6 comments Gregg Easterbrook Names the Nominees for His Fake MVP Award; Still Claims He Voluntarily Doesn't Sit in the Press Box

Last week Gregg Easterbrook informed us his Authentic Games metric indeed works because after multiple guesses it got the Super Bowl matchup correct. It's a very impressive metric that could change every week and eventually get the correct Super Bowl matchup. As long as the metric isn't supposed to actually predict anything when only being used one time it works well. Gregg also marveled that high-scoring teams score below their season average in games they lose and gave us another example of his "had" something happened then the outcome "might" have been different statement, which is a pretty useless statement to make. This week Gregg allows his readers to vote for the longest award in sports and revives the "Crabtree Curse" despite his previous insistence this curse only impacted the 49ers when Mike Singletary was the head coach. As always, Gregg can't seem to keep his own rules straight nor is he capable of even remembering the bullshit explanation he used previously to justify why one of his half-assed theories didn't turn out to be true. The "Crabtree Curse" was supposed to have only affected the 49ers when Mike Singletary was the head coach (as was explained by Gregg once it was clear the curse was bullshit and proven to be so by the fact the 49ers were winning games with Crabtree as their best receiver), well at least until the 49ers lose an important game (and the NFC Championship game on the road nonetheless), and then the curse magically makes a comeback.

Since the NFL MVP always goes to a quarterback or running back, for a decade TMQ has conferred a Non-QB Non-RB MVP, the coveted "longest award in sports." This year for the first time, readers choose the winner!

Readers don't get to choose the nominees, so the excitement over readers being able to choose the award is muted a bit. We are beholden to Gregg's choice of four nominees.

The Non-QB Non-RB MVP must be a player from one of the Super Bowl entrants, my reasoning being that he who would wear the mantle of "most valuable" had better have created some value.

Sorry Adrian Peterson, Tom Brady and Aaron Rodgers, you didn't create value this year. Better luck next time. Obviously any moron can understand the simple fact a player didn't appear in the Super Bowl doesn't mean that player didn't create value. Notice I wrote "...any moron can understand..." so you can see how Gregg doesn't grasp this concept. An individual award should be given solely on the basis of a team's achievement apparently. 

This year's finalists in alpha order are Doug Baldwin of Seattle, Richard Sherman of Seattle, Danny Trevathan of Denver and Louis Vasquez of Denver.

What a shock that Gregg favors undrafted players over highly drafted players. I guess Demaryius Thomas, Bobby Wagner, Max Unger, Terrance Knighton, and Brandon Mebane weren't worthy of being named the Non-QB Non-RB MVP due to being players who were drafted in the 3rd round or higher. Funny how that works.

Beware that you may confer upon your choice the Non-QB Non-RB MVP Curse. The 2012 winner, David Diehl of the Giants, just retired; the 2013 winner, NaVorro Bowman of the 49ers, was injured last week, reportedly tearing his ACL and MCL.

Yes, Bowman was cursed in that he had an absolutely terrific season, is one of the top linebackers in the NFL, and his team appeared in the NFC Championship game for the third straight season. Outside of his torn ACL and MCL, what a tough life for him. Also, I'm not sure Diehl retiring can be considered a curse. I wish I was cursed and could retire before I'm 35 years old. What a curse.

TMQ wants to shine a light on reform ideas for the game.

I can think of no less qualified candidates who could do this.

The level of play has never been higher. But it's a sport with deep-seated problems that, if not addressed, could lead to long-term decline.

If the NFL doesn't fix these deep-seated problems then there might be long-term decline. Or there might not be a long-term decline. Later in this column Gregg will criticize those who make predictions so far in the future that the prediction won't be remembered. He should be criticizing himself possibly.

Right now might be the peak moment of the football bubble, and not just because big-college attendance is mildly off and Super Bowl ticket prices are falling. The whole football bubble could burst if high schools begin to drop the sport owing to liability exposure.

And if the entire planet is destroyed by an asteroid, then no one high schools will have to worry about liability exposure. If dinosaurs still existed, we would all be eaten/stepped on. Oh, and the Super Bowl ticket prices are falling most likely due to the cold weather and the fact fans don't necessarily want to sit outside in the cold to watch the game. I don't know if the popularity of the NFL is taking a hit more than the consumer's need to sit outside in New York during February has taken a hit.

