Dan Shaughnessy loves to revel in the failures of Boston area sports teams. There is plenty of evidence this is true. Here. Here. Here. And here. So when the Red Sox are struggling he just can't help himself but to rub it in just a little bit and bash the team for even considering they could be a contending team. He's looked stupid in the past when he's bashed the Red Sox and then the team turned out to win the World Series that same year. I'm not sure if that will be the case for the 2015 season, but his trolling and asshole-ish glee at watching the Red Sox fail, all while holding the team to a ridiculous standard by acting like their recent success isn't impressive, is very much annoying to read. His disdain for common sense and hiding behind his telling "the truth" is just one of the many journalistic crimes he commits. Jay Mariotti likes Dan Shaughnessy, so that tells me all I need to know even if I didn't ever read Dan's writing.
So here he is reveling at the myth that the Red Sox are a contending team. You can feel his joy at being able to bash them dripping off the computer screen. He bashed them here on June 2, then the Red Sox starting winning games so he jumped back on the bandwagon, then they started losing games and he bashed them again.
The Red Sox are a myth,
The entire franchise. It doesn't exist. The Red Sox are the Easter Bunny or Santa Claus of professional sports, just created to give fans in the Boston area something to cheer for during the summer.
The myth of the Sox is that they are some kind of perennial playoff contender.
This isn't a myth. Over the last 20 years the Red Sox have made the playoffs 10 times. 50% of the time over the last 20 years the Red Sox have made the playoffs. That's a pretty impressive run of making the playoffs. It could be better, but it could also be worse. The bottom line is going into each season, the Red Sox are contenders to make the playoffs. Dan can argue this is ridiculous based on the eventual outcome of a season, but his protests don't make the fact the Red Sox are consistently playoff contenders false.
You know . . . three championships in 10 years.
Swell.
The only team that can say they have three championships in the last 10 years is the Giants. Before that, it would be the Yankees. Before that, it would be Oakland Athletics in the early 1970's. So the snide, "swell" is misinformed and needless. Three championships in 10 years is impressive, no matter how much Dan wants to downplay it.
But despite the hype, the highest prices in baseball, and the
$200 million payroll, the Sox are no longer legitimate contenders. They
are not a good team and they have not been a good team for quite some
time.
"For quite some time." They won the 2013 World Series. The Red Sox have won 90+ games 11 times in the past 20 years. They have had 3 seasons with a losing record in the last 20 years. All this while playing in a division (the AL East) which had a team from that division make the World Series 13 times since 1990. But yeah, the Red Sox haven't been good for "for quite some time."
Simply because Dan recites a lie doesn't mean this lie becomes the truth.
“When you look at this team — and I tell you we’ve analyzed this team —
this is a strong team,” said Henry. “They’ve just played not up to their
capabilities.”
What else would the owner say? Would he say he doesn't think they put a good team together? Perhaps after the season is over the owner may say this, but of course he will think the team is strong prior to the season starting and during the season. This quote isn't the result of a delusion, but the result of Henry really believing the Red Sox put a good team together.
The Red Sox bottled some lightning in 2013, but clearly that was an
outlier season, one that contributes to the ongoing phony narrative that
the cutting-edge Sox are ahead of the curve and loaded with talent
throughout the organization.
Ah yes, go ahead and crap on the World Series title in order to make it seem more significant than it was. Dan would really have freaked out if he covered the Red Sox from 1919-1945 when they didn't make the World Series once. The playoff set up was much different then, but the Red Sox were mostly terrible during that time. I imagine how bad Dan would flipped out believing the Red Sox wasted the golden years of Ted Williams' career. He would have gotten off so much bashing them in his column.
Wake up, people. Your baseball team is not smarter than all the other teams. Your farm system is not the best in the majors.
I'm not sure "people" think the Red Sox are smarter than other teams. They just try to use different methods of player evaluation from other teams. It's not them thinking they are smarter. Taking a different road to reach a destination doesn't necessarily mean the road you have chosen is the faster path (you can find that on a fortune cookie somewhere). The Red Sox having faith in the players in their farm system, and not wanting to trade players from that system, is a reflection that they like their own players. It doesn't mean the organization or fans think the Red Sox have the best farm system in the majors.
Your Red Sox are an aggregate 31 games under .500 (267-298) since Sept. 1, 2011. According to the Providence Journal,
the 2015 Red Sox entered Tuesday as Boston’s worst baseball team since
1960 in the area of run differential — minus-48 after 51 games.
It's so weird how Dan Shaughnessy uses September 1, 2011 as the cut-off date. I really do believe many of these sportswriters needed to take more statistics courses in college. September 1 is a sort of random cut-off date that intentionally tries to mislead the reader on the Red Sox record during the 2011 season prior to September 1. The 2015 Red Sox aren't a very good team. It doesn't mean the entire organization is fatally flawed.
Despite these inconvenient truths, folks at the top continue to say that
all is well. And rest assured the Sox soon will be OK because . . . you
know . . . they are loaded with prospects.
Yet another contention by Dan that the Red Sox believe themselves to be "loaded" with prospects, but amazingly he can't seem to include a quote from the Red Sox that supports this belief. It's almost like Dan is exaggerating (or at best, misinterpreting) the Red Sox expectations for their prospects in order to make his point seem stronger.
Asked to characterize the state of his franchise, Henry answered, “From
my perspective, it’s never been better. I think we’re as strong
throughout the organization as we’ve ever been.’’
Henry says they are "strong throughout the organization," he didn't say they are "loaded with prospects."
“We have a strong commitment to winning,’’ added chairman Tom Werner.
“We play for championships . . . It is our intention to play baseball in
October every year.’’
Yep, nothing about prospects in that quote. Nothing about having a "loaded" system. The idea the Red Sox organization constantly talks about their loaded system is a fantasy that Dan tells himself in order to make his lies and deceptions seem more real.
Increasingly invisible Sox CEO Larry Lucchino (now “busy” with Rhode
Island’s Triple A team and Boston’s 2024 Olympics bid) chimed in with,
“We’re in it to win it, to win championships. If that means this kind of
manic-depressive kind of course, maybe that’s not so terrible . . .
We’re well prepared to be a successful franchise in the next several
years.’’
Again, there is nothing said here about being "loaded" with prospects. It's just talk about where Lucchino wants the franchise to go and where he thinks the franchise currently is.
National media folks gushed about the new Red Sox lineup and predicted
another worst-to-first season for Boston. Sports Illustrated and USA
Today picked the Sox to finish first in the AL East — which, of course,
is still possible in the toxic landfill that the division has become.
And when have national experts ever been wrong about anything? Just check out the ESPN experts' predictions for the 2014 season to see how wrong these "experts" were about the World Series participants. Expecting experts to be correct all the time, when that's not close to being the case, and then basing criticism of the Red Sox on not meeting the expectations of "experts" is ridiculous.
Sox starting pitchers mocked the naysayers, wearing T-shirts that
said, “He’s the ace,’’ and after Clay Buchholz outpitched Philadelphia’s
Cole Hamels on Opening Day, Henry noted to a reporter that the Sox did
indeed have an ace starter.
Outpitching Cole Hamels is now turned into a bad thing, because it wasn't a sign of things to come for the entire season.
And now here we are again. Worst-to-first has become worst-to-worst.
Yes, here the Red Sox are "again." The last time they finished in last place of the AL East in consecutive seasons was 1993-1994 and the Detroit Tigers were in the AL East at that point. But yeah, "again" the Red Sox are going to be in last place of the AL East in consecutive seasons. It happens all the time, just as long the fact it hasn't happened in over 20 years gets ignored.
But many of the Red Sox’ current problems are still rooted in arrogance,
NESN ratings (Messrs. Sandoval and Ramirez are looking like Crawford
and Gonzalez from 2011), an insistence that an ace pitcher is not a good
value, and a system philosophy that relies heavily on new metrics.
Except Sandoval and Ramirez are signed to smaller contracts than Carl Crawford and Adrian Gonzalez were signed to, so Ramirez and Sandoval are not quite the burden Crawford and Gonzalez were on the Red Sox payroll. The new metrics have paid off for the Red Sox in the past ten years.
Turning their backs on arcane thinking (and 130 years of baseball
history), the Sox are out to prove that a team does not need a true No. 1
starter. Instead, the organization chooses to live on the cutting edge
of WAR, VORP, BABIP, DIPS, EqAS, and UZR.
So what? Other teams use these metrics and have success. At no point has any front office that uses advanced metrics stated these metrics are the end-all be-all to determine whether a player is successful or not. This is a constant misinterpretation baseball writers like Dan Shaughnessy (and Steve Dilbeck, Murray Chass, Jerry Green, Terence Moore) have, which is front offices that heavily use advanced metrics still factor in they need good players to be successful. They are simply using different metrics to evaluate players, along with the traditional player evaluation metrics.
OMG. LOL.
STFU.
Alex Speier’s feature on Mookie Betts in the Globe in
February informed us that the Red Sox partnered with a technology
company to measure how fast a baseball brain works. They developed a
proprietary SAT-like testing system to tell them who the good hitters
might be. One of the Sox draftees who crushed the neuroscouting tests
was Jackie Bradley Jr., who has batted .192 over parts of three big
league seasons.
This is compared to human baseball scouts who haven't missed on a prospect over the past 130 years, right? Human scouts are allowed to miss all of the time, but when new technology is used to scout or gather information about a prospect then it has to be correct 100% of the time or else it's considered absolutely useless. So the neuroscouting test didn't accurately show Jackie Bradley's skill level. Real human scouts use metrics that don't correctly evaluate a player's skill all the time.
A lot of big contracts have been given to the wrong people, and it might
be time for the Sox-loving world to stop perpetuating the fallacy of
Boston’s amazing scouting and player development.
They screw up sometimes. Yes, the Red Sox have missed on players who received big contracts.
There’s a nationwide insistence that no Sox minor leaguers can be dealt
to the Phillies for Hamels because the Sox are just too gosh-darned
loaded with great prospects.
Well, plus Hamels is a 30+ year old pitcher who is making a lot of money per year. He could end up being one of those big contracts the Red Sox have taken on which continue to perpetuate the fallacy of Boston's amazing scouting. Of course Dan complains the Red Sox have too many underachieving, expensive players and then bemoans they won't trade their prospects for a 30+ year old pitcher who has a large contract. I wouldn't expect him to be consistent in his criticism though.
the sad fact is that the Red Sox have not drafted and developed a big
league starting pitcher or an All-Star position player since Buchholz
and Jacoby Ellsbury were drafted by Theo Epstein 10 years ago.
What about Anthony Rizzo? (ducks as Red Sox fans throw things at me)
Another question. Shouldn't Hanley Ramirez and Justin Masterson count? They were both considered (and proved to be) ready for the majors when the Red Sox traded them and now they are back on the Red Sox team. I would probably count them both as players the Red Sox developed. Justin Masterson is a big league pitcher while Hanley Ramirez has made an All-Star team.
It’s fitting that the Minnesota Twins are in town this week. The
Twins share Fort Myers with the Red Sox, and we feel sorry for them all
spring. The Red Sox get all the attention and have all the fans and are
nationally acclaimed as the brilliant, big-money franchise, always ahead
of everybody else. The poor Twins have no payroll, no star power, and
no national following.
They also have a first-place team with the third-best record in the American League.
This is absolutely laughable. With no sense of irony, in a column where Dan Shaughnessy bemoans that the Red Sox are "again" in last place in the AL East, he starts talking about the Twins coming to town. This is the same Twins team that has been last in the AL Central 6 times in the last 20 years. They have been next-to-last in the AL Central 4 times in the last 20 years. They have made zero World Series and one ALCS in that time, along with having a losing record in 11 of those seasons. THIS is the team he talks about as the antithesis of the Red Sox. Why? Because the Twins are currently in first place in the AL Central. Dan pays studious attention to the Red Sox recent history in an attempt to paint them as a failed franchise, while dismissing their successes, yet he pays attention to the Twins record this season and dismisses their recent history by simply not acknowledging it. He's the worst. This is what to expect from Dan Shaughnessy though. He's incapable of being a good writer when it comes to making a point outside of his trolling opinion.
We have the Red Sox.
We have the myth.
The biggest myth overall is that the Red Sox are a failing organization. They may not be succeeding right now, but they have the resources to improve quickly. Of course, when that improvement comes, and it will, Dan is going to forget entirely that he wrote this column. Just like he forgets the variety of other columns he's written bashing the Red Sox. Dan's only purpose as a writer is to serve as a troll and be negative. It gets him attention, which is mostly what he craves. He's horrible.
To add to the hilarity, Dan wrote this column on June 2 and then on June 8 he changed his tune about these Red Sox team. All of a sudden, after a few wins the myth of the Red Sox being contenders may not be a myth. I will have Dan's contradictory column about the Red Sox in my next post. He's the worst. Just the worst. He can't even troll consistently.
Showing posts with label its all lies. Show all posts
Showing posts with label its all lies. Show all posts
Tuesday, June 16, 2015
Tuesday, May 5, 2015
9 comments MMQB Review: Peter King Wrote that Depression is a Character Flaw, But Don't Worry He Apologized So It's All Better Now
Peter King stalked a woman on a running trail last week in MMQB. I'm overstating what happened. He didn't stalk her. He just ran behind her for a mile and listened to her conversation while eagerly trying to remember what she was talking about. That's totally different from stalking. It's like eavesdropping, which is so much better. Peter got ready for the 2015 NFL Draft that had no consensus top players, unlike yet very much like, NFL Drafts in the past. Peter insisted there was a consensus #1 pick last year, yet I showed where Peter didn't even mock Clowney to the Texans three days before the start of the 2014 NFL Draft. This week Peter talks about THE CRAZIEST DRAFT IN THE HISTORY OF DRAFTS, how the Buccaneers didn't talk themselves into Jameis Winston, talks about the best moves (moves regarding players whose names Peter had heard of) and worst moves (moves that Peter didn't understand based on his knowing for a fact when all the players were going to be taken), and Peter enjoyed the Clippers-Spurs series even though (DID YOU KNOW THIS?) he's not a basketball fan.
Pick up the Tampa Bay Times, and see a huge photo of Jameis Winston in a red Bucs cap surrounded by nine blaring all-caps words:
Bring the paper to One Buc Place, where the team has its offices and practice facility. Winston is resplendent in a black suit, black tie, white shirt, Bucs lapel pin and that same red cap.
I still don't know if I think the crab legs photo was excellent trolling or a sign of immaturity. It probably doesn't matter either way.
Take out the paper to show Winston what greets him on his first day as a professional, the ink barely dry on his four-year, $25.3-million rookie contract, which he signed 90 minutes earlier. Open it for him to see. He looks. He’s emotionless.
What’s your reaction, Jameis?
(Winston stands on a table and screams "Fuck her righ----" as Jason Licht immediately tackles Winston and plunges a syringe into his neck)
Winston said: “I had to grow the last couple of years, because of what I’ve done, because of what I have brought on myself. It’s all a part of growing up. I can’t change people’s opinions of me. I just gotta keep getting better every day, as a player and as a man.
“The only thing I can do … It’s not words. It’s actions. It’s by my actions.”
That's a great point by Manzi---I mean Jameis Winston. It's his actions that people will judge him by.
I feel bad for Winston because the sports media just got burnt by Johnny Manziel swearing he was a different person from who he was in college and then he wasn't (I'm not blaming him, he's a person who has to grow up like any early 20-something does), so they are going to be very skeptical of Jameis Winston and his insistence he's totally different now.
Winston knows. It’s a talk-is-cheap time of his life, and he knows he has to stack day after day after day of business-like days together, one after another.
See? Manziel has ruined it for everybody over the next couple of years.
He has to win too.
What? The Buccaneers expect Winston to win them some games? The things you can learn in MMQB...
Two top-10 picks in January turning into the 23rd and 60th picks because of off-field problems. A first-round tackle turning into an undrafted player because of a Louisiana murder.
The NFL everyone!
The draft began with boredom: fairly predictable first round, and only two trades. But we’ve known Winston was going to be the first pick for so long that we forgot what a seminal pick he was, and what a risky pick too, for such a downtrodden franchise that needed him so badly.
Just like last year, when Peter had the Texans picking Blake Bortles #1 overall like everyone knew they would, the top of this draft was pretty boring.
On Friday, when Winston and his family stepped off a plane from their home in Alabama, the entire Bucs staff was in the lobby to give Winston an ovation. There might be some hate in the community and the wider world, but not here. Not today. Livelihoods are at stake, and the new quarterback can save jobs if he plays like he often did up the road at Florida State.
Yeah, no pressure Jameis. You are not only supposed to learn how to be an NFL quarterback in no time at all but everybody wants you to save their jobs. These people shouldn't be expected to save their own jobs I guess.
“One of the pivotal moments came when Lovie and I went to the Rose Bowl,” says Licht, of the Jan. 1 game that pitted Oregon against FSU, Mariota against Winston, the two best quarterbacks facing off. “We got on the plane here in Tampa and Lovie pulled out his [Microsoft] Surface to watch tape, and I didn’t even want to see what he was looking at. I wanted Lovie to come to his own decision, not influenced in any way by me.”
The game: Oregon 59, Florida State 20. A walkoff win by Mariota. Now the two men who share the final say on Bucs’ draft choices and trades were alone, thinking. After the game, in the car back to the hotel, Licht was dying to know. He said to Smith: “All right, Lovie. Who’s your guy?”
“Jase, you know who it is,” Smith said.
