7 comments MMQB Review: Peter's Super Bowl Pick Edition

Peter King made some observations from all 16 of the useless preseason games in last week's MMQB. He also suggested Judge Berman decide to end all of this nonsense about the Patriots deflating footballs in order to kick the can down the road and make this nonsense last longer. Peter wanted the judge to wait until after the 2015 season to rule so that way there would be a whole other five months of measuring the PSI of footballs in cold weather. Fortunately, Judge Berman did not take Peter's advice. This week, Peter talks about Aaron Rodgers and how perfect he is, makes his Super Bowl prediction, and is the 10,000th media member to recommend "Do Your Job." I think Peter wins an award or something for being the 10,000th media member to recommend this documentary, doesn't he?

Factoid I Learned this Summer That I Have Been Dying To Share With You: 

Your daughter is having another big gay wedding and you want everyone to be open-minded about it while specifically referring to it as a "gay wedding" on Twitter and not just a "wedding" thereby showing you subconsciously differentiate between the two type of weddings?

This is the 10th season Mike McCarthy has coached the Packers, and the 10th season Aaron Rodgers has played for Mike McCarthy. In all that time, from January 2006 to this weekend, Rodgers has never been fined by the team. He has never been late to a meeting, a practice, a game, an off-season workout. He has never missed any of those scheduled events without permission. He has never violated curfew either in training camp or the night before any of the 197 preseason, regular-season or postseason games since McCarthy took over. He has never mouthed off to anyone, or violated any team rule to the extent that he had to be fined. 

I find it hard to believe Rodgers has never mouthed off to anyone. I think his mouthing off is simply being forgotten. A lot of people aren't late to work, don't get suspended, and don't violate any rules while at work. Congrats to Aaron Rodgers and this is such a worthy note to lead off the column with. Very important information to know.

And of course other sportswriters on Twitter thought this factoid was brilliant and congratulated Peter as if he had found the Holy Grail and then managed to sell it off to an alien race which allowed him to cure cancer. And yes, a "factoid" is still a statement of questionable factual basis, so maybe Peter is lying, or he still insists on not using a dictionary before using big words.

“That is true,” Rodgers told me. “Now, in my rookie year, 2005, I did get fined once.

So as long as the time Aaron Rodgers DID get fined isn't counted, then this factoid is true. A lot of facts can be true if a person works around all the times that fact wasn't true.

I was five minutes late to a meeting. I was speeding down [Wisconsin route] 41, a little late, and I said, ‘I can either get a ticket here and be late, or I can drive normal and be late.’ I decided to be six minutes late and take the fine.” 

Aaron Rodgers favors taking his medicine and staying within the law over violating the law and doing what's best for him. He's the hero we need.

There’s no really good reason to write that this morning.

Finally, we can agree. Football starts in less than a week and Peter is starting off his column with factoids about Aaron Rodgers.

I’m picking a Green Bay-Baltimore Super Bowl. Two teams that blew golden chances to meet in the Super Bowl last year, finally keeping the appointment a year later. (NFC title game last January, five minutes left: Green Bay 19, Seattle 7. AFC divisional game last January, 23 minutes left: Baltimore 28, New England 14.) 

There's the whole "Well yeah, Dez Bryant caught that pass and so the Packers may not have even advanced to the NFC title game if that rule made any sense and the Cowboys had managed to punch the ball in from the two-yard line with the best running game in the NFL" argument, but I guess that should be ignored in keeping with the storyline that Peter is crafting right now.

To make that pick, I have to get over a lot of things. For Green Bay, the Jordy Nelson injury is the biggest thing—the most dangerous weapon for Rodgers on the team that scored the most points (486) in football last year...But I recall Davante Adams being in the right place at the right time for Green Bay to beat Miami last year.

Peter was worried about losing Nelson, but then he realized one time last year Davante Adams caught an important pass and this helped Peter realize Nelson is probably useless anyway.

I like the defense well enough too, despite the loss to free agency of solid corners Tramon Williams and Davon House. Maybe that’s me trying to talk my way into picking Green Bay, but I remember in the NFC title game last year what I saw in the first 55 minutes: 12 Seattle drives, seven points, 187 yards, four interceptions of Russell Wilson.

Yes, that game was against Seattle, the renowned offensively explosive team who can attack you from anywhere in their high octane passing game. Peter is worried about the Packers losing two solid corners, but points out the Packers did well against a team that isn't known for having a great passing attack (WITH those two corners on the roster at the time) and it made him feel better about the Packers secondary. Ignore the last five minutes of the game because the first part of MMQB is all about making statements and leaving information out that disputes those statements.

Baltimore? You’ll be surprised at the Ravens’ biggest challenge.

Let me guess, you think they are going to trade Joe Flacco midseason because Ozzie Newsome said, "I can see a trade or two happening this year" as an offhand comment to a reporter?

So what is the Ravens' biggest challenge? Their ONE biggest challenge?

Two, actually: 

YOU GOT ME AGAIN, PETER! YOU SAID "CHALLENGE" LIKE THERE WAS ONE, THEN SURPRISED ME WITH TWO! TWO SURPRISES AROUND YOUR PICK OF THE RAVENS? I'M STANDING UP APPLAUDING YOU RIGHT NOW, BUT IF I WEREN'T, I WOULD BE ON THE EDGE OF MY SEAT WANTING TO KNOW WHAT THE SURPRISE IS!

1. The Bengals. You’d think the Ravens are significantly better over the past few years, right? Well, in the post-season, yes. But Cincinnati and Baltimore have 40 regular-season wins apiece in the past four years. The Bengals beat the Ravens in the AFC North standings in 2013 and ’14. In their past five meetings, the Bengals are 4-1 against the Ravens and have allowed Baltimore just 18.8 points a game. 

And so because the Bengals have been good over the past four years and the Ravens have to play the Bengals two total times this year, this means that the Bengals will be good this year as well?

But no, Peter King is doing the whole "Two topics that are really one topic but inexplicably separated" thing he does in the "Things I Think I Think" section. Really, there is one challenge for the Ravens.

2. Baltimore has to earn home-field in the playoffs. I know: Every team wants to be at home in the playoffs, but for the Ravens the home-field edge has been huge in the John Harbaugh era. Since Harbaugh took over in 2008, Baltimore is 45-11 at home and 27-29 on the road in the regular season.

So the challenge for the Ravens isn't the Bengals, but to win their division and get homefield advantage. Let's not overcomplicate it. Also, home-field edge has been huge for the Ravens during the John Harbaugh era as long as the fact the Ravens won a Super Bowl by winning two road games or that the Ravens are 7-5 on the road in the playoffs under Harbaugh gets ignored.

The Ravens have played 15 postseason games since 2008 … only two at home. Twelve on the road, and one (the Super Bowl, against San Francisco) at a neutral site. 

But it’s worn on Baltimore. Like last year. Even with a World League secondary, the Ravens held two 14-point leads at New England in the divisional round and couldn’t hang on. Imagine if the game had been in Baltimore, where the Ravens have won a Patriot-like 81 percent of their home games since 2008. 

Imagine if that game had been played on an aircraft carrier in the middle of the Atlantic Ocean. How would that have affected the outcome? What about if this game was played on a field made of pillows, how could that have had an effect on the score? 

I see the Ravens winning the North

Kings of the North! Flying their family banner! Fuck the Starks!

If they win the North, that’s one home playoff game at least. If they win 12 games, that should be enough for two. What they really need, though, is for the rest of the conference to get as good as the North has been in recent years, so the road to Santa Clara won’t be all on the road.

All teams want home playoff games, but I don't see why the need for the Ravens to have one is so great. They have proven they can win games on the road in the playoffs.

Regarding the other contenders:
 
New England. No repeat champions in the past 10 Super Bowls; I’m not big at all on picking repeat champs. Then there’s the weak secondary (minus Darrelle Revis and Super Bowl unsung hero Brandon Browner), and the Ravens-like lack of depth at receiver.

If only the Patriots had a dynamic tight end who is essentially uncoverable. Alas, they do not and we must all move on.

Seattle. I checked in with a Seahawk source Sunday night, and there’s scant optimism that strong safety Kam Chancellor—vital on the field, of course, but in the locker room too—will be in St. Louis for the opener in six days. Plus, free safety Earl Thomas, rehabbing from a torn labrum in his left shoulder, is likely to play next week but not certain. So, Seattle could face a matchup nightmare in St. Louis (last three years: Rams two wins, Seattle one in St. Louis)

A matchup nightmare! A total nightmare facing that up-and-coming Los Angeles Rams team! They are so formidable and scary. The Rams have won two games at home against the Seahawks over the last three years. If that's not having a team's number then I don't know what a small sample size is.

The Seahawks should score more,

Except for Russell Wilson, who isn't scoring at all apparently.

Indianapolis. When we last left the Colts, they were getting steamrolled on the ground for the third time in their past 20 games by the Patriots. Arthur Jones, key run-stopper up front, has been lost for the year, and they haven’t made any significant adds to the defensive front, save Kandall Langford, who’s no Haloti Ngata. If Andrew Luck can score 40 points a Sunday, I like the Colts to go far. If not, they’ll win the AFC South and be frustrated again in late January.

The Colts drafted Phillip Dorsett. Imagine how awesome Andrew Luck's MVP numbers are going to look after the season is over. Sure, Ryan Grigson could have improved the defense and just didn't like the guys available in the first round, but he's also not one to trade a first round pick for an active player in an effort to improve his team. Not at all.

Philadelphia/Dallas. Flip a coin.

You go flip a coin.

I like the Eagles better, by a bit, mostly because the Cowboys lost their best defensive back (Orlando Scandrick) for the year this preseason, and because Philadelphia scored faster this preseason than the Kardashians printed money. But there’s no insurance for Sam Bradford staying upright for the season; if he does, the Eagles are as good as anyone in the NFC, and maybe better.

It's always dumb to assume Sam Bradford is going to be healthy all year long. It's always dumb, but Peter and I do agree what could happen IF Bradford is healthy all year. And yes, I really regret counting on Bradford to be healthy in my predictions because I know it's not happening.

My playoff jumpers? (The rising teams in each conference, I mean).

Thanks for explaining, Peter. Your readers are mental midgets who didn't understand what you were saying and desperately needed you to clarify. Playoff jumpers? How can a franchise literally jump the playoffs? Without the explanation, that's how I would feel.

I think Peter lacks a certain amount of intellectual respect for his readers at times. His need to explain things can be a bit condescending. This from a guy who can't use the definition of "precocious" and "factoid" correctly, but it doesn't stop him from using those words as much as possible.

Minnesota (7-9 last year) and Miami (8-8 last year).

(throws up) It appears I agree with Peter on something else.

Regarding Miami: I haven’t seen a team in recent years with the schedule advantage the Dolphins have in the first two months. Their opening seven weeks: at Kirk Cousins (Washington), at Blake Bortles (Jacksonville), versus Tyrod Taylor (Buffalo) at home, versus Ryan Fitzpatrick (Jets) in London, bye, at Marcus Mariota (Tennessee), versus Brian Hoyer (Houston) at home.

And since when have any NFL teams been bad one season and then improved the very next season? Never, so obviously the Dolphins schedule is very easy and the great Ryan Tannehill certainly won't have to play against any good defenses like the Bills, Jets and Texans have over this span. Remember, football is only a game of matchups between each team's quarterback.

Of course, they’ve got the Patriots twice, the Eagles, Cowboys and Chargers in the last 10 games, 

So it leads to something like 8-8, assuming the Dolphins lose to a team they should not lose to and then beat a team they should beat? Great, glad we talked about this.

My picks, division by division:

AFC: New England, Baltimore, Indianapolis, Kansas City.

Wild Cards: Denver, Miami.

NFC: Philadelphia, Green Bay, Atlanta, Seattle.

Wild Cards: Arizona, Dallas.

Not criticizing, just pointing out this is basically the same teams that made the playoffs last year except Atlanta will win the NFC South, Peter thinks the team that stands in the way of the Ravens making the playoffs don't even make the postseason (the Bengals), and he believes in Andy Reid so much he thinks the Chiefs win the AFC West. So there is 25% turnover among the 12 playoff teams. 

Lots of leftovers after the embarrassing but not shocking (except to the NFL) total defeat in U.S. District Court on Thursday:

Clearly, some around the league don’t think Ted Wells, Jeff Pash and Goodell have the goods on Brady. They are right: The league doesn’t have the goods. There’s no proof that Brady told anyone to take air out of the footballs.

