I want to go ahead and get this out of the way, but with a caveat of course. Bill Simmons was right, the Chicago Bulls-Boston Celtics series is shaping up to be a classic first round series. So he is right about that, but it still doesn't explain why he predicted the series would be won by Boston in 5 games before the series began. So basically he didn't really predict the series would be great, he more observed that it was a great series after it began. Also, the Celtics seemed to do pretty well last night without the key to the series, Ray Allen, who fouled out with 4 minutes left, and the "tired" Paul Pierce hit all five of his last shots in regulation and OT. So Bill was right about the series being a classic, after the series began of course so he was not really "right" he was just able to observe it and then write it down. Also, Ray Allen is not the only Celtic player who is the key to the series and Rondo only did only one thing last night that was something (arguably) no other player in the NBA could do, which was a layup over/around Derrick Rose (I think) to pull the Celtics within two points...I would argue another player could have done that as well or perhaps dunked it but I won't. On to TMQ...
As much as I claim that I hate TMQ, because everytime I read the articles I get frustrated and wish that it would go away, I do miss it when Gregg does not write his weekly contribution to the idiocy of American journalism. Such is the life of mine. I spend most of my time wishing bad journalists to go away, but if they actually left I don't know exactly what I would write about every day. Today Gregg breaks down the NFL Draft in his own special way, which means we get to read a whole new column from a guy who barely seems to understand the basic concepts of football...and this person feels the need to second guess decisions made in the NFL Draft as if he were in fact an expert.
As Tuesday Morning Quarterback endlessly cautions, there is no law of nature that says the NFL must remain popular.
But we don't want to find the NFL saturation point. Better never to know. To tamper with the current super-successful NFL formula is asking for trouble. The current formula is exciting and profitable. Let's leave matters as they are.
I always enjoy it when Gregg and I can start off agreeing with each other. This will be the first, last, and only time we will agree with each other.
What if Godzilla gets laid off? He'll be in a foul mood and take out his frustrations on Tokyo. If the "Cloverfield" sequel gets canceled for cost-cutting reasons, that monster could end up as some kind of juvenile delinquent, staying out all hours, associating with the wrong kinds of creatures. King Kong, Mothra, the Blob -- none of them has the right résumé for globalization, either. Imagine a couple of unemployed movie monsters bumping into each other in a studio lot:
PREDATOR: Wassup 'Zilla? Got a gig?
GODZILLA: I would rather not talk about it.
PREDATOR: Any residuals checks come in lately?
GODZILLA: I said, I don't want to talk about it! (Smashes skyscraper.)
(sound of crickets chirping)
The Cardinals failed to move Anquan Boldin, who complains so much, why would anyone want to trade for him? Boldin has been complaining about his contract for two years and about supposed slights from the Arizona coaching staff for nearly as long.
To be fair, Boldin signed an incredibly team friendly contract extension for 4 years at about $24 million and then the Cardinals signed Larry Fitzgerald to a 4 year $40 million dollar contract extension in 2007 after re-negotiating his rookie contract that was just signed in 2004. Boldin is making almost half the money that Fitzgerald is making and he is not half the receiver that Fitzgerald is. Yes, Boldin has whined about the contract a lot, but other than that he has been a great receiver.
His constant complaining surely is why other teams haven't shown more enthusiasm about obtaining his services -- thus preventing Boldin from getting the new contract he wants.
Sure, Gregg that is the one reason he hasn't gotten traded...that and the Cardinals reportedly want a 1st round pick and possibly more for him. Teams never trade for players who complain about their contract in the NFL...the only exception to this rule is every team in the NFL will do this. Productions trumps a player being a problem child. If a player can be productive, a team will trade for him, no matter how annoying he is. Well, until he is progressively more annoying over a long period of time, but Boldin has not reached that level yet.
Atlanta. The Falcons traded for Tony Gonzalez and only had to surrender a draft choice in 2010 -- TMQ is still trying to figure out how they got away with that.
This is why I think Gregg knows absolutely nothing about the NFL. The reason Atlanta "got away with that" is because they traded a 2nd round pick for a 33 year old tight end. Granted, they received one of the best tight ends in NFL history but a 2nd round pick is pretty high compensation for a tight end that will only play at a high level for 3 more years. (Now watch, Gonzalez be catching TD's well into his upper 30's and have 23 TD receptions against the Panthers)
I like this trade for Atlanta, but Gregg you fucktard, they gave up a 2nd round pick for him, that's how they did it.