It's Rex Grossman isn't it?
Licht didn’t know exactly how Smith arrived at this conclusion, but he knew Smith meant Winston.
Meanwhile, Lovie Smith sat there awkwardly because he was clearly referring to the quarterback whose team won by 39 points, but he didn't want to bring this up. After all, he had made a Super Bowl with Rex Grossman and Kyle Orton. Lovie could handle Jameis being his quarterback.
I don't want to be a wet blanket, but if I'm a Bucs fan it scares me a bit that Licht had it in his mind to pick Winston for over a year now. This is the same guy who thought Josh McCown could be a full-time NFL starter just last year.
So why didn’t the Bucs, who talked to more than 75 people as part of the organization’s investigation into Winston’s character, talk to the woman who accused him of attacking her, Erica Kinsman? Did the Bucs just want the investigation to be finished, and to say what the team wanted it to say?
“That’s not the case,” Licht said adamantly. “We are not talking about this now… but we read the depositions. We knew what she was going to say. This was a thorough investigation. We were not going to mistake charisma for character.”
So the Bucs didn't talk to anyone who gave a deposition during that investigation because they knew what these people would say? Or did the Bucs talk to some people who gave a deposition, except the person who was making the accusations during the investigation? I have no dog in this fight, but talking to some who gave a deposition, while also knowing what they would say, then saying "We didn't talk to the alleged victim because we knew what she would say," sounds a bit like reaching a conclusion the team wanted to reach. If the Bucs interviewed another person who had given a deposition then why did they interview this person if they just knew what he/she would say?
Said Licht: “The more I watched of him, the more I thought, what worries you about him, you love. He’s so damn tough. So clutch. When things are going bad, he rises.”
I mean, I could make a joke about bad things and Winston "rising" in those situations, but it would not be appropriate and in poor taste.
There is no question that Licht will be judged by this pick.
BREAKING NEWS: A General Manager will be judged by his draft picks.
But Smith is adamant about one thing.
“I try as a rule to make my own decisions about a person,” he said Saturday, sitting on the edge of the couch in his office. “So we had some incidents in college about Jameis to consider. The crab legs, shooting BB guns, standing in the cafeteria and shouting things out. You know, you do stupid things sometimes when you’re 20, 21 years old. You get off track. You say later, ‘I wish I hadn’t done those things.’ But then there was a serious accusation we had to come to grips with. [The accusation that he sexually assaulted a Florida State student, Kinsman.] That was investigated three times. No charges were filed. I understand something happened. But when do you get to the point where you say, ‘We have to let the courts decide, and we abide by their ruling?’ They did not charge Jameis with anything. And at that point, I am going to make the judgment that I am not going to hold this incident against him.”
Okay...I don't think the point is to hold the incident against Winston. The point is that the Buccaneers need to know if this incident is an example of Winston's behavior towards women, if it was a one-time incident that would never happen again if it ever happened originally or it's just one example of behavior that will cause problems for him as a professional in the NFL. It's not about holding incidents against a player, but judging behavior as representative of behavior you want associated with your franchise now and in the future.
Smith met an uncle of Winston’s who asked him: “You like the NBA?” Smith said he did.
“You remember the Michael Jordan draft?”
Peter doesn't remember this because he doesn't like basketball. Has Peter ever mentioned he doesn't watch much basketball when he's busy making judgments about basketball players/teams?
Smith did. That’s the year, 1984, that Portland took the ill-fated Sam Bowie second overall, and Chicago took Jordan third.
“Don’t pick the wrong guy,” the uncle said.
Don’t pick Marcus Mariota over Winston, he meant.
IS THAT WHAT HE MEANT, PETER?
I do believe that Peter King thinks his readers are absolute morons. He feels the need to explain that "Don't pick the wrong guy," coming from Jameis Winston's uncle means Winston's uncle thinks the Bucs should choose his nephew over Marcus Mariota. Does this need an explanation? Does Peter think his readers are so stupid that they would believe Jameis' uncle is warning the Bucs NOT to choose his nephew? Does Peter think Jameis' uncle thought this would be a good chance to advocate for Dante Fowler Jr. to be the #1 overall pick? Of course Jameis' uncle is referring to drafting Mariota over Winston. Yet, Peter is compelled to explain that's the meaning to his readers of MMQB. Peter thinks his readers are idiots. So haughty of him.
They’d give this test to both Winston (first) and then Mariota (a week later). Winston reported to the facility one day in early March, and offensive coordinator Dirk Koetter and quarterback coach Mike Bajakian taught him what he’d learn on the first day of rookie minicamp. “Day 1 Install,” it was called. Fifteen plays, runs and passes, with a slew of formations, progressions in the quarterback’s read, snap counts, coverages, hot receivers if the defense blitzed, offensive-line protections. Bajakian took 90 minutes to explain the “install,” flying through it on purpose, to throw a lot at Winston to see what he’d remember—more conceptually than in memorization. Then, as part of the information-overload, the coaches took him to lunch in the Bucs cafeteria,
To see if he would stand up on a table and start screaming something obscene?
introducing him to a slew of people, talking to him about his family, doing whatever to get his mind off the football and on to something else. They wanted to test his recall, and his football acumen.
And if Winston couldn't remember the name of Beverly, a fine lady who was in charge of all desserts at the Buccaneers facility, well then he certainly wasn't worth the #1 overall pick.
Licht was blown away by Koetter’s impression after that couple of hours with Winston. “I’m going to compare every guy I test like that the rest of my career to Jameis,” Koetter told Licht.
But there was one other thing that Koetter saw as a danger sign—and the Bucs realize is part of the education of a young quarterback. At Florida State, Winston threw 18 interceptions last season, and had at least seven more dropped or missed. Winston has bravado, which every team wants in its quarterback.
“I’m not afraid of making any throw,” Winston told Koetter that day in March.
“You need to be,” Koetter told Winston.
Good advice.
I think it's bad advice. Part of the reason behind Winston's success at Florida State is his confidence that he can make any throw, so why try to take that away from him? Sure, refine it and convince him to not make certain throws in certain situations, but to tell him he needs to be afraid of making any throw? I think that neuters Winston and could eventually erode his confidence by turning him into a quarterback who goes against what has made him successful in college. Teach Winston to recognize coverage and why he shouldn't make a certain throw, don't teach him to be afraid of making that throw though. Let him figure out why he shouldn't make the throw he knows he could make. What do I know though?
You may recall when I wrote about Winston—the Florida State baseball team’s closer last season—at the combine in my Feb. 23 column that I asked him whether he would ever want to play both sports as a professional. “I can’t speak on that,” he said. “It has always been my dream, but I’m just playing football right now.”
Licht and agents Greg Genske and Kenny Felder negotiated the Winston contract so he’d have the business of football out of the way and he could focus solely on football starting with the Bucs’ minicamp starting this Thursday in Tampa. In the contract, a Bucs’ source said, is a clause prohibiting Winston from playing professional baseball during the life of his Tampa Bay deal.
Winston was never really thinking of playing baseball professionally. I like how this statement made to Peter King caused some to wonder about Winston's commitment to football, yet no one seems to have a huge issue with Russell Wilson pretending he may play baseball as a negotiating tool to get a new contract. Wilson has won a Super Bowl, so his commitment to football could never be questioned, even if he spends part of the offseason hanging around the camp of the MLB team that drafted him and constantly is like, "Man, I'd like to play baseball" as an obvious negotiating tactic.
Some inside football here.
I like how Peter has to warn his readers there is some "inside football" coming up. He wants them to have this warning in case they stumbled upon MMQB and thought it was just a collection of short stories about coffee, beer and how women on running trails should really not talk on the phone because they never know who may be following them for a mile. Shows me where the priority is for MMQB these days.
Four really good stories happened between the 53rd pick in the draft, held by Cincinnati as day two of the draft began, and the 61st pick, held by Indianapolis and traded to Tampa Bay when the Colts were on the clock.
Pick 53, Cincinnati: Jake Fisher, tackle, Oregon.
Coach Marvin Lewis loved Fisher. Owner Mike Brown lives by the draft board, and midway through the round, Fisher was the only player left with a first-round Bengal grade. The Bengals turned in the pick. Alexander, working his 22nd draft with the Bengals (the coaches in Cincinnati are more involved than with any other franchise), got the biggest surprise of his personnel evaluation career: He thought one or both of Ogbuehi and Fisher would be gone at pick No. 21, and he got one of them at 21, the other at 53.
As I've said on Twitter of late, teams lie after the draft as well. Either way Marvin Lewis isn't good at player evaluation or he is lying. There was no way that Ogbuehi was going to be gone by #21 due to the injury concerns and I didn't see many mocks that had both Ogbuehi and Fisher gone at that point. I can't imagine what team would pick Ogbuehi in the top 20 picks of the draft given the concern for his knee. I could be wrong, because as we learn later clearly Peter King knows when every player in the draft was due to be drafted.
This could be a redshirt year for Ogbuehi, who won’t be fully healthy until at least November;
Exactly, but Marvin Lewis thinks Ogbuehi would go in the first 20 picks and there is a chance Fisher goes that early too? Once you accept NFL teams lie about shit year-round, it makes what they say much easier to see through.
Pick 55, Baltimore: Maxx Williams, tight end, Minnesota.
But then, maybe 45 minutes before they were scheduled to pick, the Ravens heard reliably (or so they thought) that the Steelers were locked on Williams. Maybe it was true, maybe it wasn’t; you never know in the middle of the draft if you are being played or getting the real scoop. But Baltimore began to call teams ahead of Pittsburgh, picking 56th, to see if they would move. Arizona, at 55, was willing, figuring the guy they wanted here, defensive end Markus Golden of Missouri would likely make it to 58. For the cost of a pick exactly 100 picks later—No. 158 overall—Baltimore leapfrogged Pittsburgh. The Ravens picked Williams.
“So for a fifth-round pick, Ravens stole Maxx Williams from Steelers. Great move,” tweeted Ed Bouchette, long-time and plugged-in Steeler beat man.
It's interesting to me how Peter pays attention to what some NFL beat guys Tweet and ignores others. Ed Bouchette confirms the Steelers may have wanted Williams, so Peter takes this as reality, but later in this MMQB Peter states another prospect was a reach in the 1st round when a Dallas sportscaster stated the Cowboys were going to take this player at #27.
The Steelers got their rookie tight end, Jesse James of Penn State, in the fifth round. It’ll be interesting to see over the next few years how much damage Williams does in this rivalry. The Steelers are the types to look back, but if Williams makes beautiful music with Flacco, he’ll add some spice to a rivalry that doesn’t need it.
Keep creating these storylines and narratives, Peter. We can't let exciting football games between these two teams be the only story. There has to be more.
Pick 60, Dallas: Randy Gregory, defensive end/outside linebacker, Nebraska. My first thought after this pick: Rod Marinelli’s going to have Greg Hardy and Randy Gregory in his defensive team meeting room. Hope he’s ready. The Cowboys honestly considered Gregory in the first round, too, before going for another need guy, cornerback Byron Jones of UConn. When it got close to pick 60, I’m told a serious conversation wasn’t needed; Gregory was such a strong candidate as a player that Dallas was willing to work with him on his marijuana history, and his history of depression and anxiety, according to SI.com’s Don Banks. Other reports say Gregory was either bipolar or had some other personality disorder that made it difficult for him to focus on football, or anything, for long periods. Gregory, without question, was a top-10 value on talent alone. But he tumbled down so many draft boards because of his character flaws.
Yes, in the original draft of this MMQB Peter King referred to a history of depression and anxiety, as well as possibly being bipolar as "character flaws." Of course he did. These are the types of things that Peter writes without thinking. He later apologized on Twitter and all was good. I, of course, made some vague Tweets about a lack of comment from a certain guy who works for "SI" who criticizes other writers and sports talking heads for their comments, as he was suspiciously quiet about this statement. I feel like he gives more leeway to employees of "SI" for statements such as this. He has sort of a "Yeah, he screwed that one up" type of attitude, which is fine, but I get concerned Peter even made the statement in MMQB. Sure, he apologized, but if I Tweet something insensitive on a topic (or do something like this almost every month as it seems of late in regard to Peter King), then what good is an apology if my audience doesn't believe I won't just do it again? That's how I feel about Peter. I feel he is so disconnected from reality in some ways that he needs everyone to say, "Hey buddy, being bi-polar isn't a 'character flaw'" and it shouldn't be that way. Should Peter need someone to correct this statement for him? I wouldn't think so, yet he does. I think that merits some criticism.
Talking football, there have always been rumors that Greg Hardy is a bit bi-polar as well. It's always a rumor and it doesn't mean it's correct. Some guys are just odd. I heard similar stuff about Gregory during the college football season, but in a slightly different version.
And for the Jones family. On Sunday night, I spoke with Cowboys COO Stephen Jones, who was on the front line of the Gregory decision over the past month:
Said with no sense of irony from the team that signed Greg Hardy as a free agent.
Translation (and this goes for every NFL team): If they can win us some games and make their position coach look good, then they have a spot on this team. Just as long as they don't get in trouble again, of course. If these players do get in trouble then the team will try to figure out how good they will be without that player and take action or not take action accordingly.
Pick 61, Tampa Bay: Ali Marpet, guard, Hobart. Not a lot of pressure on Tampa Bay GM Jason Licht in this draft. There’s the Jameis Winston pick, and the dangers of that. There’s the disaster of 2014 free agency, which included the pricey acquisition at left tackle, Anthony Collins, failing miserably and getting cut after the season.
Don't forget the rest of the failure from the 2014 free agency period and win the Buccaneers "won" free agency before by signing Carl Nicks and Dashon Goldson.
At the Senior Bowl, offensive line coach George Warhop told Licht his favorite two players were Smith and Marpet. At the combine, after Marpet ran a guard-best 4.98 40-yard dash, Licht texted one of the Bucs’ owners in the Glazer family—desperate for news on how the quarterbacks looked in Indianapolis—with news on the passers. And he added: “By the way, our favorite player here is Ali Marpet.”
Isn't it weird how most NFL teams get the exact players they loved prior to the draft on draft day? It's odd how nearly every single team was targeting this specific player and then they ended up drafting that player. Yet it happens all the time. A team is targeting a player and then they land that player. Odd, especially given the NFL teams don't continue to lie after the draft. It's all truth-telling from that point on.
On Sept. 13, 2014, Marpet played left tackle and blocked for quarterback Patrick Conlan against Endicott College in Beverly, Mass., with 1,725 watching. On Sept. 13, 2015, if all goes well, Marpet will line up at right guard and block for the first pick in the NFL draft, Jameis Winston, in his NFL debut against the Tennessee Titans, with 65,908 watching. That’s not too big an adjustment, is it?
Well, since Marpet isn't a woman official then I see no reason why this would be a huge adjustment for him. If Marpet were a female official making her introduction to NFL life, then Peter would have serious issues with this type of adjustment.
Now Peter names his "GM's of the Weekend" or as it is better known, "GM's who seem to have made good moves on paper because that's all Peter really understands or knows at this point."
Trent Baalke, San Francisco. No one plays the futures trading game better than Baalke. He held the 15th pick of the first round, and the worst-kept secret in football leading up to the draft was that San Francisco was over-the-top smitten with Oregon defensive end Arik Armstead. Here was Armstead, available at 15. But here came San Diego, picking 17th, desperately wanting to get up to pick Melvin Gordon, fearful that Houston, at 16, might. Baalke got San Diego’s fourth-round pick this year and fifth-round pick in 2016, and still got Armstead picking at 17 … at a savings of about $725,000 in first-round-slotting-system contract dollars because Baalke got him two picks later. Baalke also traded a pick 10 slots from the bottom of the draft, number 246 overall, and flipped that to Dallas for a 2016 sixth-rounder. So the Niners enter the offseason with a league-high nine picks in the 2016 draft.
As Peter is prone to do, he thinks a team "wins" the draft by having the most picks in next year's draft and creating more picks in this year's draft. This "futures game" that Baalke is playing worked so well for the 49ers last year, plus he has Jim Tomsula coaching these guys up so what could go wrong?
Next year around draft time, Peter is sure to have a MMQB where he will state that the 49ers "control" the 2016 NFL Draft. What team "won" the draft the year before will then "control" the draft for the next year. That's how it works for Peter.
Mike Maccagnan, New York Jets.
Maccagnan added a speed merchant used to playing big games, Ohio State’s Devin Smith,
Oh, so how will Smith having experience playing in big games help the Jets then?
and an intriguing quarterback prospect, Bryce Petty, with a value pick at 103.
Intriguing meaning, "He's a white, pocket quarterback who some reporters got duped into believing he would be taken earlier so this seems like a steal based on incorrect previous information these reporters had."
Tom Telesco, San Diego. I like Melvin Gordon a lot, and the Denzel Perryman pick gives San Diego three solid inside linebackers; Perryman will be the best of the lot by midseason. But this nod to Telesco is for not trading Philip Rivers. Making that trade because Rivers is 33 and the Chargers aren’t sure if he’ll sign with the franchise long-term would been a dumb, panicked move
Great job in not doing something stupid by trading a franchise quarterback! Also, the Saints didn't trade Drew Brees, so kudos to their front office for not considering a trade since Brees has a huge cap number next year and the team may have to renegotiate or release him. They could have considered a trade, but did not. Great job!
GM I Couldn’t Figure Out
Dave Gettleman, Carolina. None of these things can be judged for at least a couple of years, of course, so Gettleman, who has done a good job being patient in his Carolina rebuild, deserves time to see if he’s right and everyone else is wrong.
