Monday, October 19, 2009

25 comments MMQB Review: Late, Late Edition

Last night after Sunday's NFL games I knew this was going to be a potentially unbearable MMQB from Peter King. Brett Favre led another comeback, the team Peter recently discovered in New Orleans is playing like they are unstoppable and he doesn't even need a good excuse to mention how good New England is this week because they played incredibly well Sunday. What confuses me is that it took Peter longer to post his MMQB this morning. He is talking about great of a quarterback Brett Favre has been, doesn't he have a standard template he uses for things like this? "Brett Favre is grizzled, doesn't care about stats, does whatever it takes to get his team to win, this is why he came out of retirement, these are a great bunch of guys, he's really showing those who thought he was done, I wish that I could spend every day with him."

For the record again, I never said Favre would stink 6 games into the season, I said come the end of the year when he gets tired I will be interested to see how he plays. Regardless, these are topics I thought Peter could cover without taking extra time to write about them but I guess I was wrong. How am I supposed to be able to have the time to mock Peter if he can't get his MMQB out on time? It's really not fair to me and my schedule. He needed some extra time to think about the proper way to fawn over his favorite players and teams I guess.

NEW YORK -- We usually start with the winners in this space every Monday, and we'll get to them soon enough. But today, there's something so compelling about the Washington Redskins I've got to start there.

"Compelling" meaning "they are located near where I live so they are more interesting because I pay more attention to them than any other crappy team in the league."

"Jim's doing too much,'' Cerrato told me. "He's coaching the quarterbacks, putting the game plan together, calling the plays, coaching the team. We need Jim to coach the team, to do what a head coach does. It's been 14 games now [the Redskins are a toothless 4-10 since last Halloween], and we've got to do something.''

I like how Zorn is doing too much and the team is winless, so they want him to do a little bit less and they will hope the team will actually win games. It's almost like the coach is part of the problem.

I expect Washington to give this new play-calling thing three or four weeks, and when that doesn't work, then Zorn will be dismissed. I was told Sunday night that the logical in-season successor, defensive coordinator Greg Blache, doesn't want the job,

For nearly every coordinator under the age of 55 in the NFL, a head coaching gig is the ultimate prize they each strive for. For a coordinator to not want an interim job because he is afraid it will mess up his chances to get another head coaching job says a lot about how good Blanche thinks the Redskins are.

I personally don't believe the Redskins are in as bad of shape as everyone thinks they are. They need a new coach and a quarterback, but there is talent on that roster. Some smart coach will take over and go 8-8 with them next year I bet.

Speaking of big-name coaches, it wouldn't surprise me if Dan Snyder had dinner with one of them this weekend. Jon Gruden will be in town to do the Monday night game for ESPN. Jon Gruden wants back into football. Jon Gruden can coach quarterbacks.

Can Jon Gruden coach quarterbacks? Or is this just a rumor based on the fact he won a Super Bowl with Brad Johnson as his QB? I feel like Gruden always wants veteran quarterbacks and he doesn't actually teach young quarterbacks well. Brad Johnson, Jeff Garcia, Rich Gannon...there is a difference in having a young quarterback to coach and an old quarterback to coach. I don't know about Gruden and his success in coaching young quarterbacks really.

It seems as if Gruden is a coach who more accumulates young quarterbacks than actually develops and teaches them well.

I turned to Tony Dungy in our NBC viewing room at Rockefeller Center and said, "The Giants are going to have to go for it on fourth down for the rest of the game. They just have no hope of stopping Drew Brees.

Great story by Peter.

In the spring, I power-rated the Saints as the 24th-best team in football. I thought there was no hope for their defense. "Twenty-fourth!'' Sean Payton said to me a few months ago in amazement. Talk about one I wish I had back. The Saints aren't the best defense in the game, but they make up for any lack of talent by playing with an edgy attitude with defensive coordinator Gregg Williams sending rushers from anywhere.

Literally anywhere. They cut holes in the floor of the dome and have pass rushers pop through the floor of the dome to sack the quarterback. Yesterday, Jonathan Vilma swung from a rope on the ceiling and chased down Eli Manning and cause an incompletion. Later Sedrick Ellis hit Brandon Jacobs for a loss in the parking lot after the game. These Saints are relentless and Peter noticed.

Then Peter turned to Tony Dungy and said, "these Saints play with an edgy attitude because of Gregg Williams by sending rushers from anywhere" and then told us about this one sentence conversation in his MMQB.

I think a Minnesota-New Orleans NFC Championship Game would be one of the most anticipated football games of this era.

This would be one of the most anticipated games by Peter King. White quarterbacks who fling the ball around the field with abandon are a big turn-on for Peter. I wonder if by "era" Peter means the "Derek Jeter is the best baseball player of my lifetime" time span, which is actually only over the last 20 years or "era" means an actual era which should span a lot longer than 20 years in my mind.

Either way, maybe Peter is overexaggerating by calling this potential game one of the most anticipated football games of this era. Maybe just a little bit? Or a whole lot? I am not saying I wouldn't want to watch the game, but I think this statement is more a reflection of how much Peter likes these two teams more than a reflection of how anticipated the game would be.

I don't even know how to respond to this assertion other than to ramble about how I disagree with it. I may need a break.

(The sound of Bengoodfella leaving the attic for the first time in 2 months, going outside to breathe oxygen, choking a little on the oxygen reaching his lungs for the first time in months, and him slowly sneaking back in the house and up to the attic before his mom notices.)