I love how Gregg has not noticed that Gonzalez did his fair amount of bitching to get out of Kansas City...then he would take it back...then he would bitch again. Really, why does he get to write a column for ESPN, that's my main complaint? Gonzalez has been complaining about the direction of the franchise for a couple of years, I would think under Gregg's "Boldin" theory no one would want to trade for a guy like Gonzalez who complains.
Atlanta could well go into 2009 as the NFC favorite, and this is the team many touts picked to be the NFL's worst last season.
What the hell are "touts?" He refers to this repeatedly and I have no idea what/who they are.
Oher joins a strong Baltimore roster, and may not be expected to start in 2009. It's possible no Baltimore draft choices will start in the fall, a sign of the team's overall strength.
It could also be a sign the team had very few draft choices, made incredibly bad draft choices, that the coaching staff prefers not to start rookies at the beginning of the year until they adjust to the speed of the NFL or it could be for many other reasons. Just assuming the draft choices don't start because the team is good is a fallacy in reasoning.
Note that after the Bills gave major-money free-agent contracts in past years to offensive linemen Derrick Dockery and Langston Walker, both of whom are average performers, they refused to make a big-money offer to Pro Bowl left tackle Jason Peters, now traded to Philadelphia. Common thread? Dockery and Walker were high draft selections, Peters was undrafted. So it's not just agents who assume that high-drafted players should be paid more; apparently management assumes this, too.
Langston Walker was drafted in the late part of the second round and Derrick Dockery was drafted in the 3rd round, I would not call them both "high draft selections" at all. What's the common thread in Gregg's TMQ? Lack of research on his part looking into what the hell he is talking about.
Jason Peters was undrafted as a tight end out of college. He was converted to LT by the Bills. Management does not assume Peters should be paid less because he is not a high draft pick, he wanted more money than they were willing to pay, especially after the Walker and Dockery debacles, so they traded him for a first round draft pick.
If Peters' name was Tony Gonzalez, Gregg would be wondering how the Bills got a 1st round and 4th round pick for a guy who gave up 11.5 sacks last year and pouted his way through the season last year due to a contract squabble. (See, how I just combined the Boldin and Gonzalez situation into the Peters situation? Gregg should be amazed Jason Peters got a new contract AND he should be amazed how much the Bills got for him)
Though already possessing one of the league's top fullbacks in Brad Hoover,
He has made zero Pro Bowls and no notable career achievements on his wikipedia page. (Pro Bowls mean nothing but Gregg's statement is completely arguable...personally I fucking love Hoover but I try to be objective)
Carolina spent a fourth-round selection on Tony Fiammetta of Syracuse, viewed as the best fullback in the draft. When was the last time an NFL team was overstocked at fullback?
When that team has a fullback that is 33 years old in November and there is no other viable backup on the roster.
TMQ fears the gruntled Jay Cutler is overrated.
Based on what?????????? The fact he doesn't have a great career win-loss record? If so, you should be smacked.
Smith was suspended for his final game at Alabama, then got mad and walked out at the combine, then showed up for his Pro Day out of shape. A perfect fit for the Cincinnati program!
They don't call them "programs" when it is an NFL team. This is just one more thing about the NFL that Gregg doesn't understand.
Actually, I think Gregg writes from the point of view of the fan more than Bill Simmons does, except Gregg's fan perspective is the lazy fan who tends to make random fucking observations as statements of fact based on his misunderstanding of the NFL.
Those extra choices were burning a hole in the Cursors' pocket, however, as Denver traded a first-round choice in 2010 for a second-round choice Saturday. Touts think next year's draft class will be better than this year's, so the trade was mildly puzzling -- same for Carolina trading its 2010 first-round choice for a 2009 second-rounder.
Who the hell is "touts?" Also, as Rulebook (I believe) has told us and Gregg should probably know since he writes for ESPN and all, a second round draft choice this year is equivalent to a first round draft choice this year. Also, Carolina received a 4th round pick in the trade and Denver still has a first round pick next year, so it is not like Carolina traded the 2nd round pick for the 1st round pick straight up or Denver doesn't have a 1st round pick next year.
I am not sure how "touts" know that next year's draft class will be better than this year's draft class, that sounds like pure speculation, much like saying Alphonso Smith will not be better than a 1st round pick available to the Broncos next year.
Lydell Mitchell and Franco Harris notwithstanding, TMQ has always been suspicious of college teammates at the same position drafted high into the NFL, because there's the possibility they made each other look better.
