2 comments Ten Things I Think I Think Peter King Has Not Thought Of: Trying to Tackle Some TMQ Edition

It is getting ready to be that dead period in sports where the only sporting events that are going on are hockey (if that still counts), college/pro basketball, the Brett Favre retirement watch and 131 NFL mock drafts from "experts" that can't seem to get any pick past #4 correct. This has nothing to do with anything but I felt like I would warn everyone it is coming. I like college basketball so this time of year is not that painful for me, but if my favorite college team tanks again it could be, especially since I am actually dreading the beginning of Major League Baseball for the first time in almost 20 years. Something about your favorite team not having a complete starting rotation, or 2/3 of an outfield just doesn't get you pumped up for spring training.

I am still disappointed Bill Simmons has not whined about the Patriots in print.

1. I tried to tackle some TMQ this week. Reading TMQ every week for me is very surreal, I feel like I should know exactly what he is talking about because I follow sports and I do recognize some of the things he is talking about, yet I can't seem to understand what the hell he is writing about. First, he is talking about sports, then throws in a cheerleader profile, talks about the economy, throws in some mention of an invention in Europe, and finally will make a reference to a 1830's scientist. It makes my head hurt.

The NFC Pro Bowl roster includes 16 players from teams that did not reach the playoffs, and only two Philadelphia Eagles. Yet the Eagles were the NFC's hottest team down the stretch and on Sunday played tremendous defense. The AFC roster has 20 players from teams that did not reach the postseason, and only two San Diego Chargers. Yet the Chargers were the AFC's hottest team down the stretch and on Saturday played tremendous defense.

I can't believe the Pro Bowl rosters included players who were on teams that did not make the playoffs! We should take it out of the hands of the fans and put it in the hands of monkeys who can draw names out of hats as to who makes the Pro Bowl.

Being "the hottest teams down the stretch and "on Saturday playing tremendous defense" are not reasons for individual players to be honored as the best at their position. If there was a Pro Bowl for teams, wait there is and it is called the Super Bowl, then the teams could qualify for that. Actually fuck it, let's vote the entire Eagles and Chargers defense into the Pro Bowl because they played great defense last week. I wonder if TMQ would agree with that decision.

Here is my NFL overtime proposal. An entire fifth quarter is played: but in the fifth quarter kicking is forbidden, except after scores. No punts, no field-goal attempts, no PAT kicks. Such a system would ensure each team more than one overtime possession, but enforce a standard of very aggressive play because you'd have to go for it on every fourth down and go for two after a touchdown. Fans might find they prefer football without kicking! If the game was still tied at the end of five, the sixth quarter would be sudden-death.

What a brilliant system! The first overtime will not resemble anything related to football, kind of like instead of having shootouts or sudden death OT in soccer you make the players shoot flaming arrows through the holes in the soccer goal and whoever can get the most through without setting the goal on fire wins. Fans may find they prefer soccer without a ball!

Then if that doesn't work, we would just use the same fucking OT system we have now. I always thought the purpose was to eliminate the current bad system, not think of a new way to play football...which by the way, if it is still tied at the end of the game, we would use the same shitty system we have now. Doesn't seem like progress to me.

With Philadelphia leading 16-14 at the midpoint of the fourth quarter but the home crowd on Minnesota's side -- home teams tend to win close games -- the Nesharim had first-and-10 on their 29. Donovan McNabb threw a weakside screen to Brian Westbrook; the always-playing-for-sacks Jared Allen of the Vikings totally bit on the fake;

What an asshole! Jared Allen was not brought to Minnesota to get sacks, he was brought to Minnesota to drop into coverage and cover receivers, that's what he is paid $50 million dollars to do. Great point Gregg, completely ignore the job of the linebackers and the secondary to notice a screen pass and focus on the player whose job it is to rush the QB, but blame him for doing his job.

when the Colts went for it on fourth-and-1, the Bolts forced an incompletion and took possession. That was sweet. But about that fourth-and-1: Peyton Manning play-faked and sprinted almost 15 yards backward, then had to throw the ball away. You only need 1 yard, why are you sprinting backward? That was sour.

Generally it is a good idea to sprint backwards/sideways when there are players from the opposing team chasing you. Do you understand football at all?

Falling behind 28-17 late in the third quarter, Atlanta got the ball back and on first down panicked and threw deep: interception. There was ample clock for the Falcons to work slowly down the field, while Arizona was expecting a deep strike. TMQ Law of Panic holds: Don't Panic Yet, There Will Be Plenty of Time for That Later.

This must be unrelated to the the TMQ Law of Always Go For it On Fourth Down.

