Showing posts with label fighting with obviousness. Show all posts
Showing posts with label fighting with obviousness. Show all posts

Friday, October 16, 2015

7 comments Gregg Easterbrook Continues to Write Very Obvious Things And Tries To Pass It Off As Insight

Gregg Easterbrook warned of the dangers of gambling in last week's TMQ. But that's important right now. What is important is Gregg's picture is finally updated beside TMQ. In reaction to the furious response of zero readers besides me who complained, the "New York Times" has provided a picture of Gregg that isn't 20 years old. He looks...different than he did in his old picture. This week Gregg decides he is going to write something obvious and try to pass it off as an insightful comment. He writes TMQ this week based on the idea that defenses start comebacks and offenses stop comebacks. This is so shockingly obvious and is in no way insightful. Of course a team can't comeback until the other team stops scoring. It's like saying running faster wins a marathon while running slower loses a marathon. It blows my mind that Gregg really believes what he is writing is news of some sort. And yet, he does.

Cincinnati’s comeback against two-time Super Bowl entrant Seattle may prove the Bengals’ 2015 signature victory.

The Bengals probably really hope this isn't their signature victory of the season. It's Week 5 and they have a lot of important games to be played. And remember a couple of weeks ago when Gregg said this:

In a FanDuel television ad, a man — viewers have no idea whether he’s an actor — says to the camera, “Every single week I can win money on Fan Duel!” Can is quite a fudge word: Statements of this nature would not pass scrutiny in breakfast-cereal advertising.

Think about that when reading TMQ and reading all the declarative statements that Gregg tries to make using the word "may" or "could." This may or may not be the Bengals signature victory. Be sure to pay attention to TMQ until the end of the Bengals season when Gregg will either brag he was correct or ignore he said this entirely. 

The sports world praised the Cincinnati offense for scoring: “Dalton Leads Frenetic Comeback” read the Washington Post print edition headline. But the key to the comeback was the Cincinnati defense.

An iron law of the gridiron: Defense starts comebacks, offense stops them.

Everyone who reads this blog is smart. If you weren't smart, you wouldn't read what I write (ego alert). I don't have to explain the sheer stupidity of Gregg passing off this "iron law" to his readers as if it means something. It's impossible for a team to come back in a game if the other team continues scoring points. If not impossible, it's very, very hard. So yes, this is common sense and not a law. The fact Gregg constantly parrots this saying over and over shows how needy he is for fresh material in TMQ.

Of course the trailing team must post more points, but Step 1 of any comeback is to prevent the leading team from widening the margin.

No fucking shit? Are you sure about this? Are you sure if a team is down 34-10 then they need to stop the other team from scoring more points before they can make a comeback? Does this also mean before I can lose weight I have to stop eating 5000 calories a day? I need clarification. 

Seattle led, 24-7, at the beginning of the fourth quarter. Seahawks possession results from then on: punt, punt, punt, punt, punt. Strong defense by Cincinnati created the circumstance in which the offense could reassert itself.

Yes, they stopped the Seahawks from scoring. Defense will always start the comeback, because a comeback can't actually begin until the opposing team stops scoring points. Please stop and think about how obvious this is. 

Defense starts comebacks, offense stops them.

Continuing to write this over and over does not make it more insightful nor will it distract anyone from just how obvious this statement is. 

Consider January’s N.F.C. title game, Green Bay at Seattle. The Packers attained a 22-7 lead in the fourth quarter. Green Bay possession results from then on: punt, punt, field goal. From the juncture of the 22-7 lead, Green Bay gained just three first downs.

And if the Packers had three touchdowns on these three possessions then the Seahawks could not have come back and won the game. This isn't a law, it's common sense. 

Then two weeks later at the Super Bowl, Seattle led New England, 24-14, at the start of fourth quarter. Seahawks possession results from then till the double-whistle: three-and-out, three-and-out, interception. Defense sparked the New England rebound.

Because if the defense didn't spark the comeback and continued to give up points, it doesn't matter what the offense does. How many times have announcers said, "The defense has to make a stop here if Team X wants a chance to win this game"? Saying defense starts comebacks is not insightful. It's common sense. 

In the greatest comeback ever, the old Houston Oilers led the Buffalo Bills, 35-3, in the third quarter of a 1993 playoff game. The Bills put up a passel of touchdowns, but as important was that for the remainder of the contest, Houston scored just 3 points. Defense led the comeback.

It also helped that the offense put up 35 points in the second half. Without all those points, the defense could give up zero points in the second half and the Bills still would have lost. It's almost like a good offense and good defense go hand-in-hand or something. 

On the flip side, offense stops comebacks.

Oh my fucking goodness...yes, if one team scores 21 straight points and is down 3 points, but the other team scores a touchdown, then the comeback will be temporarily stopped. This is shockingly obvious and I'm not sure why Gregg's editor doesn't yell in his ear that his insight is actually just common sense. 

If way behind, focus on stopping the other side from advancing the ball. If way ahead, score again to ice the contest.

My head just exploded. Why does Gregg exist as a person writing TMQ? Why? So he is wasting his and our time telling us that if a team is losing, they want to stop the opposing team from scoring more points, while if a team is way ahead they should continue to try and score points. This is what he is doing. Apparently he thinks that TMQ readers need to be notified that NFL defenses should want to stop the other team from scoring and NFL offenses should want to try and score points. This is not news. It's not even close to news. It's obviousness wrapped up in the disguise of insight. 

The Patriots have won six straight versus Indianapolis. The last four meetings were blowouts, the Flying Elvii outscoring the Colts, 189-73. Andrew Luck is 0-4 versus New England, 37-16 versus all other teams. His shoulder hurting, Luck may or may not dress. Knowing who’s coming may tempt him to take an extra week off.

It may tempt him to take another week off or it may not tempt him to take another week off. Luck may or may not play. Speaking of comebacks, come back next week when Gregg criticizes other people for writing sentences that contain fudge words.

The primary reason the Patriots are dominating the Colts is that New England is the better team.

#analysis

"The primary reason the Yankees have won so many World Series is because they have better players and were better than the teams they were playing."

"The primary reason John Lennon hasn't put out any new material since 1980 is that he is dead."

This must be the "incredibly obvious statements" version of TMQ.

In two meetings with Indianapolis last season, discounting kneel-downs, New England rushed a total of 80 times, a high number for the New England offense, and threw short 53 times and long 12 times. Forty percent of Patriots’ passes were short to Tom Brady’s right. If in Sunday’s date at Indianapolis, New England rushes more than usual and throws short right repeatedly, expect the Colts to act surprised.

Or they can just act like it's not easy to just stop a team from running the ball out of sheer will. There is a difference in knowing a team is running the football and actually being able to stop that team from running the football.

Besides, what does Gregg want the Colts to do? If the Patriots split Gronkowski wide then he has to be double-covered, right? Gregg writes all the time how a team needs to cover a tight end split wide with two defenders, so it's not like the Colts can stack the box against the Patriots.

This is another great example of Gregg making rules and assertions that he eventually contradicts. Whatever ends up working for a team is the strategy that team should have used, while if a strategy didn't work then that team should not have used it. All of Gregg's criticisms are based entirely on outcomes. He wants the Colts to focus on stopping the run and throws to the right, all while double-covering Gronkowski if/when he is split out wide. He doesn't think about how these two positions can contradict each other, because all he cares about is seeing what didn't work for the Colts and independently suggesting a solution in a vacuum.

On “Monday Night Football,” an awful lot, in terms of action and of football logic, was packed into the final five seconds.

And if anyone knows anything about football logic, it's Gregg Easterbrook. 

The host Chargers leading by 3, Pittsburgh completed a pass to the San Diego 1, five seconds showing. First, San Diego safety Jahleel Addae delivered a vicious helmet-to-helmet hit on Steelers tight end Heath Miller, and officials flagged him for unnecessary roughness.

I think what Gregg means is that undrafted, hard-working free agent Jahleel Addae made a mental error when delivering a hit on highly-paid glory boy first round pick Heath Miller. Or is it that their draft positions aren't relevant because knowledge of the draft position of these two players doesn't go to prove a point that Gregg wants to prove? 

Second, rather than kick a field goal and proceed to overtime, the Steelers went for the win — and using a run. In the pass-wacky contemporary N.F.L., coaches throw too many passes from the 1-yard line — the Seahawks at the Super Bowl, for instance. In the last five seasons, N.F.L. teams scored touchdowns on 54 percent of rushes from the 1, versus on 50 percent of passes.

A 4% difference that is probably significant statistically, but isn't really significant in terms of whether a team will decide to throw or run the football into the end zone. An NFL team, and I know this is shocking because it goes against Gregg's rule of "always run the ball into the end zone," should play to their strengths when trying to score a touchdown from the 1-yard line.

A small difference to be sure — but at the 1, running the ball is playing the percentages.

It is playing the percentages, while ignoring the strengths/weaknesses of the team playing defense and ignoring the strengths/weaknesses of the team on offense. Decisions can't be made in a vacuum using easy to understand rules based on the percentages while ignoring the specific situation on the field. Percentages are great to run the ball until a team with a height advantage at receiver and a weak running game is going up against a team with a strong run defense on the 1-yard line. 

Third, Pittsburgh came out with Michael Vick in the huddle — then Vick flanked wide and Le’Veon Bell, a tailback, lined up behind center. Seeing this funky set, San Diego called a timeout. Surely, the Chargers thought, Pittsburgh will now change to a different look.

The Chargers called timeout, just like Gregg always wants a defense to do. This fixed everything, right? The defense called a timeout, as Gregg always suggests they should do in this situation, but that didn't work. What? How could this happen? 

After the timeout, the Steelers used reverse psychology and ran exactly the same play — “you must have suspected I would have known” — Bell rushing for the winning touchdown.

So the Chargers called a timeout in order to set up a defense against a different play than the one the Steelers would be running? This is what Gregg wants us to believe? The Chargers saw they didn't have the correct personnel on the field, called timeout, and then called a defensive play based on the Steelers changing their play to another play the Chargers didn't know if they would have the correct personnel to defend? This is Gregg's position. 