I would wonder why exactly TMQ is suspicious of this but really there is no reason, Gregg is just making things up right now. I think T.J. Houshmanzedah and Chad Johnson have done fairly well in the NFL. They both went to college together and have played games without the other in the lineup for the Bengals. Actually for better proof, Chad Johnson even played in junior college with Steve Smith, and each seems to have done pretty well for himself without the other around. I would like to know the list of players who played together in college that TMQ is suspicious of, but really TMQ doesn't know of any examples of why he should be suspicious so we won't get one.
If USC's linebackers were that good, how come the Trojans lost at Oregon State?
This said Oregon the first time I read this article but ESPN fixed it. I think it would have been easier to fix in the editing process, but what do I really know?
What the hell does losing one game during the college football season have to do with whether the USC linebackers are any good? Using this messed up logic, the only team in college football that would have good players is Utah. That's like saying, if Peyton Manning so good, how come he never won a National Championship at Tennessee? Or how come Tom Brady never won the Michigan starting QB job if he is such a great quarterback?
If both of BC's defensive tackles deserved to be high NFL draft choices, how did anyone ever run inside on Boston College?
(me getting a headache wondering why this man is so stupid)
Life is not a video game, just because a team has two good players on a starting defensive roster of 11 doesn't mean that team will not get beaten or will always be successful.
The visuals of the original 1960s show were delightfully cheesy -- simple sets, starcruiser models held up by wires, "futuristic" coffee mugs that obviously were Styrofoam cups covered with tin foil. The minimalism of the sets and special effects forced the show to be plot-driven, which is why it was so good. You've already guessed that the upcoming movie is crammed with super-advanced computer-generated battle scenes and superbly detailed sets.
I am sure if the new Star Trek used styrofoam cups covered with tin foil for props that would automatically make the plot of the new movie that much better. Movies do tend to rely on special effects too much sometimes but not relying on special effects doesn't make the movie better, it could very well make the movie cheesier, cheaper and turn off the audience.
But wait, how could fancy Starfleet spaceships have happened before the spare, low-rent Starfleet depicted in the 1960s series?
They are two completely different series with two completely different sets of actors. Is it possible to just let this go?
Yet if time travel were possible, at the instant anyone departed for the past, any changes he or she caused would already be in effect -- since after all, they already occurred long ago. If Romulans interfered with the past when Kirk was a teen, any changes they caused already would have been apparent when the Year 2264 was first depicted in the 1960s original series.
Gregg Easterbrook has to be the absolute most insufferable human being that has ever existed. If you don't understand or don't want to understand the premise, don't watch the movie. It's like he doesn't want to be entertained, he wants everything to make logical, perfect sense all the time.
The Giants have drafted several defensive backs high in the same period. That's a lot of skinny gentlemen. Who's going to man the trenches? Tackle William Beatty, taken in the second round, is the first high-drafted offensive lineman for Jersey/A in five years.
Well, they don't really need a new offensive line considering the one they had last year was intact for every game, were tied for first in rushing yards per game, first in yards per carry average, and had led the Giants to a Super Bowl victory in 2008.
Why draft a position you don't necessarily need?
the Mets' average premium seat is $150, the Yankees' is $500. The Yankees really think their team has three times the appeal of the Mets?
Of all the people in the world who would understand the principle of economics, I would think it would be Gregg Easterbrook. The Yankees don't think their team has three times the appeal of the Mets, they think the Yankees fans will pay three times as much for a ticket to see the Yankees play. It's simple economics and supply-demand. It may be stupid supply-demand, or incorrect supply-demand, but the Yankees did not have a big meeting where they looked at the ticket prices of the Mets in their new stadium and then tried to guess how much more appeal the Yankees had than the Mets.
Touts assume the Dolphins will switch White to slot receiver and kick returner; TMQ thinks he will play quarterback.
Since the Dolphins cut John Beck yesterday, I would say TMQ is correct.
Suppose Chad Pennington starts at quarterback, but White comes in for, say, 10 snaps a game behind center. White can either run or throw -- his passing accuracy is better than you think.
Better than who thinks? I don't understand why Gregg thinks he is telling us all something here. Pat White was a quarterback at WVU for four years, and a very successful quarterback as well, I think his accuracy is pretty good and it really should be.
You get the feeling that if Heyward-Bey had gone in the second round, his chances of a successful NFL career would be higher.
If you get this feeling, you could very well be wrong. Even as a second round pick, Heyward-Bey would have been required to come in and play well his first year in the NFL. His chances of success would only increase if he were not drafted so high as to be relied on early in his career and then he would probably not have as much skill or be blocked by a superior receiver in the lineup. Maybe not, I just like to challenge any stupid assumption that Gregg Easterbrook makes, and this was a stupid assumption.