Here is a great contradiction a few lines later of the TMQ Law of Panic:

With the game scoreless, host Minnesota faced fourth-and-inches at its own 28. The Vikings punted, and Eagles returner DeSean Jackson ran the ball back to the Vikings' 27 -- where it would have been anyway had Minnesota gone for it and failed. Needless to say, Minnesota went on to lose.

How does this guy get to write for ESPN? I would say going for it in your own territory in a scoreless game is to panic. How many times does a long return result in the ball being right back where it started at the punt? I am going to say very few times and it is not needless to say Minnesota lost, the game was scoreless at this point. Stop writing and go take 32 Asprin.

Now the Crimson Tide trail mid-major Utah 28-17 halfway through the third quarter of the Allstate Sugar Bowl, and face fourth-and-2 on the Utes' 32. That cannot be the field goal team trotting on -- especially when the Alabama kicker missed from the same spot in the first half. Outraged, the football gods pushed the try aside. Now Alabama, still down 28-17, faces fourth-and-3 well into the fourth quarter. That cannot be the punt team trotting on! Who cares if it's your own 24 -- score on this possession or give up!

So in a 28-17 game throwing deep down the field is being in a panic (as stated in the TMQ Law of Panic) but in a 28-17 game not going for it on fourth down is absolutely illogical? You are stupid, stupid, stupid. At least when you are trying to make a point, don't contradict yourself several lines later, stay consistent. This is why no one has respect for many of the columns that are posted online and why I write here. Take a position and stick with it, don't let your position change based on what you want to say next or for what you are trying to prove. Also, please remember what the hell you typed five paragraphs earlier.

As for The Ultimate Leader, in November 2006 the Broncos were 7-4 with the inside track to a wild-card slot. Then Shanahan benched Jake Plummer for Jay Cutler, and the Broncos have gone 17-20 since. Should Shanahan simply have stayed with Plummer?

I am sure there were no other variables involved in that record but for simplicity sake let's just assume there were none. So this was a dumb move?

Whoever takes the helm at Denver will be the beneficiary of the time Shanahan invested in letting Cutler learn by struggling.

So it was a good move? Make up your mind. Actually, please stop writing.

2. Peter King's Tuesday follow up to his MMQB doesn't get enough negative recognition from me.

"Let's see. In the second half, the Colts couldn't get one lousy yard to convert a fourth down, and gained 26 yards on 16 plays when they had a chance to end the game in the third and fourth quarters. But somehow you think the overtime rule cost them the game?! The overtime rule might be broken, but you need a better example to make your argument.''

Exactly. This reader is correct. Readers are correct, writers are wrong...this seems to happen a lot.

This never has been about me thinking the overtime rule cost the Colts the game. It's about fairness. If the Colts won the toss and marched to the winning score on the first possession, I'd be saying the same thing -- the coin toss plays too important a role in these football games.

He would be saying the same thing if the Colts had won, but just not as strongly, and it just so happens after Peyton Manning gets screwed over this becomes Peter's new favorite argument.

3. Speaking of this issue, Peter King and Don Banks debate the overtime rule.

One possession each in overtime sounds completely equitable. But no overtime format I've heard of would ever be completely equitable. There's always going to be an inherent advantage to the team that has the ball first, because it doesn't have the pressure of trying to match a score to keep the game alive.

Then, on the flip side, how is it completely equitable if you do give up a score first in overtime, you get the ball knowing that you have all four downs to keep the chains moving, rather than having to punt on fourth down, like the situation that the first-possession team faced? The second-possession team has 25 percent more downs to work with in trying to match or beat the other team's score because a punt is never going to be part of the equation for a team trailing in overtime.

That's Don Banks and he is completely correct in his evaluation of why OT rules can never be fair, we just need to make up a system and stick with it.

141 regular-season games have gone to overtime and ended with only one team having possession. So, on average, four times per year, a coin flip plays a major role in the outcome of an NFL game.

This is Peter. Four times a year, is that a lot? There are 256 games in a year, not including the playoffs, and therefore there is a 1.5% chance the game is going to end in OT with the second team not getting possession of the football based on this happening four times a year. Since there is a 50% chance your team will win the coin flip, there is a 0.78% chance your favorite team is going to lose in OT without getting the ball. This is not a major problem, sure I have a fear it is going to happen to my favorite team, but that is the rules of football. It will greatly piss me off when it happens. I don't like the rules of OT but there is nothing that is more equitable that has been mentioned at this point. Quit spitting out random fucking numbers without looking at their meaning in the larger picture.