“Badger! Badger!” Trailing by 24-14, the Bengals reached the Seahawks’ 5 with 3 minutes 41 seconds remaining in regulation. Before starting the cadence, quarterback Andy Dalton shouted “badger!” ardently, while pointing to the far left of the Cincinnati formation, where the Bengals had a trips set of three receivers. In pass-wacky modern football, the defense was expecting a throw:

Another great example of how Gregg can read the minds of an entire defensive unit. It's a shame an NFL team hasn't scooped Gregg up yet to work in their front office, considering he is capable of knowing what an entire defensive unit is thinking on a given play. I would think Gregg's ability to come up with bullshit in order to prove his point would be beneficial to an NFL team. 

But Dalton didn’t want the visitors to realize what he was thinking. “Badger! Badger!” was a fake audible. Dalton appeared to be telling the three receivers on the left what he wanted them to do. Then Dalton went straight up the middle to score the touchdown that changed the complexion of the contest.

So let's follow this football logic. Dalton audibled using the word "Badger!" while pointing at his receivers. This made the defense think there was a pass coming. BUT, "Badger!" was a fake audible and Andy Dalton instead ran the original play call, which was a quarterback rush up the middle of the defense. This is what Gregg claims happened.

So we are to believe, because "Badger!" was a fake audible, the original play call from Hue Jackson was a quarterback sneak up the middle. This was the play being called and Dalton fake-audibled using "Badger!" to convince the defense that he was throwing the football. Again, Hue Jackson called a quarterback sneak up the middle. This is the play call Gregg wants us to believe and Dalton wasn't really calling an audible. Gregg doesn't think the original play call was a pass and Dalton saw the middle was open, then called an audible using the word "Badger!," a clever play on words for a quarterback run considering the Bengals were playing the Seahawks and Russell Wilson who played for the Wisconsin Badgers, thereby telling his receivers to run block. Gregg thinks the original play call was a run for Andy Dalton up the middle. That's what he is trying to bullshit his readers into believing.

Sour Play of the Week. Washington leading, 16-12, with 30 seconds remaining in regulation, Atlanta reached first-and-goal on the 6. Defensive ends want sacks — that’s the stat they are rewarded for at contract time. Offensive coordinators exploit defensive ends who gamble for sacks. At the snap, Washington defensive end Ryan Kerrigan sprinted straight up the field to try to sack Matt Ryan, totally giving up his contain.

Ryan Kerrigan is not a defensive end. He is a weakside linebacker. I know, these are just details that should in no way distract from the story. Ignore the facts that are incorrect and just assume the rest of the story is accurate.

Sweet ‘n’ Sour Matched Set of Plays. Game scoreless, Cincinnati had the ball on the Seattle 14. Seahawks strong safety Kam Chancellor lined up over Bengals tight end Tyler Eifert, who was in-line left. Usually the strong safety covers the tight end. When Eifert ran straight up the field to the end zone, Chancellor let him go by, neither jamming him nor attempting to cover him; Chancellor double-teamed a wide receiver going short. Uncovered touchdown for Eifert.

"Usually the strong safety covers the tight end." Sure, whatever works for Gregg to believe, regardless of whether this declarative statement is true or not.

Now it’s the fourth quarter, Seattle with a seemingly secure 24-7 lead. Cincinnati reached the Seattle 10. Same play call — Eifert in-line left, straight up the field — as when the Bengals were in this field position before. Same defense, Chancellor over Eifert. Same result as before: Chancellor ignored the Cincinnati tight end in order to double-team a wide receiver pulling up short. Same result, touchdown.

Check out the video at the 1:00 minute mark. Chancellor thought he had help from Cary Williams behind him and he did not double team the wide receiver going short. He was the only Seahawks player covering the Bengals player going short. If he had not covered the Bengals player running a route in front of the zone, and stayed on Eifert, then the Bengals player running short of the end zone could have walked into the end zone after catching a pass. 

While the attention goes to the schools that perform in prime time, it’s important to remember just how much college football is played. There are 128 Division I programs (the N.C.A.A. insists on calling Division I the Football Bowl Subdivision though this division now crowns a champion); Division I-AA has 125 member schools (the N.C.A.A. calls this the Football Championship Subdivision, though all subdivisions now have champions); there are 156 Division II football colleges (this is the level at which California of Pennsylvania and Indiana of Pennsylvania play); 241 colleges field Division III football teams; and 87 colleges participate in football through the N.A.I.A., an off-price generic version of the N.C.A.A.

It's always great when Gregg is around to help his readers understand things like this. Last week, Gregg watched out for the unsophisticated people who think FanDuel and DraftKings is an easy way to make fast money, and this week, Gregg is around to let his readers know that there are other football programs in the United States that aren't Division I programs. I know! Some of you may have gone to a college (like I did) that didn't have a Division I football program, but still had no idea that the football program at your school was not Division I. Gregg is here to enlighten you though, so worry no more.

That’s 737 college football teams: considering byes, around 350 college games per autumn weekend.

I think more than 37 teams have a bye during a given week during the season. If the football season is 14 weeks long, then this means only 518 of the 737 teams get a bye during the season. That seems a bit low. 

If you haven’t been to a small-college football game lately, try one. The level of play may surprise you, and unless it’s raining, the experience is likely to be pleasing.

Yes, I have tried it a few times before. It was okay, but it was nothing like a football game between two teams that are Division I football teams. 

Another reason the Colts appear doomed this coming Sunday: Under Bill Belichick, the Patriots are 46-16 in October.

I hope the Colts win just so Gregg has to talk his way out of essentially saying the Colts have no chance of winning this game. Yes, I'm sure that the Colts are doomed because traditionally Bill Belichick is strong in October. Tradition is what decides the outcome of a football game. Belichick has been with the Patriots for 16 years, so he loses one game every October. What if this is the game the Patriots lose in October? 

The Navy announced yet another delay in delivery of the Gerald R. Ford, lead ship in the next class of supercarriers. Once in service, the Ford will join these active supercarriers named for Republican presidents: the George H.W. Bush, the Eisenhower, the Lincoln, the Reagan and the Theodore Roosevelt, plus one supercarrier named for a Democratic president, the Truman. The second ship of the Ford class will be the John Kennedy. Still, that will be six Republican-named supercarriers, two named for Democrats.

There is a clear bias against Democrats when it comes to naming supercarriers after Presidents who were Democrats. Above all else, I think Congress should do an investigation into this. 

There’s a destroyer named jointly for Franklin and Eleanor Roosevelt. But there’s no supercarrier named for F.D.R. — longest-serving president, chief executive during World War II — and no ship named for that aspiring First Squire, William Jefferson Clinton. Gerald Ford was a fine man but never elected to national office; Clinton was twice chosen president by voters. Yet Ford’s name is on a supercarrier while Clinton’s name is nowhere to be found.

My God, the horror. To make matters worse, Bill Clinton left office 15 years ago and he doesn't have a supercarrier named after him, while Gerald Ford left office 41 years ago and is just now having a supercarrier named after him. I can't believe Clinton doesn't get a supercarrier named after him. WHY MUST THE WILL OF THE AMERICAN PEOPLE BE IGNORED?

BOLOs of the Week. All units, all units, be on the lookout for the Seattle Seahawks’ offensive line. Russell Wilson has been sacked 22 times, on a pace for 70 sacks. (Last season’s worst was 71 sacks allowed by Jacksonville.) Two weeks ago versus Detroit, offensive line malfunctions caused Seattle to face fourth-and-goal from the 33. Sunday, Wilson was sacked on third down before the punt that positioned Cincinnati to force overtime, then sacked again on third down before the punt that positioned Cincinnati to win.

As most people know, it's not just the offensive line that can be to blame for a quarterback getting sacked. Sometimes a quarterback holds the ball too long, lacks the pocket awareness to get rid of the football, or just moves in the wrong direction and takes a sack. Stafford and Wilson's offensive line may be terrible, but there is an occasion when the quarterback is at fault too. I wouldn't expect Gregg to understand any type of nuance or understand everything isn't black and white. 

Adventures in Officiating. Twice in the fourth quarter at Atlanta, the Potomac Drainage Basin Indigenous Persons ran hitch screens to wide receiver Jamison Crowder, once for a long gainer, once for a loss. On both plays, Washington offensive linemen ran downfield before the pass, no flag. Hitch screens — called “bubble” or “smoke” screens depending on the offense — have become so frequent that zebras seem to have lost focus on watching for linemen downfield.

Or the NFL has directed officials to not call a penalty for linemen blocking downfield so strictly in an effort to help offenses score points and generate excitement. In certain situations, the linemen can be downfield, such as when he is blocking a defensive player. I didn't see these plays, but given Gregg's history of not understanding what he's watching, I wouldn't be surprised if these linemen were blocking their man and therefore not subject to a penalty. 

Stop Me Before I Blitz Again! Cleveland facing third-and-5 on the Baltimore 18, the Ravens ran a “house” blitz — seven men rushing the passer. Baltimore didn’t need a sack, since Cleveland would have been in field-goal position anyway; what Baltimore needed was an incompletion. Highlight reels are loving the touchdown pass that tight end Gary Barnidge caught with his legs against this ill-advised all-out blitz.

Yes, this "ill-advised blitz" that had McCown throwing a prayer into the air off his back leg to a receiver who had to catch the pass with his ass in order to catch the touchdown. The blitz didn't work because McCown through up a prayer and Barnidge made a miraculous catch. That doesn't seem ill-advised to me. It seems it was a good play call that didn't work due to two great plays by the Browns. But again, Gregg bases his criticism on the outcome, so because the outcome was bad for the Ravens then Gregg thinks it was obviously a wrong play call. This despite the fact the play call had the quarterback throwing up a prayer and the receiver having to make an ass-catch.

I love how Gregg constantly assumes that a team can just rush four players at the quarterback and incompletion will result. Gregg doesn't understand the concept that rushing four players doesn't guarantee an incompletion because the quarterback could have more time to find an open receiver. He writes "what Baltimore needed was an incompletion" while criticizing the blitz, which is an obvious attempt to claim by not blitzing the Ravens would have had a better chance of getting an incompletion. This is not necessarily true.

Tennessee leading Buffalo, 13-7, in the fourth quarter, the Titans had the Bills facing third-and-23. Tennessee didn’t need a sack, just an incompletion. It’s a blitz! Tyrod Taylor runs for the first down and the hosts are not looking too gorgeous.

Hey look! Gregg is lying again! Notice that the Bills rushed four at Taylor with a linebacker as a spy. They did not blitz and Taylor made a fantastic run to get the first down. I don't know why Gregg insists on lying or maybe he just wants the Bills to have blitzed in order to make his point become true. Either way, the Bills rushed four and had a linebacker as a spy. Clearly Gregg is not astute enough to see the difference in a blitzer and a spying linebacker. 