Texas Tech coach Mike Leach was fuming Saturday night about how various supposed NFL conspiracies prevented Crabtree from going at the very top of the draft, which would have been a feather in Leach's cap. Hey, Crabtree went 10th. This is not chopped liver!
I don't know what it is about Gregg's DNA that forces him to write down things like this that are complete half truths. Mike Leach was upset about Michael Crabtree being seen as a diva and that being the reason he fell in the draft, and not just that Crabtree feel in the draft, but he was really fuming about Graham Harrell not being drafted at all. That was the main focus of his anger.
I don't know if Gregg just intentionally left that part out, did not know that part, or just wanted to write something down that was really only half of the story, but he is kind of misrepresenting exactly why Mike Leach was angry.
The Blue Men Group brain trust must think 2008 was a fluke and Seattle's accustomed winning ways will return in 2009, since they traded their second-round selection to bank a 2010 first-rounder. The transaction was with Denver, which was holding its own 2010 first-rounder plus Chicago's. The Seahawks got Denver's 2010 first-round pick, with Denver keeping Chicago's 2010 first choice. Thus Seattle wagers that Denver will have a worse season than Chicago:
Yes, Gregg this is exactly what this means. Why do I feel like Gregg is learning all of this for the very first time? I constantly feel like he is teaching a class of NFL for Beginners to a classroom full of NFL Intermediates.
Last year at No. 2, Les Mouflons passed on Matt Ryan, an instant star at quarterback;
This fact everyone knows only in retrospect. There are few people who thought Matt Ryan would step in and play as well as he did from Day 1.
Since that contract, Bulger has more interceptions than touchdown passes, while St. Louis would owe him $11 million if waived. This makes the Rams perceive themselves as locked in to Bulger.
Bulger has stunk since signing that extension but if the Rams had drafted Mark Sanchez this year they would have signed him to almost $40 million in guaranteed money and still had to pay Bulger the money he was owed, if they didn't trade him. If the Rams did trade him, then Sanchez would have to start from Day 1, assuming the Rams don't sign another quarterback to start the year. For a team that is rebuilding right now, it is very hard to put that much money into the QB position, so they were not only perceived as locked into Bulger at the QB position, they actually ARE locked into him at that position. They could have traded him and then taken Sanchez, but what team would really want Marc Bulger and his contract?
Remember, at New England, McDaniels worked with Tom Brady, whom no other team wanted, then with Matt Cassel, whom no other team wanted. Now McDaniels has Orton, whom no other team wanted.
Kyle Orton is not exactly the pick of the litter or anything but I don't know how the hell Gregg knows that no other team wanted Orton. He was drafted in the 4th round and the Bears did not offer him in a trade to any other team, at least that I know of. He lasted until the fourth round in the draft but I don't think it is exactly accurate to say no other team in the NFL wanted Orton. The Bears have had his rights since then, so no other team has had a chance to get Orton.
It's blanket statements like this that Gregg Easterbrook makes that just gets my blood boiling.
Going into the 2008 season, the Pittsburgh Steelers were the best team under the radar.
Which is so easy to say after they won the freaking Super Bowl last year. Hindsight makes things so much easier to understand doesn't it?
Going into the 2009 season, the Tennessee Titans are the best team under the radar.
The team with the best record in the AFC last year is the best team under the radar? Only in Gregg's world. Besides there are only 32 teams in the NFL, how far under the radar can any team really be?
Wouldn't it be nice if Redskins management was putting its quarterback into a position to succeed rather than systematically undercutting him!
It would be nice, but that is the state of the NFL today. Those who follow the NFL for more than the purpose of questioning every coach's logical decision understand this. Teams are always looking for better players at the quarterback position. Jay Cutler was undercut by Josh McDaniels, Kellen Clemons was undercut by Rex Ryan, Luke McCown and two other quarterbacks were undercut by Raheem Morris drafting Josh Freeman, and this happens all the time. Just because Washington is right around the corner from where you live doesn't mean it doesn't happen all the time and Washington is the only team that does this.
Last week reader Alec Stais of New York received an e-mail from Radio City Music Hall, urging him to buy tickets now to the 2009 Christmas pageant. Radio City said the tickets were offered for "presale." Isn't a "presale" the same as a "sale"?
Holy crap it is! Why do we drive on a parkway and park on a driveway? That doesn't make sense! Life is so wacky, let's write about things like this in a football column some more.