For the NFL:

Require disclosure of painkiller use club by club -- as anonymous data, with names removed. Painkiller abuse may be football's next scandal.

Good luck getting the player's union to agree to disclosure of painkiller use by club. Even if this happened then I wouldn't doubt what happened in MLB would end up happening in the NFL where this "anonymous" list all of a sudden gets released and the public finds out the names of the players who have used painkillers.

Change law so images of football games played in publicly funded stadia cannot be copyrighted. The effect would be that the NFL would immediately repay all stadium construction subsidies, and never seek a subsidy again. Altering national copyright law seems more promising than trying to ban pro football stadium subsidies state by state, since the handouts originate with a broad mix of state, county and city agencies. 

Good luck with that too. Most of Gregg's suggestions seem like pipe dreams to me. What Gregg doesn't understand is Congress and the American people probably don't want to declare war on the NFL right now and there are better things to worry about.

For the NCAA:

For FBS players, the year-to-year scholarship -- which pressures them to favor football over the library, to ensure the scholarship is renewed -- should be replaced with a six-year scholarship. That way once a player's athletic eligibility has expired, typically after 4.5 years, and once the NFL does not call -- 97 percent of FBS players never take an NFL snap -- there will be paid-up semesters remaining for him to be a full-time student, repair credits and earn that diploma. Not all will need the extra semesters.

This is a great example of how out of touch Gregg Easterbrook is. Trust me on this, in my experience if you give an athlete a six-year scholarship then that athlete is going to take more than four years to graduate. Why graduate earlier if school is paid for over six years instead of just four years? This gives the athlete two years of a scholarship where he doesn't have to study and can just jerk around and do nothing, then focus for four years after that. If Gregg wants fewer athletes to graduate then schools should start handing out six year scholarships and give the athletes incentive to graduate in less than four years. But again, it doesn't pop into Gregg's mind that an athlete might intentionally take six years to graduate if he knows his education is paid for over six years because in Gregg's white, upper middle-class experience ALL student-athletes want to graduate as early as possible. Giving an athlete four extra semester gives that athlete less incentive to graduate on-time. This would undoubtedly result in fewer athletes graduating in four years. Brilliant idea, Gregg.

But six-year full scholarships would change big-college football from a cynical exercise in using up impressionable young men and throwing them away, into a fair deal: The university gets great football, the players get educations.

Or the players could be compensated or allowed the opportunity to pursue compensation for the value they provide to the university. This is as opposed to giving them permission to graduate two years after they are supposed to.

For football at all levels:

Ban the three-point and four-point stance. Because of these stances, most football plays begin with linemen's heads colliding. No reform reduces helmet-to-helmet contact faster than requiring all players to begin downs with hands off the ground and heads up. Will this make football a sissified sport? That's what was said of the forward pass.

I don't know about this. I get that the purpose is to reduce concussions, but I think Gregg's next suggestion (to require only 4 or 5 star helmets) could reduce the impact of concussions without eliminating the three-point and four-point stance. Of course that's an expensive solution.

Only four- or five-star rated helmets should be permitted. Some of the safest helmets are prohibitively expensive for public high school districts, but the four-star, $149 Rawlings Impulse is not. 

Again, this is another situation where Gregg shows he lives in a white, upper-middle class neighborhood and lives that lifestyle. I think spending $9,000 (Just guessing $149 for 60 players) on helmets could feel somewhat prohibitive for some school districts where teachers are having to purchase their own supplies and schools are struggling for funds. But again, Gregg seems to be going off his experience in upper-middle class Maryland as proof public high school districts can afford $9,000 per school on helmets. I don't believe this is true for all public high school districts.

Want to impress your friends while watching the game? If either the Broncos or Seahawks score on a pick-six, immediately announce they will win.

Your friends will be so impressed you are a presumptive moron, they will immediately offer you the chance to shut the hell up and just watch the damn game.

Teams returning an interception for a touchdown are 11-0 in the Super Bowl.

I hope that changes this year so Gregg can look stupid, except he won't ever mention he was wrong that the team who intercepted a pass for a touchdown will win the Super Bowl.