I'm just glad we got to the bottom of whether air in the amount of a few tenths of a PSI were taken out of the football or not and who knew what and when they knew it. With offensive line coaches hitting their loved ones and all that boring football stuff to focus on, I like to see important things like whether footballs used in a game back in January where the outcome wasn't in doubt had reduced air pressure in them.

There are between two and four owners, a very small cabal, down on Goodell right now to the point that they would consider joining a movement to replace him. That’s not many, especially when you consider that Goodell is on the losing streak of all commissioner losing streaks, and when you consider that 24 votes would be required to replace Goodell. Understand that many of the leading owners in the league consider that Goodell is doing their bidding, fighting for what he believes is the right thing, and also that he’s taking hits for them on fronts like domestic violence.

I always laugh when the idea of the owners replacing Goodell comes up. I think they probably should, but why do that when he's taking all the heat and making them look good? Who hates Jerry Richardson because Greg Hardy hit a woman? Nobody. Who got mad at Steve Bisciotti because the Ravens handled the Ray Rice situation poorly? A few people did and then forgot about it once Roger Goodell started fumbling around when attempting to punish Rice. Goodell is paid to be the bad guy so the owners don't have to be.

It could be that the union, smelling blood in the water, will stand firm and not give up anything in bargaining with the NFL, because the players know how weakened the NFL is right now. I doubt that will be enough for the league to just say, We’ll hand you neutral arbitration. But both sides know Goodell needs to fork over the appeal process for Brady-type cases. This solution seems logical:

Almost as logical as Peter's solution to punish Tom Brady, which was to make this whole drama get drawn out longer? 

The league and players agree to a panel of three arbitrators; the arbitrators would be mutually agreed upon by the league and the union. Each time there’s an appeal of a commissioner discipline case, one of the three arbitrators would be picked randomly to hear the appeal.

So all the league and players would have to do is agree on three arbitrators? Wow, that seems easy enough considering the union doesn't trust the league and the league has no respect for the union. 

In exchange, the CBA, set to expire following the 2020 season, will be extended one season, and would expire after the 2021 season. Now, the league will howl at this, saying that’s not enough of a trade with the players to give up such a valuable chip. But I would maintain this: The chip has become a poisonous one. The chip is not nearly as valuable as it once was. It’s now worth 20 cents on the dollar. Goodell has to make a save-face deal with the players, or risk the waterfall of negative press and public opinion washing over him and the league.

He doesn't care, Peter. Roger Goodell doesn't care about saving face with the players. He doesn't care about the waterfall of negative press and public opinion because everybody still watches the NFL games, buys the merchandise and the stadiums will undoubtedly be full on Thursday nights, all day Sunday and Monday nights. This makes the owners money, they are happy, which means they are happy with Goodell, so Goodell is happy and has done his job. Roger Goodell only cares about saving face or public opinion when it comes to hurting the NFL's bottom line. Otherwise, it's all noise to him as long as the money keeps rolling in.

I’ve screened NFL Network’s “Do Your Job: Bill Belichick and the 2014 New England Patriots,” an hour-long documentary that airs Wednesday on NFL Network at 8 p.m. ET. It might be the best example I’ve ever watched of how Belichick works—how he prepares players, how he prepares coaches, how he gets coaches ready to impart what players need to know to win, how he motivates players (thought there’s not a lot of that here), how he uses mysterious director of football research Ernie Adams (who is interviewed for the documentary), and how he uses so much minutiae of football knowledge to prepare for games.

I find it interesting how there is a constant presumption of secretiveness surrounding Belichick and the Patriots. To an extent that is true on the day-to-day aspects of knowing what goes in with the Patriots, but this is the second documentary in the last couple of years about the Patriots and/or Belichick where the inner workings of his team and decision-making process are examined on camera. For a guy who is really secretive and there isn't much known about how the Patriots go about their business, the public sure knows a hell of a lot more about how he runs his team than they know about how Pete Carroll runs the inner workings of his team. So they are secretive, but I think it's at the point we know more about the Patriots than many other NFL teams. 

It’ll be easy for non-Patriot fans to sneer at it and say, Enough of the bleepin’ Patriots overload! But this is such a good show about football, and about the inner game of football, that if you’re a football fan you’ll be doing yourself a disservice by not at least setting the DVR to record this show.

It's still about the Patriots though. I would watch it, but if someone is tired of the Patriots, then an entire show about the team and how they just won the Super Bowl probably isn't something that sounds enticing to watch.

“Maybe the one word that isn’t in that sentence,” said Belichick in the doc, “that’s implied but not stated, is ‘Do your job well.’ Take care of the one or two three things that we’ve emphasized all week, and we’ll be okay.”

I recognize that no other NFL head coaches have had the success that Bill Belichick has had, but what is Mike McCarthy's mantra? What do we know about McCarthy and how he runs his Packers team? Not that Belichick isn't secretive, but it's growing harder for me to see this types of documentaries being introduced as if they are a brief glimpse into the world of Belichick that few others will ever see. These documentaries are a glimpse few others will see into every head coach's team, so while Belichick is secretive, there is a lot more that is known about his overall philosophies then there is known about the overall philosophies of pretty much any other NFL head coach.

Offensive coordinator Josh McDaniels confirmed the coaches showed the offense a clip of Alabama throwing the unbalanced offensive-line formation against LSU before the divisional game against Baltimore, and then explained why the play was used when it was—in the third quarter, down 14, with the season on the line. New England ran it twice and Tom Brady completed both passes on a scoring drive. ”We waited 'til the second half, purposefully so they didn’t have an opportunity at halftime to talk about it,” said McDaniels.

That is cheating to run a play that defense doesn't have to time to adjust to after they have seen it. Pure cheating. It's classless to fool the opposing team this way. 

Belichick explains why he didn’t call a timeout on the Seahawks’ fateful last drive, which would have opened him to ridicule had Seattle scored and left New England to go the length of the field in 17 or 20 seconds to have a chance had Seattle scored on the play. Basically, it’s like what we all thought: Belichick saw confusion and players hurrying around on the Seattle sideline, so he wanted to take advantage of the confusion (or so it seemed) and make them snap without being fully prepared for the play.

Little did Belichick know that Russell Wilson didn't need to be prepared for the play and the confusion didn't hurt, because God was speaking to him right at that moment. Probably talking to Wilson about the benefits of Recovery Water. 

Really good show.

I'm shocked Peter liked it. Shocked. 

“Brady’s free!”

—A passenger in the back of a Boston-to-Denver Southwest Airline flight on Thursday, shortly after the plane landed late in the morning and when passengers switched on the phones, got wifi, and learned the news of Judge Richard Berman vacating the suspension of Tom Brady, according to passenger Abby Chin of Comcast Sports Net-New England

I didn't have a dog in this fight, but the whole "Brady is free" exclamations were a little annoying to me. He's not in jail. He was initially suspended from playing a sporting event, a game, for four games. It was probably an overreach by the commissioner, but Brady wasn't jailed while on a humanitarian mission in a foreign country. He was accused of conspiring to deflate footballs. He wasn't ever not free. If he wasn't playing football for four games, then he would have been chilling at home with his kids and wife. Let's get a little perspective. 

“Now we don’t have to play what’s-his-name.”

—A kid on the Boston-to-Denver flight, once he learned Brady, and not Jimmy Garappolo, would be playing quarterback for the Patriots early in the season.

Ten years from now this kid will be in a bar talking about how he knew Jimmy G. was the right QB for the Patriots even at the age of 13 when the Pats drafted him.

Snaps played in 13 combined preseason games by three 2015 Most Valuable Player candidates:

Adrian Peterson (five games): 0.

J.J. Watt (four games): 0.

Rob Gronkowski (four games): 0.

Can we at some point, please, have a discussion about cutting the preseason from four to two games?

Hold on for a second. You made the NFL owners lose count again.  

Sure, we can have the discussion about cutting down the preseason. Don't you think a conversation about gun control is probably more important though? So the owners will let Congress figure that one out and then we can talk about cutting the preseason from four to two games. The owners want to have the gun control conversation first. 

The final weekend of the regular season includes New England playing at Miami on Jan. 3, 2016, at 1 p.m. In the last two New England games at Miami, it has been 84 degrees at kickoff (in December 2013) and 89 degrees at kickoff (in September 2014). The Patriots have lost both games—24-20 two years ago, 33-20 last year.

Might be a good idea for the Patriots to pray for a New Year’s cold snap in south Florida, or to think about practicing in steamy conditions, somewhere, before the game this year.

If really cold conditions make the PSI in a ball decrease, then does playing in a hot climate cause the PSI in the football to increase? If so, tell Ted Wells! Here is further proof of the Patriots cheating. They can't win football games in hot climates. 

Mr. Starwood Preferred Member Travel Note of the Week

Another reason Amtrak should be the mode of transportation for more people: timeliness.

I boarded Amtrak 2158, an Acela train from New York to Boston, at about 11:55 a.m. Wednesday. Train slated to depart at 12:03 p.m. I had my laptop open, with the digital clock up. At 12:03:10, the doors to the train closed. At 12:03:33, the train started moving. We were due at Boston’s Back Bay station at 3:36 p.m. Arrival time: 3:29. My experience is that’s pretty common on the Acela (not so much on the regional trains).

Two weeks from now:

"Here is my major complaint about the Acela. It's normally on time, but there were two kids on the train who insisted on playing games on their phone. At least I assume they were games and they had the volume up at a high level where I could barely hear the important conversation I was having on my phone, so I of course had to talk louder. Everyone was annoyed at the amount of noise those two kids were making playing their game, though I honestly couldn't hear what they were saying because I was having to talk so loud to hear my conversation. Also, if a train is supposed to be in Boston at 2:30pm..."

Ten Things I Think I Think

2. I think these were the stories of cutdown weekend in the NFL:

a. Tim Tebow is not one of 1,696 active players in the National Football League. The four NFL people to get rid of Tebow—John Elway, Rex Ryan (and, in part, Mike Tannenbaum), Bill Belichick, Chip Kelly—should give you an idea of the odds he faces in returning to the NFL.

This doesn't include a successful head coach like John Fox who was part of getting rid of Tebow too. At a certain point, that's a lot of smart people who seem to agree. 

He’s just not an accurate-enough thrower right now, but as Kelly told him, he needs to play the position in games, and the only place for him to do that now is in the Canadian Football League. If Tebow is serious about continuing his career in the NFL, he should be all about seeking a job in the CFL.

Real question: If Tebow is so dedicated to becoming an NFL quarterback, which isn't something I would normally doubt, then is it overly-prideful of him to not seek a job with the CFL in an effort to get back to the NFL eventually? Doesn't this show he isn't quite as dedicated to becoming an NFL quarterback as he claims to be? He wants to be an NFL quarterback and will work for it, but yeah, he's not going to do something like play in the CFL because that's below him, even if it is a way to where he could eventually get back in the NFL. We have heard all about how dedicated Tebow is, but is he dedicated when he's been told, "Here's the path you need to take" and refuses to take that path? Tebow is serious about playing quarterback in the NFL. He's not serious about playing quarterback in any other league that isn't the NFL to get there. That's a bit diva-like, isn't it? Especially when really good college quarterbacks are currently in the CFL. Somehow other quarterbacks swallow their pride and accept a job playing quarterback in the CFL, because they love to play quarterback and love to play football. Does Tebow like playing football or does he just like playing football in the NFL?

c. Tyrod Taylor is the quarterback of the Bills, and Matt Cassel is on the street. When the offseason began, Vegas odds (just kidding) had Cassel winning the starting job, E.J. Manuel the likely number two, and Tyrod Taylor fighting to fend off the rest of all available quarterbacks for number three. Taylor’s versatility and pleasantly surprising arm strength in camp won him the job. Now Cassel is hoping for a backup job somewhere else, and Houston (as Mike Florio reported Saturday) is a logical landing spot.

Houston is the landing spot for ex-Patriots backup quarterbacks who fooled other NFL teams into thinking they were real starting quarterbacks. Somebody has to make it stop. 

d. The trade for Kelcie McCray shows how serious the Kam Chancellor/AWOL situation is in Seattle. Clearly, the Seahawks are planning to play without Chancellor. That’s a serious situation. Read Greg Bishop’s enlightening story in this week’s Sports Illustrated to see for yourself how much of a leader and locker-room and on-field factor Chancellor is. But he wants to re-do his contract with three years left, and GM John Schneider isn’t willing to budge, for now, on at least making Chancellor’s contract increasingly guaranteed. 