Peter Love of Arlington, Va., writes, "My family and I were watching 'It's the Easter Beagle, Charlie Brown.' The Peanuts gang goes to a department store to get Easter presents for Sally, Peppermint Patty and Marcie. Charlie Brown complains that the store already has its Christmas decorations and merchandise out. There's even a store sign visible in a scene that says, 'Only 246 Days Left Until Christmas.' This special first aired in 1974, so obviously Christmas Creep was an issue back then."
Peter Love of Arlington, Virginia, please do not encourage Gregg Easterbrook to continue his Christmas Creep shit every year. We get it, Christmas comes earlier every year because retail outlets want to sell more stuff. We get it, it's understood, now shut up about it.
"See you in September ..." Actually in August, when the football artificial universe resumes.
I won't be looking forward to it...even though I will be.
Ok, how many egregious, idiotic things that Gregg said did I miss?
15 comments:
well I think TMQ's "same college" idea has some merit...remember in 2006 when like four guys on the Florida State defense got picked? Cromartie and Sims turned out all right but I haven't heard much from Wimbley or Bunkley. that was also the year three guys on the NC State d-line got picked (and it looks like Mario Williams made Lawson and McCargo look better than they actually were) and the AJ Hawk/Bobby Carpenter thing...I don't feel like doing Gregggg's research for him this morning though.
A tout is one of those guys who hangs around racetracks and offers to sell you tips on what horse to bet on. I don't know if they still exist, but I guess Easterbrook is trying to draw a connection between Mel Kiper and characters in Guys and Dolls.
although his reasoning for it is pretty damn stupid.
also he offers no draft analysis whatsoever (in a draft review column) for Atlanta, Dallas, Minnesota, Philly, Pittsburgh, or the Titans. but it's not like any of those teams were important last year or anything.
on another draft-related note, looking at the first round i still have no idea why KC went for Tyson Jackson. the other potential 3-4 rush OLB (English, Ayers, Orakpo) went between the 10th and 20th pick, just like guys like Merriman and Ware did. if they wanted him that badly why didn't they just trade down? the Jets would have definitely traded up to get Sanchez, and I couldn't see anyone before Denver at #12 taking Jackson, giving KC room to move up a little from the Jets' #17 pick. maybe they really wanted to reunite half the LSU line. I dunno. hindsight is 20/20
See, it is not the same college he is talking about, he is talking about the same position in college, so Cromartie and Sims would not count and neither would Wimbley or Bunkley, though there could be a comparison between Sims and Wimbley b/c they played the same position at FSU. His argument could have some merit but he doesn't list a single person that gives him this feeling, other than to blanketly say he is suspicious of them. I can think of many, but there have also been other guys who did well in the pros even though they played the same position in college. I need a name thrown out there before I can buy his suspiciousness.
I don't expect him to ever do any type analysis of the drafts, he is much better at calling the teams fake names and then changing the subject to the economy. I am thinking maybe Cleveland was trying to take Jackson at #5 if Sanchez was not available or something and that is why they did not trade back, but I don't really know because that doesn't make sense really. Otherwise, I think they could have easily traded back and still gotten Jackson. I am almost at the point to say Belichick's disciples don't know exactly what they are doing...though I am not sure Pioli is a Belichick disciple or not.
Either way, I think they did not have to Jackson in that spot. I watched a lot of LSU games last year and I am not sure how I even feel about Jackson overall.
Monty, I am glad you are here to give me this information. I don't know how I feel about a connection between Guys and Dolls and the NFL Draft. It is very Easterbrook-ish though.
Touts are also referred to as the betting sheets at race tracks, or a handicapper/oddsmaker. In England a tout is anybody who solicits business in an improper manner.
I'd like the NFL to change a few things, so I have to disagree with Ben and TMQ a bit here. First, Ben and I agree, put the draft back to noon eastern. Then if the NFL is going to start the season on Thursday night it should have a Friday night game also. I'd say have a Staurday night game, but the NFL traditionally, and I think it's a smart and considerate thing, doesn't like to go up against college football. So we would have 4 days of NFL, and one night of top flight college ball (cause you know some teams would want to be part of that action, Virginia Tech v Alabama is a great early season match up this year). Welcome to football season. It would be great. They should cut it down to two preseason games, but not expand the season to 17 or 18. That's just too long if they aren't going to change the way they have IR rules and roster movement.
I think teams don't want to trade for Bouldin for the cost of a 1st and 3rd along with having to crank up the salary structure of their team to sign him. They figure they can get him as a free agent.