Tuesday Morning Quarterback Non-QB Non-RB MVP: Previous winners: Alan Faneca, Steelers, 2001; Lincoln Kennedy, Raiders, 2002; Damien Woody, Patriots, 2003; Troy Brown, Patriots, 2004; Walter Jones, Seahawks, 2005; Jeff Saturday, Colts, 2006; Matt Light, Patriots, 2007; James Harrison, Steelers, 2008; Dallas Clark, Colts, 2009; Dan Koppen, Patriots, 2010; David Diehl, Giants, 2012; NaVorro Bowman, 49ers, 2013.

And also notice how many first round draft picks are on this list. By my count there are six first round draft choices. These are highly drafted glory boys that Gregg thinks make too much money and have too much ego to succeed in the NFL. 

This year's candidates:

Doug Baldwin, Seattle:

As the second best receiver on the Seahawks team Baldwin should definitely be the Non-QB Non-RB MVP (I'm not going to write the whole thing). Mostly, Gregg prefers Baldwin over Golden Tate because Tate was a second round draft pick.

Bonus factor: Baldwin was undrafted out of Stanford, and TMQ loves undrafted players.

Yep, so that's why he favors Baldwin over Tate.

Richard Sherman, Seattle:

Danny Trevathan, Denver: Manning and his offensive line are the core of the Broncos, but Denver posted a reasonable defensive season despite the no-huddle offense often scoring quickly then sending the defense back out. Trevathan led Denver with 87 unassisted tackles -- the closest teammate compiled 58 -- and his 10 passes defensed is a high number for a linebacker. 

Nothing against Trevathan, but perhaps he had 10 passes defensed because the Broncos' opponent was throwing the ball alot due to their no-huddle high scoring offense? It doesn't make it any less impressive, but Gregg acknowledges the Broncos' offense was scoring a lot of points, yet he doesn't attribute Trevathan's passes defensed partially to the Broncos' opponents throwing the ball a lot to catch up.

Louis Vasquez, Denver: Denver allowed a league-low 20 sacks in the regular season; Manning has yet to be pulled down in the playoffs. Manning has been hit once every 14 dropbacks; the typical NFL quarterback is hit once every seven dropbacks.

Peyton Manning is a veteran quarterback and he is good at ensuring his offensive linemen have the correct protections lined up. Plus, it's a team effort on the offensive line to make sure Manning doesn't get sacked. Manning is very good at being sacked. This takes nothing away from Louis Vasquez, but Manning is good at avoiding being sacked and protecting Manning is a team effort.

Quick release is one reason it's so hard to reach Manning. Superior blocking is the main reason.

I would actually say it is 50/50 as to why reaching Manning is so hard to sack. A quarterback helps his offensive linemen by getting rid of the ball quickly, so while the Broncos have really good blocking, they are helped by Manning's quick release and pocket awareness.

As recently as December, your columnist thought Zane Beadles was having the Broncos' best year at OL. Vasquez has been spectacular in the playoffs, near perfect pass blocking and run blocking without help (Beadles has been double-teaming with the center).

Gregg also realized that Vasquez was a 3rd round pick and had made the Pro Bowl, while Beadles is a 2nd round pick and did not make the Pro Bowl. So Gregg decided he would follow what others did and say Vasquez is the better offensive linemen, plus it was a bonus that Vasquez was drafted lower than Beadles was. Also, Beadles doesn't double-team with the center on every play and for Gregg to indicate Beadles has been double-teaming with the center on nearly every play is ridiculous. If that was really true then opposing teams would adjust quickly and start to take advantage of this. Gregg's analysis consistently sucks.

Stats to Ponder No. 5: If the Broncos prevail, they will be the second team to lead the NFL in passing yards and also win that season's Super Bowl. So far only the 1999 Rams finished first in passing and also won the Super Bowl.

If the Broncos win the Super Bowl will Gregg admit that throughout this year when he has stated that pass-wacky teams have a hard time winning the Super Bowl that this isn't universally true and despite what he says about the Patriots and other teams a record-setting offensive team can win the Super Bowl? Probably not.

Stats to Ponder No. 6: The Broncos are the NFL's highest-scoring team ever. Of the previous 10 highest-scoring teams, only the 1999 Rams won the Super Bowl that season.

Yep, it's that stat which Gregg loves to cite.

Stats to Ponder No. 8: The Jersey/A Giants and Jersey/B Jets, host teams for the Super Bowl, this season combined to commit 73 turnovers. Denver and Seattle combined to commit 27.

