A" crew?)
1.) Joe Buck, Troy Aikman - No change from last year. Or the year before that and the year before that and the year before that, I think you get the picture.
2.) Kenny Albert, Daryl Johnston - No change from last year for FOX's "B" crew, either. And they will still have the (dis)pleasure of Tony Siragusa, who offers nothing in the way of insightful analysis. Oh well.
3.) Thom Brennaman, Brian Billick - Same team, different slot. They've moved up a slot from last year, which is probably no matter. Brennaman will spell Buck during the baseball playoffs. Whee!
4.) Dick Stockton, John Lynch. Stockton was the "C" team announcer last year, who was paired with Charles Davis, who has slipped to 8th in the FOX batting order (and probably for the better). Lynch has moved up 2 slots from last year.
5.) Chris Myers, Tim Ryan - Ryan was the 5th slot analyst last year, but was paired with Sam Rosen, who unfortunately has slipped to 7th. Myers was the 7th slot announcer last year. This and FOX's 8th team (read below) may be the bottom of the barrel of NFL announcing teams for 2011 just because of Myers.
6.) Ron Pitts, Jim Mora Jr. - Pitts was the 6th team announcer last year, but Mora Jr. is a new addition. I see potential in this team.
7.) Sam Rosen, Chad Pennington - Whoo boy, gotta feel sorry for this team, as I feel they should be slotted much higher, but it's not up to me. The recently retired Pennington has always struck observers as one of the smartest and more cerebral quarterbacks, so he will potentially become a welcome new face to the NFL on Sunday.
8.) Gus Johnson, Charles Davis, Tim Brewster - Last and least is this crew, and (probably) thankfully they won't even work every NFL week (FOX rarely airs 8 games a Sunday).
So are the announcing pairs really that bad? Or are we lowering our standards for them and we'll get blown away by their performance this year. Who knows. NFL on FOX has a doubleheader Week 1 (September 11) with Falcons-Bears and Giants-Redskins the marquee matchups. (Does it surprise you that two NFC East teams that did not make the playoffs last year will be worked by the "A" crew?)
27 June 2011
YouTube Finds: Jon Gruden Post -"Snow Bowl" Press Confrence & Al Davis' Post-Gruden Trade Press Confrence
Yes, I'm still alive, believe it or not. There's just not much going on that I feel like talking about, with most of the NFL talk surrounding the frickin' lockout. The only "good" news is Marv Albert has joined the NFL on CBS crew, filling Gus Johnson's vacancy. This is good news providing a.) He does more prominent games than Johnson ever did, perhaps challenging Jim Nantz's A-crew spot (that's wishful thinking). Or b.) He does NOT challenge Greg Gumbel's B-crew spot with Dan Dierdorf. So where does that leave the YES! man? Well, actually, not too many places, unless he indeed becomes the fifth-tier announcer, but I could see them bumping his TNT partner Kevin Harlan down a spot and Albert becoming the 4th tier-announcer. We will see, providing there is football, of course.
Now, onto why I really decided to come out of hiding and post. It's regarding a couple of interesting NFL-related YouTube finds.
The first series of videos is then-Raiders coach Jon Gruden post "Snow Bowl" press conference regarding the call, the game, his relationship with the organization, and his future with the team.
The second is Al Davis' press conference the morning after Gruden's trade with the Buccaneers (I can't exactly find the exact date the trade took place, but from the sounds of things, it was after the Super Bowl).
Now for a little reaction from me. I really think this was a sudden situation, I don't think there was some grand conspiracy behind it. The Bucs fired Tony Dungy, and were in need of a head coach, especially after their primary candidate, Bill Parcells, turned the job down and Steve Mariucci decided to stay in San Francisco. Bucs management appealed to Gruden heart and appealed to Davis' wallet, essentially, and I guess Davis thought that his team could have long-term success without Gruden.
For better or for worse, it the press conferences paint Gruden as a mercenary. Despite two division titles and an improving offense, Gruden wanted to coach with a team his family had connections with and wanted to be near family (his brother Jay was the quarterback of the Arena League Orlando Predators) .
And regarding the conversations between Gruden and Bucs management after the loss in Foxboro, Gruden was best to keep them secret from the media, because at first, even Al Davis was in total disagreement, but they were able to make a deal at the last minute and the rest is history.
Now, for the draft picks the Raiders got as compensation. They got first and second round picks in 2002, which turned into Phillip Buchanon and Langston Walker, who weren't exactly busts (Buchanon was still in the league as of 2010), a first round pick in 2003 (Tyler Brayton, who also was still in the league as of 2010 and also not exactly a bust), and finally, a second-round pick in 2004 (Jake Grove, a lineman, who has been a backup with both the Raiders and the Dolphins. He is still a free agent and did not play with a team in 2010).
So while the draft picks the Raiders got as compensation did not turn out to be jackpot players, they were hardly busts, either.
Some speculate that another reason why Davis was willing to let Gruden go was because Davis did not agree with Gruden "West Coast" style of offense. If that were the truth, then why did Davis say he allowed Gruden to pick his own coordinators? You would think with Davis' influence, if he did not agree with a coordinator's hire, that he would intervene and handpick somebody instead.
Another speculation is that Davis was willing to let Gruden go because he would have been in the last year of his contract in 2002 and that Davis was thinking about not signing Gruden to an extension. That may hold water, but to me that fact is nominal in whatever compelled Davis to let Gruden go.
I think it was the lure of draft picks and money that wooed Davis to allow Gruden to essentially be traded. And it was the beginning of the end of Davis to be able to make rational decisions about hiring and firing coaches.
Now, onto why I really decided to come out of hiding and post. It's regarding a couple of interesting NFL-related YouTube finds.