Think of it: Brees and his all-world offense in one corner.
Brett Favre, if he survives the year, in the other corner, with his sidekick Adrian Peterson. God, don't let any of those three men get hurt before January.

Yes, please God don't let any of these players get hurt so Peter's favorite choice of NFC Championship Games can come true. It's not even a matter of playing the rest of the year, these teams are in the NFC Championship as long as these three players stay healthy. As far as the other players on the Saints and Vikings, no one gives a crap if they even die or not. They aren't important to the team at all. It's good to see Peter openly cheers for certain teams and players to do well from week to week.

But Peterson rushed for 143 yards on 22 carries, and Favre ate the Baltimore secondary alive -- completing 72 percent of his throws with three touchdowns and no interceptions. There's no better combo platter of rusher and passer out there now, and I challenge you to think back to when there was.

Kurt Warner and Marshall Faulk.

Kurt Warner and Marshall Faulk come to mind, but Faulk wasn't the inside runner Peterson is.

And Adrian Peterson isn't quite the receiver that Marshall Faulk was either...not to mention Kurt Warner arguably had a much better year in 2000 and 2001 then Brett Favre could end up having this year. I say at the best it is a draw for Favre and Peterson for this comparison. Let's not get too excited Peter, the Baltimore secondary hasn't exactly been lock down all year and the season isn't even over yet. I know Peter is pumped to give some accolades to Favre and the Vikings but I think Favre and Peterson fall short from Faulk and Warner.

I am sure there are even better running back and wide receiver combinations that can match up with Favre-Peterson, but I am just not remembering them right now.

Two last points on Peterson. We were stunned at NBC Sunday to see the Vikings -- with 2:30 left in the game, trailing Baltimore 31-30, with a third-and-nine at the Ravens' 17 -- to not go aggressively for the first down. "We were a little surprised too,'' Peterson said. Peterson ran for a three-yard gain, with the Vikings happy to settle for the field goal. It was a poor call because the Ravens had scored 21 points in the fourth quarter, the Vikes looked gassed on defense, and even if Ryan Longwell made the field goal, Baltimore would have two minutes to win it.

Thank you Gregg Easterbrook. Actually, I agree the Vikings should have thrown on third down, but they got lucky and it didn't hurt them. I guess fortune didn't favor the bold here.

The Fine Fifteen

Actually it's the Nice Nineteen this week.

Then just call it the Nice Nineteen. It's your column.

2. Minnesota (6-0). Brett Favre's never been 6-0 before.

Well, that is complete justification to put Minnesota at #2 right now. I am not disagreeing, just not liking using Brett Favre's own milestones as a reason to put the Vikings somewhere in a power poll.

5. New England (4-2). Either the Tennessee Titans are Secaucus High, or the Patriots might have taken their first snowy steps back to prominence Sunday.

Back to prominence? They have already beaten #7 and #12 on Peter's Nice Nineteen. I would say they are already there. Quit underselling this Patriots team so you can write stories about how they did so well to bounce back.

9. Green Bay (3-2).Aaron Rodgers completed passes (29 of them) to nine receivers Sunday. It's fitting that 34-year-old Donald Driver was the one to lead them. Seven catches, 107 yards, giving him 602 career catches, setting the Packers' all-time record. Hallowed ground: more catches than Don Hutson and Sterling Sharpe.

I thought achieving personal milestones could get you in the Top 5 of Peter's power poll? This should at least put Green Bay at #2. It was a personal milestone!

I know, I know the Vikings deserve it.

14. (tie) Miami (2-3). Not sure how long they'll be here. Next three games: Saints, at Jets, at Pats. As that noted football analyst Scooby Doo would say, "Ruh-Roh.''

As Bengoodfella would say, "What??????"

14. (tie) Arizona (3-2). If the Cards would be consistent, I'd know what to do with them. Of course, can't you say that about every team but the top three or four in here?

"I wish the Cardinals were consistent because I don't know where to put them. Of course that goes for every team but three or four teams, so basically I have no idea where to put any of these teams."

"I just gave that team the win.''

-- Jets quarterbackMark Sanchez, after throwing five interceptions in the Jets' 16-13 overtime loss to the Bills.

But, but................his poise in the pocket. His decision making ability....I have already started chiseling his plaque for the NFL Hall of Fame...he's an attractive quarterback in the largest market in the United States...........he is the greatest quarterback in Jets history. This can't be happening! Mark Sanchez may not be a great quarterback yet?

He's a rookie. This is why I don't get all excited when I see him have a couple of good games. Once teams get a report on him, notice his tendencies and how to stop him from being efficient, it is a whole new ball game.

JaMarcus Russell, QB, Oakland.
Russell removed the arrows from his back long enough to play good, but not great Sunday in Oakland. But no player in the league had been as bad in the first six weeks of the season as Russell, so his outing against the Eagles is worthy of mention here, with congratulations. Russell completed 17 of 28 passes for 224 yards, with a TD and two interceptions.

The odds of me leaving off JaMarcus Russell: 0.001%

This was not a good game for JaMarcus Russell, this was a death rattle. Congratulations though JaMarcus, for one game you were a competent NFL quarterback who still threw more interceptions than touchdowns. The Raiders defense held the Eagles to 9 points. I think that had something to do with the victory as well. Let's give the Raiders defense a little credit here and not credit Russell too much for leading his offense to a mammoth 13 points.

Goat of the Week

Dante Wesley, DB, Carolina.

As I pointed out earlier in this column, there is absolutely no excuse for launching yourself into a defenseless return man without the ball, the way Wesley did against Clifton Smith of the Bucs. The more I watched the play Sunday night, the more I was repulsed. It was barbaric.