This is interesting only to show how bad the Jets and Giants were this season, but the fact both teams are hosting the Super Bowl doesn't in any way mean they were awarded the Super Bowl because they were supposed to have really good seasons.

Tuesday Morning Quarterback contends the outdoor cold-weather Super Bowl will be either a rousing success or total fiasco.

Of course it will. It's not possible for there to be any inbetween.

Craig Cognetti of Scranton, Pa., wrote, "Several states, cities and areas in the U.S. start with New; New Hampshire, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, New England, New Orleans, New Haven and so on. New Jersey is the only 'New' that has so differentiated itself that people routinely drop the first part; Jersey Shore, Jersey Boys, Jersey tomatoes etc. No one roots for the York Yankees or goes out for Haven-style pizza. Only New Jersey is so distinctive it doesn't need the New."

While I get what this reader is saying, it's clear he is a loyal reader of Gregg's because he overlooks an important fact. If the "New" is dropped from some of these cities, states and areas then a person could be confused as to what exact state, city, area or country is being referenced. For example, Hampshire and England are two places in Europe, York and Haven could reference several places in the United States, while Mexico is a country close to New Mexico so the "New" is crucial to pinpoint the exact location being referenced. There is a Jersey off the coast of France (and that's the only "Jersey" I found on a quick Google search), but it is only 46 square miles, so "Jersey" generally references New Jersey. It's not that New Jersey is so distinctive necessarily, but the "New" is required to differentiate some of these other places from larger cities and countries. So while New Jersey is distinctive, the "New" isn't always required to tell a person the exact location being referenced.

The cult-status "Sopranos" episode "Pine Barrens" -- in which Chris and Paulie Walnuts wander incompetently through New Jersey's famed pine barrens searching for an equally incompetent Russian mobster they are supposed to whack -- was not filmed in the pine barrens.

Actually, the entire point of that episode was that the Russian mobster turned out to be the very opposite of incompetent. He was a well-decorated soldier who killed 16 Czechs in one fight by himself. Not that I would expect Gregg to actually be accurate or make an attempt to not mislead his readers. If he's going to make a reference to something and try to act like he knows what he's talking about, it always helps if he actually knows what he's talking about. The entire point of the episode is Paulie and Christopher underestimated the Russian mobster.

The episode was filmed in New York's Harriman State Park, whose tree species differ significantly from those of the pine barrens. Thus in the NFL, New York is located in New Jersey; on the "Sopranos," New Jersey was located in New York.

Gregg is so insufferable.

Crabtree Curse Revived: Early in Michael Crabtree's career, TMQ tracked the Crabtree Curse -- the 49ers were more likely to win when Crabtree was hurt than when he was in the lineup. Many readers, including Herman Hou of London, note the Crabtree Curse lives. Not only was the final throw of the NFC title game, intercepted by Seattle, targeted at Crabtree: all three of San Francisco's final throws of the 2013 Super Bowl, all incompletions, were targeted at Crabtree. Bad enough that the 49ers let Crabtree onto the field; when they try to throw him the ball, a Curse awaits.

As usual, in his attempts to be a cutesy little dipshit there are important factors that Gregg Easterbrook neglects to mention. One factor is the 49ers were in the NFC Championship Game when this pass was targeted towards Crabtree and the 49ers were in the Super Bowl when the three other passes were targeted to him. If making two NFC Championship games and a Super Bowl over the last three seasons is a curse caused by Michael Crabtree then every other NFC team probably would want a curse like Michael Crabtree on their team. Another factor is that Gregg ignores the 49ers offense played better when Crabtree was on the field this season as opposed to when he was injured. But again, why wouldn't Gregg try to lie to his readers in order to be a cutesy dipshit?

From my 2009 column on cheerleader low pay: "Cheer-babes dancing in short skirts, or posing for swimsuit calendars, is not exploitation. After all, you're supposed to look at the cheerleaders! Professional athletics is foremost a form of entertainment, and the scantily-clad dancing girl has a long history as integral to entertainment in theatrical arts as well as sport. It is, however, objectionable if everyone involved in an NFL contest is making buckets of money, except for the cheerleaders."

The NFL's attitude seems to be that cheerleaders are just frilly little things flouncing around, let their boyfriends look after them. 