The first series of videos is then-Raiders coach Jon Gruden post "Snow Bowl" press conference regarding the call, the game, his relationship with the organization, and his future with the team.
The second is Al Davis' press conference the morning after Gruden's trade with the Buccaneers (I can't exactly find the exact date the trade took place, but from the sounds of things, it was after the Super Bowl).
Now for a little reaction from me. I really think this was a sudden situation, I don't think there was some grand conspiracy behind it. The Bucs fired Tony Dungy, and were in need of a head coach, especially after their primary candidate, Bill Parcells, turned the job down and Steve Mariucci decided to stay in San Francisco. Bucs management appealed to Gruden heart and appealed to Davis' wallet, essentially, and I guess Davis thought that his team could have long-term success without Gruden.
For better or for worse, it the press conferences paint Gruden as a mercenary. Despite two division titles and an improving offense, Gruden wanted to coach with a team his family had connections with and wanted to be near family (his brother Jay was the quarterback of the Arena League Orlando Predators) .
And regarding the conversations between Gruden and Bucs management after the loss in Foxboro, Gruden was best to keep them secret from the media, because at first, even Al Davis was in total disagreement, but they were able to make a deal at the last minute and the rest is history.
Now, for the draft picks the Raiders got as compensation. They got first and second round picks in 2002, which turned into Phillip Buchanon and Langston Walker, who weren't exactly busts (Buchanon was still in the league as of 2010), a first round pick in 2003 (Tyler Brayton, who also was still in the league as of 2010 and also not exactly a bust), and finally, a second-round pick in 2004 (Jake Grove, a lineman, who has been a backup with both the Raiders and the Dolphins. He is still a free agent and did not play with a team in 2010).
So while the draft picks the Raiders got as compensation did not turn out to be jackpot players, they were hardly busts, either.
Some speculate that another reason why Davis was willing to let Gruden go was because Davis did not agree with Gruden "West Coast" style of offense. If that were the truth, then why did Davis say he allowed Gruden to pick his own coordinators? You would think with Davis' influence, if he did not agree with a coordinator's hire, that he would intervene and handpick somebody instead.
Another speculation is that Davis was willing to let Gruden go because he would have been in the last year of his contract in 2002 and that Davis was thinking about not signing Gruden to an extension. That may hold water, but to me that fact is nominal in whatever compelled Davis to let Gruden go.
I think it was the lure of draft picks and money that wooed Davis to allow Gruden to essentially be traded. And it was the beginning of the end of Davis to be able to make rational decisions about hiring and firing coaches.
09 May 2011
Gus Johnson To FOX...I Care Why?
I am not a Gus Johnson fan in the least. I don't like his style, I don't like his calls. I don't like that his calls become part of the game. I don't like him, and apparently CBS doesn't, either. Gus, who worked at the eye network for 13 years for their NCAA basketball and NFL telecasts, was a favorite with younger fans a the blogosphere for reasons I'll never comprehend, but that's neither here nor there. What I hate the most his the blogosphere's love-affair for what I see as a sub-par announcer, that's the biggest problem I have.
He was never a top-tier announcer, obviously. In 1998, when football returned to CBS, Johnson and Steve Tasker were paired in the #4 spot on the CBS totem pole. In 1999 and 2000, Johnson was paired with Brent Jones in the #4 spot, where he would stay until 2006, when he and Steve Tasker dropped to the #5 slot (Jones left part-way into the 2005 season). Then the next season, Johnson and Tasker dropped to the #7 slot, where they remained until last season.
It has already been confirmed that Johnson will be lead announcer for FOX's college football telecasts for Pac 12 coverage and the Big 10 Championship Game (so we'll have to be exposed to his screaming every week, it looks like). Now, I'll be the first to admit that FOX's performances in college football have been pretty poor (except for last year's Cotton Bowl, which was handled very well by Kenny Albert and Daryl Johnston).
Alright, now I'll digest and prognosticate Awful Announcing's piece about Johnson moving to FOX. It's not pretty:
He is heading to Fox and appears to be in line to be their #1 college sports announcer. With the Big 10 Championship Game and Pac 12 coverage coming to the network, Gus is a big coup to immediately lift Fox's coverage of college sports. Which, as you may remember, has a checkered history at best... ok, it was awful.
Yes it was a disaster but I think the jury is still out on whether or not Johnson will help FOX's college football coverage (I think FOX was desperate and CBS was desperate to cut ties with Johnson, as they probably should have been).
It appears that Gus' talents will also be used for Fox's NFL coverage, where he would be a welcome addition. Look at the stable of NFL on Fox play by play men - Joe Buck, Kenny Albert, Thom Brennaman, Dick Stockton, Sam Rosen, Ron Pitts, Chris Rose, Chris Myers... it's below average, especially compared to CBS. Gus Johnson should be #2 at worst. Let's not get our hopes up that he will replace Joe Buck anytime soon, but we can at least dream of Gus calling the Super Bowl if there's now no chance at the Final Four.
Actually the only one of those announcers that are really bad are Chris Rose and Chris Myers (Joe Buck isn't terrible but he is nowhere near great). FOX needs analysts, bad. They used to have great analysts (Bentley, Baldinger, Madden, Millen when he was sane), but now, not so good. At best I would put Johnson with Billick at #3 (or #4. It's unclear to me if Stockton and Davis are #3 or #4. Your guess is as good as mine).
Just for shits and giggles, here is my mock NFL on FOX batting order including Gus Johnson:
1 - Albert or Stockton, Aikman
2 - Albert or Stockton, Johnston
3 - Rosen, Ryan
4 - Pitts, Billick
5 - Johnson, Davis
6 - Buck, Lynch
7 - Brennaman, Holt/Mora
A CBS source who wanted Johnson back said not only money, but politics was an issue. The source said some of CBS Sports' college hoops voices were not thrilled with Johnson's rise to March Madness' most popular voice.