While Peter was gnashing his teeth and worrying about Russell Wilson not being a Seahawk after this season, which again at the time was a ridiculous thought on par with "Are the Ravens going to let Joe Flacco go in free agency?," Kam Chancellor is the real Seahawks player who has the contractual issues. 

g. Andy Levitre, two years after being the highest-paid guard ever by Tennessee, got flipped to Atlanta for a sixth-round pick next year, plus a little more. Levitre should start for the Falcons, after costing Tennessee $1,015,625 per start in the past two years. (Do the division: $32.5 million, 32 starts.)

So Peter is going to eviscerate Levitre on a weekly basis now, right? He was stealing money from the Titans without contributing and ended up on the bench for the 2015 season. Levitre signed with the Titans and then completely didn't come through as he was supposed to, so much so that the Titans traded him. Under the Josh Freeman rule, it's time to eviscerate Levitre, especially if he doesn't start for the Falcons. I guess there is a difference in a guy getting paid $32.5 million to start over two seasons and a guy getting paid $2 million for one season that I'm just not aware of.

I'll never totally understand Peter's hatred for Josh Freeman.

i. One of the game’s best guards, Kyle Long, moves outside to tackle...A month ago, though, in Bears’ camp, Long told me he didn’t want to move, saying:“They’ll have to get a tractor to move me outside to tackle. I’d rather get in a fist fight in a phone booth [at guard] any day. Those guys outside, there’s too much space. Too scary out there.” Well now.

These are the guys who are blocking for Jay Cutler and he's the one with the bad attitude all the time. His tackle doesn't want to protect him at that spot on the offensive line because it's "too scary." I can't imagine why Cutler is in a foul mood all the time. 

5. I think this was the headline of the week in the NFL, from the New York Post, on Sunday, after the Eagles cut Tim Tebow: “GOD MAN OUT.”

Peter expected something better than this? Why would he? 

8. I think Carson Palmer has some interesting comments about football preparation.

On the air pressure he prefers in footballs: “The air is … we never mess with the air. Whatever is legal, he’s by the book. I never notice [if it’s 12.5 or 13.5 psi], I don’t know the difference but if it was low it would be great, obviously. The softer the ball, the easier it is to grip and throw a tighter spiral, especially if it’s wet, especially if it’s windy. If it's windy that throws a whole new angle at it. I’ll play in snow and rain but when it gets to 40- and 50-mph winds, if you can grab the ball a little bit better, it cuts the air better. If it’s rainy you can grip it a little better but between 12.5 and 13.5, I wouldn’t know.”

So what I'm hearing is that Carson Palmer likes a softer ball and has no idea whether the ball he throws has too much or too little air in it, but he definitely prefers a softer ball if possible. I think Roger Goodell should begin an investigation immediately into whether Carson Palmer has knowledge of football deflating. Turn over your phone, Carson!

On Brady: “It’s been so media-overload, when stuff like that starts happening, I just can’t even turn on ESPN. Rules are the rules. If the balls were below, the balls were below. There’s a reason.

Right, but Carson Palmer, who throws footballs for a living, just claimed he has no idea if a ball is over or under-inflated according to the NFL rules. He states he has no idea what the PSI of the ball is, so rules are rules, but if the balls were below, then the balls were below. He's missing the basic question of whether the balls were below. Tom Brady is expected to know the exact PSI of a ball even though Carson Palmer admits he wouldn't know the exact PSI of a ball unless he was told.

9. I think if you have a spare $18.88, a good investment that might yield a pretty great weekend is available at Weekend With The 88s. Carolina tight end Greg Olsen wears 88, and NASCAR driver Dale Earnhardt Jr. drives the number 88 car and is based in nearby Concord, N.C. If you win, you get a tour of Earnhardt’s garage and Bank of America Stadium on Saturday, Oct. 31; a helicopter ride to Earnhardt’s race on Sunday, and sideline passes and game tickets to the Panthers-Colts game in Charlotte on Monday night, Nov. 2. The fund-raiser benefits Levine Children’s Hospital in Charlotte, with is near to Olsen’s heart.

I see what you did there, Peter. Very tasteful. Did all of the kind words about Dr. Z and how much he is missed by his colleagues make his wife speechless? A fund raiser at Levine is close to Olsen's heart. This isn't egregious or anything, but considering what Olsen's son went through it's just another example of Peter writing something that isn't in the best of taste. Who cares though? How many people has Greg Olsen killed?

In 2012, Olsen’s son T.J. was born with a non-functioning left side of his heart, which required surgery, and he spent 40 days getting treatment there.

See, it's close to Olsen's heart because his son's heart didn't work! Get it? His son spent 40 days in the hospital getting his heart repaired and fundraisers at Levine Children's Hospital are close to Olsen's heart. Oh no! Another unintentional mini-gaffe from Peter. He doesn't intend to write these things, but they just happen. 

10. I think these are my non-football thoughts of the week:

c. Jayson Stark with the MLB Factoid of the Year: Bryce Harper scored four runs Thursday for the Nationals without swinging at a pitch.

d. You can look it up. Four at-bats against Atlanta. Sixteen balls, four called strikes, four walks. Four runs and one RBI, and he never swung in 20 pitches.

This was against the Braves. The fact Bryce Harper had to actually step in the batter's box means this was unimpressive. I could score four runs against the Braves' pitching without even leaving the dugout.

e. Great read by ESPN.com’s Israel Gutierrez on a current event in his life.

Peter thinks Gutierrez is having a "gay wedding." 

h. A bad day, by the way, for the Christian Hackenberg-as-top-overall-2016-pick crowd.

Christian Hackenberg will be the top pick in 2016 in the same way that Jake Locker was going to be the top pick in 2010 or 2011. Just ignore his progression as a quarterback in college and convince yourself to see those things that you want to see. 

i. Regarding Matt Harvey and the Mets and James Andrews and the innings limit they’re fussing about: Why doesn’t Harvey have an MRI done right now, to see if his Tommy John-repaired elbow is in perfect condition? If it isn’t, then the innings limit seems wise. If the elbow looks fine, why not have a reasonable discussion about whether he should pitch as he’s normally pitching now?

j. I’m interested in hearing from an orthopedist, particularly one who has worked on pitching elbows, to see if that idea is reasonable, or malarkey.

I'm not an orthopedist, but I don't know if a doctor can look at an MRI and start to see a potential tear or problem in Harvey's elbow that he hasn't started to feel as of yet. I don't think elbows are like tread on tires where you can see how much it has been used and how much more it has left in it. I could be wrong about what an MRI shows regarding wear on an elbow, but this MRI idea sounds like a bad precedent as well. A precedent I probably wouldn't want to set if I were Matt Harvey. 

l. Beernerdness: So how was the MMQB Saison? Really, really good. Harpoon brewer Steve Theoharides took great care to brew a classic Saison—yellow, cloudy, flavorful, with a hint of banana and clove (don’t laugh; those are great hints of tastes in a beer).

Basically it takes like a fruity beer. Peter loves himself some beer that just doesn't taste like beer, but tastes like a cocktail mixed with beer. I don't mind a few occasionally, but Peter doesn't seem to drink anything but beer that has hints of fruit in it. 

The Adieu Haiku

My picks stink. So don’t
get ticked if it’s Bills-Niners.
Berman Super Bowl.

I'm not sure I understand this reference to Chris Berman or want to understand the reference. I do understand the Adieu Haiku stinks worse than Peter's Super Bowl pick. 

10 comments 2013 NFL Season Predictions

I don't always make NFL season predictions, but when I do, they are guaranteed to be wrong. Regardless, I don't like it when people make predictions and then act like they are dismissing their own predictions, so I'm going to be super-confident in my predictions. Go to Vegas and bet all the money you have on what I am able to predict. What could go wrong? It's always hard to predict the upcoming NFL season. Some teams don't do well and other teams go from last to first. Some teams catch a break or two and that allows them to cruise to a 11-5 record, while other teams struggle with bad luck and only go 8-8 and miss the playoffs. Given the short NFL season, there is a certain amount of luck that goes into whether a team makes the playoffs or wins their division. Regardless, here are my 2013 NFL predictions. Feel free to mock mine or make your own in the comments.

NFC East

Philadelphia Eagles (11-5): I just have a feeling this is about to become the year of Chip Kelly. I think the Eagles are going to really benefit from the change in head coaches and his offense will take enough teams by surprise that the Eagles will be able to win the NFC East. This is a tough division and I can almost see any team in this division winning the division. This is an offense that Mike Vick seems born to run...we'll see. I also sort of like the Eagles defense too and think they are a team that takes the "first year head coach leap" which is something I just made up and isn't a real thing. I think Brandon Graham is going to have a breakout year and end up with 10+ sacks.

New York Giants (10-6): I have a hard time counting the Giants out. Even if Victor Cruz doesn't return completely healthy I fully expect Rueben Randle and David Wilson to have some breakout years (but not Bleacher Report-type breakout years where they have already broken out and I am predicting they will break out again). The Giants can still protect the passer and rush the quarterback, which is always nice. The defense will still be strong in rushing the passer and I am of the opinion a strong pass rush is the best way to win football games, especially in a division with Robert Griffin and Chip Kelly's offense.

Washington Redskins (8-8): It's not that I am down on the Redskins anymore than I am down on the Griffin carrying the offense and the Redskins (what I perceive to be) overachieving again. I'm obviously guessing at this, but I like the Redskins defense and offense, but just don't think they will win as many games this year. I don't think the Redskins have strong enough receivers and other teams have had all summer to gameplan around the zone-read. Even if Griffin is 100% all year, which I am not confident in this occurring, I don't think he has the receiving targets which will force defenses to adjust to stopping the Skins running game. The Redskins do have Brian Orakpo back, which is going to help the pass rush, but I still feel the Redskins overachieved last year.

Dallas Cowboys (6-10): I think the Cowboys are at a turning point right now. This could be the season the Cowboys put it together, Romo proves his critics wrong and Jason Garrett shows why Jerry Jones liked him so much 4-5 years ago. This could also be the season Romo gets even more criticism for his lackluster play, Garrett gets fired after the season, and the Cowboys head into the offseason ready to make major coaching staff and personnel changes that I can only guess at (something insanely crazy like trading for Phillip Rivers and hiring Jon Gruden). I'm also not sold on Monte Kiffin coming back to the NFL and being a quality defensive coordinator. I don't hate Romo as much as a lot of people, but this seems like an extreme year where Romo could be run out of town when things go bad. Though his new contract makes my doomsday scenario not very viable. Hey, Gruden loves veteran quarterbacks so Romo would be probably be a guy he'd love to work with. Gruden loves that guy!

NFC North

Chicago Bears (11-5): Logic dictates to me the Bears will be better than I think. I am not happy with this prediction, but on paper the Bears look very good to me. Many of the problems I have harped on in the past have been fixed. The offensive line is stronger, there is another receiving option (or two) for Cutler and the defense isn't going to be completely broken by losing Brian Urlacher. I have always had more faith in Jay Cutler than I should, but he has a better offensive line and this is really the year he has to show up to earn a new contract. The Bears defense is going to help them win games, but I think this is the year the Bears get a second receiving threat and an offensive line that protects Cutler. They will win the division.

Detroit Lions (10-6): I feel like it is a fool's errand to pick the Lions to make the playoffs, but I think it will happen. I'm not a big Reggie Bush fan, but he is going to be in an offense where he'll have room to catch the ball and he certainly is a better running option than the Lions have had recently. I still believe the Lions are weak in the secondary, but a good pass rush fixes a lot of defensive problems and the Lions got Ansah and Devin Taylor in the draft to help Suh and Fairley up front. I think the Lions will stay healthy and have just enough defense to win 10 games and make the playoffs.

Green Bay Packers (8-8): It's pretty boring to choose the Packers to win this division, I must admit, so I won't do it. Of course I'm not convinced the Packers can protect Rodgers sufficiently, but Rodgers did well last year and was sacked 51 times. He'll make due. The Packers actually have a running game now (hopefully) with Eddie Lacy, which only serves to make the offense more potent. I'm not exactly excited about the Packers defense and I think that's where they will get tripped up this year. The secondary is weak and while Rodgers is going to make due at the quarterback spot and will put up great numbers, this Packers offensive line could be a sieve. I see a step-back year for the Packers followed by them getting serious about upgrading the defense and offensive line in the offseason.