For the record, it was barbaric, but Peter didn't mention this earlier in the column.

(Seriously, he needs to only quit mentioning negative things some teams do. Carolina ran for 250+ yards yesterday and he only writes about the negative. If you are going to ignore teams, just ignore them, don't only write the bad things they do or bad things that happen in their games.)

but many Eagle fans are ambivalent about Reid; he's turned the Eagles into consistent winners but never has led the team to a Super Bowl victory. I thought I'd compare Reid at this stage of his career to another long-term Pennsylvania coach, Bill Cowher, who also had some in Pennsylvania questioning whether he should keep his job after 10 or 11 years.

This is actually a great point by Peter. How come people tend to forget that Pittsburgh fans weren't always completely enamored with Cowher and Cowher couldn't win the Super Bowl or AFC Championship Games at home? He won 1 Super Bowl and now we have all forgotten about all of this. Bill Cowher is now considered a legendary coach and his name is attached to nearly every team that needs a head's amazing what winning one extra game (the Super Bowl) can do to a coach's reputation.

There was a time when Steelers fans were not too happy with Cowher losing home playoff games and his overall ability to be the best possible coach for the Steelers, but once Cowher won a Super Bowl, all of this has been forgotten and he is a legend in everyone's mind.

Readers of this column know I'm a faithful follower of the Red Sox. And maybe the Yankees aren't any different from many teams and many products all over sporting America. It's just that, $10 for a cup of hot chocolate, I think we'd all agree, is over the top.

In a place with $6 hot dogs, $2,000 seats, and $260 million dollar baseball players...for Peter King $10 for a cup of hot chocolate is over the top. Every man has his breaking point and we have just found Peter's. I find it interesting a guy who spends $5 daily (minimum) at Starbucks on coffee has $10 hot chocolate at a cold autumn game to be his breaking point.

(This is the point where Blogger didn't save anything I typed or edited because "an error occurred." Seriously, screw you Blogger, this isn't the first time this has happened and I don't have time to deal with this shit. It's bad enough I had to wait around for Peter to actually post his column, but now Blogger gives me problems. Sure, I'll re-write the second half of the post again, no I feel better.)

1. U2 was good. Breathe, Ultraviolet, Walk On, City of Blinding Lights and New Year's Day sounded best to me. I liked the acoustics, relatively speaking, in JerryWorld.

Congratulations U2. You and Bruce Springsteen have cornered the market on white, middle aged people liking your band. You should feel proud. Somewhere Dave Matthews Band waits in the wings for their time to take over the crown.

4. Never, ever, ever eat airport Chinese food. I know it smells good when you pass by, but remember the last time you got it, and the sesame chicken was 70 percent breading, 15 percent inedible goo over the breading, 6 percent gristle, 4 percent tough meat, and 2 percent sesame? It hasn't changed. Walk on by.

I am just sad Peter didn't tell us about his bowel movement after he ate this food. It's so un-Peter King like.

9. Since when did it become OK for flight attendants to pass the hat for a cause? I'm all in favor of breast-cancer research and fund-raising, but on airplanes? Every leg of every Delta flight? On an early-morning Delta flight, one flight attendant told us she'd let us sleep as long as we donated enough money (chuckling), but then semi-strong-armed us ('We can do better than $315, folks!'') when the first passing of the hat didn't result in enough money for her liking. I'd be interested in your responses on this, but it struck me as a little creepy.

It's ok for Peter King to brow beat his readers and people around the NFL to donate to Dr. Z's cause every week in his MMQB, but it's creepy to have flight attendants pass a hat around for this supposed "breast cancer research." I guess that is Peter's stance on this issue. Not to mention we are a couple weeks off an interview where Peter admitted he makes a ridiculous amount of money, so really Peter doesn't come off too well here.

Ok, I will admit it is 10% creepy to do this, but I can't reconcile this with the fact Peter spent 2 months asking for contributions for the Dr. Z fund.

b. A long, long time ago -- oh, maybe four weeks -- most of us were saying the NFC East was the best division in football. We'll see how things play out this year, but right now I think the AFC North and NFC North might be better, and the NFC South is close.

The NFC South has two really crappy teams. There is no way they are one of the better divisions in football.

i. Starting strong safety for Houston Sunday: Bernard Pollard.

I thought they kicked Bernard Pollard out of the league for ruining the Patriots season last year and forcing the cancellation of the NFL season. I can't believe Pollard didn't get kicked out of the NFL and is still being allowed to play. This is the most interesting statement I have read all day.

2. I think I've got to question the Bears leaving themselves without a pick in the first two rounds for two straight drafts. I liked the Jay Cutler trade, which cost two first-round picks, a third- and Kyle Orton. But in sending their 2010 second-rounder to Tampa Bay for disappointing pass-rusher Gaines Adams

John Saunders said on Sports Reporters the Bills should trade Terrell Owens to the Bears. What does he expect the Bears to give the Bills since they don't have a 1st or 2nd round pick? I don't know if a package starting with a 3rd round pick would get the job done. Ideas are great as long as they are actually possible.

a. Wes Welker, 10 catches for 150. Ho hum.

(Using the Boston accent I can't type) Greatest receiver ever!

e. Jacksonville: 33 first downs. Maurice Jones-Drew: 33 rushes. For 133 yards.

Congratulations Jacksonville, this is the only mention you will be getting from Peter this week. He doesn't even know what state you are located in.