As they should have been. CBS had some great, and I mean great announcers for their NCAA Tornament coverage (Lundquist, Albert, Harlan, Brando). Apparently Johnson's co-workers and bosses did like his style and his gradual rise up the CBS totem pole.
Viewers will now tune into Fox's college football and basketball and NFL broadcasts because of Gus Johnson.
I agree with this statement, and this is one of the reasons I don't like Johnson, because as a result of his calls, he becomes bigger than the game, which is something an announcer should not become.
Not being a huge Gus Johnson fan, I don't really care what happens to him...but it seems as though he'll be doing some prominent college games for FOX, but it is unclear where he'll be put in FOX's batting order.
Lastly, here is a mock ordering of CBS commentators:
1 - Nantz, Simms
2 - Gumbel, Dierdorf
3 - Eagle or Criqui, Fouts
4 - Harlan, Wilcots
5/6 - Macatee or Criqui, Gannon or Beuerlien
7 - Dedes or Brando, Cross
I'd like to see either Brando come back to football telecasts and for Criqui to move up (he's still just as sharp as he was 30 years ago). Of course my dream CBS pairing would be for Gumbel and Simms to team up again for the top spot (this was their top team when I started watching football heavily).
Perhaps you're wondering why I don't like Gus Johnson very much? It has to do with a few different things. 1.) He's become bigger than the game. 2.) It worries me that so many people are attracted to him when he doesn't get his stuff right. He is just not a very accurate announcer and relies on the emotion of the moment to help the flow of his calls.
I feel like I'm going into "beating a dead horse" territory so I think I'll stop now.
He was never a top-tier announcer, obviously. In 1998, when football returned to CBS, Johnson and Steve Tasker were paired in the #4 spot on the CBS totem pole. In 1999 and 2000, Johnson was paired with Brent Jones in the #4 spot, where he would stay until 2006, when he and Steve Tasker dropped to the #5 slot (Jones left part-way into the 2005 season). Then the next season, Johnson and Tasker dropped to the #7 slot, where they remained until last season.
It has already been confirmed that Johnson will be lead announcer for FOX's college football telecasts for Pac 12 coverage and the Big 10 Championship Game (so we'll have to be exposed to his screaming every week, it looks like). Now, I'll be the first to admit that FOX's performances in college football have been pretty poor (except for last year's Cotton Bowl, which was handled very well by Kenny Albert and Daryl Johnston).
Alright, now I'll digest and prognosticate Awful Announcing's piece about Johnson moving to FOX. It's not pretty:
He is heading to Fox and appears to be in line to be their #1 college sports announcer. With the Big 10 Championship Game and Pac 12 coverage coming to the network, Gus is a big coup to immediately lift Fox's coverage of college sports. Which, as you may remember, has a checkered history at best... ok, it was awful.
Yes it was a disaster but I think the jury is still out on whether or not Johnson will help FOX's college football coverage (I think FOX was desperate and CBS was desperate to cut ties with Johnson, as they probably should have been).
It appears that Gus' talents will also be used for Fox's NFL coverage, where he would be a welcome addition. Look at the stable of NFL on Fox play by play men - Joe Buck, Kenny Albert, Thom Brennaman, Dick Stockton, Sam Rosen, Ron Pitts, Chris Rose, Chris Myers... it's below average, especially compared to CBS. Gus Johnson should be #2 at worst. Let's not get our hopes up that he will replace Joe Buck anytime soon, but we can at least dream of Gus calling the Super Bowl if there's now no chance at the Final Four.
Actually the only one of those announcers that are really bad are Chris Rose and Chris Myers (Joe Buck isn't terrible but he is nowhere near great). FOX needs analysts, bad. They used to have great analysts (Bentley, Baldinger, Madden, Millen when he was sane), but now, not so good. At best I would put Johnson with Billick at #3 (or #4. It's unclear to me if Stockton and Davis are #3 or #4. Your guess is as good as mine).
Just for shits and giggles, here is my mock NFL on FOX batting order including Gus Johnson:
1 - Albert or Stockton, Aikman
2 - Albert or Stockton, Johnston
3 - Rosen, Ryan
4 - Pitts, Billick
5 - Johnson, Davis
6 - Buck, Lynch
7 - Brennaman, Holt/Mora
A CBS source who wanted Johnson back said not only money, but politics was an issue. The source said some of CBS Sports' college hoops voices were not thrilled with Johnson's rise to March Madness' most popular voice.
As they should have been. CBS had some great, and I mean great announcers for their NCAA Tornament coverage (Lundquist, Albert, Harlan, Brando). Apparently Johnson's co-workers and bosses did like his style and his gradual rise up the CBS totem pole.
Viewers will now tune into Fox's college football and basketball and NFL broadcasts because of Gus Johnson.
I agree with this statement, and this is one of the reasons I don't like Johnson, because as a result of his calls, he becomes bigger than the game, which is something an announcer should not become.
Not being a huge Gus Johnson fan, I don't really care what happens to him...but it seems as though he'll be doing some prominent college games for FOX, but it is unclear where he'll be put in FOX's batting order.
Lastly, here is a mock ordering of CBS commentators:
1 - Nantz, Simms
2 - Gumbel, Dierdorf
3 - Eagle or Criqui, Fouts
4 - Harlan, Wilcots
5/6 - Macatee or Criqui, Gannon or Beuerlien
7 - Dedes or Brando, Cross
I'd like to see either Brando come back to football telecasts and for Criqui to move up (he's still just as sharp as he was 30 years ago). Of course my dream CBS pairing would be for Gumbel and Simms to team up again for the top spot (this was their top team when I started watching football heavily).