Minnesota Vikings (3-13): I hate Christian Ponder. Not as a person, mind you, but as a football player. Aside from the fact I think Christian Ponder isn't very good, these are the receivers he has to throw the ball to:

Greg Jennings: Declining and never played with a quarterback who isn't really good. Christian Ponder isn't very good.

Cordarelle Patterson: He's a rookie. If you know what to expect from him, tell me, because I don't know.

Kyle Rudolph: A real receiving threat.

Jerome Simpson: Blah.

The offensive line isn't terrible at the tackle and center spots, while the defensive line is very good, which always helps. Still, no matter how good the defense can be, the offense (and by offense I mean "Adrian Peterson") has a ton of pressure to score points and I don't think the Vikings offense can score points. Last year's playoff appearance was a miracle and I don't see this team going anywhere with Christian Ponder anytime soon.

NFC South

New Orleans Saints (13-3): The Saints schedule isn't exactly threatening and I firmly believe Sean Payton will get the ship righted on the offensive and defensive sides of the ball this year. The Saints can't be as bad they were last year on defense. More importantly, the Saints haven't ever really counted on the defense to do anything but create turnovers and make sure the ball gets back to the Saints offense. It goes against my common sense to bet on Rob Ryan, but since the Saints were so bad last year if he pulls the defense up to be even average he is going to look like the genius I don't believe him to be. The Saints offense is still potent and I think the Saints defense will be on a mission to prove they aren't as bad as last year. It's a leap of faith, but I think the Saints will win the NFC South.

Atlanta Falcons (9-7): I think the Falcons are a popular pick for good reason to win the NFC South, but the Falcons are also a tad bit overrated. A tad bit, I mean, not a lot. Regardless of their talent, they are counting on two rookie cornerbacks to play well in a division with really good receivers. As great as Steven Jackson has been during his career in St. Louis, he is 30 years old and has 2802 touches in the passing and running game to his credit during his career. Granted, the Falcons made due with Michael Turner while Turner was running with weights around his legs, a fork in his back, and the breakaway speed of, well, he had no breakaway speed. So I am nitpicking. The Falcons are a sexy pick for good reason, but their linebackers and secondary have the potential to be not very good at all. The Falcons look really, really good on paper, but they have questions on the right side of the offensive line and I'm not sold on their defense at all.

Tampa Bay Buccaneers (6-10): Looking at the Bucs defense I feel like I should like them more. All jokes aside about Revis, even if he is only 70% of what he was then he is a starting cornerback in the NFL. I love Lavonte David, like how the Bucs dedicated themselves to making their secondary better, but I'm not sure the defensive line can get pressure. Then I move to the offense where the Buccaneers have a "franchise" running back (whatever that means these days) in Doug Martin and two great receivers. But yes, they do have Josh Freeman who can make spectacular passes or just outright look terrible. He's symbolic of this Bucs team. There's talent and they will beat some good teams, but I can't see them putting it together over an entire season. Too little pass rush, too little faith in Freeman. The good news is he will be a free man (see what I did there?) when the Bucs let him leave in free agency after this year.

Carolina Panthers (6-10): At the end of last season, the Panthers had shaky coaching, an offensive line with questions on the right side, no second wide receiver to complement Steve Smith and a secondary that had a lot of holes. Going into this season none of these things have improved and the secondary doesn't have holes, it's just a hole. Carolina has a really good defensive line but the rule that pressure makes the secondary look good doesn't apply when the secondary is this awful. Same story as the previous two seasons. Carolina won't win important early games, Cam Newton will get blamed for the offensive struggles partially caused by inept play-calling, and Ron Rivera should have been fired back in January. New GM, new head coach. That's the rule. There's great players here, but Carolina hasn't committed to giving Newton more weapons in the passing game and the secondary could very well allow opposing quarterbacks an 80% completion percentage.

NFC West

San Francisco 49ers (11-5): This is a really tough division to predict. Even though the 49ers don't have a great secondary and Colin Kaepernick lacks weapons in the passing game I still think the 49ers can win the really tough NFC West. The injury last season to Justin Smith showed how much Aldon Smith is reliant on Justin Smith playing well on the defensive line. Still, the 49ers have a great defense and I'm excited to see what Kaepernick can do over a full season. The 49ers have a really steady offensive line and the 2013 draft made it clear that Trent Baalke is setting the 49ers up to contend this year and for quite a few years down the road. I just don't know who Kaepernick is going to throw the ball to other than Vernon Davis and Anquan Boldin, but the way the 49ers can run the ball I can still see them winning the division.

Arizona Cardinals (8-8): Here's the thing about the Cardinals. They won four games last year with shitty quarterbacks and they have a new coach in Bruce Arians who has shown he knows how to help quarterbacks improve and develop. Maybe Carson Palmer can't develop too much more, but he is competent and the Cardinals simply need competent. Even with Jonathan Cooper being injured indefinitely I think the Cardinals offensive line has moderately improved and Larry Fitzgerald is due for a bounce-back year because I didn't decide to keep him as one of my keepers in a fantasy league. I also think the Cardinals defense will be very solid. All reports about Tyrann Mathieu seem to be positive coming out of Cardinals training camp and Patrick Peterson has one side of the field fairly well locked up. There are questions at linebacker, but the Cardinals have Darnell Dockett, Calais Campbell, and I think Dan Williams will improve to become a very good nose tackle. I'm pretty high on the Cardinals, even if they don't make the playoffs. I think I've under-guessed their record for the season and will regret it when they make the playoffs and I didn't predict they would.

Seattle Seahawks (8-8): I know, this is probably a stupid choice because Russell Wilson is a winner and Marshawn Lynch is a beast, plus Pete Carroll is just great. I blame my gut feeling. I feel like Seattle had a really good year last year, but with the Irvin suspension and Percy Harvin being out indefinitely I'm getting bad vibes about this season. I have more than vibes, so don't worry, I also have my opinion...which means jackshit of course. The Seahawks offensive line is pretty good, but shaky on the right side. More importantly, I don't know if Russell Wilson has anyone to throw the ball to if Harvin stays out, which doesn't bode well for the passing game. Of course the Seahawks defense is great and it's really great in the secondary where I would have to nitpick in order to criticize them. Even with the addition of Cliff Avril and Michael Bennett I'm still not sure these two are going to get the pass rush where the Seahawks want it to be. Their schedule also plays out to be really brutal.

St. Louis Rams (5-11): I'm not hating because of Peter King's love for the Rams, I promise. I think Tavon Austin will deserve to win Offensive Rookie of the Year and he will make a difference in the Rams passing game. The problem is I don't trust Chris Givens, Jared Cook and Brian Quick to make a difference in ensuring defenses don't key on Tavon Austin. Not to mention, the Rams running back position just looks awful to me and these running backs will be running behind an offensive line that has talent (Jake Long) but questions as to whether they can stay healthy (Scott Wells and Jake Long). Giving Bradford no running game isn't the way to win football games. The Rams defense is very solid up front with Brockers, Langford, Quinn, and Long, while the secondary looks great as long as you just don't pay attention to the safeties. It's a partial-birth abortion at this position unless T.J. McDonald is a lot better than I anticipate him being. But hey, if the Rams have a bad season just look to Peter King for a few rays of sunshine.

NFC Playoffs: 

Byes: New Orleans Saints, Chicago Bears

Wild Card Round: San Francisco 49ers over Detroit Lions, New York Giants over Philadelphia Eagles

Divisional Round: New Orleans Saints over New York Giants, San Francisco 49ers over Chicago Bears

Conference Championship: San Francisco 49ers over New Orleans Saints

AFC East

New England Patriots (13-3): I'm not quite convinced the Patriots are going to lose this division only because the names of Tom Brady's offensive weapons aren't well-known. I think Danny Amendola can do a very good Wes Welker impression and the Patriots are lucky to have a running back in Shane Vereen that is a very good receiver. Obviously the questions tend to lie the most with the Patriots secondary and how well they can stop the opposing team. I feel pretty good about Dennard and Talib with McCourty playing safety. I'm not sure the Patriots have it all worked out defensively quite yet, but they have a good pass rush with Chandler Jones and a solid group of linebackers who all seem to be from SEC schools (whatever that means for their NFL careers). I'm not ballsy enough to predict the Patriots to lose the division as long as the Patriots really good offensive line protects Tom Brady. 

Buffalo Bills (9-7): Obviously this prediction's accuracy lies in how much Jeff Tuel ends up playing this season. If he plays only in the opening game of the season (which it seems he won't even play in that game) I feel the Bills can go 9-6 over the rest of the schedule with E.J. Manuel as their starter. I didn't like Manuel as much coming out of college, but all indications I have read is that he had a really good training camp. I'm overly high on the Bills. C.J. Spiller is going to only benefit from getting the football more and I believe the Bills receiving corps of Stevie Johnson, Marquise Goodwin, T.J. Graham and Robert Woods are young, but are going to help Manuel succeed at the quarterback spot this season. Mostly, I like the Bills defense. I know the defensive line struggled last year, but I think this year they are going to look a lot better and allow the Bills to get pressure on the quarterback with just three or four rushers. The Bills have moved to a 3-4, but so few teams run a straight 3-4 or 4-3 system and there are hybrids the Bills can run with Mario Williams dropping back into a linebacker spot that I have faith the Bills defense will adjust. Stephon Gilmore (a breakout player according to Bleacher Report) is going to improve this season and I'm just going to ignore the Bills linebackers because I don't have as much faith in them.

Miami Dolphins (6-10): I appreciate the sentiment of improving the receivers by signing Mike Wallace and Brandon Gibson. That's the way to help Ryan Tannehill succeed as a quarterback, which is to put quality playmakers around him. The Dolphins let Jake Long go, but Tyson Clabo should hold down the right tackle spot sufficiently, though I'm not convinced Tannehill won't be murdered by a pass rusher who beats Jonathan Martin on the left side. So I don't feel as okay about the offensive line as I should. I'm just afraid the Dolphins offense isn't going to be as good running the ball and will force Tannehill into too many tough throwing situations. Plus, the Dolphins better run a lot of hybrid defenses because I'm not sure I like their defensive players as a fit in a 4-3 system. What do I know though? I don't believe the Dolphins offense will improve as necessary and they don't really have very strong cornerbacks, which made cutting Richard Marshall a bit of an odd move. It's hard for me to see the Dolphins doing better than 6-10.

New York Jets (1-15): I tried hard to think of a reason why the Jets aren't going to be 1-15 and failed. A few of the many reasons I can see a team have a terrible season is bad quarterback play, a lack of a balanced offense, a porous offensive line and a defense that isn't able to compensate for the offense's issues. I think the Jets have all four of these characteristics. They don't really have a starting quarterback, I don't trust any of their running backs to carry the load, even if they had a competent quarterback who the hell does he throw the football to, and I don't have faith in the right side of the offensive line. Maybe Stephen Hill or Santonio Holmes will be productive and healthy. Maybe Chris Ivory can be the 200 carry back I don't believe he is capable of being. The Jets defense isn't terrible by any stretch of the imagination, but Rex Ryan's defenses with the Jets has relied on strong cornerback play which this team doesn't have. I feel like it's time for a change and this year just seems like it is going to be a dumpster fire for the Jets.

AFC North

Cincinnati Bengals (12-4):The Bengals are a really popular pick this year and for good reason. They had a pretty good offseason and part of the reason I see them playing so well is because of the draft picks I didn't really like...if that makes sense. I didn't think Tyler Eifert was a great choice, not because of his talent, but because I thought the Bengals had other needs. Still, he will make a great weapon for Andy Dalton. I'm not too high on Gio Bernard, but he will complement BenJarvus Green-Ellis well simply by giving defenses a different look. I also like the Bengals defense with Dre Kirkpatrick (hopefully) finally making it back from injury and the pass rush should be pretty strong, which helps out considering the safeties are a bit of a question. Yeah, I'm buying on the Bengals, so I'm pretty screwed.