I think a coin should be flipped at the start of overtime, with the winning team having the choice of whether to take the ball first. But then, if neither team has the lead after the second possession of overtime, the game enters sudden death.

Despite the fact the two teams have had multiple possessions and 60 minutes to outscore each other, Peter thinks the teams should have two more possessions, then it goes to the shitty OT rules we have now. I thought we all agreed the sudden death is stupid, why is every new idea involve using sudden death as a backup if the new idea does not work?

Peter's brilliant idea STILL favors the team that wins the coin flip because they would conceivably get one more possession than the other team. That's not fair either and really makes no sense.

If this system is so fair, then why has, on 99 percent of the coin flips to start overtime in the last 35 years, the team that won the coin flip chosen to receive? Because it's a huge advantage to get the ball first.

Under your system, it would still be a great advantage because the team that wins still gets one more possession. These teams play 60 full minutes of football, why do we have to have multiple more possessions in OT?

I personally think there should be a coin flip to decide possession, then one possession for each team and the second team with possession has to go for two if they get a touchdown and can not kick a field goal. If the first team gets a field goal, then the next team can win with a touchdown, and they have to go for it. If the first team gets a touchdown, the second team can still win the game. I think it provides good strategic decisions that can be made and would be fun to watch...also it would be slightly more fair. The team that wins the coin flip may choose to get the ball second to answer the first teams score but then they have more pressure because they can't kick a field goal.

OK, but you want to know something that really drives me crazy? It's when I hear you and others complain that the reigning league MVP didn't even get to touch the ball Saturday night in overtime, as if Peyton Manning somehow deserved a chance to win the game in dramatic fashion. The truth is, he had his chance to win the game and be the hero, and it came late in regulation.

This is Don Banks and he is talking very correct words out of his mouth right now.

Just because he's Peyton Manning doesn't mean we should engineer some sort of phony baloney rule to make sure that the great Manning is able to touch the ball in overtime. But in a game where the hottest quarterback in the last month of the season (San Diego's Philip Rivers) duels the hottest quarterback in the last half of the season (Manning), I think it's folly that the toss of a coin should play such a big role in one of them touching the ball from that point on and the other not.

This is Peter and he is basically saying, "sure I agree we should not engineer a rule to make sure Peyton can touch the ball again, but it was so fun to watch so let's do it anyway."

I still like my idea best.

4. Bill Cowher is smart for not taking the Jets job.

They told Jets general manager Mike Tannenbaum that the former Steelers coach was 95 percent sure he was not going to return to coaching. Cowher's reps then told Tannenbaum that Jets owner Woody Johnson should call him, insinuating if Johnson offered an exorbitant amount of money, Cowher might change his mind. Johnson, who was out of the country, felt a phone conversation with Cowher would just be a money grab by the coach.

I think it is inappropriate to call this a money grab by Bill Cowher. He simply does not have to go back to coaching if he does not want to and wants to make sure the situation is right and that he gets paid for his services. He has this thing called leverage and I think Cowher may be the Jet's best shot, if they are planning on keep God Favre around next year, to actually succeed because Cowher may be one of the few coaches who could control Favre's fragile, sad ego.

Of course Cowher also may not succeed outside of the Steeler's coaching coccoon. There has been no head coach in the last 30 years who has left the Steelers and coached anywhere else so it is hard to know if that is the case. I think if the Jets are really serious about getting a good head coach they should figure out the Favre situation first.

5. Woody Paige seems to think it was time to fire Shanahan.

The most revitalizing possibilities are Bill Parcells and Bill Cowher. Parcells has an out clause if the Dolphins are sold, and they are being sold. Cowher, who has been out of football for two seasons, is ready to come back. Each would demand total power, as Shanahan had.

Nothing more exciting than hearing Woody brainstorm possibilities. I really don't think either would be too interested in this job, they seem more like East Coast guys to me.

The most interesting possibilities are Josh McDaniels (Patriots offensive coordinator), Mike Leach (Texas Tech head coach) and Pete Carroll (USC head coach).

If by "interesting" Woody means "most likely to fail" then yes these are interesting choices. I would be nervous because other New England coaches have not done well outside of New England, though of course McDaniels deserves an interview. Just be cautious is all I am saying. Pete Carroll has failed at the NFL level before, what in the hell would make you think he could do it well this time? Mike Leach? Remember Steve Spurrier's attempt to take his college offense to the NFL? Then add in the fact Leach has never won a National Championship in college nor placed any of his vaunted great college quarterbacks in the NFL as of yet in a starting job, and I don't think he would be a good choice.

The most thought-provoking possibility is John Elway (who needs no introduction).