Whatever. I don't care about Peter's opinion of the Panthers' draft. What I do care about is when Peter says things that aren't factually true. While earlier in this MMQB he paid attention to a Tweet from Ed Bouchette, and created a narrative regarding the drafting of Maxx Williams by the Ravens, when the Steelers wanted him as well. It seems Peter ignores other evidence he could find where a statement he might want to believe is true, is actually incorrect.
But with a significant tackle need (Carolina is due to start the shaky Michael Oher on Cam Newton’s blind side, no pun intended), I thought Gettleman over-drafted Shaq Thompson at 25. Thompson certainly would have been there 10 or more picks later.
Thompson "certainly" would have been there. Really? From a Dallas sportscaster...
And picking wide receiver/tight end combo guy Devin Funchess at 41 was a significant reach, according to the chorus of GMs I spoke with over the weekend. “Can be lazy and become disinterested in the game if he goes stretches without being utilized,” Ourlads Guide to the NFL Draft wrote of Funchess.
You mean like Steve Smith would get, which is why the game plan usually ensured he got the ball early in every game? And of course, these GM's all were lying before the draft, but they are back to always telling the truth after the draft is over.
But Gettleman didn’t just reach for Funchess. He traded third- and sixth-round picks to move up to get him. There will be significant pressure on the 14th tackle picked in this draft, fourth-round pick Daryl Williams, to produce at tackle for Carolina.
He's not even penciled in as the starter right now. The guy who started the last part of the season and two playoff games is penciled in as the starter. So.............not as much pressure as Peter King wants there to be.
None of these players may be any good and this could be an "F" draft. I don't care, but at least try and base these opinions on fact if you are going to try and pass them off as fact.
Picks I Liked
40. Tennessee: Dorial Green-Beckham, wide receiver, Missouri/Oklahoma. No idea if he’ll boom or bust. But the 40th pick is a good place for a player with Randy Moss raw talent and a risk-reward pockmarked past.
Peter needed to get a quick interview in with Stephen Jones to find out what motivated the Cowboys to draft a guy with "character flaws" at #60, but the guy who pushed a girl down some stairs at #40, well that seems about the right time to take a kid with that kind of talent. Peter likes it.
Idiot Mock Drafter of the Year
Me. When will I learn? I got worse as the month went on. In my mock draft from last Tuesday, I had four direct hits: Jameis Winston, Marcus Mariota, Trae Waynes, Arik Armstead. In my mock draft April 1, I had six direct hits: Winston, Mariota, Waynes, Dante Fowler, DeVante Parker, Kevin Johnson. I mean, who gets worse with four more weeks to research?
Someone who takes the time to speak with NFL GM's and scouts about their feelings regarding which teams will pick which players at certain spots. Someone who then relies on these same anonymous scouts and GM's to honestly evaluate players after the draft is over and yet now feels like he has gotten to the bottom of the truth.
“It doesn’t bother me. It happens all the time. That’s what makes sports great. You have nothing to talk about on sports radio, it’s ‘Hey, let’s talk trades,’ and everybody comes up with a trade. It’s great. I think it’s fun. But if the guy getting talked about in the trade gets a little nervous, my point is, I’ve got to tell him just not to listen to that stuff. I mean, everybody can trade. Trade me. I don’t care.”
—Philadelphia coach Chip Kelly, on the spate of trade rumors around his team, as reports swirled that he desperately wanted to trade up to acquire Marcus Mariota with the first or second pick of the draft.
The wisdom of Chip Kelly. What wisdom it is.
Factoids of the Week That May Interest Only Me
Todd Gurley was the top-rated player on the St. Louis draft board.
It doesn't surprise me the future Los Angeles Rams had Gurley as the top-rated player on their board. He's a stud running back, even if he is coming off a major injury. Plus, Jeff Fisher knows you build a team from the running back position up while ignoring the quarterback position until he has to upgrade at that position.
The Atlanta Falcons in April arranged for a former star linebacker, Jessie Tuggle, to announce the team’s fifth-round pick, live from the new College Football Hall of Fame in Atlanta. All teams did their day-three picks remotely, to boost interest locally somewhere in the home market, and most got at least one former star to announce one or more of them.
Tuggle was handed the card to make the announcement and looked down at it.
Tuggle’s son.
This is an interesting story, but it's exactly that, a story. This isn't a "factoid" by any stretch of the imagination. I just am saying this probably doesn't fit under the "Factoids of the Week that May Only Interest Me" section of MMQB. It's a story, not a fact.
Marcus Mariota does not have accounts on Twitter, Instagram or Facebook.
Then that must mean he is going to be successful in the NFL because he's too focused on succeeding to have time for social media. It could also mean he doesn't want anyone seeing the things that he does during his life, whether good or bad, but that's probably just the jaded away of looking at it.
Mr. Starwood Preferred Member Travel Notes of the Week
1. The more big events in my life in Chicago, the better. Love that city. Love walking everywhere. Love the crowds on Michigan Avenue.
It's a great place to walk behind people for a mile or so while they are talking on the phone or just trying to go about living their lives.
My Chicago hotel Wednesday and Thursday nights, before traveling to Tampa on Friday, was 1.6 miles from the draft site on Michigan Avenue. I walked it three times in the two days I was in town and wouldn’t have minded walking it six times.
Peter even followed this one lady down an alley. He had been trailing behind her for a few blocks while she was on her phone and then she quickly turned down an alley (she must have been in a hurry!) and ran off. It's weird to Peter how the women in Chicago would take off running after he trailed behind them for a while. It must be a new exercise program.
Then Peter has a Tweet about Floyd Mayweather's team pulling the credential of Rachel Nichols and Michelle Beadle. I didn't feel like embedding it, but if Mayweather pulling a credential from journalists would surprise you then it shouldn't.
Ten Things I Think I Think
1. I think it was cool to see Nate Boyer, the 34-year-old Army Special Forces veteran of three tours in the Middle East, get signed as an undrafted free-agent long-snapper by the Seahawks on Saturday. That shouldn’t be confused with “has a great job at winning the long-snapping job with the Seahawks” because of the clear advantage that incumbent Clint Gresham has to win the job. Not only did Gresham just sign a three-year, $2.7-million deal with Seattle, with a $300,000 signing bonus, but he has some physical advantages. He’s six years younger, and 6-3 and 240. Boyer is 5-11 and 220.
Nate Boyer didn't have a bad snap in three years at Texas. Yet, he went undrafted and finally got on with a team as an undrafted free agent. Was Boyer undrafted because he's old and was in the military? Obviously it couldn't have had anything to do with his skill set. Why did he go undrafted just because he's older and served his country?
(Seeing if anyone gets this non-hilarious parody of last year's post-draft rage)
3. I think there haven’t been many stories like the La’el Collins story since I’ve covered the NFL, and we need to let the legal system take its course. But if I were him, and if I were exonerated by police in the case, I would go play football somewhere this year.
Since apparently I was a homer a little while back while discussing the Panthers draft, let me be a homer for another minute. Robert Klemko responded back to me on Twitter (he's another writer who looks for his name on Twitter, even when it's not tagged) at my criticism that he had the Panthers taking Dorial Beckham-Green at #25. Yeah, it wasn't ever happening. Never. Not happening.
After paying $13.1 million to a guy who sat out the rest of the 2014 season due to legal troubles, the team was going to draft a guy who pushed a girl down stairs? No fucking way. Klemko defended the mock draft choice (found here) by telling me Dave Gettleman (the Panthers GM) was with the Giants when Plaxico got in legal trouble and then the team drafted Hakeem Nicks. He then called Nicks "no angel" at UNC. Interesting, except Nicks did nothing at UNC that could qualify for "no angel" status. He never got in trouble with the law, at least that I could find. Nicks was part of an academic fraud investigation, but that was AFTER he was drafted and had played for the Giants. But sure, whatever way Klemko wants to defend his picks, even he has to play slightly loose with facts. This response bothered me for some reason. He seems to have made up Nicks being "no angel" at UNC, unless there is something else I don't know about or couldn't find he was referring to.
8. I think the NFL allowing the Patriots’ deflated football saga—the Ted Wells investigative team began its work 101 days ago—to stretch past the draft makes this absurdity possible: If New England is punished, say by the loss of a draft choice, something that happened in the 2014 season will be punished in the 2016 season. That’s just wrong. Roger Goodell cannot simply say to Ted Wells or to any investigator: “Get back to me when you get back to me.” He has to either put a time limit on the investigation, or at the bare minimum, say, “You’ve got to have this done some time before the draft, so if there are sanctions to be assessed, we can assess them at the right time, not a year and a half later.”
Look Peter, Roger Goodell is not in charge of a timeline for any type of NFL investigation. Sure, maybe Wells is collecting billing hours while sipping cocktails, but he's doing that without Roger Goodell's knowledge. Sometimes an investigation into whether a bunch of footballs were deflated, and if true, when they were deflated takes over 100 days. Roger Goodell expects the NFL's players to do exactly as he wants them to do, but his hands are tied when it comes to making Ted Wells wrap up an investigation the NFL is paying him to provide conclusions on.
10. I think these are my non-football thoughts of the week:
a. So Alex Rodriguez tied for number four on the all-time home run list. So? Let me know when he’s going for number one, and then I’ll pay attention. I mean, in what other walk of life does time stop when you become the fourth-best at something, particularly with Rodiguez’s asterisks?
Way to try and pass it off as not a big deal, Peter. Yeah, who really cares about the 4th leading home run hitter in MLB history. Who is Willie Mays anyway? It's no big deal. Nice way to pretend your apathy doesn't revolve entirely around A-Rod's repeated PED use.
b. Kevin Harlan in last two minutes of Clippers-Spurs: “I DO NOT WANT THIS SERIES TO END!”
c. Me either,
But Peter, you are talking about the NBA. ARE YOU A FAN OF THE NBA? YOU HAVEN'T MADE YOUR POSITION ON THIS CLEAR IN THE PAST!
and I’m not even a basketball fan.
Oh, that's better. No mention of the NBA, and the mentions happen every week now, are complete without a caveat on how much Peter hates the NBA.
d. B.B. King is in hospice care. Comfort to him. Our culture has been so enriched because of him.
I'm betting the only B.B. King song that Peter knows is "When Love Comes to Town," and he only knows this song because King did the song with U2.
i. Always good to steal a game at Wrigley, as I did Wednesday night. Thanks to my SI Chicago ad sales team for a fun evening, even in the 46-degree chill. Gerrit Cole’s something to see. And it was cool to see Andrew McCutchen’s 1,000th career hit, a screaming triple to the center field warning track.
The ball was probably screaming because Peter had been following behind it for a mile, eavesdropping on the conversations it was having.
The Adieu Haiku
Marpet, guard. Hobart.
In the second round. Hobart.
You kidding? Hobart
Congrats, Peter! In a 11 word haiku, you manged to use the same word three times. This is now the most useless "Adieu Haiku" in MMQB history. I would say it's the fourth-worst "Adieu Haiku" but apparently no one cares about the fourth-best or worst at anything.
Pick up the Tampa Bay Times, and see a huge photo of Jameis Winston in a red Bucs cap surrounded by nine blaring all-caps words:
Bring the paper to One Buc Place, where the team has its offices and practice facility. Winston is resplendent in a black suit, black tie, white shirt, Bucs lapel pin and that same red cap.
I still don't know if I think the crab legs photo was excellent trolling or a sign of immaturity. It probably doesn't matter either way.
Take out the paper to show Winston what greets him on his first day as a professional, the ink barely dry on his four-year, $25.3-million rookie contract, which he signed 90 minutes earlier. Open it for him to see. He looks. He’s emotionless.
What’s your reaction, Jameis?
(Winston stands on a table and screams "Fuck her righ----" as Jason Licht immediately tackles Winston and plunges a syringe into his neck)
Winston said: “I had to grow the last couple of years, because of what I’ve done, because of what I have brought on myself. It’s all a part of growing up. I can’t change people’s opinions of me. I just gotta keep getting better every day, as a player and as a man.
“The only thing I can do … It’s not words. It’s actions. It’s by my actions.”
That's a great point by Manzi---I mean Jameis Winston. It's his actions that people will judge him by.
I feel bad for Winston because the sports media just got burnt by Johnny Manziel swearing he was a different person from who he was in college and then he wasn't (I'm not blaming him, he's a person who has to grow up like any early 20-something does), so they are going to be very skeptical of Jameis Winston and his insistence he's totally different now.
Winston knows. It’s a talk-is-cheap time of his life, and he knows he has to stack day after day after day of business-like days together, one after another.
See? Manziel has ruined it for everybody over the next couple of years.
He has to win too.
What? The Buccaneers expect Winston to win them some games? The things you can learn in MMQB...
Two top-10 picks in January turning into the 23rd and 60th picks because of off-field problems. A first-round tackle turning into an undrafted player because of a Louisiana murder.
The NFL everyone!
The draft began with boredom: fairly predictable first round, and only two trades. But we’ve known Winston was going to be the first pick for so long that we forgot what a seminal pick he was, and what a risky pick too, for such a downtrodden franchise that needed him so badly.
Just like last year, when Peter had the Texans picking Blake Bortles #1 overall like everyone knew they would, the top of this draft was pretty boring.
On Friday, when Winston and his family stepped off a plane from their home in Alabama, the entire Bucs staff was in the lobby to give Winston an ovation. There might be some hate in the community and the wider world, but not here. Not today. Livelihoods are at stake, and the new quarterback can save jobs if he plays like he often did up the road at Florida State.
Yeah, no pressure Jameis. You are not only supposed to learn how to be an NFL quarterback in no time at all but everybody wants you to save their jobs. These people shouldn't be expected to save their own jobs I guess.
“One of the pivotal moments came when Lovie and I went to the Rose Bowl,” says Licht, of the Jan. 1 game that pitted Oregon against FSU, Mariota against Winston, the two best quarterbacks facing off. “We got on the plane here in Tampa and Lovie pulled out his [Microsoft] Surface to watch tape, and I didn’t even want to see what he was looking at. I wanted Lovie to come to his own decision, not influenced in any way by me.”
The game: Oregon 59, Florida State 20. A walkoff win by Mariota. Now the two men who share the final say on Bucs’ draft choices and trades were alone, thinking. After the game, in the car back to the hotel, Licht was dying to know. He said to Smith: “All right, Lovie. Who’s your guy?”
“Jase, you know who it is,” Smith said.
It's Rex Grossman isn't it?
Licht didn’t know exactly how Smith arrived at this conclusion, but he knew Smith meant Winston.
Meanwhile, Lovie Smith sat there awkwardly because he was clearly referring to the quarterback whose team won by 39 points, but he didn't want to bring this up. After all, he had made a Super Bowl with Rex Grossman and Kyle Orton. Lovie could handle Jameis being his quarterback.
I don't want to be a wet blanket, but if I'm a Bucs fan it scares me a bit that Licht had it in his mind to pick Winston for over a year now. This is the same guy who thought Josh McCown could be a full-time NFL starter just last year.
So why didn’t the Bucs, who talked to more than 75 people as part of the organization’s investigation into Winston’s character, talk to the woman who accused him of attacking her, Erica Kinsman? Did the Bucs just want the investigation to be finished, and to say what the team wanted it to say?
“That’s not the case,” Licht said adamantly. “We are not talking about this now… but we read the depositions. We knew what she was going to say. This was a thorough investigation. We were not going to mistake charisma for character.”
So the Bucs didn't talk to anyone who gave a deposition during that investigation because they knew what these people would say? Or did the Bucs talk to some people who gave a deposition, except the person who was making the accusations during the investigation? I have no dog in this fight, but talking to some who gave a deposition, while also knowing what they would say, then saying "We didn't talk to the alleged victim because we knew what she would say," sounds a bit like reaching a conclusion the team wanted to reach. If the Bucs interviewed another person who had given a deposition then why did they interview this person if they just knew what he/she would say?
Said Licht: “The more I watched of him, the more I thought, what worries you about him, you love. He’s so damn tough. So clutch. When things are going bad, he rises.”
I mean, I could make a joke about bad things and Winston "rising" in those situations, but it would not be appropriate and in poor taste.
There is no question that Licht will be judged by this pick.
BREAKING NEWS: A General Manager will be judged by his draft picks.
But Smith is adamant about one thing.
“I try as a rule to make my own decisions about a person,” he said Saturday, sitting on the edge of the couch in his office. “So we had some incidents in college about Jameis to consider. The crab legs, shooting BB guns, standing in the cafeteria and shouting things out. You know, you do stupid things sometimes when you’re 20, 21 years old. You get off track. You say later, ‘I wish I hadn’t done those things.’ But then there was a serious accusation we had to come to grips with. [The accusation that he sexually assaulted a Florida State student, Kinsman.] That was investigated three times. No charges were filed. I understand something happened. But when do you get to the point where you say, ‘We have to let the courts decide, and we abide by their ruling?’ They did not charge Jameis with anything. And at that point, I am going to make the judgment that I am not going to hold this incident against him.”
Okay...I don't think the point is to hold the incident against Winston. The point is that the Buccaneers need to know if this incident is an example of Winston's behavior towards women, if it was a one-time incident that would never happen again if it ever happened originally or it's just one example of behavior that will cause problems for him as a professional in the NFL. It's not about holding incidents against a player, but judging behavior as representative of behavior you want associated with your franchise now and in the future.
Smith met an uncle of Winston’s who asked him: “You like the NBA?” Smith said he did.