The Booth Gods Chortled. Two weeks ago, Tuesday Morning Quarterback noted that network announcers criticize players (labor) but validate coaches (management) even when coaches are plainly wrong. Broncos leading the Raiders, 16-7, with six minutes remaining, Oakland lined up to punt. Down by more than a touchdown with six minutes remaining, why are the Raiders punting? “You have to punt it here and hope your defense can get a couple stops,” the CBS color man Trent Green said.

That's not at all how the play-by-play says this happened. I'm seeing Derek Carr got intercepted for a pick-six with 6:53 left in the game, then on their next possession, the Raiders ended up going for it on a fourth-and-19 that fell short. I don't at all see where the Raiders punted in this situation like Gregg claims the Raiders did. I don't know if I'm wrong or Gregg is making things up. He does have a tendency to make things up.

The Football Gods Winced. Hosting Indianapolis on prime-time television, Houston trailed, 10-0. The Moo Cows always roll over and play dead for the Colts. Houston entered the contest having lost five straight to Indianapolis; all-time, 4-22 versus the Colts. Facing third-and-1, Houston went empty backfield, telling the defense the play was all but certain to be a quarterback sneak.

"All but certain" to be a quarterback sneak. Granted, this was an awful QB sneak, but isn't it entirely possible, especially considering Gregg loves talking about how "pass-wacky" the NFL is, that the Texans were going to throw the ball here instead of running a sneak? Gregg likes to mention how teams go empty backfield on the 1-yard line and throw the ball, so why would it be "certain" the Texans are sneaking the ball here on third-and-1? 

Watt was held by the bedraggled Indianapolis offensive line to one QH — quarterback hurry — and two assisted tackles. No full tackle, sack or TFL — tackle for a loss. If you’re going to call out your own teammates, as Watt did after the loss, maybe you should perform first.

Watt has performed at a very high level for some time now. He was getting blocked by multiple Colts players. I'm not a big fan of J.J. Watt's personality, but he can play football, and he would perform better if a couple other defensive players could step up and prevent him from being double-teamed on every down. Again, I don't like Watt's personality, but it's hard to do much when the offense is able to key on you so much and prevent you from getting to the quarterback. Hence, that's why Watt would like the other Texans players to step up.

Other underwhelming Texans include Jadeveon Clowney, first overall choice of the 2014 draft, 

J.J. Watt is not underwhelming because he is being double and tripled-team. Stop being stupid. 

who was held by the bedraggled Colts line to a QH and a TFL but no sack. When Clowney, who’s been an athletic celebrity since high school, was chosen first that year and Khalil Mack, who received no football-factory recruiting offers out of high school, went fifth, yours truly wrote, “Don’t be surprised if over the next five years,” Mack outperforms Clowney. Hmmm — did not take five years, it’s happened already.

Oh Gregg, you don't even understand that which you write. You didn't write, "Don't be surprised if within the next five years Mack outperforms Clowney." You wrote (all while not putting the quotations around your entire quote), "Don't be surprised if OVER the next five years Mack outperforms Clowney." There is still more than three years left OVER this five year time period for Clowney to outperform Mack. You can't even understand what you are writing and what you meant when you wrote it. How do you even write a weekly NFL column?

Gregg is now attempting to mislead his readers based on something he personally wrote. He's misquoting himself essentially. 

As the Lions went down in flames to the Cardinals, Detroit set an N.F.L. record with 70 pass attempts. In the pros, a huge number of pass attempts usually coincides with a blowout loss; 

Please write "NFL."

A huge number of pass attempts usually coincides with a loss in the NFL, unless it doesn't, and then Gregg will talk about how the team passed the ball so much and the defense HAD to know that team was going to be passing a lot. So here is a rule that is a rule unless it isn't. 

in the N.C.A.A., it may coincide with victory.

Or it may not. Not that Gregg will use fudge words all the time when writing TMQ so that he can eventually weasel out of whatever he wrote. 

Boosters in an Uproar Because Priorities Not Misplaced Enough. The University of Maryland fired Coach Randy Edsall for the sin of failing to win enough. Maryland has been attempting to join the ranks of those major universities — including Alabama, Florida State, Ohio State and Oregon — making so much money on sports they don’t even bother to pretend that what’s happening is education. But with meh on-field performance and lots of empty seats, Maryland cleared a mere $6 million profit on football last year, versus $53 million in profit at Alabama and a $38 million profit at Oregon...So out the door Edsall goes.

Gregg does realize some of the money the football program brings in goes to fund other sports at a school, right? Maybe not a ton of money goes towards other sports, but some does. So when Maryland "only" makes $6 million in profits then that is money that can't be used for other sports and is money the university can't use for whatever the hell they want to use it for. And yes, Edsall was hired to win football games, as college football coaches are hired. So when he doesn't win games, he gets fired. If Gregg would stop pretending Division I football schools hire head coaches to help players get good grades in class then he may stop being baffled when a head coach gets fired for not winning enough games. They get paid to win. Sad, but true. 

Today’s Promo Code. When commenting on T.M.Q., use promo code DON’T PUNT.

I don't even understand if this is supposed to be funny or what. When commenting on TMQ, go ahead and point out where Gregg intentionally misleads his readers so that he will ignore he does this and continue to write TMQ like his shit don't stink. 

Wednesday, July 22, 2015

8 comments MMQB Review: The Zone Blitz Had Many Fathers Edition

Peter King made his return to writing MMQB last week by noting how nothing exciting had happened since he took a month off, but THINGS WILL BE HAPPENING SOON! JUST WAIT! Peter wrote last week about Ken Stabler's Hall of Fame chances and changing the Redskins name. Peter didn't get why the Redskins just don't change the name since it obviously will be changed at some point. I don't think it's that obvious to the Redskins they will have to change their name though. This week Peter previews the best storylines of 2015 (yes, "previews" storylines, as if the NFL season is a television show), lists 32 players who are "feeling the heat" in training camp, and admits he was wrong that Ace Sanders was not a poor man's Tavon Austin. Wait, so if Sanders isn't even a poor man's Tavon Austin, then what is Tavon Austin (71 catches 660 yards over two seasons after being the #8 overall pick)? Is he a poor man's Danny Amendola, who was a poor man's Wes Welker?

Time for the 2015 Training Camp Primer. Everything you need to know about the NFL’s 32 training camps, with some fun on the side.

This is literally not everything I need to know about training camp. It doesn't even cover what I need to know for just one NFL team.

First things first, though. It was a notable Saturday evening for the Favre family. Not only did the famous Favre, Brett, have his number retired and get enshrined in the Green Bay Packers Hall of Fame in an emotional ceremony witnessed by most of Wisconsin.

I'm so tired of Brett Favre. For someone who is retired and supposedly staying out of the spotlight, he manages to find his way into the spotlight a lot.

But a few hours to the southeast, in Canton, Ohio, quarterbacking nephew Dylan Favre had a perfect night in the International Federation of American Football championship game—12 of 12 for 124 yards and a touchdown—in the United States’ 59-12 rout of Japan.

When I've written "I don't care" in the past, it truly pales in comparison to how much I don't care about how Brett Favre's nephew played in a football game. I know Peter is obsessed with Brett Favre, but I would still hope the obsession wouldn't continually be so obvious after Favre's retirement.

Now for your 2015 camp preview.

Ten Best Camp Stories

1. The fate of Tom Brady. Will he get his four-game suspension reduced? Even if he does, he’ll probably still go to court to overturn what his side believes is a patently unfair ban. Then it’s let the best lawyers win. It’s Jeff Pash (NFL) versus the man the NFL office loves to hate, Jeffrey Kessler (Brady). Either way, second-year man Jimmy Garoppolo is probably going to have to play some for the Patriots (Week 1: versus Big Ben; Week 2: at Rex Ryan),

"At Rex Ryan," apparently Peter thinks the Bills don't have an actual team name. And Peter refers to Garoppolo playing "Big Ben" like it's a tennis match or something. Actually, Garoppolo plays a fairly young Steelers defense with most of the offense that won the Super Bowl behind him.

4. Winston and Mariota careen toward a Week 1 showdown. Unlike one or both stinks in training camp,

I think Peter means "unless," though so much time was probably spent feeling good for Brett Favre this past weekend that Peter had to hustle this MMQB out and didn't have time for an editor to look at it. So maybe this error can be forgiven. It's not like I would expect an editor to catch something I caught first time reading through this column.

All we’ve heard from off-season work so far is how marvelous each has played, and without question how both are headed for Hall of Fame careers. We shall see.

Perhaps I haven't been paying enough attention, but I have not heard anything about how Winston and Mariota are headed for Hall of Fame careers. All of the talk has been pretty standard, "His teammates like him and he looks ready to compete" type of stuff. I don't find there has been excessive hype for either quarterback.

Biggest dates for them this summer: Aug. 28 for Mariota (Week 3 preseason game at Kansas City), Aug. 29 for Winston (Week 3 preseason game versus Cleveland). Logic says each should play into the third quarter of those games, and we’ll get an indication how ready they are for prime time in Week 1.

Because nothing says "This guy is ready for Week 1" like a preseason game where every sportswriters will say, "DON'T DRAW TOO MANY CONCLUSIONS, BUT HERE'S WHAT WE KNOW FOR CERTAIN!"

6. The Saints, changing on the fly. With ungodly talent on offense, New Orleans has gone 26-24 in the past three seasons. So the Saints jettisoned soft tight end Jimmy Graham to Seattle, 

Shots fired. I love when Peter throws these random shots at a player into MMQB. He goes out of his way not to offend, then calls a player "soft." Where the hell does this even come from? Peter has never in the past even hinted that he thinks Graham is soft.

8. The adaptation of a Dolphin named Suh. 

What the fuck does this even mean? Sometimes I think Peter writes inside jokes to himself in MMQB.

Ndamukong Suh will impact two franchises this summer. The Lions, who now have a huge hole with the losses of Suh and Nick Fairley in the interior of the defense, had better hope Haloti Ngata can be his classic run-stuffing and penetrating self. And the Dolphins, of course, need to see production and leadership befitting the highest paid defensive player in NFL history.