Perhaps you're wondering why I don't like Gus Johnson very much? It has to do with a few different things. 1.) He's become bigger than the game. 2.) It worries me that so many people are attracted to him when he doesn't get his stuff right. He is just not a very accurate announcer and relies on the emotion of the moment to help the flow of his calls.
I feel like I'm going into "beating a dead horse" territory so I think I'll stop now.
26 April 2011
TMQ Is Back, And It's Still Just As Bad As Ever
TMQ has returned to mock the mock draft as he does, annoyingly, every year. However he devotes the first third of this column to the NFL labor dispute, only in the way TMQ can, basically saying both sides should have respectfully negotiated somewhere not taxpayer funded and that all these rich fucking crybaby assholes are in it for their own personal gain. Like I said, the only way TMQ can.
The NFL players and owners can't possibly be foolish enough to kill a goose that lays $10 billion worth of golden eggs each year, can they?
You would think not but somehow I think it will.
Don't answer that!
I just did.
As the historian Barbara Tuchman wrote, human history reflects a "march of folly" -- people and institutions go out of their way to do that which sabotages their own interests.
Yes, TMQ is a "march of folly". It is a person and an institution who goes out of its way to sabotage their own interests.
The previous agreement had room for improvement, of course. Health benefits for former players were poor. Bonuses for first-round draft choices were getting out of hand. But a routine negotiation could have handled such matters. There was no need for the owners and players to engage in a public meltdown that may damage both their interests.
I actually agree with this statement. Wholeheartedly, too. The problem is both sides wanted to get the fans involved and start lobbying their platform to them. What's worse is that at the onset of this the fans did not care, but both the players and the owners wanted to get them involved.
Are players and owners a bunch of spoiled crybabies, millionaires arguing with billionaires about who pays for the champagne? The simplest explanation is often correct, and this is the simplest explanation. But there is a crazed dynamic at work -- one that must end, so American taxpayers with a median household income of $53,000 can stop subsidizing federal courtroom time for wealthy crybabies to shout at each other. Here's what is happening:
This is a very cryptic way of saying, well, nothing.
That left the bossypants cohort of NFL owners smarting, wanting revenge on someone. Vying for revenge against your own players -- who are the product; not many people come to stadiums to watch the owners -- doesn't make a great deal of sense. But human history is a march of folly.
I seriously don't they wanted revenge. Perhaps they wanted to win, sure, but revenge? Sounds kind of crazy.
Believing they had "lost" the 2006 bargaining round, some NFL owners said words to the effect of, "Let's hire this [expletive] Batterman and crush the NFLPA."
Oh, hyperbole. I doubt this quote was every actually said.
Nevertheless, in 2008 the owners hired Batterman as labor counsel. He laid out a plan to create a lockout, and that's what happened. What does he care if an NFL season is canceled, and the league's popularity declines? He gets the same fee regardless.
Do you really think that the owners are that greedy that they will jeopardize their income (the team playing games, fans filling seats, selling beer, merchandise, etc) just to "win" the labor dispute. I actually don't think so but I'm sure some (Easterbrook included) do. However an outside counsel probably does not care since he'll get paid as Easterbrook said.
On the labor side: Upshaw, a former NFL player, was a gifted negotiator -- he won free agency for NFL athletes, steadily rising pay for them, and benefits for retired players. Because he'd been an NFL star, he was secure in his manhood. Because he'd played in the league, in all things he put the interests of the players first.
Actually the more and more I read in to this the more I side with the owners and not the players. According to TMQ, Smith and a few players (that were said to represent all players) filed a lawsuit that if it success would spell the end of the draft, free agency, and salary cap - scary thought.
Basically it stipulates that high salary players will continue to get paid their high salary, if not more (double their salary, perhaps), while less well-off players' salaries will decline.
I actually agree with TMQ's "The path to the solution" paragraph, but I think it's wishful thinking. I don't think the litigation will escape the courtroom.
What TMQ finds worrisome about Newton is … he played for a BCS title team. That's a major negative; see below. But first, TMQ's annual mock of mock drafts.
Only TMQ would not equate success with success. We'll see. If Newton is a bust, he's a bust. I don't see why it matters that he was a one-hit wonder or if his integrity is questioned (only by moralists like TMQ).
His next segment is what worries me about TMQ. Deadspin hit it on their rant about TMQ's rant about President Obama filling out a bracket. "This is the worst kind of sports column: irrelevant, pedantic, and completely in love with its own righteousness." That, my friends, is TMQ each week.
And then we get TMQ's short-sighted observations and pronouncements about Cam Newton.
Is there more to his recruiting scandal? It's easy to believe a starry-eyed teenager would not grasp that NCAA rules forbid cash in return for signing a college letter of intent. It's hard to believe Newton's father did not grasp this, and it's really hard to believe the full truth of the matter has come out. Any team that drafts Newton runs a risk the NCAA will at some point void Auburn's 2010 season, and Newton will return his Heisman. If this happens, a wave of negativity would wash over a franchise that's just given Newton a check for a staggering amount of money.
Only TMQ would continue to pound this into the ground because for some reason he has an axe to grind with Newton's character. There really is nothing else to say here other than TMQ I'm sure is the only person who still thinks this is an issue.
Why did he leave Florida? Newton was at three colleges in three autumns -- University of Florida, then Blinn, then Auburn. The situation at Florida seemed ideal for Newton: backing up Tim Tebow, learning from a master in Urban Meyer, with the likelihood that as a junior, he would become the face of one of college football's best-run programs. Why did he leave, and suddenly? Not for the challenge of leading Blinn to the NJCAA playoffs. Reports say Newton was about to be expelled from Florida for cheating, which the school will neither confirm nor deny. There's something not right about the whole Florida business.