Brilliant idea. The Broncos need someone with zero head coaching experience. Why not have Terrell Owens come in as offensive coordinator and Bill Romanowski can be the defensive coordinator? The only thought this provokes is, other than being a great player, what the hell has Elway done to deserve a head coaching job?

Brilliance in sportswriting, thy name is Woody.

6. Rob Parker "quit."

Detroit News sports columnist Rob Parker has resigned from the newspaper, the paper's managing editor told Journal-isms on Tuesday. Parker had been demoted to general assignment sports reporter,

I think this seems a bit harsh if he "resigned" because of the whole Marinelli incident. Though I don't think that is the case and he hasn't seemed too insightful when I saw him on First Take, so he may just be a bad columnist.

He penned a much-debated column where he called Hank Aaron a 'coward' for declining to attend when Barry Bonds would break the career Major League home run record."

I did not know he said this. I think he is a moron for saying this. It seems like he tries to be controversial but just comes off as being a real asshole.

Last year, Parker declared on ESPN's "First Take" that he had low expectations for college players Tyler Hansbrough and Kevin Love in the NBA, because they are white.

I have low expectations for him because of these comments.

7. I love it when colleges treat athletes like commodities.

Shannon took it to the extreme. According to Marve, he was prohibited from transferring to 27 schools.

Miami shortened the list a little bit but to prohibit Marve from going to 27 schools is absolutely insane. I don't think colleges should be able to create a list this long. I could see an argument that the student could not go to school in the conference but that is about it. Imagine if you decided to transfer schools and the school you are transferring from creates a list of 20 schools you can't go to. That would seem crazy. I guess it is different for athletes but this seems like it unfairly prohibits an athlete's ability to get an education and play sports. You know, the whole student-athlete thing.

Miami softened its stance slightly and now will allow Marve to transfer on scholarship to any SEC school other than Florida, LSU and Tennessee. Miami alleges those schools were tampering with the player. The ACC and in-state ban stands, though.

How generous. Miami does realize it has a reputation for being a school of thugs and probably should work harder to rehab it's image, right?

An in-state ban on playing football is outrageous. What if he wanted to stay closer to home or be able to see his family on the weekends he was not playing football? I don't agree with this, partly because players already have to sit out a year and especially when coaches can take jobs anywhere they want, whenever they want with no restrictions, but yet they have the ability to restrict student-athletes on where they can go to college.

How are policies like this good for recruiting?

8. Any Pettitte is being high maintenance.

The left-handed starter has rejected the Yankees' one-year, $10 million offer, The New York Times reported, citing a person with knowledge of the negotiations.

Not only is Pettitte not worth this amount of money, he has not even come close to earning the $32 million he "earned" over the past two years. I think he should accept this amount for stealing money the past couple years. Not that that Yankees would notice of course, but the principle stands.

Pettitte went 14-14 with a 4.54 ERA last season, after starting the year at the center of baseball's performance-enhancing drugs scandal.

He earned $16 million last year, went .500 with a 4.54 ERA and now $10 million is not enough for him to get paid? I am not even going to talk about how the team stood by him after he admitted he took PEDs, which I guess I did just talk about.

The really horrifying part about this is Pettitte can do this because there is a complete lack of good pitching available on the free agent market. Randy Wolf and Oliver Perez do not entice me all that much for the amount of money they want.

How can someone make $16 million dollars, be an average pitcher, and then expect the team to not offer them a salary decrease?

9. I hate ESPN's new web site. I don't get why sites insist on putting all these videos and other shit on their home page. It is annoying. I know I sound like I am 80 years old but I don't want video or highlights or anything on the introduction page because it makes the page load incredibly slowly. Google is my home page because ESPN takes half an hour to load with all of the interactive features they provide. Fortunately, I can get better news from other sources but most of the shitty columnists work for ESPN so I have to brave the site to get to the good shit.

10. Ever since Bill Simmons' "any measurement that does not have the Boston Celtics as the best team in the NBA needs to be worked to have that result" comment about John Hollinger's team rankings, the Celtics have gone 2-4 with losses to the Knicks and the Bobcats. Yet we have not heard a peep from Bill about this at all, much like no word on the Patriots not making the playoffs. When we do hear from him, I am sure he will say all of the losses were on the road.A team that is the best team in the league should not lose to teams that are a combined 56-82 no matter where they play.

Maybe John Hollinger's rankings are actually correct. Of course you will never hear Bill admit he was wrong on this, if he does say it, then he clearly got screwed over by the officiating or there was some conspiracy against the Celtics that was in play as well. I wish he posted a column every single day.