“You remember the Michael Jordan draft?”
Peter doesn't remember this because he doesn't like basketball. Has Peter ever mentioned he doesn't watch much basketball when he's busy making judgments about basketball players/teams?
Smith did. That’s the year, 1984, that Portland took the ill-fated Sam Bowie second overall, and Chicago took Jordan third.
“Don’t pick the wrong guy,” the uncle said.
Don’t pick Marcus Mariota over Winston, he meant.
IS THAT WHAT HE MEANT, PETER?
I do believe that Peter King thinks his readers are absolute morons. He feels the need to explain that "Don't pick the wrong guy," coming from Jameis Winston's uncle means Winston's uncle thinks the Bucs should choose his nephew over Marcus Mariota. Does this need an explanation? Does Peter think his readers are so stupid that they would believe Jameis' uncle is warning the Bucs NOT to choose his nephew? Does Peter think Jameis' uncle thought this would be a good chance to advocate for Dante Fowler Jr. to be the #1 overall pick? Of course Jameis' uncle is referring to drafting Mariota over Winston. Yet, Peter is compelled to explain that's the meaning to his readers of MMQB. Peter thinks his readers are idiots. So haughty of him.
They’d give this test to both Winston (first) and then Mariota (a week later). Winston reported to the facility one day in early March, and offensive coordinator Dirk Koetter and quarterback coach Mike Bajakian taught him what he’d learn on the first day of rookie minicamp. “Day 1 Install,” it was called. Fifteen plays, runs and passes, with a slew of formations, progressions in the quarterback’s read, snap counts, coverages, hot receivers if the defense blitzed, offensive-line protections. Bajakian took 90 minutes to explain the “install,” flying through it on purpose, to throw a lot at Winston to see what he’d remember—more conceptually than in memorization. Then, as part of the information-overload, the coaches took him to lunch in the Bucs cafeteria,
To see if he would stand up on a table and start screaming something obscene?
introducing him to a slew of people, talking to him about his family, doing whatever to get his mind off the football and on to something else. They wanted to test his recall, and his football acumen.
And if Winston couldn't remember the name of Beverly, a fine lady who was in charge of all desserts at the Buccaneers facility, well then he certainly wasn't worth the #1 overall pick.
Licht was blown away by Koetter’s impression after that couple of hours with Winston. “I’m going to compare every guy I test like that the rest of my career to Jameis,” Koetter told Licht.
But there was one other thing that Koetter saw as a danger sign—and the Bucs realize is part of the education of a young quarterback. At Florida State, Winston threw 18 interceptions last season, and had at least seven more dropped or missed. Winston has bravado, which every team wants in its quarterback.
“I’m not afraid of making any throw,” Winston told Koetter that day in March.
“You need to be,” Koetter told Winston.
Good advice.
I think it's bad advice. Part of the reason behind Winston's success at Florida State is his confidence that he can make any throw, so why try to take that away from him? Sure, refine it and convince him to not make certain throws in certain situations, but to tell him he needs to be afraid of making any throw? I think that neuters Winston and could eventually erode his confidence by turning him into a quarterback who goes against what has made him successful in college. Teach Winston to recognize coverage and why he shouldn't make a certain throw, don't teach him to be afraid of making that throw though. Let him figure out why he shouldn't make the throw he knows he could make. What do I know though?
You may recall when I wrote about Winston—the Florida State baseball team’s closer last season—at the combine in my Feb. 23 column that I asked him whether he would ever want to play both sports as a professional. “I can’t speak on that,” he said. “It has always been my dream, but I’m just playing football right now.”
Licht and agents Greg Genske and Kenny Felder negotiated the Winston contract so he’d have the business of football out of the way and he could focus solely on football starting with the Bucs’ minicamp starting this Thursday in Tampa. In the contract, a Bucs’ source said, is a clause prohibiting Winston from playing professional baseball during the life of his Tampa Bay deal.
Winston was never really thinking of playing baseball professionally. I like how this statement made to Peter King caused some to wonder about Winston's commitment to football, yet no one seems to have a huge issue with Russell Wilson pretending he may play baseball as a negotiating tool to get a new contract. Wilson has won a Super Bowl, so his commitment to football could never be questioned, even if he spends part of the offseason hanging around the camp of the MLB team that drafted him and constantly is like, "Man, I'd like to play baseball" as an obvious negotiating tactic.
Some inside football here.
I like how Peter has to warn his readers there is some "inside football" coming up. He wants them to have this warning in case they stumbled upon MMQB and thought it was just a collection of short stories about coffee, beer and how women on running trails should really not talk on the phone because they never know who may be following them for a mile. Shows me where the priority is for MMQB these days.
Four really good stories happened between the 53rd pick in the draft, held by Cincinnati as day two of the draft began, and the 61st pick, held by Indianapolis and traded to Tampa Bay when the Colts were on the clock.
Pick 53, Cincinnati: Jake Fisher, tackle, Oregon.
Coach Marvin Lewis loved Fisher. Owner Mike Brown lives by the draft board, and midway through the round, Fisher was the only player left with a first-round Bengal grade. The Bengals turned in the pick. Alexander, working his 22nd draft with the Bengals (the coaches in Cincinnati are more involved than with any other franchise), got the biggest surprise of his personnel evaluation career: He thought one or both of Ogbuehi and Fisher would be gone at pick No. 21, and he got one of them at 21, the other at 53.
As I've said on Twitter of late, teams lie after the draft as well. Either way Marvin Lewis isn't good at player evaluation or he is lying. There was no way that Ogbuehi was going to be gone by #21 due to the injury concerns and I didn't see many mocks that had both Ogbuehi and Fisher gone at that point. I can't imagine what team would pick Ogbuehi in the top 20 picks of the draft given the concern for his knee. I could be wrong, because as we learn later clearly Peter King knows when every player in the draft was due to be drafted.
This could be a redshirt year for Ogbuehi, who won’t be fully healthy until at least November;
Exactly, but Marvin Lewis thinks Ogbuehi would go in the first 20 picks and there is a chance Fisher goes that early too? Once you accept NFL teams lie about shit year-round, it makes what they say much easier to see through.
Pick 55, Baltimore: Maxx Williams, tight end, Minnesota.
But then, maybe 45 minutes before they were scheduled to pick, the Ravens heard reliably (or so they thought) that the Steelers were locked on Williams. Maybe it was true, maybe it wasn’t; you never know in the middle of the draft if you are being played or getting the real scoop. But Baltimore began to call teams ahead of Pittsburgh, picking 56th, to see if they would move. Arizona, at 55, was willing, figuring the guy they wanted here, defensive end Markus Golden of Missouri would likely make it to 58. For the cost of a pick exactly 100 picks later—No. 158 overall—Baltimore leapfrogged Pittsburgh. The Ravens picked Williams.
“So for a fifth-round pick, Ravens stole Maxx Williams from Steelers. Great move,” tweeted Ed Bouchette, long-time and plugged-in Steeler beat man.
It's interesting to me how Peter pays attention to what some NFL beat guys Tweet and ignores others. Ed Bouchette confirms the Steelers may have wanted Williams, so Peter takes this as reality, but later in this MMQB Peter states another prospect was a reach in the 1st round when a Dallas sportscaster stated the Cowboys were going to take this player at #27.
The Steelers got their rookie tight end, Jesse James of Penn State, in the fifth round. It’ll be interesting to see over the next few years how much damage Williams does in this rivalry. The Steelers are the types to look back, but if Williams makes beautiful music with Flacco, he’ll add some spice to a rivalry that doesn’t need it.
Keep creating these storylines and narratives, Peter. We can't let exciting football games between these two teams be the only story. There has to be more.
Pick 60, Dallas: Randy Gregory, defensive end/outside linebacker, Nebraska. My first thought after this pick: Rod Marinelli’s going to have Greg Hardy and Randy Gregory in his defensive team meeting room. Hope he’s ready. The Cowboys honestly considered Gregory in the first round, too, before going for another need guy, cornerback Byron Jones of UConn. When it got close to pick 60, I’m told a serious conversation wasn’t needed; Gregory was such a strong candidate as a player that Dallas was willing to work with him on his marijuana history, and his history of depression and anxiety, according to SI.com’s Don Banks. Other reports say Gregory was either bipolar or had some other personality disorder that made it difficult for him to focus on football, or anything, for long periods. Gregory, without question, was a top-10 value on talent alone. But he tumbled down so many draft boards because of his character flaws.
Yes, in the original draft of this MMQB Peter King referred to a history of depression and anxiety, as well as possibly being bipolar as "character flaws." Of course he did. These are the types of things that Peter writes without thinking. He later apologized on Twitter and all was good. I, of course, made some vague Tweets about a lack of comment from a certain guy who works for "SI" who criticizes other writers and sports talking heads for their comments, as he was suspiciously quiet about this statement. I feel like he gives more leeway to employees of "SI" for statements such as this. He has sort of a "Yeah, he screwed that one up" type of attitude, which is fine, but I get concerned Peter even made the statement in MMQB. Sure, he apologized, but if I Tweet something insensitive on a topic (or do something like this almost every month as it seems of late in regard to Peter King), then what good is an apology if my audience doesn't believe I won't just do it again? That's how I feel about Peter. I feel he is so disconnected from reality in some ways that he needs everyone to say, "Hey buddy, being bi-polar isn't a 'character flaw'" and it shouldn't be that way. Should Peter need someone to correct this statement for him? I wouldn't think so, yet he does. I think that merits some criticism.
Talking football, there have always been rumors that Greg Hardy is a bit bi-polar as well. It's always a rumor and it doesn't mean it's correct. Some guys are just odd. I heard similar stuff about Gregory during the college football season, but in a slightly different version.
And for the Jones family. On Sunday night, I spoke with Cowboys COO Stephen Jones, who was on the front line of the Gregory decision over the past month:
The MMQB: Did you consider him in the first round? I heard you did.
Jones: I think in this day and time, we want our first-round pick to be clean. That’s how we operated here.
Said with no sense of irony from the team that signed Greg Hardy as a free agent.
The MMQB: Rod Marinelli seems like a my-way-or-the-highway kind of guy. Was he on board with Gregory?
Jones: Absolutely. He is my
way or the highway. He has said to us before about certain players, ‘I
don’t think I can work with this guy.’ But if they love football, and if
they fight their ass off in practice and in games, he can work with
them. And he wants them.
Translation (and this goes for every NFL team): If they can win us some games and make their position coach look good, then they have a spot on this team. Just as long as they don't get in trouble again, of course. If these players do get in trouble then the team will try to figure out how good they will be without that player and take action or not take action accordingly.
Pick 61, Tampa Bay: Ali Marpet, guard, Hobart. Not a lot of pressure on Tampa Bay GM Jason Licht in this draft. There’s the Jameis Winston pick, and the dangers of that. There’s the disaster of 2014 free agency, which included the pricey acquisition at left tackle, Anthony Collins, failing miserably and getting cut after the season.
Don't forget the rest of the failure from the 2014 free agency period and win the Buccaneers "won" free agency before by signing Carl Nicks and Dashon Goldson.
At the Senior Bowl, offensive line coach George Warhop told Licht his favorite two players were Smith and Marpet. At the combine, after Marpet ran a guard-best 4.98 40-yard dash, Licht texted one of the Bucs’ owners in the Glazer family—desperate for news on how the quarterbacks looked in Indianapolis—with news on the passers. And he added: “By the way, our favorite player here is Ali Marpet.”
Isn't it weird how most NFL teams get the exact players they loved prior to the draft on draft day? It's odd how nearly every single team was targeting this specific player and then they ended up drafting that player. Yet it happens all the time. A team is targeting a player and then they land that player. Odd, especially given the NFL teams don't continue to lie after the draft. It's all truth-telling from that point on.
On Sept. 13, 2014, Marpet played left tackle and blocked for quarterback Patrick Conlan against Endicott College in Beverly, Mass., with 1,725 watching. On Sept. 13, 2015, if all goes well, Marpet will line up at right guard and block for the first pick in the NFL draft, Jameis Winston, in his NFL debut against the Tennessee Titans, with 65,908 watching. That’s not too big an adjustment, is it?
Well, since Marpet isn't a woman official then I see no reason why this would be a huge adjustment for him. If Marpet were a female official making her introduction to NFL life, then Peter would have serious issues with this type of adjustment.
Now Peter names his "GM's of the Weekend" or as it is better known, "GM's who seem to have made good moves on paper because that's all Peter really understands or knows at this point."
Trent Baalke, San Francisco. No one plays the futures trading game better than Baalke. He held the 15th pick of the first round, and the worst-kept secret in football leading up to the draft was that San Francisco was over-the-top smitten with Oregon defensive end Arik Armstead. Here was Armstead, available at 15. But here came San Diego, picking 17th, desperately wanting to get up to pick Melvin Gordon, fearful that Houston, at 16, might. Baalke got San Diego’s fourth-round pick this year and fifth-round pick in 2016, and still got Armstead picking at 17 … at a savings of about $725,000 in first-round-slotting-system contract dollars because Baalke got him two picks later. Baalke also traded a pick 10 slots from the bottom of the draft, number 246 overall, and flipped that to Dallas for a 2016 sixth-rounder. So the Niners enter the offseason with a league-high nine picks in the 2016 draft.
As Peter is prone to do, he thinks a team "wins" the draft by having the most picks in next year's draft and creating more picks in this year's draft. This "futures game" that Baalke is playing worked so well for the 49ers last year, plus he has Jim Tomsula coaching these guys up so what could go wrong?
Next year around draft time, Peter is sure to have a MMQB where he will state that the 49ers "control" the 2016 NFL Draft. What team "won" the draft the year before will then "control" the draft for the next year. That's how it works for Peter.
Mike Maccagnan, New York Jets.
Maccagnan added a speed merchant used to playing big games, Ohio State’s Devin Smith,
Oh, so how will Smith having experience playing in big games help the Jets then?
and an intriguing quarterback prospect, Bryce Petty, with a value pick at 103.
Intriguing meaning, "He's a white, pocket quarterback who some reporters got duped into believing he would be taken earlier so this seems like a steal based on incorrect previous information these reporters had."
Tom Telesco, San Diego. I like Melvin Gordon a lot, and the Denzel Perryman pick gives San Diego three solid inside linebackers; Perryman will be the best of the lot by midseason. But this nod to Telesco is for not trading Philip Rivers. Making that trade because Rivers is 33 and the Chargers aren’t sure if he’ll sign with the franchise long-term would been a dumb, panicked move
Great job in not doing something stupid by trading a franchise quarterback! Also, the Saints didn't trade Drew Brees, so kudos to their front office for not considering a trade since Brees has a huge cap number next year and the team may have to renegotiate or release him. They could have considered a trade, but did not. Great job!
GM I Couldn’t Figure Out
Dave Gettleman, Carolina. None of these things can be judged for at least a couple of years, of course, so Gettleman, who has done a good job being patient in his Carolina rebuild, deserves time to see if he’s right and everyone else is wrong.
Whatever. I don't care about Peter's opinion of the Panthers' draft. What I do care about is when Peter says things that aren't factually true. While earlier in this MMQB he paid attention to a Tweet from Ed Bouchette, and created a narrative regarding the drafting of Maxx Williams by the Ravens, when the Steelers wanted him as well. It seems Peter ignores other evidence he could find where a statement he might want to believe is true, is actually incorrect.
But with a significant tackle need (Carolina is due to start the shaky Michael Oher on Cam Newton’s blind side, no pun intended), I thought Gettleman over-drafted Shaq Thompson at 25. Thompson certainly would have been there 10 or more picks later.
Thompson "certainly" would have been there. Really? From a Dallas sportscaster...
Cowboys wanted Shaq Thompson in 1st round...Landon Collins very similar player but wasn't under consideration here
— Bill Jones (@CBS11BillJones) May 2, 2015
Peter King: Carolina "over-drafted Shaq Thompson at 25...would have been there 10 or more picks later.">Shaq wasn't getting past 27
— Bill Jones (@CBS11BillJones) May 4, 2015
Maybe it is just Dallas saying that and the Panthers stumbled into drafting him at the perfect time.
Gettleman says on @WFNZ #Panthers' Don Gregory said during pre-draft that Shaq might go to Cowboys, team got a call yesterday confirming.
— Chris Kroeger (@Kroeger) May 4, 2015
So I don't care what Peter thinks, but evidence points to Thompson not being a reach at #27. Maybe the Panthers are lying and they really care if "experts" think they reached and the Cowboys are covering for them. Or maybe Peter just sort of wrote what he felt he knew but didn't really know. And picking wide receiver/tight end combo guy Devin Funchess at 41 was a significant reach, according to the chorus of GMs I spoke with over the weekend. “Can be lazy and become disinterested in the game if he goes stretches without being utilized,” Ourlads Guide to the NFL Draft wrote of Funchess.
You mean like Steve Smith would get, which is why the game plan usually ensured he got the ball early in every game? And of course, these GM's all were lying before the draft, but they are back to always telling the truth after the draft is over.
But Gettleman didn’t just reach for Funchess. He traded third- and sixth-round picks to move up to get him. There will be significant pressure on the 14th tackle picked in this draft, fourth-round pick Daryl Williams, to produce at tackle for Carolina.
He's not even penciled in as the starter right now. The guy who started the last part of the season and two playoff games is penciled in as the starter. So.............not as much pressure as Peter King wants there to be.
