What The Hell Is Colin Cowherd Talking About?

Colin Cowherd, to me, is a very polarizing ESPN figure. People either love him to death or hate his guts. Many used to be fans of his but now are not (I fall into this category). Now, before going on, if I were to run into him somewhere, I wouldn't call him an asshole or try to fight him or anything. In fact, there was a time he did his show from Columbus and I thought about going down except the weather was horrid that day, so I didn't.

He started off today's show basically by saying that fans hold onto their team's losses for too long and that players don't really care about losses at all because, besides, it's their job. I don't know if I've ever heard a more bullshit statement in my life than that. The hell they do! Players lament about losses, especially in big games, alot, especially in the correct setting. When they can't sleep I am willing to bet they will go back and think about that interception or that missed tackle that cost them the game. I bet they do, and if they don't, I will be the first to admit that I am wrong, but still, Cowherd's statement smells of bullshit to me.

He then went on to say that the reason the Jay Cutler might have quit on the Bears storyline caught on was because players and fans were making their opinions as such on Twitter, but that their arguments don't hold water to people over 40, because people over 40 have perspective and young people don't and that people over 40 don't know how to use or don't understand Twitter. OK. Fine. I agree with the first part of the argument. People were reading too much into Cutler's demeanor and it also didn't help that anybody from the Bears or Fox provided us with the real info. (By the way, I just threw out 40 as a blanket age. 'Herd said something like "a 45-year-old guy with perspective, a 54, 64-year old business owner") What I have a problem with is his multiple generalizations and stereotypes about...everything. I don't have a Twitter account and I'm 19. Perhaps I'm an outlier but none of my friends who are around the same age as me have Twitter accounts, either. Again, we may be outliers but so-be it.

Getting back to Cowherd, here are my main beefs with him:
1.) Making fun of his listeners, emailers, and callers for calling in and emailing for so much as caring about sports - sort of kills the point of having sports talk in the first place.
3.) His cutsie cultural references and motifs to cover up no real analysis whatsoever.
4.) His claims that's he's progressive only to use stereotypes and generalizations to get his point across ("Overweight people have low self-worth, that's why they're overweight." -- referring to Mark Mangino)
5.) His asinine opinions on the NBA and market size (listen to his show now that football is winding down and you'll figure out what I'm referring to).

I realize this whole post is sort of like letting the terrorists win or letting the playground bully get the best of me, but 'Herd's open today pushed me over the limit, and I just had to write about it. 'Herd used to be cool. He introduced compelling arguments and opinions, but that was several years ago when he was not as prominent. I mean, yeah, he told a caller to shoot themselves and said that all southern white males agree with each other, but, I don't know, it was less annoying. That all changed when he got a TV show. Then I think it all went to his head and he just sort of enjoyed listening to himself talk too much, and wants to take stances just to create controversy and hoopla (perhaps management is making him do this to garner more ratings, but I don't think so).

OK. I think I've decompressed now. Thanks as always for reading.

Jim Cornelison Sings "The Star-Spangled Banner"

As you've probably heard already, Jim Cornelison sang two of the best renditions of "The Star-Spangled Banner" ever heard at both the NFC Divisional Playoff in Chicago and the NFC Championship Game. Well, in case you haven't seen it, or want to see it again and again and again, here it is from the Divisional Playoff Game:

Commentator Awards 2010 Follow-Up Post

I have a couple of follow-up thoughts about my awards. Overall, I'm pretty happy with them. Although I feel I should have switched Fouts and Eagle and Simms and Nantz. Throughout the postseason, I have not been overly-impressed with Nantz and Simms, while I actually think Buck is honing in more on his skills and not being so monotonous. Unfortunately I missed the Ravens-Steelers game that Gumbel and Dierdorf did. And obviously I did not do a review of the second NBC team that did the Saints-Seahawks Wild Card game or one for the NFL Network team of Bob Papa, Matt Millen and Joe Thiesmann, but I'll take a wild guess and say they're pretty bad because of Millen and Theismann. I'll close with this, if you tune out Siragusa, Albert and Johnston are a good team, trust me. Just mute your set when "Goose" speaks. And is Dick Stockton really that terrible?