Maybe because he wanted to play, perhaps? Just maybe? He knew that while Tebow was still there he wouldn't have a chance at starting. And maybe perhaps he knew that if he wanted a chance in the NFL he had to get out of Meyer stupid whatever you call it offense and get into a pro-style offense. Again, I don't know why TMQ has such an axe to grind with Newton.
He played for a BCS title team. In his one year at Auburn, Newton was surrounded by premium athletes. Newton had stars to hand off to and stars to throw to. The blocking was exceptional. Oh mighty football gods, if I am reincarnated as a quarterback, put me on a stacked team.
Most of those quaterbacks mentioned above played at football factories or something close to it, they didnt' exactly have it the hard way. If teams were smarted, they would draft Newton to a team with either a veteran quarterback or a coach who can help and further coach Newton to NFL standards. And I wouldn't exactly say Vince Young's career is solid.
The NFL players and owners can't possibly be foolish enough to kill a goose that lays $10 billion worth of golden eggs each year, can they?
You would think not but somehow I think it will.
Don't answer that!
I just did.
As the historian Barbara Tuchman wrote, human history reflects a "march of folly" -- people and institutions go out of their way to do that which sabotages their own interests.
Yes, TMQ is a "march of folly". It is a person and an institution who goes out of its way to sabotage their own interests.
The previous agreement had room for improvement, of course. Health benefits for former players were poor. Bonuses for first-round draft choices were getting out of hand. But a routine negotiation could have handled such matters. There was no need for the owners and players to engage in a public meltdown that may damage both their interests.
I actually agree with this statement. Wholeheartedly, too. The problem is both sides wanted to get the fans involved and start lobbying their platform to them. What's worse is that at the onset of this the fans did not care, but both the players and the owners wanted to get them involved.
Are players and owners a bunch of spoiled crybabies, millionaires arguing with billionaires about who pays for the champagne? The simplest explanation is often correct, and this is the simplest explanation. But there is a crazed dynamic at work -- one that must end, so American taxpayers with a median household income of $53,000 can stop subsidizing federal courtroom time for wealthy crybabies to shout at each other. Here's what is happening:
This is a very cryptic way of saying, well, nothing.
That left the bossypants cohort of NFL owners smarting, wanting revenge on someone. Vying for revenge against your own players -- who are the product; not many people come to stadiums to watch the owners -- doesn't make a great deal of sense. But human history is a march of folly.
I seriously don't they wanted revenge. Perhaps they wanted to win, sure, but revenge? Sounds kind of crazy.
Believing they had "lost" the 2006 bargaining round, some NFL owners said words to the effect of, "Let's hire this [expletive] Batterman and crush the NFLPA."
Oh, hyperbole. I doubt this quote was every actually said.
Nevertheless, in 2008 the owners hired Batterman as labor counsel. He laid out a plan to create a lockout, and that's what happened. What does he care if an NFL season is canceled, and the league's popularity declines? He gets the same fee regardless.
Do you really think that the owners are that greedy that they will jeopardize their income (the team playing games, fans filling seats, selling beer, merchandise, etc) just to "win" the labor dispute. I actually don't think so but I'm sure some (Easterbrook included) do. However an outside counsel probably does not care since he'll get paid as Easterbrook said.
On the labor side: Upshaw, a former NFL player, was a gifted negotiator -- he won free agency for NFL athletes, steadily rising pay for them, and benefits for retired players. Because he'd been an NFL star, he was secure in his manhood. Because he'd played in the league, in all things he put the interests of the players first.
After Upshaw's death, DeMaurice Smith was elected head of the union. He is the second supervillain in this story. Smith never played pro sports -- for that matter, had no background in labor law or sports economics. He worked in the Justice Department, then became a litigator for Patton Boggs, a leading legal firm. The first impulse of litigators is to create conflicts; the second, to sustain them. The longer and nastier a conflict is, the more a litigator benefits, in fees and in personal importance.
I actually agree with this statement. It makes sense that the man representing the players should have, well, been a player. He gets paid regardless of what which side wins.Actually the more and more I read in to this the more I side with the owners and not the players. According to TMQ, Smith and a few players (that were said to represent all players) filed a lawsuit that if it success would spell the end of the draft, free agency, and salary cap - scary thought.
Basically it stipulates that high salary players will continue to get paid their high salary, if not more (double their salary, perhaps), while less well-off players' salaries will decline.
I actually agree with TMQ's "The path to the solution" paragraph, but I think it's wishful thinking. I don't think the litigation will escape the courtroom.
What TMQ finds worrisome about Newton is … he played for a BCS title team. That's a major negative; see below. But first, TMQ's annual mock of mock drafts.
Only TMQ would not equate success with success. We'll see. If Newton is a bust, he's a bust. I don't see why it matters that he was a one-hit wonder or if his integrity is questioned (only by moralists like TMQ).
His next segment is what worries me about TMQ. Deadspin hit it on their rant about TMQ's rant about President Obama filling out a bracket. "This is the worst kind of sports column: irrelevant, pedantic, and completely in love with its own righteousness." That, my friends, is TMQ each week.
And then we get TMQ's short-sighted observations and pronouncements about Cam Newton.
Is there more to his recruiting scandal? It's easy to believe a starry-eyed teenager would not grasp that NCAA rules forbid cash in return for signing a college letter of intent. It's hard to believe Newton's father did not grasp this, and it's really hard to believe the full truth of the matter has come out. Any team that drafts Newton runs a risk the NCAA will at some point void Auburn's 2010 season, and Newton will return his Heisman. If this happens, a wave of negativity would wash over a franchise that's just given Newton a check for a staggering amount of money.
Only TMQ would continue to pound this into the ground because for some reason he has an axe to grind with Newton's character. There really is nothing else to say here other than TMQ I'm sure is the only person who still thinks this is an issue.