None of these players may be any good and this could be an "F" draft. I don't care, but at least try and base these opinions on fact if you are going to try and pass them off as fact.
Picks I Liked
40. Tennessee: Dorial Green-Beckham, wide receiver, Missouri/Oklahoma. No idea if he’ll boom or bust. But the 40th pick is a good place for a player with Randy Moss raw talent and a risk-reward pockmarked past.
Peter needed to get a quick interview in with Stephen Jones to find out what motivated the Cowboys to draft a guy with "character flaws" at #60, but the guy who pushed a girl down some stairs at #40, well that seems about the right time to take a kid with that kind of talent. Peter likes it.
Idiot Mock Drafter of the Year
Me. When will I learn? I got worse as the month went on. In my mock draft from last Tuesday, I had four direct hits: Jameis Winston, Marcus Mariota, Trae Waynes, Arik Armstead. In my mock draft April 1, I had six direct hits: Winston, Mariota, Waynes, Dante Fowler, DeVante Parker, Kevin Johnson. I mean, who gets worse with four more weeks to research?
Someone who takes the time to speak with NFL GM's and scouts about their feelings regarding which teams will pick which players at certain spots. Someone who then relies on these same anonymous scouts and GM's to honestly evaluate players after the draft is over and yet now feels like he has gotten to the bottom of the truth.
“It doesn’t bother me. It happens all the time. That’s what makes sports great. You have nothing to talk about on sports radio, it’s ‘Hey, let’s talk trades,’ and everybody comes up with a trade. It’s great. I think it’s fun. But if the guy getting talked about in the trade gets a little nervous, my point is, I’ve got to tell him just not to listen to that stuff. I mean, everybody can trade. Trade me. I don’t care.”
—Philadelphia coach Chip Kelly, on the spate of trade rumors around his team, as reports swirled that he desperately wanted to trade up to acquire Marcus Mariota with the first or second pick of the draft.
The wisdom of Chip Kelly. What wisdom it is.
Factoids of the Week That May Interest Only Me
Todd Gurley was the top-rated player on the St. Louis draft board.
It doesn't surprise me the future Los Angeles Rams had Gurley as the top-rated player on their board. He's a stud running back, even if he is coming off a major injury. Plus, Jeff Fisher knows you build a team from the running back position up while ignoring the quarterback position until he has to upgrade at that position.
The Atlanta Falcons in April arranged for a former star linebacker, Jessie Tuggle, to announce the team’s fifth-round pick, live from the new College Football Hall of Fame in Atlanta. All teams did their day-three picks remotely, to boost interest locally somewhere in the home market, and most got at least one former star to announce one or more of them.
Tuggle was handed the card to make the announcement and looked down at it.
Grady Jarrett, defensive tackle, Clemson.
Tuggle’s son.
This is an interesting story, but it's exactly that, a story. This isn't a "factoid" by any stretch of the imagination. I just am saying this probably doesn't fit under the "Factoids of the Week that May Only Interest Me" section of MMQB. It's a story, not a fact.
Marcus Mariota does not have accounts on Twitter, Instagram or Facebook.
Then that must mean he is going to be successful in the NFL because he's too focused on succeeding to have time for social media. It could also mean he doesn't want anyone seeing the things that he does during his life, whether good or bad, but that's probably just the jaded away of looking at it.
Mr. Starwood Preferred Member Travel Notes of the Week
1. The more big events in my life in Chicago, the better. Love that city. Love walking everywhere. Love the crowds on Michigan Avenue.
It's a great place to walk behind people for a mile or so while they are talking on the phone or just trying to go about living their lives.
My Chicago hotel Wednesday and Thursday nights, before traveling to Tampa on Friday, was 1.6 miles from the draft site on Michigan Avenue. I walked it three times in the two days I was in town and wouldn’t have minded walking it six times.
Peter even followed this one lady down an alley. He had been trailing behind her for a few blocks while she was on her phone and then she quickly turned down an alley (she must have been in a hurry!) and ran off. It's weird to Peter how the women in Chicago would take off running after he trailed behind them for a while. It must be a new exercise program.
Then Peter has a Tweet about Floyd Mayweather's team pulling the credential of Rachel Nichols and Michelle Beadle. I didn't feel like embedding it, but if Mayweather pulling a credential from journalists would surprise you then it shouldn't.
Ten Things I Think I Think
1. I think it was cool to see Nate Boyer, the 34-year-old Army Special Forces veteran of three tours in the Middle East, get signed as an undrafted free-agent long-snapper by the Seahawks on Saturday. That shouldn’t be confused with “has a great job at winning the long-snapping job with the Seahawks” because of the clear advantage that incumbent Clint Gresham has to win the job. Not only did Gresham just sign a three-year, $2.7-million deal with Seattle, with a $300,000 signing bonus, but he has some physical advantages. He’s six years younger, and 6-3 and 240. Boyer is 5-11 and 220.
Nate Boyer didn't have a bad snap in three years at Texas. Yet, he went undrafted and finally got on with a team as an undrafted free agent. Was Boyer undrafted because he's old and was in the military? Obviously it couldn't have had anything to do with his skill set. Why did he go undrafted just because he's older and served his country?
(Seeing if anyone gets this non-hilarious parody of last year's post-draft rage)
3. I think there haven’t been many stories like the La’el Collins story since I’ve covered the NFL, and we need to let the legal system take its course. But if I were him, and if I were exonerated by police in the case, I would go play football somewhere this year.
Since apparently I was a homer a little while back while discussing the Panthers draft, let me be a homer for another minute. Robert Klemko responded back to me on Twitter (he's another writer who looks for his name on Twitter, even when it's not tagged) at my criticism that he had the Panthers taking Dorial Beckham-Green at #25. Yeah, it wasn't ever happening. Never. Not happening.
After paying $13.1 million to a guy who sat out the rest of the 2014 season due to legal troubles, the team was going to draft a guy who pushed a girl down stairs? No fucking way. Klemko defended the mock draft choice (found here) by telling me Dave Gettleman (the Panthers GM) was with the Giants when Plaxico got in legal trouble and then the team drafted Hakeem Nicks. He then called Nicks "no angel" at UNC. Interesting, except Nicks did nothing at UNC that could qualify for "no angel" status. He never got in trouble with the law, at least that I could find. Nicks was part of an academic fraud investigation, but that was AFTER he was drafted and had played for the Giants. But sure, whatever way Klemko wants to defend his picks, even he has to play slightly loose with facts. This response bothered me for some reason. He seems to have made up Nicks being "no angel" at UNC, unless there is something else I don't know about or couldn't find he was referring to.
8. I think the NFL allowing the Patriots’ deflated football saga—the Ted Wells investigative team began its work 101 days ago—to stretch past the draft makes this absurdity possible: If New England is punished, say by the loss of a draft choice, something that happened in the 2014 season will be punished in the 2016 season. That’s just wrong. Roger Goodell cannot simply say to Ted Wells or to any investigator: “Get back to me when you get back to me.” He has to either put a time limit on the investigation, or at the bare minimum, say, “You’ve got to have this done some time before the draft, so if there are sanctions to be assessed, we can assess them at the right time, not a year and a half later.”
Look Peter, Roger Goodell is not in charge of a timeline for any type of NFL investigation. Sure, maybe Wells is collecting billing hours while sipping cocktails, but he's doing that without Roger Goodell's knowledge. Sometimes an investigation into whether a bunch of footballs were deflated, and if true, when they were deflated takes over 100 days. Roger Goodell expects the NFL's players to do exactly as he wants them to do, but his hands are tied when it comes to making Ted Wells wrap up an investigation the NFL is paying him to provide conclusions on.
10. I think these are my non-football thoughts of the week:
a. So Alex Rodriguez tied for number four on the all-time home run list. So? Let me know when he’s going for number one, and then I’ll pay attention. I mean, in what other walk of life does time stop when you become the fourth-best at something, particularly with Rodiguez’s asterisks?
Way to try and pass it off as not a big deal, Peter. Yeah, who really cares about the 4th leading home run hitter in MLB history. Who is Willie Mays anyway? It's no big deal. Nice way to pretend your apathy doesn't revolve entirely around A-Rod's repeated PED use.
b. Kevin Harlan in last two minutes of Clippers-Spurs: “I DO NOT WANT THIS SERIES TO END!”
c. Me either,
But Peter, you are talking about the NBA. ARE YOU A FAN OF THE NBA? YOU HAVEN'T MADE YOUR POSITION ON THIS CLEAR IN THE PAST!
and I’m not even a basketball fan.
Oh, that's better. No mention of the NBA, and the mentions happen every week now, are complete without a caveat on how much Peter hates the NBA.
d. B.B. King is in hospice care. Comfort to him. Our culture has been so enriched because of him.
I'm betting the only B.B. King song that Peter knows is "When Love Comes to Town," and he only knows this song because King did the song with U2.
i. Always good to steal a game at Wrigley, as I did Wednesday night. Thanks to my SI Chicago ad sales team for a fun evening, even in the 46-degree chill. Gerrit Cole’s something to see. And it was cool to see Andrew McCutchen’s 1,000th career hit, a screaming triple to the center field warning track.
The ball was probably screaming because Peter had been following behind it for a mile, eavesdropping on the conversations it was having.
The Adieu Haiku
Marpet, guard. Hobart.
In the second round. Hobart.
You kidding? Hobart
Congrats, Peter! In a 11 word haiku, you manged to use the same word three times. This is now the most useless "Adieu Haiku" in MMQB history. I would say it's the fourth-worst "Adieu Haiku" but apparently no one cares about the fourth-best or worst at anything.
Thursday, October 30, 2014
9 comments Gregg Easterbrook Outright Lies In TMQ About Something Rex Ryan Said
Gregg Easterbrook pointed out all of the teams that weren't going to make the playoffs after Week 7 in last week's TMQ. He also indicated that a team with a 7% chance of making the playoffs should be worried, while a team with a 6% chance of making the playoffs probably should be excited about their chances. This stuff never ends with Gregg. Let's see how he will ignore that the Cardinals and the Redskins won games this weekend through blitzing the opposing team. Spoiler alert: He sort of ignores it, but simply dismisses blitzing is a defensive tactic that can win football games. In the face of evidence that disproves your hypothesis, ignore such evidence. That's not Gregg's mantra, but probably should be. This week, Gregg still harps on academics being factored into the college football playoff and does all the same annoying shit with second-guessing teams and leaving out information that he does every week in TMQ. I would say there is about 35% more lying and misleading this week.
Today, the new College Football Playoff selection committee releases its first rankings, a hint at the four power schools that will square off in the inaugural football factory elimination tourney. Records, schedule strength, quality of victory and even quality of defeat will be debated.
What if graduation rates were considered, too?
Then it would be stupid because the College Football Playoff (am I supposed to capitalize it?) only deals with how teams perform on the field and not in the classroom. What if schools ranked academically by "US World Report" and other publications ranked the school based on their academic criteria, but also how good that school is at football? Would that make sense?
In August, ESPN introduced ESPN Grade, a new way to think about college football rankings.
"A new way" meaning "A stupid way" of thinking about college football rankings because it only factors in the schools in the Top 25 and weighs football results more than it weighs academic results. If ESPN Grade were a true blend of academics and football then it would have a 50-50 mix of academics and football. But of course, it doesn't. Therefore, uselessness is the result.
Here's what would happen if ESPN Grade were applied to the CFP: Right now, the top four seeds, in order, would be Notre Dame, Alabama, Georgia and Auburn.
So the SEC would have three teams along with an independent school. I can't imagine how this would be a problem. Plus, this ESPN Grade result would result in a four team playoff that has teams who are ranked 1, 4, 11, and 14 in academics among the Top 25 teams. I think that alone shows the uselessness of ESPN Grade. What about the two teams who are 11th and 14th in academics? ESPN Grade claims to reward schools with great academics, except it doesn't. Like the good ESPN boy that Gregg is, he will continue to force ESPN Grade down the throats of his readers.
The CFP's initial No. 1 seems likely to be Mississippi State, which is first in the major, victories-only polls. Factoring in the classroom causes Mississippi State to plummet, given that its football graduation rate is an unimpressive 59 percent, 21st among the Top 25 colleges. Florida State plummets, too, with an embarrassing 58 percent football graduation rate, which is 23rd of 25. Ole Miss plummets as well, with a 55 percent football graduation rate, 24th of 25.
As much as I love academics, it still makes no sense to base a football poll on a team's graduation rate. In Fairy Tale Land, where Gregg thinks college football is played, it makes sense, but not in the real world. Plus, ESPN Grade leaves out the academic standing of every team not in the Top 25. So ESPN Grade doesn't even measure the majority of Division-I football teams' success in the classroom and on the field as a comparison to Notre Dame, Alabama, Georgia and Auburn.
Suppose Mississippi State or Florida State go on to win the first big playoff title. A champion that graduates barely more than half its football players would be terrible for the sport, to say nothing of the young men not receiving degrees.
I guess if you as a sports fan are under the impression that the best college football team should also be the best college football team who is also the best at academics, it would be terrible for the sport. Otherwise, nope, Florida State won last year and college football still manages to survive. Go figure. It's almost like most sports fans realize the college football playoff (or BCS at the time) isn't intended to measure a team's ability in the classroom, as well as that team's ability on the field.
In contrast, an inaugural CFP championship by Notre Dame, Alabama, Georgia or Auburn would reflect well on collegiate athletics, as these schools combine success on game day with success on commencement day.
Because a college that is 14th among 25 teams in academics would be a great source of pride for the NCAA. This team has a graduation rate that is in the middle of a 25 team subset! What an accomplishment.
But the core purpose of college is education. Providing sports entertainment, a secondary mission, gains legitimacy only through results on commencement day. Unless you'd prefer the big conferences become semipro leagues that have nothing to do with universities -- with the lore and excitement of college traditions instantly lost -- you need to care about graduation rates.
Umm...Gregg, the big conferences ARE semipro leagues that have very little to do with the universities, while the lore and excitement of college traditions have not been lost. So, that's a pretty fucking weak argument you are furthering.
All universities say they educate their athletes. The ones that do a better job should be rewarded in the rankings.
Yes, in Fairy Tale Land they should. In the real world, where the intent is to win football games and bring in revenue to the school, the job is to win football games and make sure the students stay eligible to play sports. It's a sad world, I know.
On a related point, the University of North Carolina scandal just keeps getting worse. According to a new report, for 18 years, the Chapel Hill school offered "paper" courses that handed out an average 3.62 GPA (that means the average grade was an A) to about 3,100 students, about half of whom were NCAA athletes.
This past winter, when CNN reported a University of North Carolina instructor warned about continuing extremely poor academics in Chapel Hill sports, new chancellor Carol Folt, says they could not verify the information.
Yes, that is what she said, but Gregg is leaving out the second part of that. Carol Folt said (and you can read what she said in the link Gregg provides and didn't apparently read):
In an open letter emailed to university students, faculty and employees Thursday, chancellor Carol Folt said she takes Willingham's allegations "very seriously." But the chancellor said the school has been "unable to reconcile these claims with either our own facts or with the data currently being cited as the source for the claims."
I'm not in the business of defending UNC for a variety of reasons, but Carol Folt was simply indicating they couldn't verify the information because they questioned the source and how the information Willingham provided matched the facts she (Folt) had. It's not that she was too stupid to verify the information, it was just a matter of this information not reconciling with other information she had.
The new scandal is not about athletic eligibility -- it runs much deeper than that, going to paper courses and fake grades for a broad range of students. The University of North Carolina has in recent years attempted to portray itself as among the "public Ivies." The latest report calls into question whether the University of North Carolina should even retain its accreditation. Thousands of students in fake classes would embarrass even a sleazy online school.
I don't know, I've seen some sleazy online schools that do shady crap than this.
People at the top of institutions often justify their high pay and perks -- Folt earns a taxpayer-subsidized $520,000 a year -- by saying the buck stops with them. Then, when something goes wrong, they claim they were not responsible and should not face accountability. There will be no consequences?
To be fair, Folt was in her first academic year replacing Holden Thorp as president of UNC-CH. So it's not like there wasn't accountability, because Thorp left due to the fallout from these academic issues. Gregg tries to muddy the water a little bit in an effort to make it look like there was not accountability, when there may not be accountability throughout upper management, but UNC already had a president leave due to these academic allegations. So there was accountability and Folt's time to be accountable has started.
Looks like character education is not on the curriculum at Chapel Hill.
Zing! Good one Gregg!
In other sports news, the NBA tips off Tuesday night. Tuesday Morning Quarterback believes basketball is 1 percent as interesting as football, so I annually devote 1 percent of my column inches to the hoops sport. See some NBA comments below.
Despite the fact Gregg thinks the NBA is 1% as interesting as football, he still thinks he has 100% knowledge about the NBA and doesn't hold back criticism of the NBA as if he holds an in-depth knowledge of the sport of basketball. Fake it so others don't know you aren't that smart.
Stats Of The Week No. 3: The Detroit "at" Atlanta game in London aired live at 6:30 a.m. on the West Coast and 3:30 a.m. in Honolulu.
Time zones are fun.
Stats Of The Week No. 6: The Bengals are on an 12-0-1 regular-season home streak and an 0-3 postseason home streak.
Yes, the Bengals still haven't won a home playoff game. One would expect this to change at some point when the NFL playoffs roll around, but to quote this statistic every week prior to the next NFL playoff game taking place seems unnecessary.