Pittsburgh Steelers (11-5): Despite the fact the Steelers signed Bruce Gradkowski this offseason, I am not predicting them to win the AFC North. It's the same song, different verse for me. I don't like the Steelers offensive line that much and feel like Ben Roethlisberger will be running for his life as usual. I would say again I don't like Le'Veon Bell, but he's the best they have and perhaps one of the backup running backs could get the job done if Bell gets hurt or is ineffective. I'm not counting on this to happen though. I do think the Steelers will be better than last year, simply because they have added Jarvis Jones and the Steelers (in my opinion) has a stronger secondary then they did in 2012. They are still a good team, no doubt about that, but I don't think it is the loss of Mike Wallace that will hurt the Steelers as much as the offensive and defensive line play won't put them in the running for the division title.

Baltimore Ravens (8-8): I keep getting told "Don't count out the Ravens simply because they had roster turnover" and I'm not counting them out. I just don't think they will be above .500. I know we saw MVP Joe Flacco last year in the playoffs and I have no idea where that consistently great Flacco came from. Hopefully he will show up again this year for the Ravens. I am not predicting the Ravens offense will be bad without Pitta and Boldin, but Flacco just doesn't have the supporting cast around him that will allow him to be successful. He's going to try to lean too heavily on Torrey Smith and Ray Rice, which will cause defenses to focus on those two guys more than usual. I will say this, I have bashed Jim Caldwell before, but if he puts a Top 10 offense on the field this year I may admit he deserves another shot as a head coach. The Ravens defense is a unit that I expect to be fine. Ray Lewis was a great motivator and they will miss Ed Reed/Paul Kruger, but I think Chris Canty, Elvis Dumervil, Matt Elam, and Arthur Brown can replace what Reed and Lewis provided on the field for the Ravens. I don't like the Ravens cornerback depth, but I think a pretty good defense combined with an offense that lacks weapons means the Ravens won't have above a .500 record in a really tough division.

Cleveland Browns (5-11): I'm biased when it comes to the Browns. I'm not a fan of Mike Lombardi and I think Rob Chudzinski is a talented offensive coordinator when he isn't too busy showing off how creative he is. Brandon Weeden is 30 years old and the Browns spent a first round pick on him. Whatever. That's done, but I don't think he is the guy to lead the Browns offense and I'm not sure Brian Hoyer or Jason Campbell are either. I have no idea why Mike Lombardi insisted on changing around the Browns defense. I thought the Browns defense was the growing strength of the team last year and should not be fucked with. So Mike Lombardi, a genius in his own mind, went out and overpaid for Paul Kruger and the best part about Barkevious Mingo is his name. Otherwise he is small and not worth the pick the Browns used on him in my opinion. What's most interesting to me is Lombardi messed with the defensive line (which I thought was the strength of the defense) and then ignored the cornerback and safety spots, nor did he find any linebackers that can play well in the 3-4 defense. I feel like Lombardi could have been addressed the weaker areas in the Browns defense. Maybe I'll look like an asshole, but 5-11 seems too optimistic. Weeden has more weapons on offense, but if Trent Richardson can't stay healthy then it won't do much good.

AFC South

Indianapolis Colts (11-5): This isn't the strongest of divisions and the Colts are a team on the rise, so I think they will win the AFC South. They have good young (and old) receivers and as long as Ahmad Bradshaw doesn't pull a muscle or get injured like he always seems to be injured then the Colts are going to have a strong offense. I really wish they had invested a bit more in the offensive line, as I don't think there are but 1-2 offensive linemen on the Colts line that can start in the NFL. The Colts defense is somewhat improved, though I really didn't love the money they gave to some of the players to improve the defense, at least they paid the defense lip service, unlike in 2012 when they focused on putting a good offense around Andrew Luck. I think the Colts will win AFC South based entirely on my belief that Andrew Luck will progress enough to cover up for the mediocre offensive line and slightly questionable run game. The Colts defense isn't going to be bad, but I don't know if the improvement will come from the free agents they paid to come in and improve the team.

Houston Texans (10-6): I lack faith in Matt Schaub. I'm not sure why, well I sort of know why, but I get confused sometimes when he is considered an elite quarterback. I liked how the Texans went for a receiver in the draft in DeAndre Hopkins, which can only help them considering Andre Johnson isn't getting younger and there hasn't been a consistent threat on the other side of the field to force teams to not double Johnson. I don't have a very good reason to think the Texans won't win the AFC South. They will still have a great pass rush and their corners are impressive. All in all, I think the Texans will struggle to run the ball if Arian Foster isn't completely healthy and the Texans offense is built to play best coming off of play-action. Ed Reed is probably a better addition in the locker room than on the field since he seems to be perpetually hurt. Maybe the Texans defense carries them this year, but I'm not sure J.J. Watt can be better than he was last year and if Ed Reed is hurt then I don't feel good about the safety situation.

Tennessee Titans (6-10): The Titans have done a great job of putting young receivers around Jake Locker in order to help him succeed. They have done such a great job in the past they had to ignore some of their offensive line needs and improve the line through free agency...but not this year. Chance Warmack was my favorite player in this year's draft and I like the Titans receivers. I think Warmack is going to be the best player in this draft five years from now. Still, I'm not buying the Chris Johnson resurgence quite yet and I don't think Jake Locker is the guy to lead this franchise. He isn't accurate enough and doesn't make good enough decisions. He can't ever say the Titans didn't do anything to help him succeed though. I like the Titans defense, but they don't overwhelm me and I'm not sure this is a defense that can overcome any turnovers by the offense. The Titans need a better pass rush from their ends and they replaced their safeties from last year with George Wilson and Bernard Pollad so that's some sense of improvement. I get a bad feeling if the Titans can't get a good pass rush from the ends and Sammie Lee Hill/Jurrell Casey/Mike Martin then the secondary isn't going to look very good. It's probably the end of the line for Mike Munchak after this season.

Jacksonville Jaguars (3-13): I feel badly for Maurice Jones-Drew. He's wasted the last few years of his prime playing behind Blaine Gabbert and Chad Henne. I don't think the Jaguars should have drafted a quarterback this year, but it's just unfortunate concerning the options they have at the position. I had faith in Gabbert last year to turn himself around and a part of me thinks he could be salvaged, but he really doesn't have much to work with. I'm fooling myself it seems because Gabbert has been horrible. Jacksonville did improve the offensive line, so hopefully they will at least be able to run the ball. Still, it's hard to win games with an offense like this one. We are going to see what kind of defensive coach Gus Bradley is, because the Jaguars cornerbacks are absolutely horrific. The Jaguars need to have a strong pass rush, which I don't think they will, in order to compensate for the horrible secondary. Obviously the Jags are rebuilding, but for the foreseeable future they have no pass rush, the linebackers are just okay and the best player in the secondary could be a rookie. Maybe the Jags new owner can move the team over to England and just give a total middle finger to the Jacksonville fan base that has put up with this shitty play for a few years now.

AFC West

Denver Broncos (12-4): The combination of Peyton Manning and Wes Welker seems unfair. A part of me wonders if Welker and Manning will gain the chemistry that Tom Brady and Welker had. Manning has much better options on the outside than Brady had nearly every year in New England (Brady did have Moss/Stallworth, but I think Thomas/Decker may be better overall) and this could affect how often Welker gets the football. I'm nitpicking I guess. The Broncos have also put a really good offensive line in front of Manning. I wonder if the Broncos can rush the football. I'm not a Monte Ball fan and John Fox will not play a running back who can't pass protect, so Ronnie Hillman isn't guaranteed to start either. Fox doesn't like rookie, so Broncos fans may be in for some Knowshon Moreno action for a good portion of the year. Like many others, I'm not sure where the pass rush will come from on defense and I don't generally love the secondary for the Broncos. Champ Bailey isn't "Champ Bailey" anymore and the Broncos are really counting on Dominique Rodgers-Cromartie to produce. Still, this is a decent defense and Manning is going to be able to win regular season games with this offense. I just question how far they could go if a running game doesn't eventually show up.

Kansas City Chiefs (9-7): I'm not a big Alex Smith fan, but he is an upgrade over what the Chiefs had last year at quarterback. The Chiefs managed to improve the offensive line through the draft and Andy Reid isn't an offensive genius, but he is going to find a way to use Jamaal Charles and be successful in doing so. Still, there isn't much else on the offense other than Dwayne Bowe in the receiving game. The Chiefs defense will be pretty good again and Hali/Justin Houston will provide a strong pass rush. I don't know if I like the second cornerback across from Brandon Flowers (not the lead singer of the Killers), but overall the Chiefs should have another steady defense. I can see a situation where the Chiefs have a great defense and a good enough offense to make the playoffs, especially in this division, but I'm thinking getting to a little over 500 will be enough in this semi-weak division.

San Diego Chargers (6-10): I don't think Philip Rivers is no longer a Top 15 quarterback, it's just the Chargers have slowly taken away his weapons in the passing and stuck him with a shitty running game behind a leaky offensive line. I'm not sure any of this has improved too much. D.J. Fluker isn't a tackle and Max Starks/King Dunlap aren't very good. Plus, there is no real winner among Ronnie Brown, Ryan Mathews, and Danny Woodhead in the running back spot. The winner is just who manages to fail the least. Eric Weddle is the star of the secondary and hopefully the secondary will look good because the Chargers do get a good pass rush from the middle of the defense. Still, this isn't a good enough defense to help the Chargers win games. I think Rivers improves a bit this year and then once he joins a new team manages to be back in the Top 10 quarterback discussion once he isn't given an aging tight end as the best receiver to get the ball to.

Oakland Raiders (1-15): I'm not sure whether to feel bad for Reggie McKenzie or just outright blame him. I know very, very little about the inner workings of the Raiders front office, but if this is what McKenzie envisioned in Year 2 of his rebuilding then I'm a little surprised. The Raiders skill position players are Rod Streater/Darius Moore/Darren McFadden and that's assuming McFadden stays healthy for a full season. The Raiders have two good offensive linemen. I just don't see how this offense puts points on the board if McFadden doesn't turn into Adrian Peterson. The defense is an abomination. There's no pass rush that I could find, the linebackers are all new starters, and the Raiders are counting on Charles Woodson's leadership to help a secondary that is going to have to cover receivers for a long time. The interesting part is I think McKenzie could turn it around if he got another 3-4 years, but I'm betting he isn't allowed that. Looking at the schedule, the only wins I can see are against Jacksonville or the Jets. Maybe the Raiders surprise us and beat the Chargers, but I'm not seeing more than two wins for them this year.

AFC Playoffs

Byes: New England, Cincinnati

Wild Card Round: Denver over Buffalo, Houston over Indianapolis

Divisional Round: New England over Houston, Cincinnati over Denver

Conference Championship: Cincinnati over New England

Super Bowl: San Francisco over Cincinnati

8 comments Bottom-of-the-Barrel's Pickoffapalooza 2012: Superbowl

So here it is, if you can pick yourself up after the extraordinary tension of the Pro-Bowl. Was at work during the Pro-Bowl and was going to consider checking the score and literally couldn't be fucked even clicking the relevant app on my phone. Who actually won? Allow me also to hate on the bye week break (again) for the Superbowl. Sucks the life out of it, I'm not sure when I actually should start reading up on it (articles are "ELI MANNING - ELITE!!!" about a billion times by the looks of things), and by now I'm basically ready for baseball.

Anyway, here it is, SAWX AND YANKS!

GIANTS VS NEW ENGLAND (-3.0)

By the way, bookmakers everywhere are cheering big time for the Patsies here. They started at 3.5 and would be into 2.5 if crossing three wasn't the most difficult journey ever for bookmakers. Anyway, gentlemen, it's time to pick, ensure you choose...wisely.

Jon

NEW ENGLAND -3.0
NEW ENGLAND 30-24

I think this game will be pretty evenly matched. While the Giants are playing very good football I don't think they will be able to defeat a determined New England team. I see the Patriots taking care of the ball and ultimately doing what they do, dominating time of possession and keeping the Giants' offense off the field. That said, New York has the weapons to score quickly and to keep this game close.

Sean

NEW ENGLAND -3.0
NEW ENGLAND 34-24

Too much Giants hype and not enough respect for Tom Brady being really fucking good. New York is playing well, but the strength of their team (the pass rush) will be negated by Brady's propensity to get rid of the ball quickly. Pats roll.