I love Ndamukong Suh. He's been overpaid. He would have to have an impact on the Dolphins in the same way a franchise quarterback would impact them to earn his contract. I don't see that happening.

10. Jay Cutler trying to prove to yet another regime he’s worth the trouble. Now coach John Fox and GM Ryan Pace climb aboard the Cutler roller coaster.

Nine seasons, one playoff win.

I thought we were talking about Jay Cutler, not Jeff Fisher? 

I was going to have a segment about franchise relocation. But it’s not a training camp story. Plus, we’re all bored by franchise relocation now.

This is as opposed to the Adieu Haiku, which still tickles the world's fancy every time Peter includes one in MMQB.

Play-by-play of franchise shifts: necessary (I suppose), but really boring.

Yes, really boring. Now let's get to Peter's riveting list of 32 players who are feeling the heat this summer (get it?).

Thirty-two teams, 32 folks in the spotlight during training camp and beyond:

(Bengoodfella moves to the very edge of his seat)

New England: Logan Ryan, cornerback. All the third-year man from Rutgers has to do is replace Darrelle Revis. He’s not alone in corners under pressure in New England. Brandon Browner’s gone too, and a cast of thousands has lined up (Malcolm Butler, perhaps?) to take his job.

So Logan Ryan is under pressure to replace Darrelle Revis, except there are other corners on the roster who are under pressure to replace Brandon Browner? Why does Ryan have to replace Revis? Can't he be under pressure to replace Brandon Browner, and if he succeeds that, then he is a success? After all, it's nearly impossible to replace Darrelle Revis.

By the way, Peter throws quite a few rookies on this list, which is somewhat unfair. Sure, these rookies may be under pressure, but they are rookies being expected to replace veterans (in many of these situations), so it seems a bit much to expect them to come in and produce at the level the veteran did.

Indianapolis: Phillip Dorsett, wide receiver. With the Colts allowing 4.5 yards per rush in 2013, and 4.3 yards per rush last year, and with the Patriots rolling over the Colts for 177 rushing yards in the AFC title game, you’d have thought they’d have gone defensive tackle early in the draft. But no. The speedy Dorsett, who has Mike Mayock in his corner,

As Teddy Bridgewater can attest, having Mike Mayock in your corner doesn't mean a hell of a lot sometimes. On occasion he will be in your corner or not depending on whether your last throw sailed a bit high or you dropped a catchable ball. Also, if Mayock likes you or not can depend on which way the wind is blowing at that very moment.

Carolina: Devin Funchess, wide receiver. Up to him to show in Spartanburg this summer that GM Dave Gettlemen didn’t draft him a round early. Oh, and Cam Newton needs him desperately.

This is why putting rookies on this list is unfair. Phillip Dorsett is expected to come in and take Reggie Wayne's place? Devin Funchess has to prove before actual games even start that he is worth a second round pick? What, his career will be over if he isn't productive as a rookie? The assumption is no other receiver on the roster could step up and replace Wayne or be a weapon for Newton?

Remember when rookies receivers weren't expected to produce much in their first year? And no, if Funchess sucks in training camp then this is not proof he was drafted a round early. It's proof he isn't ready to be the #2 receiver on an NFL team prior to even playing one regular season game.

Detroit: Haloti Ngata, defensive tackle. No Suh. No Fairley. It’s Ngata, and a cast of several. I hope Haloti knows what’s he’s gotten himself into.

Ngata has to be the one to singlehandedly get pressure on the quarterback up the middle. And no, Ngata didn't "get himself into" the situation in Detroit. He was traded, so he had no real say in where he ended up. 

Arizona: James Bettcher, defensive coordinator. He might be the least-known coordinator in recent NFL history. 

What does this even mean? Bettcher might be the least-known coordinator in recent NFL history. According to who? I couldn't name the special teams coordinator for 90% of NFL teams, so this is just very confusing. Rather than just say that Bettcher isn't well-known, Peter has to go and exaggerate as if it makes the point he wants to make more understandable.

Chicago: Jay Cutler, quarterback. Sorry. With Chicago, I could throw in some fancy analysis and talk about rookie wideout Kevin White or the impact of John Fox or precocious pass-rusher Pernell McPhee.

McPhee is 26 years old. He is a grown man. What about how he rushes the passer makes him act as if he is older than 26 years old? 26 year olds are supposed to be able to rush the passer like McPhee does. Peter has to stop using precocious in sentences. Along with "factoid," it's a word he clearly doesn't understand the definition of.

Cleveland: Danny Shelton, nose tackle. Amazing, considering the strong defensive pedigree of head coach Mike Pettine: Cleveland had the worst run defense in the league (141.6 rush yards per game surrendered) last year, and Shelton is going to have to show from the first practice that the porousness stops now.

It is up to Danny Shelton, and only Danny Shelton, to make sure the Browns have a good run defense.

Jacksonville: Blake Bortles, quarterback. Trying not to be cliché here.

Peter will now be cliche.

But the Jags’ defense is going to be good enough to be competitive.

This is an exercise of almost Bleacher Report-type futility. The starting quarterback for the Jaguars is under the gun to play well in training camp. No shit. This is after Peter has listed four of the last five teams as having their quarterback be the player in the spotlight in training camp. In obvious news, a competent quarterback is very important in the NFL.

Miami: Ndamukong Suh, defensive tackle. Miami’s paying $2.3 million a year more than J.J. Watt. Not much to live up to there.

I don't know why Suh keeps getting compared to J.J. Watt, other than the fact they both play defense. Suh's contract alone means there is a lot to live up to. Suh is being paid like a franchise quarterback. The impact a franchise quarterback has on a team is the impact the Dolphins want from Suh. Of course, they would take the impact Watt has on the Texans defense too, but good luck with that.

New Orleans: Anthony Spencer, outside linebacker. He showed flashes of greatness in Dallas. Rob Ryan needs a rusher other than Cam Jordan to scare offensive coordinators.

Spencer showed flashes of greatness in Dallas. By the way, Spencer is 31 years old and has been in the NFL since 2007. At a certain point, probably eight years into an NFL career a player has become what he will always be. There's no need to discuss Spencer like he's in his mid-20's or just got done playing off his rookie contract and just needed a chance to show what he can do. He's 31.

Oakland: Amari Cooper, wide receiver.

St. Louis: Todd Gurley, running back.

San Diego: Melvin Gordon, running back.

This is a very "Bleacher Report-ish" list. Why didn't Peter just save time and list each team's first or second round pick?

And now, for the last four teams, I hate going all cliché, but let’s be honest …

In being honest, this means you will be cliche even though you hate being cliche?

San Francisco 49ers: Colin Kaepernick, quarterback.

Tampa Bay: Jameis Winston, quarterback.

Tennessee: Marcus Mariota, quarterback.

Washington: Robert Griffin III, quarterback.

It's funny how Peter is concerned about being cliche here in listing each team's quarterback as the player under the gun, but earlier when he listed Tyrod Taylor, Jay Cutler, Ryan Mallett, and Blake Bortles in a matter of five teams, he had no such concerns it seems. Only 11 of these players "feeling the heat" weren't first/second round picks or a quarterback. Peter King has a future making lists for Bleacher Report.

But these still are the days. I love my trips around the league to as many camps as I can reach each year. This year, weather and The MMQB van permitting, I’ll visit 20 training camps and touch between 21 and 26 teams.

The other 6 to 11 NFL teams will simply have Peter follow them around Central Park while he writes down their phone conversations. There will be no touching.

Times have changed, but this is still the time when I can get Ben Roethlisberger for a few minutes under a shade tree in Latrobe,

That's every boy's dream. Getting Ben Roethlisberger under a shade tree in Latrobe. There's rarely a better place to be.

Arthur Blank over a mesclun salad in the Falcons cafeteria, Blake Bortles in the Jags’ luxurious digs (seriously) in the bowels of their stadium, Marcus Mariota on a steaming day in Nashville, Mike McCarthy on a bench next to the Don Hutson Center practice field, Doug Whaley for coffee at the Starbucks in Pittsford, Chip Kelly somewhere in Eagledom, Russell Wilson for a few pensive minutes coming off the practice field in Renton, Tony Romo at the Cowboys’ hotel in temperate Oxnard, Peyton Manning and a succession of Broncos (I somehow manage to get eight or 10 of them on a profitable day in Denver).

Somehow Peter manages to be somewhat grating simply making a list like this one. His readers don't need this much detail about everyone Peter talks to and where. I mean, he writes that Russell Wilson is "pensive" coming off the practice field, he's in "temperate" Oxnard with Romo. Peter is not writing a novel here, so these descriptions are just a little odd to me.

As for the places I will not touch … you’ll read dispatches by the rest of our staff. In brief:

Andy Benoit, who is in the midst of doing 32 team previews at his home base in Boise, will break away to do a short West Coast swing at San Francisco, Oakland and San Diego.

Hopefully there will be no icky women's sports going on during Andy's West Coast swing. I wouldn't want him to be bored while watching women futilely play sports and fall asleep when he has somewhere to be. 

It’s impossible for me to hit every camp, of course, and to see every team live. There’s a lot to write, and a lot of ground to cover. Plus, I want our staff to be able to get to know as many people on as many teams as possible.

Absolutely. It's important to Peter's readers that his THE MMQB employees are able to network as much as possible on this trip. I understand.

So, we’re going to try a little experiment this year. We’re going to run a fan blog intermittently during the season, and we’re looking for some fans to help us run it. The idea is to have a fan of all 32 teams writing occasionally during the season—maybe when your team is playing a rival, or when your team has just won or lost a huge game, or when there’s something big affecting your team. We’re not sure now how much we’re going to use it, or when exactly we will use it. 

Great, sounds like a plan! I'm definitely interested in writing something and then maybe never seeing it published or just having it used in a way that I never anticipated it being used. This sounds like a very well-thought out experiment.

When the Ravens play the Steelers, for instance, we may ask our Pittsburgh and Baltimore bloggers to write short pieces on what it means to hate the opposing team—and why the feelings are so strident.

Oh man, I definitely want to read more about why the Ravens and Steelers hate each other. This would be completely new information to me that I haven't read anywhere else. Can we get someone from Seattle to write about why their fans are the best in sports? I've never heard that explained either. How about a Packers fan writing about the experience of seeing a game at Lambeau Field? I'm not sure that's ever been covered either. How about a Browns fan talking about the disappointment that team has been through over the past few years? I'm not educated on that either.