Great News -- Jerry Jones Embarrassed in Prime Time: Were the Cowboys that overconfident or did Colt McCoy acquire superpowers by returning to Texas and drinking its water? Three things are certain from the "Monday Night Football" mega-upset: First, as TMQ has noted before, "Colt McCoy" is the best football name ever. Second, Robert Griffin III wore a heavy ski cap indoors.
Under Gregg's theory that the coach or cheerleader who dresses with the least amount of clothing wins the game, doesn't this mean that the Redskins should have lost to the Cowboys? This would also mean Gregg's theory is horseshit, but we all know Gregg's theories could never be horseshit. Never.
The Potomac Drainage Basin Indigenous Persons figured to face constant running plays, what with Washington having a mediocre run defense and Dallas boasting the league's first-ranked rushing offense. Running plays are especially effective at home, because they ramp up crowd energy.
This is a 100% fact and not at all an opinion. Passing plays actually bore the home crowd. That's also a fact and not an opinion. Gregg holds so much knowledge that may seem to the amateur as an opinion, but is indeed a fact.
Washington gambled by big-blitzing on third down, and the gamble paid off with two sacks of Tony Romo by safety Brandon Meriweather: one knocking Romo out of the contest for a while, the other causing a fourth-quarter fumble.
Stop me before I blitz again! Big blitzing doesn't work and a good quarterback can easily beat a big blitz. Isn't that what Gregg tells his readers? Well, apparently not. I do like how Gregg just acknowledges the Redskins blitzed a lot and managed to win the game using this tactic, yet Gregg will criticize another defensive coordinator for blitzing a lot in other instances, and claim this is what caused his team to lose the game. Then from there, Gregg will attempt to make it seem like playing a base, boring defense like the Seahawks run is the best defense to run in order to win games. Then my head will explode.
McCoy scored a touchdown on a designed quarterback draw at the goal line -- this common Texas prep school play must have made him feel right at home.
Yes, this quarterback draw at the goal line is a common Texas prep school play, but also a common play in the NFL with a quarterback who is mobile. Heck, the Panthers beat the Packers 15 years ago on a quarterback draw by Steve Beuerlein from the five yard line. So it's a common Texas prep school play, but also a common football play.
The Persons broke an 0-8 streak (and 0-9 road streak) against NFC East teams. Now, sure-to-be-former head coach Jay Gruden faces yet another dilemma -- bring back RG III, or let the third-stringer play? Don't be surprised if Gruden sides with McCoy. A Griffin comeback would be a media circus, while Gruden can take credit for having the foresight to sign the unwanted McCoy last spring.
Or Gruden could choose to start Colt McCoy because McCoy has played well as the Redskins' starter and won a road game against the Cowboys. But no, I'm sure the decision to start McCoy will be based primarily on satisfying Gruden's ego and need to feel smart. It won't have anything to do with the fact McCoy has played well for the Redskins.
Sweet Play Of The Week: With the Steelers leading Indianapolis 28-10, Pittsburgh had first-and-10 on the Colts 47. Colts defensive end Arthur Jones got free on a spin move and lunged at Ben Roethlisberger's feet. Roethlisberger stumbled, and Jones seemed likely to pull the Pittsburgh quarterback down. Then undrafted Steelers guard Ramon Foster jumped atop Jones and immobilized him.
Foster makes a great play, Gregg mentions his draft position.
Freed, Roethlisberger threw a 47-yard touchdown pass to Antonio Brown.
Ben Roethlisberger throws a 47-yard touchdown pass and his draft position isn't mentioned at all. Neither is that fact that Antonio Brown, a highly-paid glory boy, caught the touchdown pass. This is how Gregg works. He assumes his readers are stupid and lazy, so he can mislead them and leave out information that fits his agenda.
When Roethlisberger was drafted out of Miami of Ohio, the book on him was he was a terrific leader but lacked finesse as a passer. One reason for this view is Roethlisberger looks like a linebacker and plays a tough-guy style -- when he's sacked, he barely seems aware of it. Now Roethlisberger has two Super Bowl rings, and on Sunday, he became the only quarterback in NFL annals to throw for 500-plus yards on more than one occasion.
But what round was he drafted in again?
Roethlisberger will never get into Brett Favre or Peyton Manning territory for career passing yards.
I'm still thinking about undrafted Steelers guard Ramon Foster, so what rounds were Favre and Manning drafted in again?
Sour Play Of The Week: With Baltimore leading 24-20, the Nevermores had host Cincinnati facing third-and-10 on its own 20 with 3:48 remaining. All the visitors needed was an incompletion. Knowing Cincinnati needed to throw deep, surely Baltimore wouldn't safety blitz! But free safety Darian Stewart blitzed, and it was a 53-yard completion to Mohamed Sanu, who went straight to the area the free safety vacated for a key down in the Cincinnati comeback victory.
Doesn't Gregg mean undrafted free safety Darian Stewart? Oh that's right, Stewart didn't make a good play so his draft position is irrelevant in Gregg's mind.
Playing at home, the Panthers never trailed the defending champions until there were 47 seconds remaining, and they left the field losers. Sour. Down 13-9, the Cats faced fourth-and-25 on their own 8 with 26 seconds showing. Essentially, this was fourth-and-99. When Cam Newton threw short incomplete, the home crowd booed lustily.
Newton didn't really "throw short," he threw a screen pass that didn't get to the intended receiver because he was about to be trucked by a defensive lineman for the third play in a row.
It turns out Super Bowl MVP quarterback Joe Flacco faced a nearly identical fourth-and-99 situation on his final snap at Cincinnati and also threw a futile short pass. But Flacco wasn't at home, so he did not hear boos.
You can't find this type of analysis anywhere else.
Reader Joshua Thrailkill of North Carolina noted the Panthers fielded four undrafted offensive linemen. But in the NFL, every team must deal with injuries.
Nope, I think what Joshua may have been pointing out is that Gregg goes on and on and on and on about undrafted free agents and how they work so hard, only care about the team and are preferable to "me-first" glory boys, but the Panthers have a pitiful offensive line nearly made up entirely of undrafted free agents. Because Gregg lacks self-awareness, he is unable to see that Joshua very well could be pointing out the fallacy of Gregg's assertions in TMQ. In this case, the assertion is that undrafted players are often preferable to highly-drafted players. It's better to be blind to his assertions being incorrect and keep making the same assertions over and over rather than Gregg subjugate his ego to admit his theory is horseshit and based entirely on assumptions and cherry-picked information that ignores evidence contrary to his assumptions.
"The 100" is teen angst goes to outer space. The title refers to 100 teenagers who descend to Earth from an enormous space station where a remnant of humanity has spent the past century in terrible conditions while waiting for radiation to fade after a nuclear apocalypse. In the series pilot, aboard the enormous space station, we see teens, and we see their parents -- but no children. How could there be 100 teenagers if there are no babies, toddlers or tweens?
Because it is a fictional television show. That's how.
On "The 100" it's the middle of the 22nd century, yet everyone speaks southern California English using present-day slang. One hundred sixty-five years into the future, people say, "Game over, man."
This is a pretty stupid criticism for two specific reasons:
1. If a television show invented it's own language and slang then Gregg would criticize the show for not using realistic language.
2. If a television show invented it's own language and slang then the viewers would have some difficulty relating and understanding what is being said by the characters. There are television shows that create their own language, but include subtitles and the entirety of the show isn't this new language (I'm thinking "Game of Thrones"). So for "The 100" to create new slang (The Shins will change your life), would involve the viewers in 2014 understanding slang used by every character from 150 years in the future. I'm not sure that's a good way to draw viewers.
In the Will Smith interplanetary ego vehicle "After Earth," it's 1,000 years into the future, and language is exactly the same as today. Characters say "I'm good to go" and "We need this ASAP."
Because it's preferable to use language nobody watching the movie understands. Makes sense.
Contrast that with the literary science fiction novel "Riddley Walker," which is set centuries after a global nuclear war pushed humanity back into the iron age. Author Russell Hoban invented an elaborate future dialect. For instance, the ancients (us) are referred to as the "Puter Leat" -- the computer elite. Surely, if there is ever a Hollywood version of "Riddley Walker," future slang will disappear and characters will say, "Sup, dog?"
See Gregg is so stupid, he doesn't understand that if there was a Hollywood version of "Riddley Walker" then slang like "Sup, dog?" would make sense. Gregg is advocating Hollywood update slang in movies or television shows that take place in the future, but then he sarcastically states "Sup, dog?" would appear in a Hollywood version of "Riddley Walker." Well, "Riddley Walker" was written in 1980, so using future slang from 2014 in a movie about the future is EXACTLY what Gregg is encouraging Hollywood to do, yet he sarcastically states this is what Hollywood do, as if the movie version should use slang from 1980. The idea of using slang from 1980 is against what Gregg wants Hollywood to do in terms of updating language based on "future slang" that would be used in movies and television shows about the future.
Chicago mayor Rahm Emanuel admitted the city deliberately shortened yellow lights. The goal was more ticket revenue -- some $8 million from 77,000 automated tickets that would not have been issued had yellow lights been set to the federally recommended, three-second minimum.
In order to fund public-sector pensions, cities and states increasingly stoop to any means to reach into citizens' pockets.
I do agree with Gregg on this issue, but that's what parking tickets, speeding tickets, and various other penalties are, an attempt to reach into citizens' pockets. I own a car. I have paid for my car entirely, yet I have to pay a tax to my local government on the value of my car. Why do I have to pay the tax? I own the car entirely and the city is supposed to receive revenue from me because I have the audacity to own a vehicle? It's an attempt to reach into my pocket and take money. I don't advocate shortened yellow lights, but this is one of the small examples of government reaching in the pockets of citizens. Every year people who have the audacity to own a car have to pay to get the car inspected. To drive a car, a person is forced to get it inspected and there is a charge for this too. It's just weird Gregg uses shortened yellow lights as an example of government overreach when there are plenty of other more egregious examples (at least in my opinion).
Automated red-light cameras are springing up in many places -- though if set to short yellow, they render the roads dangerous by causing drivers to slam on the brakes. Colorado's legalization of marijuana was inspired partly by the state's desire to tax sales. If betting on sports becomes legal -- being disputed right now in New Jersey -- the reason might be government's desire to tax this underground economy.
Yep, welcome to what some people realized a decade ago.
In effect, there were four turnovers, as Green Bay failed on a fourth-and-inches near midfield while the margin was close. Officials on the field initially signaled first down; a challenge changed the spot to fourth-and-inches.
Then the Packers, inspired by their coach's decision to go for it on fourth down and show a real need to win the game, were so motivated they rallied and beat the Saints at home, right? Wait, that didn't happen like Gregg will claim happens when a coach goes for it on fourth down? I don't understand how Gregg's "Go for it on fourth down and it will inspire your team to win the game" theory could ever be wrong.
The NFL Is More Interesting Than The NBA: Many sports enthusiasts prefer basketball to football. But even for those who do, there's a reason the NFL is more interesting: More football teams than basketball teams start the season with a chance.
There are 30 NBA teams. 53% of these teams make the playoffs.
There are 32 NFL teams. 37.5% of these teams make the playoffs.
I'm not entirely sure Gregg understands what he is writing isn't true. Either that or he just likes to outright lie. More NBA teams have a chance of making the playoffs at the beginning of the season as compared to the chance NFL teams have of making the playoffs. Therefore more NBA teams have a chance of winning the NBA title than NFL teams have a chance of winning the Super Bowl. This is true statistically at the beginning of the season at least. Carry on...
NBA teams play so many games followed by a postseason based on the "best of" series concept that by the end, the top team almost always wins the title, thereby washing out the effects of luck. By contrast, the NFL plays only 16 games followed by a postseason knockout round. There's room for variability based on luck or degree of effort.
The fact there is less room for variability in the NBA doesn't mean more NFL teams start the season with a chance to make the playoffs or win the title. Perhaps practically this is true, but statistically it is not. I'm not sure if Gregg is just dumb or trying to be willfully stupid to push his own agenda or not. Regardless of the odds an NBA team has of winning a playoff series, more NBA teams have a chance to win the title simply because a greater percentage of NBA teams qualify for the playoffs.
In turn, small NBA rosters can mean one smart trade or draft selection improves the team dramatically. Large NFL rosters take longer to build because they have more moving parts.
While true in part, there are always exceptions. It's how the Colts can go from 2-14 to making the playoffs in a calendar year.
The result of these factors is every NBA season begins with a handful of teams holding a realistic shot at the title, compared to many teams that have no chance at all. The numerous NBA teams that are goin' nowhere know who they are from the start of the season. Every NFL season begins with a larger number of teams that might win the Super Bowl and a relatively smaller number with no shot.
This argument doesn't make sense in the context of Gregg's argument above on how the smaller NBA rosters mean a team can improve dramatically in one season. If the NBA has smaller rosters and a team can be improved through one draft pick or trade, then doesn't that mean there is more variability in the NBA standings, which means there are more teams who can make one smart move and be an NBA title contender? If large NFL rosters take longer to build (and remember this is me dissecting Gregg's argument, not what I think), then doesn't that mean there are NFL teams who don't have a shot to win the Super Bowl at the beginning of the season because they have more moving parts and require more players to improve the team's chances of winning games?
So Gregg's argument about the increased variability in an NBA team's success doesn't necessarily make sense in the context of his assertion more NBA teams start the season knowing they don't have a shot at the title, because an NBA team can make fewer moves that result in that team going up or down in the standings. Gregg's conclusion seems to be correct, but I'm not sure how he reached his conclusion is accurate.
That there's more variability in the NFL than the NBA is shown by the fact that in the past 15 years, 10 NFL teams have won the Super Bowl, while six NBA clubs have monopolized that league's titles. Twelve of the past 15 NBA titles have been won by the Lakers, Spurs and Heat; the equivalent figure is seven of the past 15 NFL titles have been won by the Patriots, Giants and Steelers. Also note that 15 of the 48 Super Bowl winners failed to make the next postseason, while just two of 68 NBA champions (the 1998 Chicago Bulls and the 1969 Boston Celtics) failed to reach the next year's postseason.
This is accurate. This also goes against Gregg's assertion that one smart trade or draft selection can improve a team dramatically. If that were totally true, then wouldn't there be more volatility in which teams win the NBA title? The truth is Gregg isn't entirely wrong, but it's the fewer moving parts, along with the ability of one player to have a large impact, that allows NBA teams to stay in title contention from year-to-year. Gregg talks about how NBA teams have dramatic improvement from year-to-year, due to the addition of one player, but this doesn't happen too often. It's hard to find a Kevin Durant or LeBron James in the NBA. My basic point is Gregg isn't wrong, but he argues there is a lot of variability in the record of an NBA team based on the addition of one player to a roster, but logically this would be an argument for greater volatility in terms of which teams can win an NBA title. Yet, he is arguing the opposite.
The Charlotte Hornets -- 14 years removed from their latest playoff series victory -- have a chairman, a vice chairman, a "president, chief operating officer & alternate governor," a general manager, an assistant general manager, two executive vice presidents, three senior vice presidents and six regular vice presidents. That's 16 senior executives for 18 players.
This is a great example of Gregg Easterbrook outright lying or misleading his readers. The Charlotte Hornets haven't existed since the 2001-2002 season, when they last won a playoff series. The New Orleans Hornets did win a playoff series in 2007-2008, but the reason the Charlotte Hornets haven't won a playoff series in 14 years is because they haven't existed in 14 years. The Charlotte Hornets moved to New Orleans, then moved back to Charlotte for the 2014-2015 season. So the team actually has won a playoff series as the Charlotte Hornets three of the last five seasons they existed as the Charlotte Hornets. But to mention this would submarine Gregg's point of "Look at all these people required to manage a failing team!" Dishonesty at all costs.
No wonder the Hornets are so terrible!
Yep, they made the playoffs last year as the Charlotte Bobcats. Make up your mind. Are the Charlotte Hornets the New Orleans Hornets (now Pelicans) who have won a playoff series in the last 14 years or are the Charlotte Hornets the Charlotte Bobcats who aren't terrible and made the playoffs last year?
So what do you think? Do you think Gregg is just so uninformed about the NBA he thinks the Charlotte Hornets have been in Charlotte all of these years or do you think he is just misleading his readers as to the success of the Charlotte Hornets over the past 14 seasons? The Charlotte Bobcats are a completely different team from the Charlotte Hornets that won a playoff series 14 years ago. So comparing the Hornets last playoff victory from 14 years ago is misleading, because the Bobcats (now Hornets) haven't won a playoff series, but have only existed since the 2004-2005 season. The 2004-2005 season wasn't 14 years ago. Gregg can't seem to figure out which Charlotte Hornets team he wants to talk about, yet still manages to be wrong either way. Quite the accomplishment. It's a very clumsy and misleading point Gregg is attempting to make.
Then, with Philadelphia leading 20-17, the hosts faced third-and-5 on their 25 with 1:33 remaining. Arizona could've tried to nickel-and-dime into field goal position for overtime, but playing to win apparently made more sense. That meant big chunks of yards. Yet at the snap, the deepest Philadelphia safety, Nate Allen, was 8 yards off the line of scrimmage
Oh Gregg...NFL teams can not read minds and don't have the benefit of hindsight that you have. The Eagles didn't know the Cardinals would try to gain a big chunk of yardage. They wanted to stop the Cardinals from throwing short, but Bruce Arians called a great play that went against what the Eagles thought the Cardinals would do. That's all. It was a good play call and the Eagles' defense did the right thing to anticipate a shorter pass, rather than a 75-yard bomb.