Chris

NEW ENGLAND -3.0
NEW ENGLAND 27-23

My city, Indianapolis is playing host to Super Bowl XLVI, with 150,000 + visitors expected in the Circle City. The excess of entertainment and our societal devotion to the NFL are on full display in the streets of downtown Indianapolis. The eyes of the world will be upon us in a few short days, and it is almost enigmatic the energy and efforts extended for one game. Just one single game.

Granted, it is the one game that will further define the already rich legacies of two proud flagship NFL franchises. One game that can tie Tom Brady with Terry Bradshaw as the only quarterbacks to win four rings. One game that would give Eli Manning indisputable proof of his elite status amongst this generation of signal callers. One game that might be able to bring some degree of peace to the heart of Patriots owner Robert Kraft, whose endured the painful loss of wife Myra to cancer.

For the past ten days the second and infinitely more important meeting between the New York Giants and New England Patriots this season has been dissected, analyzed, and discussed from every conceivable angle. Every stat, story, and sound bite has been spread to the four corners of the Earth, leaving nothing about either team, or its players unknown.

For that reason I refuse to throw out a bunch of stats and figures this week as in past write-ups. The strengths and weaknesses of these two teams are known. By virtue of being the lone two teams whose players will not be in street clothes on Sunday, the Giants and Patriots must be playing pretty good football right now. Sure, Ravens kicker Billy Cundiff, and 49ers punt returned Kyle Williams deserve a Super Bowl ring depending on the victor, no one ever said that a bit of luck and fortune weren’t part of the equation.

Whichever team is able to take care of the ball, and get defensive stops at key points in the game will be the champions. That almost goes without saying. I make that statement more so to say that I think these teams are unconventional enough in the paths they’ve taken this season, and leading up to this culmination. With a penchant for winning games oftentimes while exhibiting poor play on one side of the ball or the other. Demonstrating they can win games despite playing imperfect football.. The Giants were a 9-7 regular season ball club, and the Patriots somehow have advanced despite the handicap of a defense ranked next to last in the entire league. Bill Belicheck has transformed his team yet again, this time with a most potent offense led by virtually unstoppable dual tight ends. Hopefully Gronkowski is healthy enough to be effective, and not be a decoy or hindrance. While the Giants late season surge, and fearsome pass rush mirror the very characteristics of their last Championship run.

This one, last single game of the season is a contest between two evenly matched teams. Teams with some similar qualities that blur the line just enough that you can’t really discern who has a decisive edge. Teams with different, but equally matched strengths, capable of being the deciding factor in what should be a closely contested affair.

Jimmy

GIANTS +3.0
GIANTS 38-27

Having talked about both teams for collectively five games, it might be appropriate to zoom out a bit and look at the big picture, and it just so happens we have a Superbowl which is very conducive to the big picture. Normally looking at a game from four years ago is a bit ridiculous, but maybe not in this case, as the Giants and Pats are two of the most stable franchises in football. The coaches remain from four years ago. Bradshaw, Jacobs, Umenyiora, Tuck, Manning, Ross, Webster, McKenzie, Snee, Diehl, Mankins, Koppen, Light, Wilfork, Brady and Welker all return. That is a list of most of the relevant players in this game. But I'm more interested in the changes since that game. The Giants are unequivocally better. Their receivers outside of Burress (who had one of the best receiving seasons I have ever seen that year) were decidedly mediocre going into that Superbowl. Now they boast one of the best receiver troikas in the game. Their defensive line trades an aging Strahan for the most athletic defensive player in the league. Eli Manning is much, much better than four years ago. Their offensive line might be slightly worse, but although the numbers looked bad last week, I thought they protected outstanding against San Fran early, and Manning took some sacks in lieu of making some risky throws (New York had no turnovers) he might have let go against a less dangerous ballhawking secondary. Six sacks and twelve hits also isn't quite as bad as it sounds when you consider New York called pass 64 times against a fine pass rushing team. So there's just about nowhere New York is definitively worse, and several areas they are significantly improved.

New England are the opposite. Harrison, Seymour, Bruschi, Ty Warren, Meriweather, Adalius Thomas, Vrabel, Samuel, Hobbs are all defensive subtractions from that team. Now, I understand that many of those players were well past their prime, overrated or both. But even so, just a sense of experience, intelligence, sanity and serenity in the defensive team will be sorely missed in the chaos of the ensuing two weeks. I mean the only meaningful addition is Jerod Mayo (and Mark Anderson, sort of, I guess), who had his worst season as a pro this year. The defense is undoubtedly worse, probably much worse (even though defense was hardly considered a strength of the 2008 team, they finished 4th in YPG against and 4th in PPG against). I know what you're thinking, Gronkowski and Hernandez, sure, Welker is better and Green-Ellis is probably an upgrade over Maroney but remember, Randy Moss had 1,500 yards and 23 touchdowns that year. By and large, I don't think there's much debate that New England is not the same team they were four years ago. I think both changes to the Giants and Patriots are fairly substantial, and I do think it's relevant - Superbowls are different than other games and I think how these teams responded to it four years ago is at least slightly instructive.

So is the win in Foxboro - without Hakeem Nicks, it should be said. I have mentioned how insanely hard it is to win in New England and the Giants did it, and while it did require a Manning game winning drive, there's nothing especially unusual about those drives this year. Eli's fourth quarter heroics are by now quite famous, and considering his playoff exploits, he has to be considered just about the most clutch QB in the league. The Giants have beaten Green Bay, San Francisco and New England, all on the road, the three top seeds in the NFL. They also beat Atlanta, a 10 win team, by three scores. Meanwhile, I have painstakingly compiled a list of New England's wins against teams with a winning record at the end of their season. This took a lot of time and research, so I encourage you to look over it closely;

Baltimore.

That's it. That's the list. Because Lee Evans dropped a TD pass and Billy Cundiff missed a 32 yard field goal. Their best win outside of Massachusetts is against Denver. Denver. Great.

I mentioned the Giants offensive line, who I have been broadly impressed with over the last few weeks, even though on paper it looked messy against the Niners. This game is on them, because what was apparent against Baltimore, and I suppose has been all year for the Pats, is that if you stop their pass rush, they are just completely impotent defensively. I mean, obviously every team wants a pass rush, and are a better functioning team when it is clicking for them getting to the quarterback. But it's just absolutely critical for New England as it's the only thing they do remotely competently. With a decent rush, they are a below average defense. Without it, they don't have a defense basically at all. They got to Flacco early and Baltimore's bad offense did nothing, but when Baltimore's line settled in, Flacco (Flacco!) was dissecting them with ease. Pay no mind to the "New England made stops when they needed to" storyline. It's bullshit. Yeah sure, they got a pick and a fourth down stop. Whoop de doo. They were just awful on basically every other defensive play of the second half. They gave up 213 yards (389 on Baltimore's last eight drives) and if this went into OT, I doubt the Patriots would have been able to hold on. New England is going to have to, at minimum, duplicate San Francisco's pass rush to have any hope here, against an offense infinitely better than Denver or Baltimore, and I think it's fairly obvious the chances of that are slim. I think Eli is going to absolutely go beserk on New England here. The best quarterback (by QB rating) New England have beaten was Philip Rivers (Matt Moore, no shit, was the second). It would be literally unprecidented for them this year to beat a QB or an offense of this class. I was intrigued by the performance against Denver, but probably should have known better - New England are just too atrocious defensively to take particulary seriously against good opposition, and New York easily qualifies.

Ben

Patriots (-3.0)

New England 31-20

My preseason Super Bowl pick was New England-Atlanta. I chose the Patriots to win this game back in the fall. I haven’t changed my mind since then. One of the biggest discussions I have had over the past week has been people asking me when the Giants became an unstoppable football team, to the point it seems like the Patriots should not be favored in the game? I’m not sure. I realize the Giants are peaking at the right time, but I still feel like the Patriots are the better team. As strong as the Giants have looked in these playoffs, this game has all the makings of a statement game from Brady and Belichick.

There have also been constant discussions about this game being just like the 2007 Super Bowl, which I believe to be stupid. These two teams did play earlier this year with the Giants winning that game, but I am not sure how much can be learned from this earlier game. I made a comment in a recent TMQ post that I didn’t think either of these games tell us much about the upcoming Super Bowl. This was in response to Gregg Easterbrook having made a comment the Patriots should win the game because they beat the Giants in 2007 and then lost to the Giants in the Super Bowl that year. So Gregg's logic dictated with the Giants winning earlier this year it bodes well for a Patriots victory in the Super Bowl. Commenter “JJJJShabado" did some research and came up with 11 Super Bowls where there were rematches. He posted the research in the comments and I asked his permission to post it here since I found it interesting:

2007: Giants d Patriots (Patriots d Giants in Week 17)
2001: Patriots d Rams (Rams d Patriots in Week 10)
1999: Rams d Titans (Titans d Rams in Week 8)
*1994: 49ers d Chargers (49ers d Chargers in Week 15)
1993: Cowboys d Bills (Bills d Cowboys in Week 2)
1990: Giants d Bills (Bills d Giants in Week 15)
*1986: Giants d Broncos (Giants d Broncos in Week 12)
1983: Raiders d Redskins (Redskins d Raiders in Week 5)
*1981: 49ers d Bengals (49ers d Bengals in Week 14)
1980: Raiders d Eagles (Eagles d Raiders in Week 12)
*1977: Cowboys d Broncos (Cowboys d Broncos in Week 14)

So 63.7% of the time the team has lost the regular season match-up and has won the Super Bowl.

In terms of probability, you would expect this allocation 16%, assuming each team has a 50-50 shot of winning the Super Bowl.

The starred entries are times when the team that won the first game also won the Super Bowl. It is interesting that out of the six Super Bowl rematches since 1990, the team that lost the first game won the second game. So it seems the current trend (if we can call six games over 22 years a "trend" at all) is for teams that won the first game to lose in the Super Bowl. I’m not sure this information really tells us anything (though I appreciate the research) for the upcoming game though. I'm not even sure if this is a similar game to the 2007 Super Bowl, or even the matchup earlier this year. So it may be dangerous to use any previous games these two teams have played over the past few seasons to predict the outcome of the current Super Bowl matchup.

So what does this information tell me? It tells me we can look back at previous games two teams may have played, but it doesn’t necessarily help predict the outcome. Maybe in terms of strategy the team that lost the first game would have an advantage in they will want to gameplan and scheme around the problems that caused the loss in the first game, while the team that won the first game will want to somewhat continue a gameplan that worked in the first game. Teams that win a game probably won't radically change a gameplan away from something that previously worked. Maybe this is a stupid line of thought and both teams would radically change their gameplan, I don't know.

I think that’s the biggest lesson we can learn is that each NFL game (cliché alert) is its own game and has to be judged on its own without us “learning” too much from the first game. What we “learn” is only relevant in terms of that previous game in many cases. Sports don't have hard and fast rules, like "put your hand on a hot stove and your hand will get burnt." It is hard to say because Play X/Strategy X worked last time it will work again in a rematch between the same two teams. So I believe it is hard to look at the previous Giants-Patriots game, and especially the Super Bowl from four years ago, and think that tells us something about this Sunday's Super Bowl.

I’ve heard all week about how the Patriots made Brady uneasy in the pocket and they are in his head. Few quarterbacks can be effective with pressure in his face. Eli Manning handles pressure in his face well, but it still affects his play. Both teams are obviously going to want to put pressure on the other team’s quarterback and neither team has a great defense, so the offensive line play on each side will make a huge difference in the game. Eli Manning seems to be playing well, absent the Giants second half struggles against the 49ers, and Tom Brady has sworn he won’t play as poorly against the Giants as he did against the Ravens. So both quarterbacks are coming off less than typical stellar performances. The good news for both quarterbacks is the opposing defenses aren’t nearly as strong as the Ravens and 49ers defense.

I feel like the Giants are an overwhelming pick for this game. They are the favorites without actually being favored. I’m not sure I see it. I don’t see them being able to cover Gronkowski, Hernandez, and Welker and I think the Patriots are really motivated to prepare and play well in this game. The Giants have gotten their shit together recently and put on a great run through the playoffs. As many questions as I have about the Patriots being able to cover the Giants receivers, I have as many questions about the Giants stopping the Patriots tight ends. The 49ers showed two weeks ago a good defense can get pressure on Manning and force him to look uncomfortable in the pocket. The Patriots want to do the same thing to Manning.