If you’re interested in helping us out—for a small fee—please send us a 200-word essay on the reason why you love the team you love. Send it to talkback@themmqb.com, and we’ll pore over them and contact you if we’re interested in your help.

But what if I'm a Rams fan and I want to talk about Jeff Fisher and how his presence affects the team? What if I'm a Buccaneers fan who wants to write about how Lavonte David is underrated? So this blog is just going to be fans of a team talking about how much they love that team? Sounds...interesting.

“You have to know my daughter, Breleigh. She just turned 16. She’s timid. But she comes home from school one day, and uncharacteristically, she says, ‘Did you hear they sold 67,000 tickets to your ceremony in an hour and a half?’ I said yeah. She said, ‘They must really like you.’ That says a lot about the situation. What a way to show you they welcome you back in the family. What an honor. That’s why Green Bay is Green Bay.”

—Brett Favre, on Saturday in Green Bay, as he returned for the Packers to honor him by placing him in the Packers Hall of Fame and also by retiring his number.

I mean, Favre can't even accept an honor like his number being retired without pointing out how quickly the tickets sold out and how much he is loved. It's like he has to constantly remind everyone of his relevance when it's not necessary. I really thought it was hilarious that "SI" did a "Where Are They Now?" on Favre recently. Google "Brett Favre coaching high school." Where he is now has been very, very, very well-documented. There's even video if you want to see Favre getting in the spotlight by pointing out how he is avoiding the spotlight since he retired.

“The All-Star Game was just the other night. When you think of Hall of Fame, you think of Mickey Mantle and Frank Gifford and Chuck Bednarik and people like that, not people like me. So it’s almost difficult to get your head around it.”

—Former Bills, Panthers and Colts GM Bill Polian, on his election to the Pro Football Hall of Fame. Polian will be enshrined Aug. 8 with seven others.

Or as Brett Favre would have said, "Breleigh, who you may not know since I haven't mentioned her in the past 10 minutes, is my daughter. She came home and told me, 'Did you know that you are considered one of the greatest quarterbacks in the history of the NFL?' I said yeah, I knew that. That says a lot about the Hall of Fame and the voters. They recognize greatness when they see it."

“I knew that time would be a determining factor in how all this would play out. I wasn’t waiting by the phone. In the back of my mind, I knew this was going to happen. Whether it was 30 years or five years, I knew it was going to happen. Even if I didn’t want it to. And I just remember thinking, ‘Boy, things have to get better in a hurry.’ Well, it was amazing how quickly things went back to normal.”

—Brett Favre, to Greg Bishop in a story for The MMQB, on the speed in which Favre and the Packers kissed and made up after their ugly 2008 divorce. Favre was enshrined in the Packers Hall of Fame and had his number retired Saturday night in Green Bay.

Did he, Peter? I wasn't sure because it had only been mentioned a few times on THE MMQB, "SI," and every other football outlet, as well as mentioned in this MMQB a few times. It requires no explanation that Favre was enshrined in the Packers Hall of Fame at this point. It was an ugly divorce because Favre could never make up his mind on whether he wanted to retire or not, then kept holding out hope that the Packers would trade him to a division rival so he could tear the Packers apart for the offense of daring to move on without his written permission while he was still taking 3-6 months thinking about whether he would retire or not.

“Let me tell you something about Las Vegas. A million and a half people live in Las Vegas, and Las Vegas is the only town in the world where my gig works … Every three or four days half a million people leave, and half a million people come in. Last year 40 million people visitded Las Vegas. And what do most of them have in common? They have money to spend—and they want to see a celebrity.”

—Pete Rose in Tom Verducci’s excellent profile of the 74-year-old Rose in this week’s Sports Illustrated.

This has nothing to do with whether Rose should be in the Hall of Fame or not, but I find him to be insufferable. I have no issue with him wanting to get paid for signing autographs, but it annoys me how much money he makes off the fact he isn't in the Hall of Fame and seems so money driven.

Pete Rose Stat of the Week, via Verducci: Rose signed autographs for money on 113 of the first 181 days of 2015. What a country.

Yes Peter, what a country. It annoys me when Peter writes those three words, as if Pete Rose making money for his autograph is the most America-only thing that could ever happen.

A kicker’s deal got lost in the wake of the Justin Houston/Dez Bryant/Demaryius Thomas contracts totaling $241 million. It has to be a sign of great progress for special-teams respect in the NFL that Gostkowski, 31, is going to make $10.3 million in the next year and a half. Kickers’ lives might be getting more lucrative.

It could also be a sign that Gostkowski is a reliable and really good kicker, while most field goal kickers aren't worth this type of money.

If Gostkowski plays out his new contract with New England, that would mean the Patriots would have started 23 consecutive seasons with two kickers—Adam Vinatieri and Gostkowski—from 1996 to 2018.
There’s only one asterisk on the stat. Shayne Graham kicked in eight regular-season games and one playoff game when Gostkowski was hurt in 2010.

Why would there be an asterisk? Gostkowski started the year off starting for the Patriots, so it fits in with the stat, regardless of when he got injured.

Mr. Starwood Preferred Member Travel Note of the Week

Since I didn’t go anywhere this week, I thought I’d give you a taste of a cool event in New York: Boomer Esiason’s Cystic Fibrosis Run to Breathe, a four-mile run through Central Park on Saturday morning to raise money for Esiason’s lifelong passion—eradicating cystic fibrosis, which son Gunnar is battling. I ran it along with about 5,000 others at 8 a.m., trying to beat the rain and a potentially violent storm coming in as we ran through the park. These races are so well-run by the New York Road Runners (and Esiason’s foundation), with water stations every mile and even one misting station, even though it wasn’t an oppressive morning. The main thing is benefiting Esiason’s search for a cure for CF, of course. But for so many who don’t get to run through the park, running through this peerless city oasis is such a great treat, and one I would recommend for anyone who ever visits New York.

Peter is starting to be like Gregg Easterbrook in that he can just copy and paste one part of MMQB and put this portion into the next MMQB. He has extolled the virtues of running in New York City quite frequently of late.

Oh, and one of the "Tweets of the Week" is a picture of Brett Favre. Too much is not enough. I bet Peter would like to get under a shade tree in Latrobe with Favre.

Ten Things I Think I Think

1. I think the football world lost a valuable person Friday with the death of Bill Arnsparger at 88. Arnsparger was the defensive mastermind of the unbeaten Dolphins team in 1972, and the father of the Zone Blitz. (Heck of a résumé, even if those are the only two things he ever did. And they’re not.)

Does Bill Arnsparger go by the name Dick LeBeau from time to time? Here is what Peter wrote about LeBeau in 2012:

"It's called 'establishing credibility,' " LeBeau said. He moved on to a coaching career, and is considered the father of the Zone Blitz, the offense-confounding blitz package that has defensive linemen dropping into coverage and corners and linebackers rushing the passer.

So Bill Arnsparger or Dick LeBeau, which one is the father of the Zone Blitz? Or does the answer depend entirely on which person Peter is talking about at that present moment?

But I’ve always been fascinated by Arnsparger’s role with the Zone Blitz. In 1984, the Bengals had an imaginative rookie head coach, Sam Wyche, and an imaginative first-year defensive coordinator, Dick LeBeau...So LeBeau journeyed to LSU to scout a meager crop of Tigers that spring, and spent an afternoon with LSU defensive boss Arnsparger...That day in Baton Rouge, LeBeau looked at lots of things LSU was doing that the NFL wasn’t. Namely, dropping defensive linemen and linebackers into shallow zones, covering mostly backs and tight ends on wheel routes and shallow crosses, while unexpectedly blitzing corners or safeties off the edges. When LeBeau left campus and flew on to his next stop, he took a napkin on his Delta flight and began doodling X’s and O’s, imagining dropping traditional but athletic defensive ends Eddie Edwards and Ross Browner into coverage, while letting his defensive backs apply pressure. A few years ago, talking to LeBeau about it, I recall him telling me, “I owe a lot of credit to Bill Arnsparger. He really taught me a lot about the scheme.” Think of the Zone Blitz’s effect on football, and you’ve got to think of Arnsparger’s last effect too. He’ll be missed.

It sounds like Bill Arnsparger was the father of the Zone Blitz, so why is it prior to the week that Arnsbarger died it was Dick LeBeau who Peter gave credit to as the father of the Zone Blitz? I guess it doesn't really matter, but it seems like Arnsbarger is the father of the Zone Blitz, yet it takes his death for Peter to actually give him credit. This is the sort of thing that annoys me (and probably only me). It takes a person's death for writers to be like, "Oh, listen to how important this person was..." all while not giving them credit while they were alive.

Again, it doesn't matter, but Peter refers to both LeBeau and Arnsbarger as the father of the Zone Blitz and I can't recall a time Peter has given credit to Arnsbarger for the defensive scheme until the week that Arnsparger died.

2. I think this is what I’d do on the Tom Brady sanction if I were Roger Goodell: I’d announce I’m deferring all punishment until the end of the 2015 season while the air pressure in footballs pre-game, at halftime and post-game is studied in 267 regular- and post-season games.

Yes, that's a great idea. Goodell wants the chance to seem more indecisive in handing out Brady's punishment after coming down hard on Brady and the Patriots initially. So after coming down hard on the Patriots, Peter thinks it's a good idea for Goodell to be like, "You know that 3-4 month study on the pressure of footballs we did and then I suspended Brady and docked the Patriots money/draft picks based upon it? Well, it was shit, so I'm going to get more data and then decide how to punish Brady from there."

This suggestion by Peter would allow Goodell to be seen both as knee-jerk in coming to a conclusion AND indecisive after handing down a punishment. That's a tough combo to beat. Oh, and deferring punishment would also totally ignore anything Ted Wells did. Goodell made this bed and now he has to sleep in it. Deferring punishment until after the 2015 season when more information could be found about air pressure is a great way for Goodell to continue to lose credibility.

3. I think that has as much chance of happening as me beating out Peyton Manning for the Denver quarterback job this year. Or any year. Till he’s 94.

Right, it won't happen because it's something Goodell should do, but it won't happen because it's a bad idea. Goodell has already punished the Patriots and Brady, right or wrong, he can't just decide now that his punishments were based on bad information and defer these punishments. He COULD do that, but he will come off as indecisive and like he initially punished both Brady and the Patriots based on information that he has come to believe is faulty. Goodell has an image and believability problem now, imagine if he deferred punishment because he didn't find the Wells Report persuasive enough AFTER he punished the Patriots and Brady based on this report.