Looking Back On My Pre-Season Predictions

Sorry about all the typos and mssing words and shit from my last post. That wasn't one of my better days. Anyway, I'd like to take a look back at my pre-season predictions from this NFL season and see just how good I was at picking the records of all 32 teams.

Bengals (10-6) - Actual: (4-12)

Man, was I wrong! But really, who forsaw the Bengals being one of the worst teams in the league this year?

Ravens (11-5) - Actual: (12-4)

Only one game off. Not too bad.

Steelers (6-10) - Actual: (12-4)

I guess I read too much into Ben Roethlisberger being suspended and his off-the-field issues last offeseason and that it would hamper their record or I forgot that Mike Tomlin is one of league's best, perhaps underrated, coaches.

Browns (4-12) - Actual: (5-11)

Surprisingly the Browns did better than what I actually predicted. While we were all expecting a big year from Jerome Harrison, he was cut and Peyton Hillis ran well for them instead. In the end though, sloppy and inconsistent quarterback play led to another lost season and another coach.

Colts (13-3) - Actual: (10-6)

Never before has Peyton Manning had to do so much in a season for the Colts. It seems as though they're always banged up but missing Clark and the Jaguars having a good season shook them up a bit. I figured, hey, with all this talent, how bad would they be?

Texans (11-5) - Actual: (6-10)

It seems like year after year under Gary Kubiak we think this will be their year...and it wasn't...again. Even with the NFL's leading rusher they could not garner a winning season. They do have players who play under the title of "defense", right? Perhaps a coaching aquisition in the offseason will change this.

Titans (6-10) - Actual: (6-10)

I'm right for once! The Titans shortcomings were terribly obvious before the season and during it too. I can't this was a great prediction on my part, just because what was there was blatantly obvious, but perhaps I'm being too modest.

Jaguars (9-7) - Actual: (8-8)

One game off here. Evidently the loss of Holt was not a big deal because Lewis, Walker and Thomas did so well for them, and of course there's Jones-Drew.

Patriots (12-4) - Actual: (14-2)

In the games where I said they might have issues they won. (raises right hand) "I, state your name, will never underestimate a Bill Belichick defense again." (puts hand down)

Jets (11-5) - Actual: (11-5)

Let's see, they blitzed the Colts in last year's championship game and lost. In this year's Wild Card game against the Colts, they played coverage, and won (granted on a miracle last-second field goal). I'm not trying to sound like Gregg Easterbrook here, but I am seeing a pattern. "Let's go eat a goddamn snack."

I know Rex Ryan said it's personal against Peyton Manning, and while I'm not a huge fan of his trash talk, I can't imagine the feeling as a defense winning a playoff game against the league's best quarterback, especially when Revis covered Reggie Wayne like a blanket, holding him to one reception for one yard.

Dolphins (9-7) - Actual: (7-9)

What happened (to the Dolphins)? That's all I have to say.

Bills (3-13) - Actual: (4-12)

I guess I underestimated their badness? Although Ryan Fitzpatrick did not have a bad year at quarterback. That is about the only postive about this team.

Chargers (13-3) - Actual: (9-7)

The AFC West wound up being one of the more competative divisions in the league this year. A slow start by the Chargers was anticipated, however that Week 16 loss to the Bengals really hurt their playoff chances. I stll think its hilarious that everybody thinks that Norv Turner is a lame duck coach despite the fact that he is an offensive genius and has a 41-23 record with The Bolts.