Also, Atlanta Falcons fans you should expect no mention from Peter about your team beating Peter's choice for the Super Bowl this year. The Washington Redskins are way more compelling than your team because they are so bad and Peter likes them more than he likes your team. Sorry, thems the brakes.

f. You think Cleveland's drop problem ended with the trade of Braylon Edwards? Wrong. Eleven more in two games weeks since the trade.

I think Cleveland has a talent problem, not just a drop problem. It's good Browns fans have nothing to look forward to since Eric Mangini seems intent on selling the entire team off and the Browns ownership is going to allow him to do this. There is really no reason why Mangini would want to know if Brady Quinn can be an NFL quarterback or not is there? Why not start him and either win games, pump up his trade value or keep losing...other than that clause in his contract giving him money if he takes 75% of the team's snaps.

a. Shouldn't every Curb Your Enthusiasm show this season feature the Seinfeld cast?

Yes, that should happen and then we should call the show "Seinfeld." This is almost as good an idea as giving Michael Strahan his own television show.

e. Congrats, Laura King, for running your first half-marathon Sunday in San Francisco. Wish we could have been there. You're an inspiration to your too-dormant old man.

I think it is sad Peter King can't tell his daughter this over email, phone, fax, text, Tweet or carrier pigeon and he has to use his MMQB to announce it to hundreds of thousands of people who don't care just to get it to his daughter.

f. After watching C.C. Sabathia plow though the Angels Friday night, one leftover thought from the sudden end to the Red Sox season:

Can we really count the Red Sox getting swept over a four day span as "sudden?"

h. I can't take these playoff off-days. Joel Sherman made a great point in the New York Post the other day: Last year, the Phils had 15 off-days in the playoffs ... and major-league teams had 19 scheduled off-days during the six-month regular season. I cover a sport that's a slave to TV. But baseball allows the momentum of the games at the most important time of year to be interrupted consistently.

This is the second time I have agreed with Peter in this MMQB. It doesn't make up for the rest of the MMQB though.

Bill Simmons is wiping the floor with me in the ESPN Pick 'Em and I am tied with Peter King. This has been a bad year for me with any competition related to this blog. I am horrible in the Fantasy Football league and I can't seem to outpick Peter and Bill Simmons.


KentAllard said...

The proper way to type it is "Greatest receivah EVAH!"

I've said it before, but if the Super Bowl ends up being between New England and Minnesota, Peter's column bukkakes will drive me to suicide.

Since you've been losing info to Blogger, why not type things up in your word processing program, then transfer it? That way you won't lose saved info. I write posts in Word, copy it to Notepad (Since you can't copy straight from Word to Blogger without destroying the formatting), then copying it to Blogger. That way prosperity won't be deprived of my words of wisdom on various giant snake movies.

Martin said...

Peter and some of these other baseball commenters have been making a similar mistake. They are counting days between playoff series as "off days". If a series ends early, they can't jsut start the next series, they have to wait for the for the 2nd day after what would be the last day of that round in the playoffs. Barry Larkin said the same thing the other day, but with TV constraints and having to make schedules with stadiums in advance, they can't just start up series the day after one ends. How can they not understand this?

The Casey said...

I expect Washington to give this new play-calling thing three or four weeks, and when that doesn't work, then Zorn will be dismissed. I was told Sunday night that the logical in-season successor, defensive coordinator Greg Blache, doesn't want the job,

Not "if that doesn't work", but "when that doesn't work". Nice that Peter has confidence in this move. Not that he really should. And I think Campbell is a serviceable QB, but I think the coaching is killing him. He seems like he's regressed over the past couple of years. Not that he was ever going to be Peyton Manning, but he wasn't this bad.

Troy Aikman and Emmitt Smith? Peyton Manning and Faulk or Edge James? Montana and Craig? Elway and Terrell Davis?

JaMarcus was mediocre! Somebody get that man a contract extension!

I'm hoping that Peter's newfound infatuation with the Saints will cause some attention spillover for the rest of the NFC South. It's just ridiculous that in a six or seven page column he can't mention more than a small handful of teams.


RuleBook said...

- I think a Minnesota-New Orleans NFC Championship Game would be one of the most anticipated football games of this era.

Ok, Peter, let's not get ahead of ourselves. The last time the Saints went 5-0 was 1993, and they finished with a record of 8-8, and missed the playoffs. The last time the Vikings started the season 6-0 was 2003. They finished the season with a record of 9-7 and missed the playoffs. Just remember that every season, some team starts off hot, and collapses down the stretch. After week 12 last season, wasn't everyone talking about what would happen if the Jets and Giants both hosted conference championship games?

- I would say Warner and Faulk as well. However, I've been trying to think of a good way to compare the two combos, but it's hard since Favre and Peterson haven't had a full season together.

The best I can come up with is to look at the first 6 games of the 1999 season (their first season together).

Faulk 1999: 88 car, 502 yds, 5.7 ypc, 2 TD; 34 rec, 293 yds, 8.6 avg, 1 TD; 0 Fumbles
Peterson 2009: 121 car, 624 yds, 5.2 avg, 7 TD; 14 rec, 85 yds, 6.1 avg, 0 TD; 2 Fumbles (2 lost)

In terms of scrimmage touches:
Faulk 2009: 122 touches, 795 yds, 6.5 avg, 3 TD
Peterson 2009: 135 touches, 709 yds, 5.3 avg, 7 TD

Warner 1999: 118/162 (72.8%), 1531 yds (9.45 ypa), 18 TD, 3 INT, 9 sacks, 3 fumbles (3 lost)
Favre 2009: 124/178 (69.7%), 1347 yds (7.57 ypa), 12 TD, 2 INT, 14 sacks, 0 fumbles

I don't know what any of this says except that Faulk and Warner had better averages than Peterson or Favre. However, from the "stats don't tell everything" department, Favre has Sidney Rice and Bernard Berrian to throw to, while Warner had Isaac Bruce and Torry Holt, so that will skew the numbers if you only want a QB/RB comparison.