4. I think, though, the only downside on that for Goodell is to be ripped for ruling precipitously on Brady in the first place, after Ted Wells’ report had much circumstantial but no damning provable evidence. But I think it takes a leader to stand up and say, “We’re going to be measuring the air pressure in football for the first time ever this season, before and during and after games. And this is too important an issue to not have all the evidence in-house before we make a ruling.”

No, a leader would have gotten all the information and made a smart decision prior to making any type of ruling. A leader who makes a decision based on information, waits a couple months and then decides he doesn't like that information because it's been ripped apart, seems like his only leadership comes in following public opinion to where he lacks a backbone to stand by his decisions.

5. I think I really had Ace Sanders pegged wrong. I was sure after a trip to Jaguars camp in 2013 that he’d be the poor man’s Tavon Austin.

So Sanders would have like 300 yards receiving after being in the NFL for two years? That's what a poor man's Tavon Austin would be. Also, I wonder at what point while ripping Jadeveon Clowney for having a poor rookie season Peter would acknowledge his good friend through Marvin Demoff, Jeff Fisher, basically drafted a kick/punt returner #8 overall?

Similar size, similar quickness … just not the same college production and versatility.

Sanders as a rookie only had 190 fewer yards receiving than Austin last year though...

7. I think I’ve always wondered—and my wonderment didn’t ebb last week, seeing Dez Bryant and Demaryius Thomas sign five-year, $70-million contracts on the same day, after much saber-rattling by agents and players, and charges of collusion against the Cowboys and Broncos—this about the NFL negotiating process: Why can’t owners collude but agents can?

The same reason employees can collude but corporations can not? Price-fixing, it has the potential to keep wages low, it's an asshole thing to do. 

I get it, sort of. Owners colluding is price-fixing, and that’s certainly wrong.

(Peter King): "I have a question with an easy answer, yet I still wonder about the question because I'm lofty that way." 

Now, I have no idea what the representatives for Thomas and Bryant said to each other during the process. But what if—if—an agent for one said to an agent for the other, Our floor is five years and $70 million, We’re not signing for a dime less. So stick to your guns. If we stick to that number, you’ll end up getting that too.

There would not be anything wrong with this. It's different when the employee colludes and the employers collude. One is a restraint of trade and the other is a refusal to sign a contract unless the employee gets (what they see as) a fair amount of money. If Thomas or Bryant didn't sign the contracts, and colluded to get $70 million that their employer won't give them, this doesn't affect the salaries of other wide receivers. When NFL teams get together and say they will not pay a wide receiver more than $70 million this does have an effect on salaries.

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

c. Memo to NASA: Thanks for finding Pluto, and showing it to us. That is a great example of human ingenuity.

Yes, thank you NASA. Peter would love to see Uranus now. 

e. I went to a reading of “Go Set a Watchman,” the new Harper Lee book, in Manhattan the other night. Mary Badham, who played Scout in “To Kill a Mockingbird,’’ read, then answered some questions for the crowd at the 92nd Street Y. Disappointed in a few things. One: I don’t know if Lee really wanted this book published; all her life, she said, essentially, she had one book, and now, as she sits in an Alabama nursing home, infirm, a book just appears.

Wait, you mean the author who claimed she wouldn't write another book and then "wrote" another book after she has lost capacity to make decisions for herself may NOT have wanted this book published? This was all a money grab by Lee's relatives? Whaaaaaaaaaaat? I said when this book was announced it was a money grab and Harper Lee had nothing to do with it. I'm glad it took six months for Peter to realize an old lady in a nursing home didn't suddenly decide she wanted another book published. Very naive of him.

After reading several reports in the New York Times about differing explanations about how the manuscript surfaced, I don’t feel good about supporting the book, and I won’t be buying it or reading it.

Way to have a backbone, Peter. You certainly showed them...after showing up to a reading of the book and then realizing an 89 year old woman isn't pumping out manuscripts from a nursing home.

Two: I’d have liked to have heard something from Badham, who is in touch with Lee, about whether she thought Lee wanted the book published. But she wasn’t asked. Rather, she may have been asked, but the host of the program didn’t ask her the question.

I'm sure Badham would say, "OF COURSE, Lee wanted this book published, it just so happens no one is available to answer this question and Lee isn't available to answer it." Reluctantly, those affiliated with Harper agreed to it.  

I can't wait for the stories about how those around Harper Lee used her in order to make a profit for themselves. I'm assuming these stories are at least a year away once the media stops ogling the idea of a new Harper Lee book and asks themselves how shady this all seems. You know how the media can be. Gotta give them a year or so to catch on.

n. Really enjoyed this piece on Russell Wilson’s agent, Mark Rodgers, by Bob Condotta of the Seattle Times. Enlightening, and a good example of what I’ve thought all along: Rodgers’ experience doing hardball baseball negotiations is not going to make him afraid to take the heat on Wilson and could—could, not will—drive him to either free agency or a record contract in Seattle.

Baseball and football negotiations are totally different animals. There is a salary cap in football and football players have a shorter shelf life, plus non-guaranteed contracts. I hope for Wilson's sake his agent knows what he is doing and isn't making a simple negotiation much more difficult in an effort to squeeze a few more million out of the Seahawks.

p. My gosh. How tragic, those five service members murdered in Chattanooga—and the wounded Chattanooga police officer. Terror on our soil. The world is changing before our eyes.

Yes Peter, welcome to 1995 or 2001, whenever you consider terror on American soil to have begun.

The Adieu Haiku

Bryant, Thomas pacts.  
Five years, seventy million.
Same day too. How odd!


Include the MMQB fan blog if it gets rid of the Adieu Haiku. Include "The Wisdom of Chip Kelly" section again if it means no more Adieu Haiku. Do not defer this decision.

Friday, February 27, 2015

1 comments Bleacher Report's Provides Insight on the Dos and Don'ts of NFL Free Agency By Stating the Obvious

Bleacher Report has gotten their shit together mostly (or more than they used to have their shit together) and now they are spawning copycat sites, which is always terrible news. These other sites probably think they can use the same "hot takes which provide pageviews" formula that ended up making Bleacher Report successful. These other sites just need to find enough unpaid writers willing to do a lot of the work and then grab some real, paid sportswriters a few years down the road. Bleacher Report still has crap on the site though. Today, we will learn the Dos and Don'ts of the 2015 Free Agent Market. By "learn" I mean that you might say, "Well yes, I knew that. What's the purpose of this column again?" after reading the column slideshow. As always, the last slide of this slideshow is really the first slide to the next slideshow. It's such a devious little trick used to pump up pageviews.

Let's start the slideshow!

For the 30 teams not participating in Sunday's big game, however, planning for the 2015 season has already begun.

Thank God this slideshow is being published just in time to properly prepare these teams for the offseason. What a favor the author has done these NFL teams!

Since free agency—which begins at 4 p.m. ET on March 10—is less than a month-and-a-half away, now is definitely the time for NFL organizations to start weighing their options.

It's not the time for NFL organizations to start weighing their options, it's DEFINITELY the time for NFL organizations to start weighing their options.

What follows is a quick rundown of what teams should and shouldn't do during the 2015 free-agent period in order to kick-off a successful offseason. 

Pay attention! Deep insights will follow! None of these insights are so shockingly obvious that they shouldn't have been written. Not at all.

Don't Be Afraid to Spend Money

Definitely don't be afraid to spend money. I mean, just go spend it, and victories will come. Every year a few teams spend money on free agents and those teams ALWAYS end up in the Super Bowl.

Last year, the base salary cap for NFL teams was $133 million. According to ESPN's Adam Schefter, the NFL has informed teams that the 2015 salary cap will be somewhere between $138.6 million and $141.8 million.

This is a large sum for teams to play with, even considering the league's rising salaries.

The CBA also put a rookie wage scale into place, which means teams no longer have to set aside astronomical sums in order to negotiate with high draft picks.

And none of those players under the rookie wage scale are looking for a contract extension since they have been in the league for four years now. None! Go spend that money, the rookie wage scale will save you.

This means that teams in need of immediate help or looking to get over the playoff hump can and should eschew frugality during the free-agency period, provided they haven't already gone overboard in terms of salary.

So teams should spend money, unless they don't have money to spend. In that case, DO NOT spend money. Got it.

There is simply too much proven talent to be had and, as always, plenty of questions surrounding the incoming draft class.

More great advice. At this point, no one has been able to accurately predict how every draft pick will perform. So go with the proven talent over building through the draft.

Do Look to Fill Holes

DO look to improve the team. Great. 

Does your team struggle to protect the quarterback, move the ball through the air or defend against the run? If so, your best bet is to bolster the area of weakness in free agency.

Wait, so if my team struggles to rush the passer then they should look to improve that area of the defense? What if my team struggles to run the football, DO they go try to find a running back in free agency? After all, no one can predict how the incoming draft class will perform, so it's probably best to find a free agent running back like Ben Tate or Toby Gerhart. It will be worth the expense.

This doesn't mean that every team needs to go out and overspend in order to plug a hole. However, it makes perfect sense to seek out a starting-caliber player or solid depth option.

Oh, so DON'T go out and waste money? I think I understand.

Even the most promising rookie prospects are unproven and each team is limited by the number of draft picks it possesses.

Because rookie prospects are so much less certain than those free agents. History has proven that to be correct. Sure, rookies are cheaper, but who cares. DO spend money. DON'T trust your scouting department. I'm also vexed by each team being limited by the number of draft picks it possesses. So that means my favorite team can't select 10-12 players in the first round?

Filling holes allows for more flexibility on draft day.

Okay, so try to improve the team through free agency before trying to improve the team through the draft. I'm not sure why NFL teams haven't thought of doing this before. This may be why free agency starts before the draft occurs. Probably not. It's just a coincidence.

Even if a team only finds one or two starters in free agency, that's one or two picks it can potentially package to trade up for a prospect it really wants

Yeah, but why would an NFL team do that when rookie prospects are so unproven and there are questions around a draft class? Plus, history has definitely shown the best bet to improve an area of weakness is to use free agency. Just look at how the Seahawks built their team.

Don't Expect to Find a Star Quarterback 

WHAT? There aren't star quarterbacks just lying around on the free agent market? This is definitely news to me.