Why did he leave Florida? Newton was at three colleges in three autumns -- University of Florida, then Blinn, then Auburn. The situation at Florida seemed ideal for Newton: backing up Tim Tebow, learning from a master in Urban Meyer, with the likelihood that as a junior, he would become the face of one of college football's best-run programs. Why did he leave, and suddenly? Not for the challenge of leading Blinn to the NJCAA playoffs. Reports say Newton was about to be expelled from Florida for cheating, which the school will neither confirm nor deny. There's something not right about the whole Florida business.
Maybe because he wanted to play, perhaps? Just maybe? He knew that while Tebow was still there he wouldn't have a chance at starting. And maybe perhaps he knew that if he wanted a chance in the NFL he had to get out of Meyer stupid whatever you call it offense and get into a pro-style offense. Again, I don't know why TMQ has such an axe to grind with Newton.
He played for a BCS title team. In his one year at Auburn, Newton was surrounded by premium athletes. Newton had stars to hand off to and stars to throw to. The blocking was exceptional. Oh mighty football gods, if I am reincarnated as a quarterback, put me on a stacked team.
Of the 11 BCS title-winning quarterbacks to enter the NFL, all were hot stuff in college; nine did little in the pros: Tee Martin, Chris Weinke, Josh Heupel, Ken Dorsey, Craig Krenzel, Matt Mauck, Matt Leinart, Chris Leak, Matt Flynn. The 10th, Tebow, has been in the NFL only one season; the sole (albeit current free agent) NFL quarterback with both a BCS title and a solid pro career is Vince Young. Peyton Manning, Drew Brees, Aaron Rodgers, Tom Brady, Ben Roethlisberger, Michael Vick, Matt Ryan, Josh Freeman, Philip Rivers, Joe Flacco -- none started on college title teams. They learned the hard way.
Newton sure looked great in 2010, but he looked great in a situation that would have made any quarterback look great. That's the big red flag.
Most of those quaterbacks mentioned above played at football factories or something close to it, they didnt' exactly have it the hard way. If teams were smarted, they would draft Newton to a team with either a veteran quarterback or a coach who can help and further coach Newton to NFL standards. And I wouldn't exactly say Vince Young's career is solid.
22 April 2011
2011 NFL TV Schedules Are Out...
...providing there is a 2011 NFL schedule, of course, but one can hope, right?
Let's start with the network that stunk it up in the regular season but shone in the playoffs capped off with great Super Bowl coverage - Fox
Week 1 they have a doubleheader, as always. Of the four games in the 4:15 spot the only one I forsee Buck and Aikman doing (if they are still the top team, which I assume they will be) is N.Y. Giants @ Washington.
Week 2 they have the singleheader capped off with Chicago @ New Orleans.
Week 3 is a doubleheader weekend - Green Bay @ Chicago. Good chunk of the country should see Atlanta @ Tampa.
Week 4 doesn't have great games for Fox on this singleheader weekend. Suppose Joebaby and Co. will do New Orleans @ Jacksonville. Could see them doing San Francisco @ Philadelphia, too.
Week 5, another singleheader weekend. I predict Joebaby and Co. at the Meadowlands for Seattle-N.Y. Giants.
Week 6 is a huge doubleheader weekend for Fox, as they're hosting the Patriots going up against the Cowboys.
They have another doubleheader weekend for Week 7. They're two games are St. Louis @ Dallas and Green Bay @ Minnesota. Chicago-Tampa Bay will be in London that Sunday as well (in the early slot) so Joebaby and Co. possibly will be there.
Week 8 is a fairly mediocre-looking singleheader Sunday. New Orleans @ St. Louis
For Week 9 the Giants will be facing the Patriots at 4:15, however, Green Bay is also at San Diego late.
(From this point on, games fall under flex scheduling)
For Week 10 they have a crappy doubleheader game (N.Y. Giants @ San Francisco). New Orleans @ Atlanta early, though.
Since Fox loves the NFC East they will probably do Dallas @ Washington for Week 11, but they could also do Tampa @ Green Bay.
Week 12 (other than being Thanksgiving) looks pretty crappy:
Let's start with the network that stunk it up in the regular season but shone in the playoffs capped off with great Super Bowl coverage - Fox
Week 1 they have a doubleheader, as always. Of the four games in the 4:15 spot the only one I forsee Buck and Aikman doing (if they are still the top team, which I assume they will be) is N.Y. Giants @ Washington.
Week 2 they have the singleheader capped off with Chicago @ New Orleans.
Week 3 is a doubleheader weekend - Green Bay @ Chicago. Good chunk of the country should see Atlanta @ Tampa.
Week 4 doesn't have great games for Fox on this singleheader weekend. Suppose Joebaby and Co. will do New Orleans @ Jacksonville. Could see them doing San Francisco @ Philadelphia, too.
Week 5, another singleheader weekend. I predict Joebaby and Co. at the Meadowlands for Seattle-N.Y. Giants.
Week 6 is a huge doubleheader weekend for Fox, as they're hosting the Patriots going up against the Cowboys.
They have another doubleheader weekend for Week 7. They're two games are St. Louis @ Dallas and Green Bay @ Minnesota. Chicago-Tampa Bay will be in London that Sunday as well (in the early slot) so Joebaby and Co. possibly will be there.
Week 8 is a fairly mediocre-looking singleheader Sunday. New Orleans @ St. Louis
For Week 9 the Giants will be facing the Patriots at 4:15, however, Green Bay is also at San Diego late.
(From this point on, games fall under flex scheduling)
For Week 10 they have a crappy doubleheader game (N.Y. Giants @ San Francisco). New Orleans @ Atlanta early, though.
Since Fox loves the NFC East they will probably do Dallas @ Washington for Week 11, but they could also do Tampa @ Green Bay.