Totally agree about Gonzalez. A 2nd might be too high a pick, but if he gives the team three good years, it will really help Ryan and the Falcons out on offense. Of course, they could have just kept Alge Crumpler from the previous regime and had the same thing....
Gregg wold be better off attacking the Bills for the bad signings as a reason they couldn't sign Peters. Instead he tries o use them as an example of why they should sign Peters. He seems to think teh team merely wants to avoid throwing good money after bad, when it's more, they don't have any money left to give him.
USC lost to Oregon State because the d-line played lousy, and for some reason USC always plays bad on Thursday Night games. In fact I want to say that Pete Carrol has told the AD that they'd really prefer not to play them any more. As if USC needs a ESPN Thursday Night game for money or exposure. Also, the hero of NYC, Mark "The Franchez" Sanchez, played very average in a game they needed him to step up and be big in. I'm sure this won't be repeated against the Pats, Dolphins, Chargers.....
I'm tyring to figure if he's attacking the 60's Star Trek for not using time travel to get more advanced sets and gizmos then were available at that time...or what.
So, does TMQ even realize that the Giants also drafted several d-linemen high the last few years? Not just d-backs? Of course in Gregg's world, high pick is a 4th rounder...so....
(Are we all agreed, high = rounds 1 and 2, middle is 3-5, late is 6 and 7?)
I love Pat White as a back up , Slash, kind of guy. I don't think he'll be an everydown QB, but if he gets more accurate, who knows.
Matt Ryan might be an instant star, but that doesn't make him instant great. Seriously, a dozen QB's, including the "overvalued" Jay Cutler, could have done what Ryan did with the Falcons. The fact he did it as a rookie was fantastic, and bodes well for the future, but it was the running game and defense that carried them. They got a little lucky too. Decrying him not being picked by the Rams, who need about 22 players on defense and an entire new o-line, is silly when they have Bulger. Let him take the hits, try and rebuild the foundation, then get a young QB. Bulger isn't bad, mostly just fragile, and has no blocking or weapons other then an occassional Steve Jackson.
I'm jsut spitballing here, but McDaniels is unlikely to have worked with Tom Brady in the "nobody wanted Tom Brady" days. Josh is 32, Brady was unwanted in 2000. Josh was not the QB coach at 23. I'm only guessing, didn't look it up, but I think there were other guys there like the current Notre Dame head coach, and not Josh McDaniels, shaping Tom Brady.
Gregg only put the thing in about presale cause it was about Xmas. I deal with presale all the time. It's merely special offer for certain select group to buy something at a special price before it is offered to the general public. Sort of like scalping before the tickets go on sale, not after. My friends company targets their top 10% customers and gives them stuff at "presale" for a week sometimes before regular customers, through a coupon in email and such.
Also, why does Gregg keep talking about the artificial football universe? It's not artificial. It might be compartmentalized. Perhaps even overly serious or self important, but not artificial.
BGF - I thought Wimbley played defensive end in college? I guess if he wasn't that leaves Hawk/Carpenter and the NC State line as the only examples of Greggg's theory I can think of (which I reckon are two more examples than he was able to think of). I bet there are more, but I'm also sure there are plenty of examples (like Chad Johnson/Houshmandzadeh) that even it out.
I guess the Browns were a candidate to pick Jackson at 5. I can't say that would be a great idea either though...Jackson didn't seem as impressive without Dorsey on the line next to him.
not to sound like an overly conceited Patriots fan (because I am! a Patriots fan at least, not a conceited one) who raves that Belichick is the smahtest coach evah, but looking at how his assistants seem to fade into bolivian after leaving the Patriots seems to suggest that he really is the mind behind the whole Patriots system.
Do you think Gregg gets mad when he watches a color film about any time period before the 1940's, or whenever color film was invented?
And I think Pro Bowls are doubly bogus for fullbacks. I used to get so bugged out about Alstott being named to the Pro Bowl as a fullback when he was used much more as a running back. Jameel Cook was the Buc's fullback during the Dunn/Alstott days.
[nitpick]Also, a second round choice this year is roughly equivalent to a first round choice next year. Is the common thinking, anyway.[/nitpick]
I will say this about same college/same position guys. I think it makes a difference the most at DL, CB, and WR. If one guy is getting frequently double-teamed, then other guys are getting better chances to make plays. At CB, if you have a true shutdown corner on one side, the guy on the other side is going to have more chances for highlights. Granted, in either case you still have to make plays. Also, scouts should be watching game film and taking this into account.
Also, I don't know that I saw any BC games this past season, but maybe nobody did run inside on them with much success.