Raiders (7-9) - Actual: (8-8)

I give myself a pat on the back for this one. It was bound to happen though, as over the past season or so the Raiders have looked improved (and naturally, it's all over). I guess it wasn't an earth-shattering prediction to have the Raiders win more than three or four games. I mean, yeah, they lost to Tennessee and Arizona and San Francisco, but still, it was nice when it lasted (undefeated within the division). And once again Al Davis has screwed the team by firing Tom Cable, but that's Davis. The Raiders as a franchise will go nowhere with him as the head honcho.

Broncos (6-10) - Actual: (4-12)

Perhaps I gave them too many wins with six, considering I basically said their players suck and they have a hard schedule. About the only bright spot was Tim Tebow starting, but other than that, a lost season.

Chiefs (7-9) - Actual: (10-6)

They had a really easy schedule in 2010, as they played the NFC West in their intra-conference games. They have good coaches though, although they'll lose one - Charlie Weis - to the college ranks.

Vikings (10-6) - Actual: (6-10)

Tough call on this one. I honestly thought Brett Favre was smarter than he actually is and that he would not play because he was old and still not 100% but he played anyway, which lead to alot of ugly throws, picks, and more injuries and pain. When I said this is Adrian Peterson's team, I meant to say this should be Adrian Peterson's team. Really, it should. About the only positive of this season is through Childress' firing they seem to have found their next coach.

Packers (12-4) - Actual: (10-6)

Well their offensive line still gave up way too many sacks but their defense has come together and they're still a Super Bowl contender.

Bears (8-8) - Actual: (11-5)

I said the Bears could go either way. They could be good or they could be bad, so I picked 8-8 just to be safe. Obviously they were good and they are in a mostly win-win situation with Mike Martz at coordinator.

Lions (2-14) - Actual: (6-10)

Did anybody notice they won their last four games? Perhaps they'll ride this streak into next season?

Saints (11-5) - Actual: (11-5)

I'M RIGHT! OK, they couldn't run the ball but they still played good defense. Somehow it seems fitting that they lost their playoff game even though Drew Bress threw 60 passes for over 400 yards and did not throw any interceptions.

Falcons (10-6) - Actual: (13-3)

They are mysterious, but basically what I said about them in my pre-season post still rings true, which is just plain scary.

Panthers (8-8) - Actual: (2-14)

Fail pick here. I really thought Matt Moore would build on the success of 2009, have a average to decent season, and help Jimmy Clausen develop...however that was not the case. Steve Smith, you still here?

Buccaneers (1-15) - Actual: (10-6)

I'll be a man and admit I was wrong. Clearly I vastly underestimated thier coaching staff in developing Josh Freeman and their defense played solidly.

Cowboys (13-3) - Actual: (6-10)

Me being wrong is really starting to get old. There is a complex series of reasons why the Cowboys sucked this year and basically all of them lead back to Jerry Jones. Although it seems, for awhile at least, that he's come to his senses and hired a coach that can get his players in line. However in three or four years he'll probably fire Jason Garrett for being too mean and hire another peachpuff coach. Tony Romo actually being healthy would probably win them a game or two, too, so there's that.

Giants (9-7) - Actual: (10-6)

One game off ain't so bad. As long as Eli Manning is the quarterback and Tom Coughlin is the head coach, the Giants should be okay. Their defense is nothing to scoff at either.

Eagles (7-9) - Actual: (10-6)

Well I'm a dumbass thinking them losing Donovan McNabb would hurt them, however I'm still not convinced Vick is a franchise quarterback they can hang their hat on, so they should keep Kolb around as a happy backup. You know what is one constant for the Eagles though? That Andy Reid guy. He might, just might have something to do with it.

Redskins (8-8) - Actual (6-10)

Actually I didn't miss on the Redskins too much. They did have a tough schedule and they do have a good coach but I don't think him and McNabb get along too well. And with Dan Snyder being the owner I don't see this franchise going anywhere, so there's that.

49ers (10-6) - Actual (6-10)

Another fail pick here. They need a quarterback. They have a coach, they just need a quarterback.