Week 12 (other than being Thanksgiving) looks pretty crappy:
1:00 PM Minnesota @ Atlanta Arizona @ St. Louis Carolina @ Indianapolis Tampa Bay @ Tennessee
4:05 PM Washington @ Seattle Chicago @ Oakland
It's a toss-up, anyone's guess.
Week 13 looks to be a good doubleheader weekend with Green Bay at the Giants. Depending on what SNF has this game could be flexed though.
I stared at Week 14 for awhile and got nothing:
It's a toss-up, anyone's guess.
Week 13 looks to be a good doubleheader weekend with Green Bay at the Giants. Depending on what SNF has this game could be flexed though.
I stared at Week 14 for awhile and got nothing:
1:00 PM Minnesota @ Detroit Atlanta @ Carolina Philadelphia @ Miami Tampa Bay @ Jacksonville New Orleans @ Tennessee
4:05 PM San Francisco @ Arizona Chicago @ Denver
Week 15, Joebaby and Co. visit the Meadowlands (again) to for Redskins and Giants. (Any NFC East showdown is a good bet to be visited by Joebaby and Co.)
Week 16 (Christmas Eve), Philly-Dallas for the doubleheader.
Week 17 (New Year's Day) has Seattle @ Arizona as the sole doubleheader game (both networks usually get crappy games due to flex scheduling). Depending on how the Cowboys are this year Joebaby and Co. may do Dallas-N.Y. Giants early.
Now for CBS. It has been announced that Jim Nantz and Phil Simms will continue as the lead announcing team for the eye network. Now to the games.
Due to their coverage of the U.S. Open, CBS has not had a doubleheader since 2000, and this year is no different. It's been officially announced in the press release I saw that Pittsburgh-Baltimore will be their lead game.
Their first doubleheader game on Week 2 is San Diego-New England.
Week 3 is a singleheader weekend. My crystal ball says Nantz and Co. will do Jets @ Raiders.
They have a doubleheader Week 4. Your choices are Denver @ Green Bay, New England @ Oakland, and Miami @ San Diego. They could do the GB game to get the Super Bowl champs on.
They have another doubleheader Week 5 with Jets @ Patriots.
Singleheader for Week 6 (and only five games, oddly). I'd say either Bills-Giants or Jags-Steelers.
Week 7 is another singleheader Sunday capped off with San Diego-N.Y. Jets.
Week 8 is a bigtime doubleheader - New England @ Pittsburgh.
Week 9 is a pretty mediocre singleheader Sunday. I suppose they'll do Jets @ Bills.
Week 10 is another singleheader Sunday. Usually Nantz and Co. do Cowboys games when they're on CBS. In which case they'll do Bills-Cowboys, but for fear of doing two straight Bills games (and if the Jags are any good), they could do Colts vs. Jags.
Week 11 - San Diego-Chicago. That was easy.
Week 12. Your choices are New England-Philadelphia or Denver @ San Diego at 4:15.
There are three games involving NFC teams for Week 13: N.Y Jets @ Washington, Kansas City @ Chicago, and Denver @ Minnesota. Nantz and Co. will probably do KC-Chicago.
Even though Week 14 is a doubleheader Sunday, I could see Nantz and Co. doing Indy @ Baltimore early.
Week 15 is also a doubleheader capped off with the Jets at Philadelphia.
Week 16 (still Christmas Eve). It's a crap shoot:
Denver @ Buffalo 1:00
NFL Kickoff: New Orleans Saints at Green Bay Packers
Week 1: Dallas Cowboys at New York Jets
Week 2: Philadelphia Eagles at Atlanta Falcons
Week 3: Pittsburgh Steelers at Indianapolis Colts
Week 4: New York Jets at Baltimore Ravens
Week 5: Green Bay Packers at Atlanta Falcons
Week 6: Minnesota Vikings at Chicago Bears
Week 7: Indianapolis Colts at New Orleans Saints
Week 8: Dallas Cowboys at Philadelphia Eagles
Week 9: Baltimore Ravens at Pittsburgh Steelers
Week 10: New England Patriots at New York Jets
*Week 11: Philadelphia Eagles at New York Giants
*Week 12: Pittsburgh Steelers at Kansas City Chiefs
*Week 13: Indianapolis Colts at New England Patriots
*Week 14: New York Giants at Dallas Cowboys
*Week 15: Baltimore Ravens at San Diego Chargers
Week 16: Chicago Bears at Green Bay Packers (Christmas)
*Week 17: TBA
This schedule is absolutely stacked, even Week 6 Vikings @ Chicago.
Here is the MNF schedule, certainly not as strong as the SNF one.
Week 1: New England @ Miami, Oakland @ Denver
Week 2: St. Louis @ New York Giants
Week 3: Washington @ Dallas
Week 4: Indianapolis @ Tampa Bay
Week 5: Chicago @ Detroit
Week 6: Miami @ New York Jets
Week 7: Baltimore @ Jacksonville
Week 8: San Diego @ Kansas City
Week 9: Chicago @ Philadelphia
Week 10: Minnesota @ Green Bay
Week 11: Kansas City @ New England
Week 12: New York Giants @ New Orleans
Week 13: San Diego @ Jacksonville
Week 14: St. Louis @ Seattle
Week 15: Pittsburgh @ San Francisco
Week 16: Atlanta @ New Orleans
Week 15, Joebaby and Co. visit the Meadowlands (again) to for Redskins and Giants. (Any NFC East showdown is a good bet to be visited by Joebaby and Co.)
Week 16 (Christmas Eve), Philly-Dallas for the doubleheader.
Week 17 (New Year's Day) has Seattle @ Arizona as the sole doubleheader game (both networks usually get crappy games due to flex scheduling). Depending on how the Cowboys are this year Joebaby and Co. may do Dallas-N.Y. Giants early.