The 2015 draft class isn't particularly deep at the quarterback position and the free-agent pool might be even more lackluster.

How could the free-agent pool be more lackluster than the draft? The draft class is totally unproven and nobody knows what those rookies may do.

The quarterback group is headlined by the likes of Mark Sanchez, Jake Locker and Brian Hoyer. These are guys that might hold down the job for a season or help mentor a rookie or developmental quarterback, but they probably aren't going to lead a team to the Super Bowl.

I'm not arguing the point, but umm..., Mark Sanchez has twice led his team to within one win of the Super Bowl. So, it has almost happened before.

Other experienced quarterbacks expected to hit the open market include Michael Vick, Jason Campbell and Matt Moore. There's nothing wrong with grabbing a guy to provide backup presence or add to a quarterback competition, but don't go looking for a long-term solution to your team's quarterback woes.

I'm still shocked there isn't a star quarterback just hanging out there on the free agent market.

Do Target a Wide Receiver

As teams move to re-sign their own, the list of available receivers is sure to shrink. However, proven veterans like Miles Austin, Eddie Royal, Nate Washington and Hakeem Nicks may still be available to strengthen your receiving corps.

I'm assuming this is a joke. The only thing "proven" about these wide receivers is they are good, but not good enough to not be replaced.

Don't Plan to Count on Guys with an Injury History 

cc: Jeff Fisher

I hate to repeat myself again, but....WHAT???? You mean it's a bad idea to count on a guy with an injury history to sign a new contract and then immediately stay healthy? I never knew this. Boy, these NFL teams are very fortunate this author is around to provide this type of advice.

It's definitely a going-after-a-receiver year in free agency, but guys like Wes Welker and Reggie Wayne should be avoided.

This is as opposed to "proven" veterans like Miles Austin, who has appeared in more than 12 games once since 2010? Welker and Wayne appeared in 14 and 15 games last year respectively. Obviously they are older, but I don't get why Miles Austin is "proven" and Welker and Wayne are injury risks. I would imagine these two receivers could come very cheap, so other than that I'm not advocating for them necessarily. It's just the obviousness of not counting on guys with an injury history to stay healthy has blown my mind and I can barely type right now.

Welker has suffered three concussions over the past two years and Wayne has missed 10 games in that span due to injury. At this point, Welker should seriously consider retirement and Wayne only really makes sense if he's returning to the Indianapolis Colts for a final act.

Or if he would be going to whatever team Peyton Manning plays for next season. That would make sense too.

Do Look for Pass-Rushing Help

So if a great pass-rusher is available, then DON'T ignore him? Make him an offer? What if he has an injury history? What if your team has very little money to spend?

Fortunately for teams currently without a dominant pass rush, there are plenty of younger players scheduled to hit free agency who can bring pressure on opposing signal-callers.

The list is headlined by defensive tackle Ndamukong Suh (36.0 sacks in five seasons),

Oh, he should come cheap.

defensive end Jason Pierre-Paul (42.0 sacks in five seasons)

Pierre-Paul missed five games in 2013. Wouldn't that mean he has an injury history? I guess when a player has an injury history the author wants to ignore then that injury history doesn't matter.

Promising players like linebacker Jabaal Sheard (23 sacks in four seasons), Jason Worilds (20.5 sacks over the past three years) and defensive end Jerry Hughes (20.0 sacks over past two seasons) are also scheduled to become available.

Not that it means much, but Sheard's sack numbers have steadily declined since his rookie season. Also, Jason Worilds is probably a good fit in a 3-4 defense where he can rush the passer, because he's labeled as an OLB and not a DE.

So to make the list of quality pass-rushers available in free agency, does a player have to have a first name that begins with a "J"?

Don't Ignore Special Teams

Gregg Easterbrook would argue that special teams are not as important as offense or defense. It's probably good advice to not completely ignore special teams in free agency. I'm betting most NFL teams haven't thought about improving their special teams through free agency.

Do Consider Adding a Fullback 

This obviously only applies if your offense regularly depends on having a fullback in the backfield.

Yes, obviously. If an NFL team doesn't use a fullback then DON'T sign a fullback. This is probably good advice that some NFL teams had not thought of. DON'T sign a player at a position your team doesn't use.

(Trent Baalke) "There are some really good centers that are going to hit the free agent market this upcoming summer. We'll look at them."

(Jim Tomsula) "Well, gee boss! That's a great idea! I thought we were set at center though. But I like the way you think? Can I go to the bathroom now?"

(Trent Baalke) "No, you are not allowed to go to the bathroom and you've drank enough water for the day, so give me your sippie cup. I'm thinking of signing a guy like DeAndre Jordan or maybe a power forward like Kevin Love. What do you think?"

(Jim Tomsula reaches for his sippie cup of water and gets his hand slapped back by Baalke) "Aren't those basketball players? I read a Bleacher Report article about the dos and don'ts of free agency and it said not to sign any players who won't actually have a position on your team. I think that goes for the center and power forward position. This isn't basketball, so we may just be wasting salary cap space by signing them. I think it's time to change me, I went to the bathroom without permission."

(Trent Baalke begins to change Tomsula's diaper) "That's a good point. We may not need a power forward since we are a football team. You read this on Bleacher Report? Thank God that articl---"

(Jim Tomsula) "It was a slideshow, not an article."

(Trent Baalke) "You know what I mean, now stay still so I can put your pants back on you. If it weren't for that article, I totally would have tried to sign Kevin Love to a 5 year $120 million contract. I guess since we won't have a fullback in the new offense then we shouldn't sign one of those either."

(Jim Tomsula sits up and spits up his lunch)

(Trent Baalke) "Dammit, I'm going to have to put a bib on you, aren't I?"

If your offense relies heavily on the fullback, however, you want to have a good one.

Heady, important advice. NFL teams may want to write that one down. If your offense requires a fullback, try to find as good of a fullback as possible. Without this slideshow, so many teams would try to find a shitty fullback when there are plenty of good fullbacks available.

I'm not sure why this free agent class is different from other free agent classes and these dos and don'ts needed to be written. Many of them seemed rather obvious to me. Try to find good players in free agency, try to improve your team in free agency, and you will have to pay a lot for good players so spend money if you think the player is worth it and you have enough money, but don't pay a lot for good players if you don't have enough salary cap room. Also, nothing is known about the players coming out of the draft, so there are no guarantees there, AND a team's draft picks are limited.

All of these things are definitely obvious, but I'm not sure why the author seems to think building through free agency (which is really an inefficient market that can be spoiled by one team overpaying a player) is a more proven way to succeed than building through the draft.

Thursday, February 12, 2015

4 comments Elite Pass Rushers are Overrated Because They Aren't as Valuable as an Elite Quarterback

There are quite a few Bleacher Report copycat sites, or sites that appear to be Bleacher Report copycats, popping up on the Interwebs. I believe I have mentioned this before. They are mostly fan-driven sites with hot take commentary and headlines used for the sole purpose of pageviews. You know the articles are written for pageviews because the number of pageviews for the article is right there for you to look at. SEE HOW POPULAR THIS COLUMN IS? THAT MEANS IT CAN'T BE SHITTY WRITING! 2000 VIEWS CAN'T BE WRONG!

So the headline on this site, which is called "NFL SpinZone" (a wonderful title by the way since it indicates there will be "spin" accompanying the hot take), is "J.J. Watt and Other Elite Pass Rushers Overrated in the NFL? The Facts Say Yes." You can't argue with pageviews and facts. Thank you to the reader who found and emailed me this hot take. Apparently this NFL SpinZone is in some way attached to FanSided, which links articles from Bleacher Report. It's all very confusing. So here is why elite pass rushers are overrated. Spoiler alert: It's because quarterbacks are more valuable. Because that makes sense. This is why knives are overrated, because a gun is a much better weapon for combat while in a vicious cock-fight.

How could elite pass rushers be overrated? Here’s how.

Here's how! This is how the author pulls a JemeHill and makes a statement that most probably don't believe is necessarily is true and disproves it.

"How could chocolate not serve as the primary source of protein for adults? Here's how."

"Do vaccinations cause spontaneous combustion? The facts say "no" and here's why."

"Are ants really aliens gathering weaponry to take over Earth? Probably not. Here's what the facts say."

Most people belief that pass rushers, whether DE or OLB, are one of the most important positions on a football team.

I mean, it's the first sentence. Can we maybe not have a grammatical error in the first sentence? I just belief that if you are going to write for a web site then you should probably do your best to make sure your very first sentence doesn't have grammatical errors. And yes, I'm sure I have grammatical errors in my writing, but I try to avoid them in the first sentence. I belief that's the way to go.

Oh, and also..."most people" believe this to be true? Is that a factual statement or just a statement the author is making in an attempt to disprove something that most people don't believe anyway? I think I know the answer I belief is the correct one.

Some people believe that an elite pass rusher can have as big, or almost as big, of an impact on an NFL game as a great quarterback can. 

Yes, and some people are Scientologists. I would put both sets of people on the same craziness level. Okay, that's not true. Scientology is WAY crazier than believing an elite pass rusher can have as big of an impact on an NFL game as a great quarterback can. You get my point though.

So far the author has told us what "most" people believe and then stated what "some" people believe. He's well on his way to disproving a belief that he in his own mind thinks "most" and "some" people have. He's totally JemeHill'ing this article all up. He's creating all sorts of beliefs people have so he can prove just how overrated pass rushers are.

It’s often thought that the best teams in the NFL feature the best pass rushers. However, the facts starkly suggest otherwise as Justin Houston and J.J. Watt have both been on their couches for weeks.

(coughs) Based on a sample size of one year.

Both Houston and Watt impressively hit the 20-sack plateau in 2014, but the Kansas City Chiefs and Houston Texans didn’t make the playoffs. The NFL’s top-5 pass rushers in 2014, as far as sacks recorded, were Elivs Dumervil (17 sacks), Connor Barwin (14.5), and Mario Williams (14.5). Between those five players (including Houston and Watt) only Dumervil’s Ravens made the playoffs.

Although there is no correlation between their great play and their team’s ultimate success.

Right, because they are a member of a team and the entire team has to play well in order for that team to win. The quarterback position is the most important position in football and I don't take seriously those "some" people who think an elite pass rusher is on par with an elite quarterback. So the author is disproving something that informed people probably wouldn't believe. Also, who is "Elivs Dumervil?" Is he Elvis Dumervil's evil twin? I bet Elivs Dumervil has a goatee.