Cardinals (6-10) - Actual (5-11)

This time last year we had just come off of one of the wildest playoff games in NFL history where the Cardinals beat the Packers 51-45. They just simply lost too many of their quality players. Somehow (and very quietly) Larry Fitzgerald amassed 90 receptions for 1,137 yards, which are more yards than last year...but they still had Anquan Boldin then, too...and Kurt Warner. That seems like so long ago.

Seahawks (9-7) - Actual (7-9)

Well what I said about them wasn't entirely bullshit. Pete Carroll has a winning record as an NFL head coach even though everybody seems to hate him and hated him when he was in the NFL in the 90s. Their talent still is not bad if you ask me. See, I'm not entirely crazy when I make this stuff up. Oh, wait, I'm not supposed to say that...

I realize that for some reason I did not do a preseason pick for the Rams. Perhaps I thought they would be so bad that they deserved to not be in the NFL. They wound up being 7-9 and led the NFC West down to wire. Just to throw something out there - 3-13 for a pre-season pick.

My Reaction To TYT Calling Phil Simms Worst NFL Announcer

The Young Turks is an Internet political talk show, who now I guess have branched off into sports a bit, as I discovered this YouTube video of them proclaiming Phil Simms as surpassing Randy Cross as worst NFL announcer. Technically, Phil Simms is not a announcer but an analyst, nor is Randy Cross. Jim Nantz is an announcer. Dick Stockton is an announcer. Simms and Cross are analysts, but anyway, their reasoning for naming Simms the worst "announcer" was laughable. It was during the waning moments of the Steelers-Ravens game from Week 4. Phil deduced that the Ravens should go for it on 4th & 2 but that they should run. (In actuality they passed and converted). There are a ton of reasons why that is not an outlandish prediction, which I won't go into here, but it all boils down to why is that such a bad prediction? And because he was wrong, he's the worst announcer? Have you not watch football for about, oh, about the past 15 years? He does that all the time! And most of the time, he's right (that's what being a cerebral quarterback for 16 seasons in the NFL does to you!)

Another bullshit reason of there's about why Simms is the worst announcer is because he said "nice hold" on a penalty. Again, was this their first game with Simms that they've watched? I doubt it. I am 99% sure he was joking. Again, I don't see why this is such a big deal if they know how Simms is as an analyst. The evidence tells me they don't.

Now I'm not a viewer or listener of The Young Turks, so I don't know know why they branched off into sports talk anyway, and it seems to me by reading the comments on their videos that their viewers don't like it either.

There are probably 15 or 20 announcers worse than Phil Simms, perhaps more. Trust me, he's one of the best. You want a bad announcer? I'll even give you an analyst to be along the lines with Simms - John Lynch. Steve Tasker. Rich Gannon (this kills me because I loved him as a quarterback). There.

Last Night's Cotton Bowl Broascast Not A Disaster

I watched last night's Cotton Bowl until the final minutes waiting to nit-pick on how Fox fails at covered college football bowl games, and frankly, I found very little. Granted, the game was a game until the last few minutes. That probably dictated a lot of it and the kept John Lynch and Charles Davis' spiels to a minimum, but it felt like Kenny Albert and Daryl Johnston were quite comfortable during the broadcast and knew the differences in rules between college and NFL football and they hinted at how they wished that they did more college game. (Note: This will change because Fox won the contract to televise the Pac-12 Championship game, and Fox Sports Network has televised Pac-10 games in past seasons).

Now, it will probably be awhile before the rating are posted, and whether or not they are good or not, the game itself was good and Fox's coverage of it was solid from the broadcasting side of things. I'm not sold with Chris Rose as studio host, but if that's the worst Fox does, I can live with that.

I'm glad that Pat Summerall did not do the play-by-play for this game, but it would have been a crime to leave him out of the telecast given his history with the game. He still has quite a voice, and he can still hold a conversation, despite the fact he's looking quite frail, so I'm glad he provided the voice-over for the open and the interviews he did with Jim Brown, etc.