One additional comment:
Faulk wasn't the inside runner Peterson is.

So what? Who cares that Faulk isn't the same inside runner Peterson is? Barry Sanders wasn't the same inside runner either! Since when was a RB's value confined to how well he runs between the tackles? Faulk had a better yards per carry average in his 6 game stretch.

However, in Peterson's defense, 1999 was Faulk's best year in terms of rushing average (5.5). His career average was only 4.3. Peterson was 5.6 ypc in his rookie season, and his current career average is 5.2, so he's probably still a better pure runner as Faulk. However, Faulk may be the best receiving RB of all time.

In summary: I don't think there is any possible way to say that Favre/Peterson is definitively better than Warner/Faulk, but I don't think the distinction between the two is as clear-cut as I imagined it would be. Maybe we'll look back on this near the end of the season and see what we get.

- Since we certainly don't want to give Jamarcus Russell any credit around here, allow me to mention that his one TD was 86 yds (basically, a third of his total yards), and most of the yards were gained by his TE after catching the ball and breaking tackles.

In other words, the fact that Jamarcus Russell gets accolades for throwing 1 TD and ONLY 2 INTs is, I think, proof that he is as awful as we think he is.

- Philly fans are obnoxious. I'm a Cowboys fan. I haven't seen a playoff victory since the 1996 season. I would love to have a coach that could do what Reid did.

Reid has won the division in 5 of his 10 seasons. He has made the playoffs 7 of his 10 seasons. He has won at least one playoff game in every one of those 7 seasons. He has been to 5 NFC championship games in his 10 seasons. He has been to one Super Bowl. In the 16 seasons before Reid, the Eagles were 2-6 in the playoffs, and won their division exactly once. I personally can't figure out what makes Reid such a good coach, since his game management decisions often confound me, but the numbers don't lie. He, and McNabb for that matter, are exceptional, and Philly should embrace the amazing success they have had, because it can be much, much worse.

AJ said...

I was gonna say what Kent said...type it all up in word then copy and paste it over (unless of course the copy and paste function doesn't work here...).

So King is saying that no one expected the Saints to be this good, and he has them ranked number 1 in his stupidity poll...yet Brees is NOT the MVP? This makes sense how? Oh, I forgot who we were talking about, nevermind.

Lets not get ahead of ourselves on this Vikings talk. They have yet to really play a decent team. They will lose next week for sure, probably lose at GB, lose to Arizona, and get killed by the Giants. Every other game should be a cakewalk. The Giants and Saints will finish 1 and 2...leaving the Vik's at 3. So they will have to play either the Saints or Giants in the second round. They are not beating either of those teams. So his "dream" matchup in the NFC Championship is not gonna happen.

So all we get out of the Sanchez game is a little quote? After gushing over him for 10 weeks straight? Wow.

I love his breakdown of the hot chocolate. He even did research, if thats what you call it. I wish he would have done this for beer as well...and water...and anything else sold at a stadium. I thought it was pretty well known you are getting ripped off if you buy anything at a game. I don't need any sort of research to tell me exactly how much of a rip off it is. I'm well aware that paying $9 for a beer is WELL over what it takes to produce it...duh.

Does he have to sense of prespective? I mean he goes into that story about how much a ticket cost way back in the 70's. Of course he failed to mention that for his work he probably would have only gotten paid $3 an hour instead of the amount he makes now. If you are making only $20,000 a year and it costs $10 for a ticket...isn't that the same as making $200,000 a year and a ticket costing $100?

Did anyone else understand the thing about Tiger Woods and U2 saying that song was for him? I mean I have no idea wtf he is talking about, or what U2 means. Anyone?

His Mark Cuban comment is typical...he doens't get a thing, even when its obvious. Cuban is my new hero.

"Billboards coming down in Buffalo this morning?" Anyone else watch this pathetic game? If so, I believe you know the answer to Kings question. The answer is no, the billboards are staying up.

Im also confused with the "Seattle wins at home by 41, then loses at home by 24. That's the season in Seattle.". They have played 6 games, is that a full season for them?

There is just so much crap in this article this week. The whole Ed Hochuli thing, like anyone wants to hear him explain the exact call. No one cares, all they care about is if the call is correct or not.

I could write tons on this Rush thing, and I have for one of my Masters classes....however, for the sake of space, I'll just say King is an idiot. And anyone who agrees with his reasons are hypocrites. "But Limbaugh would have been a living, breathing, daily distraction, and that's something the NFL wasn't going to have." Really?? Ever heard of a guy names Vick?

Bengoodfella said...

Thanks Kent for showing me how to type it. I still would screw it up. I don't think I could emotionally handle Minnesota in the Super Bowl.

I actually do type in Word sometimes and then transfer it to Blogger, but then re-format I may go Word to Notepad to Blogger based on your recommendation. Seriously, I know very little about computers and how to transfer stuff. It's actually embarrassing.

Martin, I get what you are saying and I don't think the MLB playoffs are as bad as the NBA or NHL playoffs simply because they are interminable. The fact there is a relatively tight schedule for games, teams have to go across country and various other issues never have stopped me from complaining about this. I just want to see baseball all the time, which is impossible.