I look for the Patriots to get the ball out of Brady’s hand quickly in the passing game and try to run the ball on the Giants early in the game to slow down their pass rush. I don’t know if the Giants will be able to run the ball on the Patriots with Wilfork in the middle of the line. The key to beating the Giants is to force them to blitz in order to get pressure on Brady and test their average secondary. The game will be closer than my predicted score indicates. I feel like the Patriots are going to run the ball with Woodhead, Benjarvus Green-Ellis and others (Hernandez?) in order to keep pressure off Brady and I believe the secondary will hold up well enough to slow down the Giants.

So rejoice Giants fans. I am picking against your team for the third time in these playoffs. That means I will probably be wrong since I have been wrong three times before. I hope everyone enjoys the Super Bowl. I still would like to see it played on Saturday night in order to prevent me from having to go to work the next day. Of course the NFL is terrified no one will watch the Super Bowl on Saturday night or that groups of people will go to bars to watch the game. I’m not sure I buy this very much. I still think people would stay at home to see the game and commercials, but I could be wrong.

Jimmy: NYG (+3.0)

Sean: NE (-3.0)

Jon: NE (-3.0)

Ben: NE (-3.0)

Chris: NE (-3.0)

Bill Simmons: NE (-3.0)

7 comments Bottom-of-the-Barrel's Pickoffapalooza 2012: Conference

I'm still pissed off about the Saints game, as you will all be subjected to in a bile filled rant soon. Something to look forward to.

BALTIMORE @ NEW ENGLAND (-7.0)
GIANTS @ SAN FRANCISCO (-2.5)

Picks...

Jimmy

First, some old fashioned ridicule of stupid journalism (something I haven't done on here for some time).

Brady orchestrated the humiliating 45-10 beatdown by carving up a number of team and league records, and serving notice that the demise of the drop-back, pocket passer has been grossly exaggerated.

Yes, Jackie, it's dismal how many people have talked about how the passing game is dead. It's all rushing and defense and three 5,000+ yard passers and line play and...oh, something's wrong here isn't there? Speaking of something being wrong with passing...

NEW ENGLAND (-7.0)
NEW ENGLAND 27-17

Flacco's shit. The Ravens had eight first downs deep in the fourth quarter. This week was a sobering reminder of the importance of turnovers, but I'm just not sure we're seeing the best teams in the conference title games because of them. Baltimore were not good last week, at home to a supposedly inferior Houston team. Jacoby Jones' stupidity (mainly the turnover obviously, but he was horrible returning the ball all game, with another drop and two negative returns, the second of which was a regulation evasion of the gunner) was basically the reason they won this game. Houston outgained them by nearly 100 yards, had nearly 50% more first downs, were better on third down, had five sacks to none and Baltimore had seven (count 'em, seven!) three and outs. You name anything aside from holding the ball (obviously not incidental, but still), Houston did it better. Foster (132 yards on 27 carries) was able to run on them consistently, and Suggs was invisible. So Houston was able to execute what it wanted on offense, namely to run - will Brady be able to throw?

I think so. The big question coming out of Saturday for me was - do you give the Patriots any credit for what just happened? Like, Denver is clearly much worse than New England, going there, lacking playoff experience, should we have expected anything less than 45-10? I think they deserve a boost in standing following the game. Sure, it was Denver, but they played as close to a perfect football game as you'll ever see. There was barely an offensive play that didn't do what New England wanted it to do. Denver had nine passing yards midway through the third quarter and 33 by the end of the third. Even with Tebow that's fucking amazing. At one point, Denver had 0.8 YPA. New England racked up 15 negative plays. Fifteen! Even if you think the offense was basically business as usual, the worst defense in the league shouldn't be able to do that to anyone, regardless of who or where they are playing. A bottom five defense shouldn't be able to. I still think they are a below average defense, obviously, but Baltimore is a below average offense too, and worse than that, a one dimensional below average offense (Baltimore has an almost impossibly low 402 yards passing in their last three games). You can gameplan for the Ravens, and the Patriots have the best such gameplanner in the business. In many ways they are similar to Denver, solid offensive line, inaccurate QB (Flacco was 26th, behind Rex Grossman - Rex Grossman! - in completion percentage), run the ball like it's 1957 (8th in rushing attempts per game and 4th among playoff teams) and the odd deep throw (namely Torrey Smith, who was 13th in yards per catch with 16.8). Baltimore's defense is obviously very good, but I don't think it's as good as it used to be. I have mentioned I don't think Reed is the same guy (dropped two relatively easy picks against the Texans, yes, even as he took one away from Andre Johnson late, that was essentially a jump ball on a double covered receiver) and he's hobbled by injury, Suggs has one sack in his last four games, and the run defense is hardly impenetrable (New England don't need 4.7YPC like Houston, something flirting with 4 will do). New England only seemed to have problems when they were almost deliberately trying not to score in the fourth quarter. Brady was hurried twice against Miller and Dumervil and not sacked at all. Is Baltimore's pass rush really that much better? Denver had twelve sacks in their final four games prior to meeting the Pats. Baltimore has three. Their offense is averaging less than 21 points in their last 12 games (and barely over 18 on the road) and haven't scored more than 24 in their last seven anywhere. Turnovers won't bail the Ravens out here, New England has four in their last five games at home and as mentioned last week, lead the AFC in giveaways. About the home thing, the Ravens are 14-15 on the road in the last three years and 4-4 this year despite playing no out of division playoff teams on the road, and considering New England's otherworldly home record, that's a bad sign. I'm not sure Baltimore's offense is much better than Denver's (Denver was a significantly superior rushing team to the Ravens who were 12th in YPC) and if New England's defense shows up with even half as good an effort as last week here, they should be able to hold them to about 20 or less and put the necessary points up themselves.

GIANTS (+2.5)
GIANTS 23-17

Run the ball, they said. New York had 95 yards on 27 carries. 23 of them came on Bradshaw's 23 yard gain against prevent defense on the second last play of the first half and 34 more yards came on the icing drive. New York had 14 yards until that Bradshaw run. Rush the passer they said. The Giants eventually had four sacks and five hits (one sack came on a hopeless Green Bay drive, down by three scores with two minutes left), but got absolutely nothing early (again) and considering how often Rodgers dropped back, and how many yards he gained on the ground (66), New York's pass rush was really quite dissapointing. I mean the first half or so (where they held the Packers to just 10), there was not anyone that seemed to even get past a block. Keep Green Bay's offense off the field, they said. Green Bay won the time of possession in the game, and ignoring the final kneel downs, they had the ball for 17:31 of the 28:13 played in the second half. So how did the Giants win? Yes, they got a well below average day from the Green Bay offense. That was always going to be necessary. The secondary that I said couldn't cover anyone, in fact played a pretty reasonable game. But the deeper answer is Manning. Eli is playing out of his fucking skull at the moment. He has nine touchdowns and one pick in his last three games. He has 953 yards and is completing 69.4% of his throws. The dropoff from Brees to Manning is smaller than you might think. And we know he has the playoff minerals to succeed on the road.

Green Bay handled the ball like it was greased up before every play (eight drops, three fumbles), but considering the Giants were on the road, and the officiating was probably hard on them, this was not a fluke performance. The Giants generally played better than Green Bay. That was not true of the Niners. Look, it's fair to say if you picked the Niners to win this game, you expected them to win the turnover battle - fine. They were +28 this year, so give them +2. Hell, give them +3. They were effectively plus five in this game when you consider the one San Fran turnover came at midfield with 17 seconds left in the first half, the Saints with no timeouts. Even for Brees that's not a meaningful possession. Plus five, with two on special teams (including one moronic kick return from the endzone). Lucky. Then, they were so incredibly outplayed in this game, that despite the turnovers, they magically are still down with 4 minutes to play. This is what every single person who picked San Francisco feared (be honest) and what everyone who liked New Orleans predicted; Alex Smith would have to throw. He does, and finishes the drive with a twenty eight yard touchdown run - the longest run of his career (he hadn't had a run of more than 14 yards since 2007). Lucky. Then San Fran are down again with one and a half minutes left and a single timeout. Now "you have to throw" isn't even an expression. You literally have to throw every down. This is really what those who picked San Francisco dreaded. Smith then throws 6/7 for 85 yards and a TD. This is a pretty good analogy to my thinking as I was sitting in my underwear watching this game, as someone that picked New Orleans. I was throwing popcorn at the screen by the end. INSANELY lucky. Lucky three different ways in this game. A game where their defense was a paper tiger. New Orleans had 472 yards, 4 touchdowns and those numbers aren't even misleading. San Francisco could not stop New Orleans in any way whatsoever when it counted. The only reason they won this game is because Drew Brees was unable to get a meaningful possession last. FOX flashed a stat that said only once in the history of the NFL had a team had a +4 turnover margin and lost in the playoffs before Saturday, and again, to remind you, it was really closer to +5. San Francisco were historically outplayed for 59 minutes (by the way, can you imagine if Tebow, and not Smith, did that? The internet might have exploded).

It is true that Dallas, Atlanta and Green Bay are all weaker pass defenses than San Francisco, albeit by less than most might think. But the difference is not in the secondaries. Dallas' secondary is a horror film, but Atlanta has disciplined players at the back, and two good man to man corners. Green Bay has Woodson, Tramon Williams, and one of the best ballhawking defensive backfields in football (and Manning had to throw into it, with his short targets being basically useless - characteristically, New York tight ends and running backs caught just five balls against Green Bay for 60 yards). No, the difference is simply in the pass rush. While San Francisco's linebackers lost the battle with Graham and Sproles, no one can question the exceptional play of the defensive Smiths. Aldon Smith is one of my favourite players in the league, and Justin Smith is just extraordinarily strong. There was an amazing play where he was pushing Jermon Bushrod back, all the way to Brees, and then grabbed Brees while still being blocked. New York's offensive line has been pretty good in the last three games, with four sacks and nineteen hits on Manning, but the only exceptional pass rusher they faced was Ware (check Matthews' numbers this year, he was invisible against the Giants too). However, the bigger problem is on the other line. Look, I think despite my grumblings about the pass rush being much more sizzle than steak of late, we can agree that Pierre-Paul, Kiwanuka, Tuck and Umenyiora are dangerous pass rushers, and San Francisco might be the worst pass blocking line in the league. The Niners conceded the seventh most sacks in the league, despite barely clearing 450 attempts this year (second last in the league)...if the Giants pass rush does get going, this could be a blowout. Even if it doesn't, New York has proven it can beat better teams than San Francisco without one, surprisingly. On the flip side, while I have done pretty well on this pick 'em thing the last three years, there is one, rather fatal flaw in my record - picking the Superbowl winner. The last two years in games involving the Packers and Saints, I am 2-5 against the spread (and 1-6 picking the winner). I am 10-5 in all other games. This year, if I have such a bogey team, it is all but certain to be the Niners. I just don't see what everyone else sees. Being 6-1 in games that don't involve them and picking against them back to back without success does concern me, but in the end, I can only pick what I think - the Giants to win.

Jon

NEW ENGLAND (-7.0)
NEW ENGLAND 30-19

How are we supposed to take a Baltimore team that lost to the Jaguars 12-7 on the road on MNF in late October (and has generally been a much different (read: worse) team on the road)? Not to mention that they looked mostly unimpressive last week (couldn't quite put away the Houston Texans, who to their credit aren't exactly bums, but let's just say I didn't walk away thinking the Ravens looked like a championship caliber team). We have all heard that defense travels well, but I don't see them faring well against New England.

On the other hand, the Patriots beat the shit out of the Broncos last week and what sucks is that no one can really take anything away from that victory. They already beat Team Tebow handily in Denver and then continued that to a further degree in Foxborough. A 13-3 team dominated an 8-8 team. Big whoop. What we do know is that the Patriots' defense, which is their biggest relative weakness in this matchup (and a huge one at that), did a pretty good job at getting to the quarterback. I think that could be huge. It looks as if the Patriots are content to go with a no-huddle offense from the get-go and well, that means that they will mostly likely jump out to a lead and force the other team to pass. Which means more Joe Flacco. On the road. In a conference championship game. I think this could end up being a great game, but Baltimore's defense will almost definitely have to score for them to have a shot at winning this game.

SAN FRANCISCO (-2.5)
SAN FRANCISCO 20-16

Anyone still wondering which New York Giants team will show up this week is an idiot. They are arguably playing the best football of any of the teams remaining. The real question is whether or not their A game is good enough to beat the 49ers in San Francisco. The weather this time around will not be as nice as last weekend. There will most likely not be any sunshine and the field will be wet. I think that this will lead to a lower scoring game and that plays right into the hands of San Francisco.