This from a guy who used to run a "Cheerleader of the Week" feature where he pretended to give a shit about the cheerleader's interest outside of football, but was really an excuse to run a picture of a cheerleader in TMQ. Also, Gregg calls them "cheer-babes" which I'm sure isn't making them sound like frilly little things flouncing around at all.

No Super Bowl pairing has ever generated such a waterfall of interesting stats.

This is the first Super Bowl in history with so many interesting statistics! Never before has a Super Bowl had so many interesting statistics and this doesn't sound made up at all.

It may be that Denver's offensive numbers and Seattle's defensive stats both were amplified by schedules. The Super Bowl will be the first time this season Denver has faced a team that finished in the top six for defense, in contrast to 12 outings by the Broncos against teams that finished in the bottom third.

The Broncos did play the 7th, 8th, and 12th ranked defenses with two of those games being on the road. I get what Gregg is saying of course, but still...

Over on the green side of the ball, the Seahawks compiled their great defensive numbers against a schedule rich in underperforming offenses. Seattle faced New Orleans twice, both times at home; the Saints were the sole top-rated offense Seattle had to contain.

But Seattle did keep the Saints to record-low yardage and point totals the first time they played them and effectively shut the Saints down the second time they played as well. So that has to count for something.

The Seahawks simply have not seen an elite offense on the road, and the Super Bowl is a road game.

It's actually a neutral-site game.

TMQ's keys to the game:

Read these intently, because if Gregg is wrong about any of these then he won't mention them again.

1. The Broncos must throw deep, even if that means Peyton Manning holding the ball for more than 2.36748790345 seconds or whatever his average is supposed to be. The drip-drip-drip short passing Denver has lived on this season will be difficult against Seattle's in-your-face press coverage.

Of course if it is cold out or somewhat windy then it may be hard for Manning to throw deep, plus the Seahawks corners are tall and by playing press coverage they make it difficult for receivers to get a clean release which would make the Broncos successful deep passing game difficult to achieve. 

2. Seattle must take the electronic governor off Russell Wilson, who does not need to outperform Manning, but can't just hand off either. The Seahawks' best game this season was a 34-7 defeat of New Orleans in which Wilson aired the ball out, 30 throws for 310 yards.

Yet the Seahawks have an advantage in that they have a really good running game which helps lead to opportunities for deep throws in the passing game. I'm not sure going completely away from the team's strength is a good way to win the Super Bowl, plus the Seahawks probably want to wear the Broncos defense down and keep Manning off the field. So while Gregg has a point that the Seahawks have to trust Russell Wilson, handing the ball off and chewing up clock is crucial to beating the Broncos.

Seattle's game plan needs to be aggressive, in case the Jersey Bowl becomes a touchdown festival.

Unfortunately, going uber-aggressive against the Broncos also plays into their hands and ensures the Seahawks may not have the advantage in time of possession, which again, is important to keep Manning off the field. Sure, the Seahawks need to be aggressive, but they shouldn't play to the Broncos strengths just in case their defense can't stop Peyton Manning.

3. The Broncos will be without Ryan Clady, Chris Harris and Von Miller, three of the team's best players. The Seahawks will be missing only Sidney Rice, who is not integral to what they do,

Yeah, he only had 50 receptions 748 yards and 7 touchdowns last year for the Seahawks. How important could he be?

My pick? I journeyed alone to a distant mountaintop -- OK, a distant parking lot -- and the football gods revealed unto me: low-scoring game, Seattle by a field goal.

Let me get this straight...Gregg is advocating the Seahawks be aggressive, advocating the Broncos should pass the ball deep, yet he thinks it will be a low scoring game. If the Seahawks succeed in being aggressive then it probably won't be a low-scoring game and if the Seahawks fail in being aggressive then I think they are looking at quite a few three-and-outs or stalled drives, which means Peyton Manning will be on the field longer. I'm not sure either scenario Gregg advocates leads to a low-scoring game. But hey, it's entirely possible Gregg will be wrong in the advice he gives each team and it will be a low-scoring game. Rest assured, if Gregg is right that it is a low-scoring game then he will forget his advice and tips for each team were shit. If the game is high-scoring he will point out he said each team should pursue aggressive strategies. In a shocking turn of events, Gregg has created a scenario where he can claim to be right almost regardless of what happens in the Super Bowl.