Rulebook, it was just last year everyone was getting excited about a NYG-NYJ Super Bowl, which is why I am too excited at this point for a Minn-NO NFC Championship.

I think we should wait until the end of the season before we start getting excited over how great Peterson and Favre have been this year. I actually in my original post, before Blogger struck, did acknowledge Warner had Holt and Bruce while Favre doesn't have near those receivers at his disposal. Peterson is a better inside runner, but I don't know if that means he is a better running back overall or not. I think Faulk is superior as a receiver, which is really obvious from the numbers you showed, and I think that is what sets Faulk apart. Peterson does have a nice YPC average compared to Faulk.

I don't think based on what you gave us, I should argue the comparison, but instead it is just a little bit early to make the comparison. Though Warner seems to definitively beat Favre in his stats, it is a bit early to tell. Thanks for the stats. I don't want you to work up the stats but I wonder how Edge and Peyton Manning or Elway and Davis would stack up to others.

Apparently Peter doesn't have any faith in Campbell and the Redskins coaching staff since he doesn't think it will work. A little Freudian slip there.

It's not that I don't want to give Russell credit, I just think he is really bad, but his numbers were greatly helped by the fact his receivers ran well with the ball after the catch. I think he could be a good QB if he wanted to be and went to a good team...ok, maybe a serviceable QB is what I think he could be.

Atlanta should have been mentioned more in his column, but I don't know outside of the hit on Clifton Smith or the Panthers running yardage either of those teams should be mentioned. They aren't very good. Hopefully a little credit will trickle down for Atlanta though.

Philly fans seem to have such high hopes for their team and don't like it when the team fails. Reid is a little bit like Cowher in that he appeared in a few NFC Championship games without winning one and his fans don't appreciate him. A lot of teams would want a coach like that.

His problems are X's and O's, like not running against the Raiders yesterday and poor game management it does shock me how the team keeps winning, but they do. I wasn't sold on Kolb either, but it looks like Reid already has the McNabb heir apparent on the team, which says something about his ability to draft to me. I know it is hard to be appreciative of Reid for Eagles fans but many teams would want the amount of success in a coach he has had.

RuleBook said...

Since Elway/Davis were together for 4 years, it's hard to know which season to use. However, since we're theoretically considering this Vikings team being a Super Bowl team, and we used the Rams' first Super Bowl year. I'm going to use this as the standard for Elway/Davis, as well as for Aikman/Smith. For Manning/James, I'm going to select the season that they started 13-0 (since James wasn't there for the super bowl season). That seems like it would have been a similar type of season. I'm only going to consider the wildcard era (1990-present). Things have changed too much to consider much before that. That said, I'd say Montana/Craig, Staubach/Dorsett, and Bradshaw/Harris would belong in the discussion as well.

It should be noted that each of these teams began 6-0 except the Cowboys, who began 5-1.

So here's a comparison for 5 different RBs, and 5 different QBs in the last 20 years from the best combos of the wildcard era. I'm still just using the first six games of the season in question, as that's all we have on Favre and Peterson.

- Smith 1992: 141 car, 581 yds, 4.1 ypc, 6 TD; 17 rec, 108 yds, 6.4 avg, 0 TD; 0 Fumbles

- Davis 1997: 150 car, 776 yds, 5.2 ypc, 6 TD; 8 rec, 38 yds, 4.8 avg, 0 TD; 1 Fumble (0 lost)

- Faulk 1999: 88 car, 502 yds, 5.7 ypc, 2 TD; 34 rec, 293 yds, 8.6 avg, 1 TD; 0 Fumbles

- James 2005: 142 car, 662 yds, 4.7 ypc, 5 TD; 18 rec, 164 yds, 9.1 avg, 1 TD; 2 Fumbles (1 lost

- Peterson 2009: 121 car, 624 yds, 5.2 ypc, 7 TD; 14 rec, 85 yds, 6.1 avg, 0 TD; 2 Fumbles (2 lost)

In terms of scrimmage touches:

- Smith 1992: 158 touches, 689 yds, 4.4 avg, 6 TD

- Davis 1997: 158 touches, 814 yds, 5.2 avg, 6 TD

- Faulk 1999: 122 touches, 795 yds, 6.5 avg, 3 TD

- James 2005: 160 touches, 826 yds, 5.2 avg, 6 TD

- Peterson 2009: 135 touches, 709 yds, 5.3 avg, 7 TD

And the QBs:

- Aikman 1992: 109/177 (61.6%), 1338 yds (7.56 ypa), 8 TD, 9 INT, 78.8 rating, 8 sacks, 0 fumbles

- Elway 1997: 96/168 (57.1%), 1291 yds (7.68 ypa), 12 TD, 5 INT, 93.1 rating, 11 sacks, 4 fumbles (2 lost)

- Warner 1999: 118/162 (72.8%), 1531 yds (9.45 ypa), 18 TD, 3 INT, 131.5 rating, 9 sacks, 3 fumbles (3 lost)

- Manning 2005: 118/174 (67.8%), 1314 yds (7.55 ypa), 9 TD, 4 INT, 97.7 rating, 3 sacks, 0 fumbles

- Favre 2009: 124/178 (69.7%), 1347 yds (7.57 ypa), 12 TD, 2 INT, 109.5 rating, 14 sacks, 0 fumbles

Combinations (not including sack yards) (Sum of QB passing + RB running (since RB receiving would be included in QB passing)):

- Smith/Aikman 1992 accounted for: 1919 yds in 318 plays (6.0 yards per play), 14 TDs, and 9 turnovers

- Elway/Davis 1997 accounted for: 2067 yds in 318 plays (6.5 yards per play), 18 TDs, and 7 turnovers (but had 3 additional fumbles that were not lost)

- Warner/Faulk 1999 accounted for: 2033 yds in 250 plays (8.1 yards per play), 20 TDs, and 6 turnovers

- Manning/James 2005 accounted for: 1976 yds in 316 plays (6.3 yards per play), 14 TDs, and 6 turnovers (but had 1 additional fumble that was not lost)

- Peterson/Favre 2009 accounted for: 1971 yds in 299 plays (6.6 yards per play), 19 TDs, and 4 turnovers

RuleBook said...