That begged the question, “How much of an impact do elite pass rushers really have on an NFL team’s success?”

Get ready for the author to prove elite pass rushers aren't as important as an elite quarterback. I know this may come as a shock, since this is probably something most people already knew. The bottom line is an elite pass rusher is great to have, but there has to be a great defense around that elite pass rusher. Football is a team sport.

Fact #1:

As stated above, only one of the NFL’s top five sack leaders led their teams to the playoffs.

Fact.

Fact #1 from me:

In 2013, three of the NFL's top five sack leaders led their teams to the playoffs.

In 2012, four of the NFL's top five sack leaders led their teams to the playoffs. 

In 2011, two of the NFL's top five sack leaders led their teams to the playoffs. Jason Pierre-Paul was one of these players and his team won the Super Bowl.

In 2010, three of the NFL's top five sack leaders led their teams to the playoffs. Clay Matthews was one of these players and his team won the Super Bowl.

In 2009, three of the NFL's top five sacks leaders led their teams to the playoffs. Will Smith was one of these players and his team won the Super Bowl.

So out of the last five seasons, 15 of the 25 players in the top 5 of the NFL in sacks led their teams to the playoffs. That's 60% of the players who appeared in the top five of the NFL in sacks over the last five years (prior to 2014) whose team made the playoffs. No correlation there I'm sure. 

So, how much of an impact do elite pass rushers have on their teams? Clearly not as much as some people like to think. 

Based on the 2014 season, these "some people" are wrong. Based on the five years prior to that, these "some people" have a better case.

Whereas nearly every NFL team with a quarterback that is widely referred to as ‘elite’ did make the playoffs.

The author is relying on a lot of opinions and definitions of "elite" here that I don't care to get into. The important thing to note is quarterbacks like Drew Brees, Philip Rivers, and Matt Ryan didn't make the playoffs. Teams made the playoffs with non-elite quarterbacks like Cam Newton, Russell Wilson, and Andy Dalton. You can have your own opinion about Joe Flacco and Matthew Stafford too. Not sure I would call them "elite."

Fact #2:

Five pass rushers have recorded at least two sacks in the playoffs this year and none of those five player’s teams made it to a Conference Championship game.

This is a dumb statistic to use. Pass rushers who play the most games in the playoffs will naturally have better sack totals, but ignoring that, taking a sample size of two games is a terrible way to prove elite pass rushers are overrated. The #1 and #2 seeds in the AFC and NFC both will have only played one game prior to the Conference Championship Game, so naturally it's expected those pass rushers won't have as good of a sack total in the playoffs prior to the Conference Championship Game. Chandler Jones could have 1 sack in the one game he played prior to the Conference Championship Game. This doesn't mean he isn't elite or he didn't help his team win the Super Bowl.

The four teams that made it to Championship Sunday do not feature a single pass rusher that has recorded two sacks in the playoffs yet. Further evidence that dominant pass rushers do not directly equate to winning in the NFL.

Fact #2:

Again, over the last six seasons (including the 2014 season) 16 of the 30 players in the top five of the NFL in regular season sacks have also appeared in the playoffs. That's 53%, which by the way, is more than half. Sure, more elite quarterbacks have appeared in the playoffs during that time span, but no reasonable person is arguing a pass rusher is as valuable as a quarterback. The fact a pass rusher isn't as valuable as a quarterback doesn't mean an elite pass rusher is overrated.

Oddly enough, it seems the opposite is true.

Oddly enough, you use one season's worth of data to show this to be true.

The trend I’m noticing is that teams with multiple above-average pass rushers win with much more consistency than teams with one elite pass rusher.

Well yeah, that's true too. A team with multiple pass rushers that are very good will win more games than a team with one elite pass rusher and shitty pass rushers around him. That's blindingly obvious. Are elite offensive linemen overrated because a team with one elite offensive linemen and a bunch of useless assholes around him doesn't win with as much consistency as a team with multiple above-average offensive linemen? I think not. The author's argument is so terrible. He misunderstands that football is a team sport. A team with better players at more positions will win more games than a team with better players at just a few positions.

Fact #3:

The league’s most dominant pass rusher, and defensive player, couldn’t lead his team to the playoffs.

Fact #3: This is information gathered from one season. Over the past six seasons a player who has appeared in the top 5 of the NFL in sacks during the regular season has been on a team that won the Super Bowl three times. That's 50% of the time a team with an elite pass rusher wins the Super Bowl. I know, I know, I'm cheating by using a sample size larger than one season. How dare I try to get to the truth of whether pass rushers are overrated because they don't lead their team to the playoffs by searching out information and data that covers more than one NFL season!

The Texans’ Watt is the undisputed king of the NFL, on the defensive side of the ball that is. Yet, even his incredible impact couldn’t raise the Texans to the postseason. Would the Texans be worse without him? Certainly! 

Does this mean an elite pass rusher is overrated? Certainly not! It just means the Texans didn't make the playoffs in the AFC this season.

But if the Texans added Aaron Rodgers or Tom Brady would it become a playoff team? I’m inclined to say yes, of course.

And because Aaron Rodgers or Tom Brady would take the Texans to the playoffs when J.J. Watt could not, this means a quarterback is more valuable than a pass rusher, which means an elite pass rusher is overrated. So OF COURSE an elite pass rusher is overrated, because there are unnamed people in the world who think an elite pass rusher is as valuable as an elite quarterback. Obviously.

So do elite pass rushers really equal success in the NFL? Or is one player, even so great as one of 2014’s five elite pass rushers, not enough to truly make a huge difference in today’s NFL.

Based on one season's worth of data, these two questions aren't even worth answering with a definitive answer one way or another. Also, you forgot a question mark in the second question you asked.

Fact #4:

None of the for teams playing on Conference Championship Sunday boast an ‘elite’ pass rusher.

Fact #4. This information from one season doesn't mean elite pass rushers are overrated. Also, Clay Matthews has 61 sacks in his six year career. I would say he's pretty close to an elite pass rusher.

Also, the author's Fact #4 basically says the same thing as Fact #1. 

As far as 2014 statistics are concerned, the Patriots, Seahawks, Packers, and Colts do not feature as single elite pass rusher. That isn’t to say they’re bad pass rushing teams — that isn’t the case. These teams can get the quarterback, but they feature multiple players that can get to the quarterback and don’t rely on just one elite player.

Which is a nice thing to be able to do, just like having one elite pass rusher and multiple other players who can rush the quarterback on the same team is also a nice thing to have.

Look at the top pass rushers of the last four teams standing. The Packers’ Clay Matthews was 12th in the NFL in sacks in 2014. The Patriots’ Rob Ninkovich was 26th in the NFL in sacks in 2014. The Seahawks’ Michael Bennett was 36th in the NFL in sacks in 2014. The Colts’ Jonathan Newsome was 40th in the NFL in sacks in 2014. 

It's one year's worth of data. If you take a larger trend out of one season then you are the idiot here, not anyone who thinks an elite pass rusher can still help his team get to the playoffs. Data over the last six years shows defensive players in the top 5 of the NFL in sacks have led their team to the playoffs more often than not.

None of these pass rushers would be considered ‘elite’ pass rushers if just this years’ statistics were referenced. Matthews is the possible exception to this, although he hasn’t been lining up as a pure rusher in 2014 as much as he used to.

And yet, he still had 11 sacks on the season. Don't try to state Matthews isn't a pass rusher because he isn't lining up as much as a pure rusher in 2014 as he used to. If you are going to judge a player by sack totals, be consistent.

The top four teams in the NFL didn’t have a single pass rusher ranked in the top 10 in sacks this year and only one (Matthews) ranked inside the top 25.

You can restate the same thing 100 ways and it still doesn't take away from the fact you are using information based on one NFL season.

Quarterbacks don’t just get more media attention because it’s the flashy position, it’s because their impact on games is tremendous. Look at the quarterbacks of the last four teams standing. Brady, Rodgers, Russell Wilson, and Andrew Luck. All four can either be considered elite or on the verge of elite at the quarterback position. It seems as though quality quarterbacks are still much more valuable than elite pass rushers.

Yes, quarterbacks are more valuable than elite pass rushers. I'm not sure anyone is arguing otherwise. Guess what though? That doesn't mean an elite pass rusher is overrated. An elite pass rusher can be less valuable than an elite quarterback and still not be overrated. 

These facts cannot be disputed that 2014’s elite pass rushers are in every way overrated, 

I literally just disputed the fact that 2014's elite pass rushers are in every way overrated by pointing out how the information you gathered for 2014 is contradicted by data from the previous five NFL seasons. Besides who is overrated and who isn't overrated is a purely subjective opinion. There are no "facts" that can definitively disprove a purely subjective opinion. It's an opinion and it's subjective. Facts can only go so far. Nice hot take to call J.J. Watt overrated in your title. I am sure it pumped up some pageviews for you. 

That is, if we all agree that winning games, going to the playoffs, and winning the Super Bowl is the main goal of every NFL team, how can these elite players not be overrated?

Because three of the Super Bowl-winning teams over the last six playoffs had a pass rusher rated in the top 5 of the NFL in sacks for that season. I would go further past six seasons, but this bullshit article isn't even worth it. I think six seasons pretty much proves the point I want to prove. Over the last six seasons, 53% of the players in the top 5 of the NFL in sacks made the playoffs. So winning games, going to the playoffs, and winning the Super Bowl IS the main goal of every NFL team. More often than not over the last six seasons, a team with a player in the top 5 of the NFL in sacks has made the playoffs. Over the last six seasons, 50% of Super Bowl-winning teams had a player in the top 5 of the NFL in sacks. So that's why these elite pass rushers are probably not overrated. I'll call that Fact #5.

I’m a huge

idiot for using one season's worth of information to jump to a conclusion?

Watt fan, don’t get me wrong, but perhaps investing in elite pass rushers isn’t as paramount to hoisting the Lombardi Trophy as most people believe.

Or perhaps you should go stop writing hot takes like this if you aren't willing to go back more than one season to come to the conclusion your hot take supports. Football is a team sport. Investing in elite pass rushers is worthless if there aren't other good pass rushers on the roster, but an elite pass rusher does help in hoisting the Lombardi Trophy. Simply because quarterback is the most important position on the field, doesn't mean elite pass rushers are overrated.

Fact #6:

This article was an embarrassment.