Safeties are coached to "keep everything in front of you" in situations such as this. Brown got behind all Eagles with apparent ease.
This is true, but the Eagles also didn't want to give up an easy reception in front of them to where the Cardinals could convert a third down into a first down.
The game would conclude with Arizona calling a big blitz on six of Philadelphia's final 13 snaps, including a seven-man blitz with 1 second remaining and the Eagles on the host's 16. It worked this time. But if Arizona continues to big-blitz so much, the chickens -- or the cactus wrens, considering indigenous birds of the Grand Canyon State -- might come home to roost.
Yes, stop blitzing or one time it may not work! That one time it doesn't work, no matter how many times it has worked, Gregg will point out when blitzing doesn't work. Why? Because that's how Gregg works. He feels free to point out the one time a blitz is ineffective, while ignoring or just warning they won't be effective 100% of the time (which is incredibly obvious).
'Tis Better To Have Rushed And Lost Than Never To Have Rushed At All: Detroit played it ultra-conservative in London, where the Tories rule. Jim Caldwell kicked down 21-0 and twice kicked on fourth-and-short inside the Atlanta 5-yard line.
And because his team saw that Jim Caldwell wasn't trying to win the game, they ended up losing. Right? Wait, that didn't happen? It's like Week 8 in the NFL was just a series of Gregg's theories and assertions being totally wrong. What a wonderful world it is.
So Atlanta's penalty effectively created a timeout for Detroit. Then, on third-and-10 with 1:50 remaining, the Falcons threw incomplete, which stopped the clock. Considering the Lions would kick the winning field goal as time expired, had Atlanta simply knelt on these two downs, the Falcons likely would have prevailed.
Yes, this is "likely" based on Gregg's own assumption that not shockingly supports his contention. It's also "likely" that Gregg assumes too much.
Flaming Thumbtacks Go Down In Flames: In my preseason AFC Preview, I warned the Titans season might devolve to "Zach Mettenberger handing off to Bishop Sankey." And verily, it came to pass. Final: Houston 30, Tennessee 16.
Is relying on rookies to win games in place of ineffective veterans really "devolving"? Sankey was a 2nd round pick and if Mettenberger is ready to play then there's no harm in putting him on the field.
On Sunday, quarterbacks Geno Smith and Michael Vick combined for a 17 rating. After the game, Rex Ryan, who in the preseason implied he was "one of the best of all time" as a coach, told Ben Shpigel, "Why we're not playing better, I don't know." An all-time great should know!
I don't remember Rex Ryan implying he is "one of the best of all time" as a coach. I do remember him saying he was NOT one of the best of all time as a coach. Here are Ryan's quotes in question and you can clearly see Gregg's lies at work.
Ryan clarified that he’s not claiming he’s Vince Lombardi.
“I’m not saying that I’m the best or whatever . . . or the best of all time,” Ryan said. “I just know that I’m the best that I can be. I know that I’m willing to do the work. I may have limitations. I get that. But nobody’s going to convince me that they’re more passionate about their job than I am . . . and that they’re more passionate about their organization than me.”
Maybe Gregg Easterbrook is functionally illiterate, or Ryan was using new slang that Hollywood created, but the way that reads to me as a person who can read words in English and has an education beyond the 6th grade is that Rex Ryan was saying he is NOT the best of all time. I can see how Gregg got confused though when Rex said specifically,
"I'm not saying that I'm the best or whatever...or the best of all time."
This is a confusing sentence structure for someone who wants to lie to his readers and mislead them into believing Rex Ryan said something he in fact did not say. Notice how Gregg provides a link to Ryan's quote about how he doesn't know why the Jets aren't playing better, but he doesn't provide a link to Ryan implying he is one of the all time best coaches. That's because Gregg knows he is lying and doesn't want his readers to know that he is deceiving them.
Thus, Cleveland surrendered a first-round draft pick and three decent players for a second-round draft pick and Euro-stashed gents who are long shots to bounce a ball in the NBA. But Cleveland got rid of Jack's and Zeller's contracts, which could not have happened without Boston supplying its $10 million trade exemption. The Cavs ended up holding extra cap space, which they (and nobody else at that juncture) knew was the final piece of the puzzle to sign LeBron James.
Really Gregg? No one knew? Here is a search for "Tyler Zeller trade to Celtics LeBron James." Doing the work that Gregg refused to do in order to pretend his assertion was correct, one can see it was assumed this trade helped free cap space for LeBron James. So "nobody else at that juncture" knew the trade freed up money for LeBron to sign with Cleveland is just an outright lie.
Tactical Use Of Cheer Babes: With City of Tampa leading Minnesota 13-10, the Vikings had the ball on their 23 at the two-minute warning. The host's cheerleaders ran onto the field, lined up almost in the Vikings' huddle and began to shake their booties in hopes of distracting the visitors.
Gregg hates how the NFL exploits these people he calls "cheer babes."
This Year's Human Development Report: Football columns are not likely to be your best source of global development news.
Or in the case of TMQ, a football column is not likely to be the best source of NFL news.
Luckily, Tom Brady Has A Bye Week In Which To Do Some Modeling: When the Flying Elvii struggled at home versus Oakland then were blown out at Kansas City, sports pundits were asking if the New England golden age were over.
Ah yes, more dishonesty. Gregg refers to "sports pundits" as a group and doesn't mention his part.
Is The Sun Setting On Tom Brady? A week ago before their home crowd, the Patriots barely outlasted the woeful Raiders. Monday night they were ground up into burger meat -- "Of course we're speaking in the figurative sense," as Weird Al would say -- by the Chiefs. Is New England's Brady-Belichick Golden Age drawing to a close?
Brady was openly frustrated throughout the contest. Every star athlete must deal with nationally televised defeat -- just ask LeBron James -- but rarely has Brady lost badly. His life with the Flying Elvii has been all news conferences, endorsements, championship rings and supermodels, 'til last night, when the Patriots looked like the Raiders East.
Gregg hates it when "sports pundits" do things like this. Of course, he isn't honest enough to mention he is the one asking if the "golden age" of Brady-Belichick was over, because that would require he admit he was wrong and made a knee-jerk reaction to a Patriots' loss. It's amazing to me how much Gregg misleads his readers and how he leaves important pieces of information out in order to protect his own ego.
Since that juncture, the Patriots have won four straight.
I can't wait for January when Gregg writes "sports pundits" said the Seahawks could miss the playoffs this year, while ignoring he is that "sports pundit" and he wrote this conclusion the Seahawks won't make the playoffs just last week.
Next Week: Will AIG issue credit-default swap insurance on NBA salary-cap trades?
I wish someone at ESPN would stop allowing Gregg to write TMQ. Or just maybe stop him from misleading his readers and only including information that makes him look correct, while leaving out information that shows when he is wrong.
Today, the new College Football Playoff selection committee releases its first rankings, a hint at the four power schools that will square off in the inaugural football factory elimination tourney. Records, schedule strength, quality of victory and even quality of defeat will be debated.
What if graduation rates were considered, too?
Then it would be stupid because the College Football Playoff (am I supposed to capitalize it?) only deals with how teams perform on the field and not in the classroom. What if schools ranked academically by "US World Report" and other publications ranked the school based on their academic criteria, but also how good that school is at football? Would that make sense?
In August, ESPN introduced ESPN Grade, a new way to think about college football rankings.
"A new way" meaning "A stupid way" of thinking about college football rankings because it only factors in the schools in the Top 25 and weighs football results more than it weighs academic results. If ESPN Grade were a true blend of academics and football then it would have a 50-50 mix of academics and football. But of course, it doesn't. Therefore, uselessness is the result.
Here's what would happen if ESPN Grade were applied to the CFP: Right now, the top four seeds, in order, would be Notre Dame, Alabama, Georgia and Auburn.
So the SEC would have three teams along with an independent school. I can't imagine how this would be a problem. Plus, this ESPN Grade result would result in a four team playoff that has teams who are ranked 1, 4, 11, and 14 in academics among the Top 25 teams. I think that alone shows the uselessness of ESPN Grade. What about the two teams who are 11th and 14th in academics? ESPN Grade claims to reward schools with great academics, except it doesn't. Like the good ESPN boy that Gregg is, he will continue to force ESPN Grade down the throats of his readers.
The CFP's initial No. 1 seems likely to be Mississippi State, which is first in the major, victories-only polls. Factoring in the classroom causes Mississippi State to plummet, given that its football graduation rate is an unimpressive 59 percent, 21st among the Top 25 colleges. Florida State plummets, too, with an embarrassing 58 percent football graduation rate, which is 23rd of 25. Ole Miss plummets as well, with a 55 percent football graduation rate, 24th of 25.
As much as I love academics, it still makes no sense to base a football poll on a team's graduation rate. In Fairy Tale Land, where Gregg thinks college football is played, it makes sense, but not in the real world. Plus, ESPN Grade leaves out the academic standing of every team not in the Top 25. So ESPN Grade doesn't even measure the majority of Division-I football teams' success in the classroom and on the field as a comparison to Notre Dame, Alabama, Georgia and Auburn.
Suppose Mississippi State or Florida State go on to win the first big playoff title. A champion that graduates barely more than half its football players would be terrible for the sport, to say nothing of the young men not receiving degrees.
I guess if you as a sports fan are under the impression that the best college football team should also be the best college football team who is also the best at academics, it would be terrible for the sport. Otherwise, nope, Florida State won last year and college football still manages to survive. Go figure. It's almost like most sports fans realize the college football playoff (or BCS at the time) isn't intended to measure a team's ability in the classroom, as well as that team's ability on the field.
In contrast, an inaugural CFP championship by Notre Dame, Alabama, Georgia or Auburn would reflect well on collegiate athletics, as these schools combine success on game day with success on commencement day.
Because a college that is 14th among 25 teams in academics would be a great source of pride for the NCAA. This team has a graduation rate that is in the middle of a 25 team subset! What an accomplishment.
But the core purpose of college is education. Providing sports entertainment, a secondary mission, gains legitimacy only through results on commencement day. Unless you'd prefer the big conferences become semipro leagues that have nothing to do with universities -- with the lore and excitement of college traditions instantly lost -- you need to care about graduation rates.
Umm...Gregg, the big conferences ARE semipro leagues that have very little to do with the universities, while the lore and excitement of college traditions have not been lost. So, that's a pretty fucking weak argument you are furthering.
All universities say they educate their athletes. The ones that do a better job should be rewarded in the rankings.
Yes, in Fairy Tale Land they should. In the real world, where the intent is to win football games and bring in revenue to the school, the job is to win football games and make sure the students stay eligible to play sports. It's a sad world, I know.
On a related point, the University of North Carolina scandal just keeps getting worse. According to a new report, for 18 years, the Chapel Hill school offered "paper" courses that handed out an average 3.62 GPA (that means the average grade was an A) to about 3,100 students, about half of whom were NCAA athletes.
This past winter, when CNN reported a University of North Carolina instructor warned about continuing extremely poor academics in Chapel Hill sports, new chancellor Carol Folt, says they could not verify the information.
Yes, that is what she said, but Gregg is leaving out the second part of that. Carol Folt said (and you can read what she said in the link Gregg provides and didn't apparently read):
In an open letter emailed to university students, faculty and employees Thursday, chancellor Carol Folt said she takes Willingham's allegations "very seriously." But the chancellor said the school has been "unable to reconcile these claims with either our own facts or with the data currently being cited as the source for the claims."
I'm not in the business of defending UNC for a variety of reasons, but Carol Folt was simply indicating they couldn't verify the information because they questioned the source and how the information Willingham provided matched the facts she (Folt) had. It's not that she was too stupid to verify the information, it was just a matter of this information not reconciling with other information she had.
The new scandal is not about athletic eligibility -- it runs much deeper than that, going to paper courses and fake grades for a broad range of students. The University of North Carolina has in recent years attempted to portray itself as among the "public Ivies." The latest report calls into question whether the University of North Carolina should even retain its accreditation. Thousands of students in fake classes would embarrass even a sleazy online school.
I don't know, I've seen some sleazy online schools that do shady crap than this.
People at the top of institutions often justify their high pay and perks -- Folt earns a taxpayer-subsidized $520,000 a year -- by saying the buck stops with them. Then, when something goes wrong, they claim they were not responsible and should not face accountability. There will be no consequences?
To be fair, Folt was in her first academic year replacing Holden Thorp as president of UNC-CH. So it's not like there wasn't accountability, because Thorp left due to the fallout from these academic issues. Gregg tries to muddy the water a little bit in an effort to make it look like there was not accountability, when there may not be accountability throughout upper management, but UNC already had a president leave due to these academic allegations. So there was accountability and Folt's time to be accountable has started.
Looks like character education is not on the curriculum at Chapel Hill.
Zing! Good one Gregg!
In other sports news, the NBA tips off Tuesday night. Tuesday Morning Quarterback believes basketball is 1 percent as interesting as football, so I annually devote 1 percent of my column inches to the hoops sport. See some NBA comments below.
Despite the fact Gregg thinks the NBA is 1% as interesting as football, he still thinks he has 100% knowledge about the NBA and doesn't hold back criticism of the NBA as if he holds an in-depth knowledge of the sport of basketball. Fake it so others don't know you aren't that smart.
Stats Of The Week No. 3: The Detroit "at" Atlanta game in London aired live at 6:30 a.m. on the West Coast and 3:30 a.m. in Honolulu.
Time zones are fun.
Stats Of The Week No. 6: The Bengals are on an 12-0-1 regular-season home streak and an 0-3 postseason home streak.
Yes, the Bengals still haven't won a home playoff game. One would expect this to change at some point when the NFL playoffs roll around, but to quote this statistic every week prior to the next NFL playoff game taking place seems unnecessary.
Great News -- Jerry Jones Embarrassed in Prime Time: Were the Cowboys that overconfident or did Colt McCoy acquire superpowers by returning to Texas and drinking its water? Three things are certain from the "Monday Night Football" mega-upset: First, as TMQ has noted before, "Colt McCoy" is the best football name ever. Second, Robert Griffin III wore a heavy ski cap indoors.
Under Gregg's theory that the coach or cheerleader who dresses with the least amount of clothing wins the game, doesn't this mean that the Redskins should have lost to the Cowboys? This would also mean Gregg's theory is horseshit, but we all know Gregg's theories could never be horseshit. Never.
The Potomac Drainage Basin Indigenous Persons figured to face constant running plays, what with Washington having a mediocre run defense and Dallas boasting the league's first-ranked rushing offense. Running plays are especially effective at home, because they ramp up crowd energy.
This is a 100% fact and not at all an opinion. Passing plays actually bore the home crowd. That's also a fact and not an opinion. Gregg holds so much knowledge that may seem to the amateur as an opinion, but is indeed a fact.
Washington gambled by big-blitzing on third down, and the gamble paid off with two sacks of Tony Romo by safety Brandon Meriweather: one knocking Romo out of the contest for a while, the other causing a fourth-quarter fumble.
Stop me before I blitz again! Big blitzing doesn't work and a good quarterback can easily beat a big blitz. Isn't that what Gregg tells his readers? Well, apparently not. I do like how Gregg just acknowledges the Redskins blitzed a lot and managed to win the game using this tactic, yet Gregg will criticize another defensive coordinator for blitzing a lot in other instances, and claim this is what caused his team to lose the game. Then from there, Gregg will attempt to make it seem like playing a base, boring defense like the Seahawks run is the best defense to run in order to win games. Then my head will explode.
McCoy scored a touchdown on a designed quarterback draw at the goal line -- this common Texas prep school play must have made him feel right at home.
Yes, this quarterback draw at the goal line is a common Texas prep school play, but also a common play in the NFL with a quarterback who is mobile. Heck, the Panthers beat the Packers 15 years ago on a quarterback draw by Steve Beuerlein from the five yard line. So it's a common Texas prep school play, but also a common football play.
The Persons broke an 0-8 streak (and 0-9 road streak) against NFC East teams. Now, sure-to-be-former head coach Jay Gruden faces yet another dilemma -- bring back RG III, or let the third-stringer play? Don't be surprised if Gruden sides with McCoy. A Griffin comeback would be a media circus, while Gruden can take credit for having the foresight to sign the unwanted McCoy last spring.
Or Gruden could choose to start Colt McCoy because McCoy has played well as the Redskins' starter and won a road game against the Cowboys. But no, I'm sure the decision to start McCoy will be based primarily on satisfying Gruden's ego and need to feel smart. It won't have anything to do with the fact McCoy has played well for the Redskins.
Sweet Play Of The Week: With the Steelers leading Indianapolis 28-10, Pittsburgh had first-and-10 on the Colts 47. Colts defensive end Arthur Jones got free on a spin move and lunged at Ben Roethlisberger's feet. Roethlisberger stumbled, and Jones seemed likely to pull the Pittsburgh quarterback down. Then undrafted Steelers guard Ramon Foster jumped atop Jones and immobilized him.
Foster makes a great play, Gregg mentions his draft position.
Freed, Roethlisberger threw a 47-yard touchdown pass to Antonio Brown.
Ben Roethlisberger throws a 47-yard touchdown pass and his draft position isn't mentioned at all. Neither is that fact that Antonio Brown, a highly-paid glory boy, caught the touchdown pass. This is how Gregg works. He assumes his readers are stupid and lazy, so he can mislead them and leave out information that fits his agenda.