Things that stand out to me (in a separate post due to too many characters):
1) 6 games is a small sample size, and Smith, Manning, and Aikman all started very slow that season and got better later (The Cowboys improving as the season progresses? I didn't realize that was possible!)
2) Faulk has a remarkably higher per play average than the other, but much fewer TDs
3) Warner's rating is off the charts (and don't let the media buffoons trick you, QB rating is a very valid stat that has one of the highest correlations with victory of any standard stat).
4) Warner/Faulk ran less than 84% as many plays as the next fewest (Peterson/Favre), but was second in yards.
5) The yards per play involved in Warner/Faulk are astounding. Couple that with the fact that they had the most TDs, and were tied for second fewest INTs, and I definitely think they were the best pair.
6) In every almost measurable category (yards per touch, yards per attempt, QB rating, yards per play, TDs, INTs), Peterson/Favre and Warner/Faulk are ranked 1 and 2 in some order (the exception being that Favre is 3 in ypa).

My conclusion is that the Greatest Show on Turf was even better than most people remember, and Warner/Faulk may have been the best QB/RB combo in NFL history, but definitely the best in the last 20 years. Also, Peterson/Favre really are putting up some impressive numbers, outplaying Manning/James, Aikman/Smith, and Elway/Davis over the 6 games.

Bengoodfella said...

AJ, I think I am going to start using Word and then transferring over to Blogger. I hope it helps because I lost an entire post one time.

Peter asks like hot chocolate is the only thing at a game that is overpriced when it is every item that is overpriced. I didn't get the U2/Tiger Woods thing really. Whatever, I guess he was just happy to be there will all the celebrities.

The billboards do need to stay up. Buffalo is still not a good team. I haven't seen anything that should make us think they should go down.

The Rush Limbaugh thing would make an interesting thesis because it's not like he would be the only distraction in the league. Of course, the NFL wants it's players to be the distraction and not the ownership to be the distraction. That's all I can reason through.

Dang Rulebook, that is some good data and it really opened my eyes to how good Warner and the Rams were. It also lets me see that Peter probably is not that far off the mark. Let me add in that I want to see what they are able to do after the season is over, because I would be interested to see if they could keep it up. I don't trust Favre or Peterson to stay completely healthy the entire year or have their numbers fall off a little bit.

Those Rams teams with Faulk and Warner were very good teams. It's almost amazing to think about. I would put them as the best pair. I wonder why Faulk didn't have as many TD's? Could it be because Warner threw for TD's or something else I wonder. I don't want you to have to do this but I wonder what the rankings will be by the end of the season? If they are similar then I would have to say Peter is right about Peterson/Favre.

Not that Smith/Aikman, Elway/Davis, Manning/James weren't good but they are easily beaten by the Greatest Show on Turf.

RuleBook said...

Yeah, I'll wait a few more weeks and then we'll revisit this then. I'm not going to worry about the whole season of the others yet, because we'll have no clue how to compare them to the current Favre/Peterson combination. For example, Warner's rating dropped to 109.2 by the end of the season, but who knows what Favre's will be near the end of the season. Everyone has bad games, Favre just hasn't had it yet.

I will say, I think the reason Faulk didn't get more TDs is because between Bruce, Holt, and Hakim, one 10 yd pass could become a TD. In those 6 games, the Rams had TD passes of 46,45,20,38,and 57. They may have had others that were long, but I'm having trouble finding them (it's hard to find box scores from games back then). In other words, Faulk would get a lot of yards, but then when Warner passed, the WR would break free for a TD.

dan said...

I don't have the time to do the excellent research RuleBook did, but lets not forget about the 1998 Vikings team!

I think it is somewhat lazy of Peter King to say that this could be the best combination ever when it may not even be the best in Vikings history. Off the top of my head I think the 1998 team is the second highest scoring team in NFL history behind only the Pats. I could be wrong though.

Now long term, Randall Cunningham and Robert Smith aren't hall of famers but for that year, they were a darn good combo.

Cunningham had 34 tds and only 10 ints in 14 starts and had averaged 250 yards a game.

Smith had 1478 yards from scrimmage and 8 tds.

And I know WRs arent part of the discussion but this offense also had Chris Carter and Randy Moss.

So what I am saying is before you compare them to other teams , compare them to their own franchise because I doubt by the end of the year they will have scored more points than that 1998 team. And I know that isn't the exact question King asked but at the end of the day points scored is the most important thing to look for in an offense.

Also, the vikings are one of the more snakebitten franchises. I thought that 1998 team was unbeatable. The vikings have a history of falling apart, so it is silly to think this far ahead in terms of NFC Championship game.

J.S. said...

Man, it's really clear this Carolina season is tearing your heart out Ben :(

Martin said...

In anticipation of the TMQ article...

Tonight, astoundingly, two punts were returned for touchdowns in the same game. No punts were blocked. Yet again Belichick >>> Gregg.