Bad Predictions on Fast-Forward: TMQ's all-bad-predictions column has been retired, but a few howlers are always welcome.

"I am behind Lane Kiffin 100 percent." USC athletic director Pat Haden, three weeks before firing him. Perhaps Haden meant he was standing behind Kiffin and planned to push him down the stairs.

"Leslie Frazier is not going anywhere. I am telling you we are very committed to Leslie Frazier." Vikings general manager Rick Spielman, one month before firing him.

I realize Gregg hates hyper-specificity, but these are statements, not predictions. Gregg has no concerns for details like this though.

New York University economist Nouriel Roubini became a media darling, and a player on the big-bucks lecture circuit after his 2006 prediction that a housing bubble would cause recession proved correct. Does that make him a seer? Roubini had predicted national economic misfortune many times before and been wrong -- and he has continued to predict it since, again being wrong. If you endlessly predict the clock will strike midnight, you will be right once a day.

Perhaps Gregg should remember this the next time he writes that a team needs to "do a little dance" to convert a first down, talks about how whichever team's cheerleaders/head coach wears the least amount of clothing will win the game, and discusses how a cornerback or safety made the high school error of looking in the quarterback's eyes instead of guarding his man (because this is basketball and not football being discussed of course). 

This is because I'll be sitting outside. After a few trial runs, your columnist eschews the press box -- it's the worst possible place to watch a football game. In most NFL press boxes, there are TV monitors, desks or counters to set up a laptop, free sandwiches, assistants who hand out stat sheets, and of course protection from the elements. 

It sounds like an absolute nightmare. I still stick to my speculation that Gregg doesn't watch a football game in the press box because the other sportswriters can't stand to be around him. I can't blame them. I would kick Gregg out of the press box too, especially after he tells a beat writer for the Seahawks he should include in his column the Seahawks didn't convert a fourth-and-1 due to the offense not "doing a little dance" or has a five minute conversation about how "The Blacklist" isn't a realistic television show.

Observing a few press boxes, I came to the conclusion that so many sportswriters and sportscasters focus on stars' personalities or coaches' postgame comments, but rarely discuss in-game tactics, because they weren't paying much attention.

Yes, too many sportswriters are too focused on writing their postgame column which would include quotes about what happened during the game. You know, they are too focused on doing their job. Also, I'm not sure how many sportscasters are working from a press box, but clearly Gregg has much more experience in a press box than I do, so I imagine there are sportscasters working there completely ignoring the game they are supposed to be watching and commenting on.

A low seat allows one to hear what is being said on the field and get a clear view of line play. It's better than being in the press box. Though at the 2007 Super Bowl in Miami, when there was steady rain, being outside made it hard to take notes. Shivering may do the same this year.

Gregg must have absolutely superior hearing if he can consistently hear what's being said on the field by any player other than the quarterback. Also, a low seat seems to me to be the worst possible way to see what's happening on the field, especially considering a low seat doesn't allow the viewer to necessarily see the entire field of play possibly.

Absurd Precision Watch: Kevin Clark in the Wall Street Journal: "According to Pro Football Focus, Peyton Manning takes a league-shortest 2.36 seconds to throw. Russell Wilson takes a league-longest 3.18 seconds." Even assuming the hundredths of seconds claimed are accurate, that's a fourth-fifths of a second difference between the fastest and the slowest.

Yes, that's very nearly an entire second difference at which each quarterback releases the football. That's easily the difference in whether a quarterback gets sacked/gets the ball tipped or completes a pass instead. In the NFL, that's a pretty big deal.

Such a difference would determine the winner at a track or swim meet, but it's hard to believe can determine the victor in a football game.

Perhaps Gregg needs to sit in the press box or pay better attention to what's going on while he's sitting in the lower levels of the stands during a football game. That's if Gregg finds it hard to believe a difference of 0.8 seconds can't make a difference in a football game. Sure, on one play a quarterback holding the ball 0.8 seconds longer may not determine the victor in a football game, but how long a quarterback holds the football can easily make a difference in whether one team wins or not. Gregg consistently underestimates the speed of the NFL game.

Next Week: That Super Bowl thing you might have heard about.

I'm sure Gregg's analysis of what happened and why it happened will probably still be super terrible.