Now, I know some people will be like, well there's no way the 49ers' turnover advantage is sustainable. Well that may be true, and while the Giants didn't need any turnovers to kick the awful Falcons' ass, they were also the beneficiary of some turnover good fortune against the Packers. In my opinion this game comes down to which defense I think will be better at creating turnovers, and I'm going to go with San Francisco. As much as I hate the Giants, I still think they have a great shot at winning this game. These two teams played an amazing game in mid-November, and I'm sure this Sunday's game will deliver as well.

Chris

BALTIMORE (+7.0)
NEW ENGLAND 21-17

As a resident Hoosier and longtime Colts fan, let’s make one thing clear. I do not want the New England Patriots to win. Under no circumstances do I wish to have the Bill Belicheck led brood in my hometown dome on February 5th. A 2-14 season, the potential farewell of a Hall of Fame quarterback, and the current front office housecleaning has not put me in a good mood when discussing the potential for Tom Brady to hoist the Lombardi trophy in my backyard.

Football Gods, why haste thou forsaken me?

Not only are the Football Gods against me, but it seems that everyone with an opinion feels that the Patriots are a shoe-in for the Super Bowl. And why shouldn’t they? Of course any comparisons between the Ravens and Patriots begins behind center. Tom Terrific put on a clinic against the Broncos, throwing for six touchdowns and 363 yards on 26 of 34 passing attempts. His counterpart, Joe Flacco struggled to move the offense behind 176 yards on 14 completions in 27 attempts. Matter of fact, Flacco hasn’t surpassed the 200 yard mark in 7 of his 8 playoff appearances (Ravens are 5-3 during that span). Just this week, teammate Ed Reed made some not so flattering remarks about his quarterback’s play against the Texans. Will the public ploy by Reed serve to motivate his beleaguered QB, or have the seeds of doubt been sewn? There are no doubts about Tom Brady.

Baltimore’s chances rest primarily on the shoulders of their defensive unit. Albeit an aging defensive unit. The Ravens surrendered just 16.6 points per game this season, third best in the NFL. The Ravens also led the AFC with 48 sacks this season, led by Terrell Suggs with 14. The defensive line must have a great game and put pressure on Brady from all sides of the pocket. Each lineman has at least 5 sacks this season, which demonstrates their ability to do just that.

These are just some of the knowns. What will decide the outcome are some of the unknowns. Can the Ravens find some way to contain the dual tight end threats of Hernandez and Gronkowski? If anyone can, these Ravens can. But then do you expect to be able to contain Wes Welker and Deion Branch as well? Will Ray Race and the tenth ranked rushing attack of the Ravens be able to exploit a Patriots defense growing in confidence? After managing a paltry 87 yards against the Texans, I’m positive that the Ravens will lean on their running game early on, which if successful will take pressure off of Flacco.

All signs point to my prayers going unanswered. Last week the Ravens didn’t make many mistakes, playing penalty free football, while not turning the ball over once. Forcing four such turnovers by Houston. Conventional logic would tell one not to expect the same this week against a veteran led playoff ball club like the Patriots. But, if the Ravens can’t improve upon the anemic output from their offense, expect to see their championship hopes dashed. Maybe the last such run for players like Ray Lewis and the aforementioned Ed Reed.

I think that Baltimore has a better defensive line, and offensive line than the Patriots. And of course you have to win in the trenches first and foremost. But, I think that Baltimore’s woes on the offensive side of the ball will be too much to overcome, even with the Ravens defense putting forth all the effort needed for a trip to Indy. In the end…..despite my obvious bias, I am picking the Patriots to win.
Watching the Patriots win this weekend would be adding insult to a season that has already seen significant injury to the collective pride of Colts Nation.

Football Gods, don’t fail me now. As this is one time that I would be more than OK with being proven completely and utterly wrong.

SAN FRANCISCO (-2.5)
SAN FRANCISCO 23-20

Generally speaking, Super Bowls are won by the elite quarterbacks of the game. Ask most people and only one of the teams in the NFC Championship game has a great QB. Eli Manning has won over any remaining detractors with his stellar play this season, especially in the clutch moments. Damn that reporter earlier this season for questioning whether Eli was in the class of Tom Brady. He may be in the back corner of the room like some new kid that just moved into the neighborhood, but he’s there alright.

Alex Smith on the other hand has faced scrutiny of a different sort for most of his career with the 49ers. Questions about whether he was fit to be a starting quarterback at the highest level dogged Smith through seven different offensive coordinators in his first seven seasons. With the arrival of new head coach Jim Harbaugh this season, the confidence of Alex Smith began to show in his play. Never more so than in the waning moments of a thrilling home win against the favored New Orleans Saints and their powerful offense last weekend. Regardless of past grievances aired by naysayers, one thing is for certain. Both Manning and Smith come into this game off the highs of great divisional round performances.

For all of the talk about their respective QB’s, make no mistake, this contest will come down to defense. Both teams boast fierce defensive fronts that can wreck havoc on offenses. San Francisco allowed a league low 77 yards rushing per game, finished top ten in sacks and led the league with 38 takeaways. The Giants resurrected season and deep playoff push can be attributed to a renewed presence of their once feared pass rush, led by Pro Bowler Jean Pierre-Paul, Osi Umenyiora and Jason Tuck. The Giants were also top ten in sacks this season. When these two teams met in Week 10, it took a defensive stand by Justin Smith, Carlos Rogers and the 49ers defense to stave off Manning for a 27-20 victory at home. Furthermore, it should be noted that two of the game’s most prolific offenses ever, now sit at home in large part because of the efforts of these defenses.

Ahmad Bradshaw missed the November 13th meeting between these two teams and may be a bit of an X-factor this week. A steady one-two punch from Bradshaw and Brandon Jacobs will likely be the key if Eli Manning is to have the time necessary to find dangerous wide receivers Hakeem Nicks, Mario Manningham and Victor Cruz. The Niners gave up less than 40 yards rushing against the Saints last week, so it really may not make a difference who is in the backfield for the Giants. Eli will need a stellar game in order for New York to advance.

Alex Smith had great success in the first game when targeting his tight ends, and coming off a 180 yard, two touchdown performance last week, Vernon Davis will be a big key for the Niners chances. The Giants bottled up the San Francisco rushing attack in that first meeting, but I bet that we see a bunch of Gore early and often in an attempt to establish ball control.

Because of how close this game will be, I think a crucial turnover will eventually be the deciding factor in this game. I think that San Fran poses just enough of a threat on the ground that Smith and the passing game moves the offense into scoring position several times throughout the contest. The 49ers have not been great in the red zone this season so I’m not predicting a dire need for several touchdowns like last week. I think a number of field goals are kicked and will be the margin of victory here.

Sean

BALTIMORE (+7.0)
BALTIMORE 20-17

Defense, defense, defense. Ed Reed was right, by the way: Joe Flacco really looked like shit. He'll probably look like shit again, too, which is why I think this one will go down to the wire. But the Ravens still have Ray Rice and I think he'll be the difference. You may wonder, "What, no credit for Tom Brady?" The man's a great quarterback. Obviously if the Patriots start strong, the Ravens will be in a lot of trouble. But I would take the Baltimore defense to win that battle any day of the week. Including Sunday.

SAN FRANCISCO (-2.5)
SAN FRANCISCO 24-20

Fine, I believe in the Niners. I'm not confident about it by any means, but if their defense can force Drew Brees to make mistakes, they can sure as hell do that to Eli Manning, too. Now that I've said that, watch the Giants win on Sunday.

Ben

New England (-7.0)
New England 34-20

You would think these games would get easier as the playoffs go along. At this point, we've seen these teams play 17-18 times this year and could have a feel for how good or bad each team is. It is just not true though, at least for me it isn't true. 17 games into the year and I still don't like the Ravens offense and still don't think they are good enough to make the Super Bowl. I've been critical of Joe Flacco over the last week, but I had a revelation a few days ago. I was critical of Flacco in the Ravens victory over the Texans. He looked bad, but he also didn't commit any turnovers, so I take that as a positive. The Texans have a very good defense too, so merely not turning the ball over is somewhat of an accomplishment. So that actually says a little bit that Flacco, who never will mistaken for Joe Montana. He played efficiently but not well during the game. So perhaps Flacco wasn't as bad as I said he was. Of course, he very well could have been as bad as I recall. I'm trying to give Flacco credit with the whole "he may not have been as bad as we recall" excuse. I mostly want to acknowledge he went up against a tough defense. He will get a lot of people off his back if he plays well on Sunday.

As far as the Patriots go, Tom Brady chewed up a good Broncos defense last week, but even if he takes a step back against the Ravens this week, I still think he is still going to put points on the board. The Patriots defense isn't seen as tough and was statistically one of the worst in the NFL this year. In theory, Flacco should be able to move the ball against the Patriots defense. The key to this game (and this may seem obvious) is the Ravens defense has to shut down Tom Brady enough to give Flacco and the Ravens offense a chance to not end up in an early hole. I'm not sure they will be able to do this. The Patriots offense is on such a roll and there has been so much attention paid to the tight ends on the Patriots roster that Wes Welker has become almost an afterthought. I think this week he reminds he us he is on the roster and has a big game while the Ravens are concerned with Gronkowski and Hernandez.

The Ravens are simply not a very good road team. They are 4-4 on the road this year with losses to Tennessee, Jacksonville, Seattle and San Diego. I don't believe the Patriots have a great defense, but I also don't believe the Ravens have a great offense. The Patriots offense is on such a roll that no matter how good the Ravens defense may be, I see the Patriots being able to score points. The Patriots are going to focus on shutting down Ray Rice and that will be the key to the game. The Patriots are going to the Super Bowl and your nightmare that involves reading running diaries from Bill Simmons while he is at the Super Bowl has become a reality.

New York Giants (+2.5)
New York Giants 17-13

This is a tough game to pick. These two teams played earlier this year in Candlestick Park and the 49ers won. Frank Gore spent much of the second half of the first game on the bench and the Giants defense wasn't playing quite as well then as they are now. This is the overpowering force versus the immovable object, at least in terms of momentum. One of these two teams has to win this game. Whether it is the Giants, who seem intent on reliving the 2007 season or the 49ers who have as much momentum as the Giants and seem destined to make the Super Bowl. It would set up a bizarro Super Bowl (against the Patriots) where a #1 overall pick (Alex Smith) would manage to be an underdog who few people believed in. That just seems weird to me.

I will disagree with J.S. that the 49ers were lucky. The 49ers forced the Saints into making turnovers in the first half and just like the 49ers defense couldn't stop the the Saints, the Saints defense couldn't stop the 49ers offense. The 49ers won that game because they had the ball last, but they proved they deserved to win the game with their play in the first half. So I disagree the 49ers were lucky and I think they weren't any luckier than the Saints would have been had they won the game.

The biggest question I've had all year with the Giants is their defense. I've never really questioned whether they could run the ball. I figured once Bradshaw got healthy the Giants running game would pick up and become more effective. I expect this to be a very good game. The 49ers came out throwing against the Saints and it worked effectively. The Giants secondary is still a bit of a question in my mind, so this plan may work in this game as well. It can help set the 49ers up for shorter second and third downs. The Giants were very effective against a weak Packers defense last week and the 49ers will pose a much bigger problem because they have the best defense the Giants have faced in the playoffs. We learned from last week the Giants need to control Vernon Davis and try to take away Frank Gore. I think the 49ers are going to limit the offensive opportunities for the Giants, but the Giants excellent defensive line is going to get more pressure (without blitzing) than the Saints could get last week. Alex Smith is excellent against the blitz and I think the Giants can slow down the 49ers run game and make Smith uncomfortable in the pocket. I hate to pick against the 49ers, but I'm finally on the Giants '07 deja vu train. Sorry Giants fans, I said I would pick against you to ensure your future luck, but I just couldn't do it.

Jimmy: NE (-7.0), NYG (+2.5)
Chris: BAL (+7.0), SF (-2.5)
Sean: BAL (+7.0), SF (-2.5)
Jon: NE (-7.0), SF (-2.5)
Ben: NE (-7.0), NYG (+2.5)
Bill Simmons: NE (-7.0), NYG (+2.5)