Bengoodfella said...

I predict Favre and Peterson will have their numbers drop slightly as the year goes on, but I think that is to be expected a little bit. I would be interested to follow up on this a little bit at the end of this year just to see where those two rank compared to the other tandems you measured them against.

I thought the reason Faulk didn't have a ton of TD's was because the WR could score at any point.

Dan, I thought about that Vikings team and that is a good point. A lot of people think about Moss and Carter on that team but Robert Smith was vitally important. It would be interesting to see if Favre and Peterson measure up to Smith and Cunningham by the end of the year.

I know, the bottom line is that we are getting way ahead of ourselves here, but that's what you have to do when you deal with Peter King and he is already predicting good NFC Championship matchups. I am surprised that 98 Vikings team lost at all and I was really shocked they lost to the Falcons in the NFC Championship. I am glad you brought up those two names b/c now we can compare Favre/Peterson to Smith/Cunningham.

J.S., you don't even know. The mediocrity scares me. I am thinking of suing Jake Delhomme for all of the pain he has caused.

Martin, I bet Easterbrook reverses course on that and starts talking about how it is smart to return the kick for a touchdown and not try to block the kick. I could be wrong, but it goes to show again how a blocked kick is probably more rare than punt return for a TD.

RuleBook said...

From tomorrow's TMQ

1) With game tied at 0-0, SD has 4th and goal at the 2 yard line. They took a fraidy-cat FG, and needless to say, they went on to lose

2) They attempted a 55 yd FG at the end of the game. TMQ thinks that most coaches play this situation wrong. The football gods were angry at the attempt to simply decrease the margin of defeat, and thus, the kick went wide left.

RuleBook said...

In that 15-1 season, Cunningham didn't play week one, and barely played week 2. Thus to combine them, I chose to calculate their 3rd-8th games instead (the first full 6 games they played together). They went 5-1 in those 6 games

Smith: 115 car, 476 yds, 4.1 ypc, 3 TD; 15 rec, 182 yds, 12.1 avg, 2 TD; 1 Fumble (1 Lost)

In terms of scrimmage touches:

Smith: 130 touches, 658 yds, 5.1 avg, 5 TD

Cunningham: 114/181 (63.0%), 1677 yds (9.27 ypa), 15 TD, 3 INT, 113.9 rating, 10 sacks, 1 fumble (1 lost)

Cunningham/Smith: 2153 yds in 296 plays (7.3 yards per play), 18 TD, 5 turnovers.

Looking at his season numbers, Smith actually was not great that season. Cunningham and his targets had a much larger influence. Still, they were definitely the second most potent offense to the Rams.

Bengoodfella said...

Rulebook, I had thought about doing that one day. Writing a TMQ on Monday for Tuesday just to see how many of the comments he makes I could predict. It would involve me having to watch every game and write down notes so I don't just seemed like a lot of work. He will probably think there is a correlation between not going for it on fourth down there and losing the game.

More interesting numbers there...I actually didn't think Smith/Cunningham would measure up to the other groups to be honest. I guess I had forgotten how powerful the Vikings receivers really were. I was a little shocked that Smith wasn't as good as the other running backs as well, or at least didn't have as great of a year. I guess when you have Moss/Carter you try to get them the ball as much as possible.

AJ said...

What about LT and Rivers in 2006? I'm not talking about the first 6 games, cuz LT blew up after that first 6 games...but as far as a season goes, pretty good combo. I know Rivers wasnt THAT great....but he will end up with similar numbers as Brett this year.

Seattle 2005 anyone (Hasselback and Alexander)?

KC in 2002 (Green and Holmes)?

Lions 1995 (Mitchell and Sanders)...ya i said it!

I could probably find plenty more that are very comparable to Peterson and Farve, but I just dont feel like looking anymore.

RuleBook said...

When the season reaches its conclusion, and we see where Favre and Peterson are, I may do a more comprehensive compilation. However, a decent probability exists that the discussion will be moot by the end of the season (by which I mean Favre has his typical implosion).

Bengoodfella said...

I think Rivers and LT may be a good comparison. I feel like I should write down these names so we can compare them at the end of the year. Scott Mitchell...I don't know what to say. It would have been funny if you had typed "You heard me."

Rulebook, I am going to write all these names down so we can follow up at the end of the year. It won't shock me if either Peterson or Favre do fall off more towards the end of the year.

AJ said...

Mitchells 1995 numbers:

4338 yards...59.3%...32 TD's...12 Ints...92.3 rating. Pretty good if you ask me.

Yes i realize he sucks, but we are talking about one year comparisons.

And rule book is correct, no need to compare now...except thats what King does. In fact, he would probably list his all time best RB's as this:

1. Peterson
2-10. No one
11. Brown

Bengoodfella said...

AJ, I love how you defend Scott Mitchell. There is nothing wrong with that. He is the semi-poster child for teams that overpay for a QB that had a good year after being called into duty for the starting QB, but really I think it is only a matter of time before Matt Cassel becomes that guy. ]

I am writing all these guys down we are talking about and I fully intend on following up on this. Really, we shouldn't take Peter's bait and compare players after only 6 games. We'll prove him wrong at the end of the year.

AJ said...

Scott Mitchell was the best QB of all time!!!

No one denies this!!

GreenPilot said...

great. now I dislike Peter King too. thanks for revealing the home cooking, Favre-swooning, bowel movement-inducing writings of the hypocritical King.

rakeback said...

I'm surprised that Gruden just signed a contract extension with ESPN, because I thin most people predicted he would be headed back to the sidelines next year.