Now for CBS. It has been announced that Jim Nantz and Phil Simms will continue as the lead announcing team for the eye network. Now to the games.
Due to their coverage of the U.S. Open, CBS has not had a doubleheader since 2000, and this year is no different. It's been officially announced in the press release I saw that Pittsburgh-Baltimore will be their lead game.
Their first doubleheader game on Week 2 is San Diego-New England.
Week 3 is a singleheader weekend. My crystal ball says Nantz and Co. will do Jets @ Raiders.
They have a doubleheader Week 4. Your choices are Denver @ Green Bay, New England @ Oakland, and Miami @ San Diego. They could do the GB game to get the Super Bowl champs on.
They have another doubleheader Week 5 with Jets @ Patriots.
Singleheader for Week 6 (and only five games, oddly). I'd say either Bills-Giants or Jags-Steelers.
Week 7 is another singleheader Sunday capped off with San Diego-N.Y. Jets.
Week 8 is a bigtime doubleheader - New England @ Pittsburgh.
Week 9 is a pretty mediocre singleheader Sunday. I suppose they'll do Jets @ Bills.
Week 10 is another singleheader Sunday. Usually Nantz and Co. do Cowboys games when they're on CBS. In which case they'll do Bills-Cowboys, but for fear of doing two straight Bills games (and if the Jags are any good), they could do Colts vs. Jags.
Week 11 - San Diego-Chicago. That was easy.
Week 12. Your choices are New England-Philadelphia or Denver @ San Diego at 4:15.
There are three games involving NFC teams for Week 13: N.Y Jets @ Washington, Kansas City @ Chicago, and Denver @ Minnesota. Nantz and Co. will probably do KC-Chicago.
Even though Week 14 is a doubleheader Sunday, I could see Nantz and Co. doing Indy @ Baltimore early.
Week 15 is also a doubleheader capped off with the Jets at Philadelphia.
Week 16 (still Christmas Eve). It's a crap shoot:
Denver @ Buffalo 1:00
Miami @ New England 1:00
Cleveland @ Baltimore 1:00
Jacksonville @ Tennessee 1:00
Oakland @ Kansas City 1:00
San Diego @ Detroit 4:05
I have no idea why Jax-Ten is all boldface and huge.
And for Week 17 they have the doubleheader offerings of KC @ Denver or San Diego @ Oakland.
NFL Kickoff: New Orleans Saints at Green Bay Packers
Week 1: Dallas Cowboys at New York Jets
Week 2: Philadelphia Eagles at Atlanta Falcons
Week 3: Pittsburgh Steelers at Indianapolis Colts
Week 4: New York Jets at Baltimore Ravens
Week 5: Green Bay Packers at Atlanta Falcons
Week 6: Minnesota Vikings at Chicago Bears
Week 7: Indianapolis Colts at New Orleans Saints
Week 8: Dallas Cowboys at Philadelphia Eagles
Week 9: Baltimore Ravens at Pittsburgh Steelers
Week 10: New England Patriots at New York Jets
*Week 11: Philadelphia Eagles at New York Giants
*Week 12: Pittsburgh Steelers at Kansas City Chiefs
*Week 13: Indianapolis Colts at New England Patriots
*Week 14: New York Giants at Dallas Cowboys
*Week 15: Baltimore Ravens at San Diego Chargers
Week 16: Chicago Bears at Green Bay Packers (Christmas)
*Week 17: TBA
This schedule is absolutely stacked, even Week 6 Vikings @ Chicago.
Here is the MNF schedule, certainly not as strong as the SNF one.
Week 1: New England @ Miami, Oakland @ Denver
Week 2: St. Louis @ New York Giants
Week 3: Washington @ Dallas
Week 4: Indianapolis @ Tampa Bay
Week 5: Chicago @ Detroit
Week 6: Miami @ New York Jets
Week 7: Baltimore @ Jacksonville
Week 8: San Diego @ Kansas City
Week 9: Chicago @ Philadelphia
Week 10: Minnesota @ Green Bay
Week 11: Kansas City @ New England
Week 12: New York Giants @ New Orleans
Week 13: San Diego @ Jacksonville
Week 14: St. Louis @ Seattle
Week 15: Pittsburgh @ San Francisco
Week 16: Atlanta @ New Orleans
31 March 2011
Tim Brown Ensenuates That Bill Callahan Changed Raiders' Super Bowl XXXVII Gameplan Out Of Respect For Jon Gruden
It has been known for some time (probably since the game was played) that Bill Callahan changed the Raiders gameplan for their Super Bowl XXXVII bout against the Bucs, as this reveals.
The cliffnotes version of Brown's speech is that the Raiders went into the game with a running gameplan, and that the team had practiced that up to the Friday before the game. On that Friday, he totally switched the gameplan. Now, the Raiders are going to throw it 60 times against a defense that is primed for stopping the pass? And you know what? I believe Brown when he said that Callahan changed the Raiders' gameplan out of respect for Jon Gruden, and that it was one of the contributing factors for Barret Robbins' disappearance.
One would have to wonder, with the Raiders offense that dominant throughout the season and for putting up such a stinker performance in the Super Bowl...
The cliffnotes version of Brown's speech is that the Raiders went into the game with a running gameplan, and that the team had practiced that up to the Friday before the game. On that Friday, he totally switched the gameplan. Now, the Raiders are going to throw it 60 times against a defense that is primed for stopping the pass? And you know what? I believe Brown when he said that Callahan changed the Raiders' gameplan out of respect for Jon Gruden, and that it was one of the contributing factors for Barret Robbins' disappearance.
One would have to wonder, with the Raiders offense that dominant throughout the season and for putting up such a stinker performance in the Super Bowl...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