I get the feeling that if Heyward-Bey had gone to a different team in the second round, his chances of success would be much higher. Or a different team at all.
About the Jason Campbell thing, unless a team is certain that they have the absolute best player in the NFL at a given position, they have to be open to upgrading that position. Now, there are better ways to do that than others, but still.
Oh, Marcus Stroud, Richard Seymour, and Charles Grant all played on the UGA D-line for at least a year or two together, although Grant had injury issues.
Martin, its ok if you disagree with me. I have to say the draft needs to go back to that noon time slot and not turned into a three day thing. I don't really actually care what the NFL does as long as they don't screw up what they are doing. I love football and it has been very, very good to me.
As I have indicated previously, I have so many questions about how effective Jason Peters is going to be in Philly, I think it is complete nonsense to question why Buffalo did not resign him. The Tony Gonzalez signing was brilliant but a 2nd round pick is more than fair compensation for him.
Martin, you are absolutely right that USC lost because of the D-line and not the LB's. Rodgers had massive holes to run through and that is on the D-line. Linebackers are generally at the mercy of a good d-line and this is a good example of that. If the d-line doesn't do their job, it is hard for the LB's to do theirs.
I agree with your assessment of draft picks. 3rd round is not a high draft choice to me and 6th begins the late rounds.
You have to ask a Pats fan but I am pretty sure Weis shaped Brady more than anyone else on that team. McDaniels is more responsible for Brady's later success and of course Matt Cassel.
I try to ignore the Gregg when it comes to the artificial football universe.
Ivn, you may be exactly right, I was just thinking Wimberly was a LB like he is in Cleveland. I was just assuming he stayed at the same position, you may have a point there. I still don't know about the accuracy of Gregg's theory though.
LSU is like my adopted college team, not my real one, but the one I end up watching a lot of football by them because I like Les Miles' coaching methods and really Jackson did not stand out to me this year. Maybe I am crazy.
As far as Belichick goes, I am not going to ever question his intelligence or really who the brains of the operation is. I have seen Crennel, McDaniels, and others try to do similar things to him and fail miserably. I believe he is the brains of that operation. He runs his team like I run my Madden team, it's crazy. I don't want to talk video games, but I accumulate draft picks and trade from a position of strength. He is a master at that.
Casey, I think Gregg gets angry any time he watches something that is not logical or if there have been some technological advances after the airing of a show.
I will toot Hoover's horn for a second but it does irritate me Alstott made all those Pro Bowls. He doesn't get enough credit for the Carolina running game...just almost no credit actually, there is a reason DeAngelo Williams had massive holes last year and it wasn't just the offensive line...but he is 33 soon, so he needs a backup.
Thanks for the information on the Georgia d-line. I tell you what, that is a hell of a line isn't it? How about John Henderson and Albert Haynesworth? Weren't they together at Tennessee? I may be slammed at work tomorrow and this may be a good challenge, to either prove or disprove Gregg's theory. I am intrigued.
If Heyward-Bey was drafted in the 3rd round by a different team, I would love the choice, but to pass up Crabtree, Maclin, and Harvin for him is insanity in my opinion.
I personally think Jason Campbell has gotten the shaft with all the coaches and coordinators but I have no problem with Washington looking to move up.
I guess I forgot the "next" in that sentence huh?
other examples from the last 10 first rounds: Michael Haynes and Jimmy Kennedy at Penn State; John Henderson and Albert Haynesworth at Tennessee; Phillip Buchanon, Mike Rumph, and Ed Reed at Miami; Vince Wilfork, William Joseph and Jerome McDougle at Miami; Reggie Wayne and Santana Moss at Miami; Ryan Sims and Julius Peppers at UNC; Ronnie Brown and Cadillac Williams at Auburn; Dwayne Bowe and Buster Davis from LSU; Jevon Kearse and Reggie McGrew (who?) from Florida; Sedrick Ellis and Lawrence Jackson from USC; Felix Jones and Darren McFadden from Arkansas
the last two examples are too early to tell for sure, but it actually looks like Gregggggg might be onto something here. if only he'd, you know, done some research.
oh! and some highlights from the new Sports Guy column:
- he kind of defends Rondo's foul on Miller last night (although to be fair he does say later on Rondo should be suspended)
- complaining about the refs and following it up with a sarcastic "The NBA ... it's FANNNNNNtastic! I love this game!" (one of his trademarks)
- patting himself on the back for one of his predictions: "First, this is now the greatest first-round series since the NBA expanded to a best-of-seven format -- no matter how it turns out -- and I just wish I could have predicted that a week ago. (Wait, I did???? Really? I'm never right! This is great!)"
- the Pantheon of Faces: "the Brad Miller 'I just got whacked in the face, my lip is swelling, my mouth tastes like blood, I'm seeing stars, and now I have to make two humongous free throws' Face as well as the Brad Miller 'I just missed the first free throw, now I really have to play up how much this hurts and act like I might keel over' Face"
- bizarre Monopoly reference: "Rondo has now passed the oranges, the reds and the greens and moved toward Park Place and Boardwalk on the Monopoly board of point guards," followed by more gushing over Rondo
- Varsity Blues reference: "The honors still go to Mox's 'Varsity Blues' football team for refusing to come out for the second half of the climactic game unless coach Bud Kilmer went away," in reference to the Hornets rolling over and dying against Denver
- the most bizarre theory I've ever heard: "You know what else? A reader (can't remember his name) pointed out something to me that I passed along in a podcast and now I will mention here: Kidd is the only guy who can defend LeBron and Kobe. Why? They respect him too much. They don't want to kick his butt. It doesn't make them feel good. They settle for jumpers instead of just destroying him off the dribble in a goofy display of guilt and respect." (what the fuck?)
- patting himself on the back for one of his predictions, part II: "Q: Why haven't you mentioned the Blazers or taken a shot at Greg Oden yet?
A: Because I might have an entire Blazers column in me and don't want to step on it. Stay tuned. Let's see what happens Thursday."
- Pantheon of Faces-ish, part II: "He let down LeBron so many times that LeBron developed an actual 'Drew Gooden disappointed me yet again and I might have to kill him soon' frown."
- Lost reference (a Simmonsite mentions it but Billy runs with it)
- a new corollary/theory: "Just one. I call it the Andre Iguodala Corollary -- namely, if you just sucked for the last two minutes of Game 1, bricked two free throws and missed another shot, you are not allowed to prance around like a superstar if you happen to make an absolutely atrocious stutter-step fallaway for the lead -- a shot that you never should have taken in a million years. I will allow you to chest-bump a teammate or two, but that's it," which includes...
- a reference from a movie made in 1992 that I had never heard of: "(Best example: Kobe's game-winner against the Suns in 2006 that recently made the slew of cool playoff commercials. We haven't seen an imitation that uncomfortable since Jennifer Jason Leigh got Bridget Fonda's haircut in 'Single White Female.')"
aaand that's about it.
I think I like the term Simmonsite more than SimmonsClone. I don't know if I am in the mood to a self referential count and a pop culture count in an article or not. I read the column and it did not annoy me all that much really other than what you just brought up, which is sad because usually his columns get me pretty fired up. You did a great job of recapping the article and I don't know if I can handle any more "Faces" or "Pantheon" shit, its slowly driving me crazy. Also, that thing at the end about Larry Bird, if it was Mike Dunleavy showing no reaction, Bill would have made a joke about how he is really dead or doesn't care.
You know, Gregg may very well be on to something, I would have liked to have seen some examples like you just made. I am trying to think of other guys who were teammates and actually ended up doing well in the NFL. Thanks for the breakdown on Simmons though, I haven't decided if I will cover it or not. I am slammed at work tomorrow so I don't know what I am going to do about that. I think Rondo should have been thrown out though but I am glad he wasn't.
"If the USC LB's are so great, why did they lose to Oregon (State)?"
Hmm, dickless. Maybe because Matt "I'm worth three players and two draft picks" Sanchez could only score 21 points against the might OSU defense despite having a bevy of track stars and a great offensive system at his disposal.
Nope. Got to be the linebackers, dickless.
PS: The word verification word is "Swinated". How cool is that?
two explanatory notes
1.) "might" should say "mighty"
2.) dickless refers to Easterbrook, not any of you fine, fine fellers!
I hate one of the professional writers from FJMariotti had to come over and be the one to tie my obvious dislike for Mark Sanchez in with a horrible point that Gregg Easterbrook made. I should have been smart enough to put those two together.
That's a great point. Sanchez and that offense did only score 21 points. Hmmm...I guess the Jets forgot to watch that game tape. Swinated is a cool word, I wonder if I could fit it into a post at some point and anyone would think it was a real word.
It's ok if you called us dickless, we understand you were just talking about TMQ and so you were angry and did not mean it.
I suppose you could add Brandon Jacobs to the Cadillac Williams/Ronnie Brown duo at Auburn. He was there for a year until he transferred to S. Illinois, so he could get some carries, I guess.
Post a Comment