When Roethlisberger was drafted out of Miami of Ohio, the book on him was he was a terrific leader but lacked finesse as a passer. One reason for this view is Roethlisberger looks like a linebacker and plays a tough-guy style -- when he's sacked, he barely seems aware of it. Now Roethlisberger has two Super Bowl rings, and on Sunday, he became the only quarterback in NFL annals to throw for 500-plus yards on more than one occasion.
But what round was he drafted in again?
Roethlisberger will never get into Brett Favre or Peyton Manning territory for career passing yards.
I'm still thinking about undrafted Steelers guard Ramon Foster, so what rounds were Favre and Manning drafted in again?
Sour Play Of The Week: With Baltimore leading 24-20, the Nevermores had host Cincinnati facing third-and-10 on its own 20 with 3:48 remaining. All the visitors needed was an incompletion. Knowing Cincinnati needed to throw deep, surely Baltimore wouldn't safety blitz! But free safety Darian Stewart blitzed, and it was a 53-yard completion to Mohamed Sanu, who went straight to the area the free safety vacated for a key down in the Cincinnati comeback victory.
Doesn't Gregg mean undrafted free safety Darian Stewart? Oh that's right, Stewart didn't make a good play so his draft position is irrelevant in Gregg's mind.
Playing at home, the Panthers never trailed the defending champions until there were 47 seconds remaining, and they left the field losers. Sour. Down 13-9, the Cats faced fourth-and-25 on their own 8 with 26 seconds showing. Essentially, this was fourth-and-99. When Cam Newton threw short incomplete, the home crowd booed lustily.
Newton didn't really "throw short," he threw a screen pass that didn't get to the intended receiver because he was about to be trucked by a defensive lineman for the third play in a row.
It turns out Super Bowl MVP quarterback Joe Flacco faced a nearly identical fourth-and-99 situation on his final snap at Cincinnati and also threw a futile short pass. But Flacco wasn't at home, so he did not hear boos.
You can't find this type of analysis anywhere else.
Reader Joshua Thrailkill of North Carolina noted the Panthers fielded four undrafted offensive linemen. But in the NFL, every team must deal with injuries.
Nope, I think what Joshua may have been pointing out is that Gregg goes on and on and on and on about undrafted free agents and how they work so hard, only care about the team and are preferable to "me-first" glory boys, but the Panthers have a pitiful offensive line nearly made up entirely of undrafted free agents. Because Gregg lacks self-awareness, he is unable to see that Joshua very well could be pointing out the fallacy of Gregg's assertions in TMQ. In this case, the assertion is that undrafted players are often preferable to highly-drafted players. It's better to be blind to his assertions being incorrect and keep making the same assertions over and over rather than Gregg subjugate his ego to admit his theory is horseshit and based entirely on assumptions and cherry-picked information that ignores evidence contrary to his assumptions.
"The 100" is teen angst goes to outer space. The title refers to 100 teenagers who descend to Earth from an enormous space station where a remnant of humanity has spent the past century in terrible conditions while waiting for radiation to fade after a nuclear apocalypse. In the series pilot, aboard the enormous space station, we see teens, and we see their parents -- but no children. How could there be 100 teenagers if there are no babies, toddlers or tweens?
Because it is a fictional television show. That's how.
On "The 100" it's the middle of the 22nd century, yet everyone speaks southern California English using present-day slang. One hundred sixty-five years into the future, people say, "Game over, man."
This is a pretty stupid criticism for two specific reasons:
1. If a television show invented it's own language and slang then Gregg would criticize the show for not using realistic language.
2. If a television show invented it's own language and slang then the viewers would have some difficulty relating and understanding what is being said by the characters. There are television shows that create their own language, but include subtitles and the entirety of the show isn't this new language (I'm thinking "Game of Thrones"). So for "The 100" to create new slang (The Shins will change your life), would involve the viewers in 2014 understanding slang used by every character from 150 years in the future. I'm not sure that's a good way to draw viewers.
In the Will Smith interplanetary ego vehicle "After Earth," it's 1,000 years into the future, and language is exactly the same as today. Characters say "I'm good to go" and "We need this ASAP."
Because it's preferable to use language nobody watching the movie understands. Makes sense.
Contrast that with the literary science fiction novel "Riddley Walker," which is set centuries after a global nuclear war pushed humanity back into the iron age. Author Russell Hoban invented an elaborate future dialect. For instance, the ancients (us) are referred to as the "Puter Leat" -- the computer elite. Surely, if there is ever a Hollywood version of "Riddley Walker," future slang will disappear and characters will say, "Sup, dog?"
See Gregg is so stupid, he doesn't understand that if there was a Hollywood version of "Riddley Walker" then slang like "Sup, dog?" would make sense. Gregg is advocating Hollywood update slang in movies or television shows that take place in the future, but then he sarcastically states "Sup, dog?" would appear in a Hollywood version of "Riddley Walker." Well, "Riddley Walker" was written in 1980, so using future slang from 2014 in a movie about the future is EXACTLY what Gregg is encouraging Hollywood to do, yet he sarcastically states this is what Hollywood do, as if the movie version should use slang from 1980. The idea of using slang from 1980 is against what Gregg wants Hollywood to do in terms of updating language based on "future slang" that would be used in movies and television shows about the future.
Chicago mayor Rahm Emanuel admitted the city deliberately shortened yellow lights. The goal was more ticket revenue -- some $8 million from 77,000 automated tickets that would not have been issued had yellow lights been set to the federally recommended, three-second minimum.
In order to fund public-sector pensions, cities and states increasingly stoop to any means to reach into citizens' pockets.
I do agree with Gregg on this issue, but that's what parking tickets, speeding tickets, and various other penalties are, an attempt to reach into citizens' pockets. I own a car. I have paid for my car entirely, yet I have to pay a tax to my local government on the value of my car. Why do I have to pay the tax? I own the car entirely and the city is supposed to receive revenue from me because I have the audacity to own a vehicle? It's an attempt to reach into my pocket and take money. I don't advocate shortened yellow lights, but this is one of the small examples of government reaching in the pockets of citizens. Every year people who have the audacity to own a car have to pay to get the car inspected. To drive a car, a person is forced to get it inspected and there is a charge for this too. It's just weird Gregg uses shortened yellow lights as an example of government overreach when there are plenty of other more egregious examples (at least in my opinion).
Automated red-light cameras are springing up in many places -- though if set to short yellow, they render the roads dangerous by causing drivers to slam on the brakes. Colorado's legalization of marijuana was inspired partly by the state's desire to tax sales. If betting on sports becomes legal -- being disputed right now in New Jersey -- the reason might be government's desire to tax this underground economy.
Yep, welcome to what some people realized a decade ago.
In effect, there were four turnovers, as Green Bay failed on a fourth-and-inches near midfield while the margin was close. Officials on the field initially signaled first down; a challenge changed the spot to fourth-and-inches.
Then the Packers, inspired by their coach's decision to go for it on fourth down and show a real need to win the game, were so motivated they rallied and beat the Saints at home, right? Wait, that didn't happen like Gregg will claim happens when a coach goes for it on fourth down? I don't understand how Gregg's "Go for it on fourth down and it will inspire your team to win the game" theory could ever be wrong.
The NFL Is More Interesting Than The NBA: Many sports enthusiasts prefer basketball to football. But even for those who do, there's a reason the NFL is more interesting: More football teams than basketball teams start the season with a chance.
There are 30 NBA teams. 53% of these teams make the playoffs.
There are 32 NFL teams. 37.5% of these teams make the playoffs.
I'm not entirely sure Gregg understands what he is writing isn't true. Either that or he just likes to outright lie. More NBA teams have a chance of making the playoffs at the beginning of the season as compared to the chance NFL teams have of making the playoffs. Therefore more NBA teams have a chance of winning the NBA title than NFL teams have a chance of winning the Super Bowl. This is true statistically at the beginning of the season at least. Carry on...
NBA teams play so many games followed by a postseason based on the "best of" series concept that by the end, the top team almost always wins the title, thereby washing out the effects of luck. By contrast, the NFL plays only 16 games followed by a postseason knockout round. There's room for variability based on luck or degree of effort.
The fact there is less room for variability in the NBA doesn't mean more NFL teams start the season with a chance to make the playoffs or win the title. Perhaps practically this is true, but statistically it is not. I'm not sure if Gregg is just dumb or trying to be willfully stupid to push his own agenda or not. Regardless of the odds an NBA team has of winning a playoff series, more NBA teams have a chance to win the title simply because a greater percentage of NBA teams qualify for the playoffs.
In turn, small NBA rosters can mean one smart trade or draft selection improves the team dramatically. Large NFL rosters take longer to build because they have more moving parts.
While true in part, there are always exceptions. It's how the Colts can go from 2-14 to making the playoffs in a calendar year.
The result of these factors is every NBA season begins with a handful of teams holding a realistic shot at the title, compared to many teams that have no chance at all. The numerous NBA teams that are goin' nowhere know who they are from the start of the season. Every NFL season begins with a larger number of teams that might win the Super Bowl and a relatively smaller number with no shot.
This argument doesn't make sense in the context of Gregg's argument above on how the smaller NBA rosters mean a team can improve dramatically in one season. If the NBA has smaller rosters and a team can be improved through one draft pick or trade, then doesn't that mean there is more variability in the NBA standings, which means there are more teams who can make one smart move and be an NBA title contender? If large NFL rosters take longer to build (and remember this is me dissecting Gregg's argument, not what I think), then doesn't that mean there are NFL teams who don't have a shot to win the Super Bowl at the beginning of the season because they have more moving parts and require more players to improve the team's chances of winning games?
So Gregg's argument about the increased variability in an NBA team's success doesn't necessarily make sense in the context of his assertion more NBA teams start the season knowing they don't have a shot at the title, because an NBA team can make fewer moves that result in that team going up or down in the standings. Gregg's conclusion seems to be correct, but I'm not sure how he reached his conclusion is accurate.
That there's more variability in the NFL than the NBA is shown by the fact that in the past 15 years, 10 NFL teams have won the Super Bowl, while six NBA clubs have monopolized that league's titles. Twelve of the past 15 NBA titles have been won by the Lakers, Spurs and Heat; the equivalent figure is seven of the past 15 NFL titles have been won by the Patriots, Giants and Steelers. Also note that 15 of the 48 Super Bowl winners failed to make the next postseason, while just two of 68 NBA champions (the 1998 Chicago Bulls and the 1969 Boston Celtics) failed to reach the next year's postseason.
This is accurate. This also goes against Gregg's assertion that one smart trade or draft selection can improve a team dramatically. If that were totally true, then wouldn't there be more volatility in which teams win the NBA title? The truth is Gregg isn't entirely wrong, but it's the fewer moving parts, along with the ability of one player to have a large impact, that allows NBA teams to stay in title contention from year-to-year. Gregg talks about how NBA teams have dramatic improvement from year-to-year, due to the addition of one player, but this doesn't happen too often. It's hard to find a Kevin Durant or LeBron James in the NBA. My basic point is Gregg isn't wrong, but he argues there is a lot of variability in the record of an NBA team based on the addition of one player to a roster, but logically this would be an argument for greater volatility in terms of which teams can win an NBA title. Yet, he is arguing the opposite.
The Charlotte Hornets -- 14 years removed from their latest playoff series victory -- have a chairman, a vice chairman, a "president, chief operating officer & alternate governor," a general manager, an assistant general manager, two executive vice presidents, three senior vice presidents and six regular vice presidents. That's 16 senior executives for 18 players.
This is a great example of Gregg Easterbrook outright lying or misleading his readers. The Charlotte Hornets haven't existed since the 2001-2002 season, when they last won a playoff series. The New Orleans Hornets did win a playoff series in 2007-2008, but the reason the Charlotte Hornets haven't won a playoff series in 14 years is because they haven't existed in 14 years. The Charlotte Hornets moved to New Orleans, then moved back to Charlotte for the 2014-2015 season. So the team actually has won a playoff series as the Charlotte Hornets three of the last five seasons they existed as the Charlotte Hornets. But to mention this would submarine Gregg's point of "Look at all these people required to manage a failing team!" Dishonesty at all costs.
No wonder the Hornets are so terrible!
Yep, they made the playoffs last year as the Charlotte Bobcats. Make up your mind. Are the Charlotte Hornets the New Orleans Hornets (now Pelicans) who have won a playoff series in the last 14 years or are the Charlotte Hornets the Charlotte Bobcats who aren't terrible and made the playoffs last year?
So what do you think? Do you think Gregg is just so uninformed about the NBA he thinks the Charlotte Hornets have been in Charlotte all of these years or do you think he is just misleading his readers as to the success of the Charlotte Hornets over the past 14 seasons? The Charlotte Bobcats are a completely different team from the Charlotte Hornets that won a playoff series 14 years ago. So comparing the Hornets last playoff victory from 14 years ago is misleading, because the Bobcats (now Hornets) haven't won a playoff series, but have only existed since the 2004-2005 season. The 2004-2005 season wasn't 14 years ago. Gregg can't seem to figure out which Charlotte Hornets team he wants to talk about, yet still manages to be wrong either way. Quite the accomplishment. It's a very clumsy and misleading point Gregg is attempting to make.
Then, with Philadelphia leading 20-17, the hosts faced third-and-5 on their 25 with 1:33 remaining. Arizona could've tried to nickel-and-dime into field goal position for overtime, but playing to win apparently made more sense. That meant big chunks of yards. Yet at the snap, the deepest Philadelphia safety, Nate Allen, was 8 yards off the line of scrimmage
Oh Gregg...NFL teams can not read minds and don't have the benefit of hindsight that you have. The Eagles didn't know the Cardinals would try to gain a big chunk of yardage. They wanted to stop the Cardinals from throwing short, but Bruce Arians called a great play that went against what the Eagles thought the Cardinals would do. That's all. It was a good play call and the Eagles' defense did the right thing to anticipate a shorter pass, rather than a 75-yard bomb.
Safeties are coached to "keep everything in front of you" in situations such as this. Brown got behind all Eagles with apparent ease.
This is true, but the Eagles also didn't want to give up an easy reception in front of them to where the Cardinals could convert a third down into a first down.
The game would conclude with Arizona calling a big blitz on six of Philadelphia's final 13 snaps, including a seven-man blitz with 1 second remaining and the Eagles on the host's 16. It worked this time. But if Arizona continues to big-blitz so much, the chickens -- or the cactus wrens, considering indigenous birds of the Grand Canyon State -- might come home to roost.
Yes, stop blitzing or one time it may not work! That one time it doesn't work, no matter how many times it has worked, Gregg will point out when blitzing doesn't work. Why? Because that's how Gregg works. He feels free to point out the one time a blitz is ineffective, while ignoring or just warning they won't be effective 100% of the time (which is incredibly obvious).
'Tis Better To Have Rushed And Lost Than Never To Have Rushed At All: Detroit played it ultra-conservative in London, where the Tories rule. Jim Caldwell kicked down 21-0 and twice kicked on fourth-and-short inside the Atlanta 5-yard line.
And because his team saw that Jim Caldwell wasn't trying to win the game, they ended up losing. Right? Wait, that didn't happen? It's like Week 8 in the NFL was just a series of Gregg's theories and assertions being totally wrong. What a wonderful world it is.
So Atlanta's penalty effectively created a timeout for Detroit. Then, on third-and-10 with 1:50 remaining, the Falcons threw incomplete, which stopped the clock. Considering the Lions would kick the winning field goal as time expired, had Atlanta simply knelt on these two downs, the Falcons likely would have prevailed.
Yes, this is "likely" based on Gregg's own assumption that not shockingly supports his contention. It's also "likely" that Gregg assumes too much.
Flaming Thumbtacks Go Down In Flames: In my preseason AFC Preview, I warned the Titans season might devolve to "Zach Mettenberger handing off to Bishop Sankey." And verily, it came to pass. Final: Houston 30, Tennessee 16.
Is relying on rookies to win games in place of ineffective veterans really "devolving"? Sankey was a 2nd round pick and if Mettenberger is ready to play then there's no harm in putting him on the field.
On Sunday, quarterbacks Geno Smith and Michael Vick combined for a 17 rating. After the game, Rex Ryan, who in the preseason implied he was "one of the best of all time" as a coach, told Ben Shpigel, "Why we're not playing better, I don't know." An all-time great should know!
I don't remember Rex Ryan implying he is "one of the best of all time" as a coach. I do remember him saying he was NOT one of the best of all time as a coach. Here are Ryan's quotes in question and you can clearly see Gregg's lies at work.
Ryan clarified that he’s not claiming he’s Vince Lombardi.
“I’m not saying that I’m the best or whatever . . . or the best of all time,” Ryan said. “I just know that I’m the best that I can be. I know that I’m willing to do the work. I may have limitations. I get that. But nobody’s going to convince me that they’re more passionate about their job than I am . . . and that they’re more passionate about their organization than me.”
Maybe Gregg Easterbrook is functionally illiterate, or Ryan was using new slang that Hollywood created, but the way that reads to me as a person who can read words in English and has an education beyond the 6th grade is that Rex Ryan was saying he is NOT the best of all time. I can see how Gregg got confused though when Rex said specifically,
"I'm not saying that I'm the best or whatever...or the best of all time."
This is a confusing sentence structure for someone who wants to lie to his readers and mislead them into believing Rex Ryan said something he in fact did not say. Notice how Gregg provides a link to Ryan's quote about how he doesn't know why the Jets aren't playing better, but he doesn't provide a link to Ryan implying he is one of the all time best coaches. That's because Gregg knows he is lying and doesn't want his readers to know that he is deceiving them.
Thus, Cleveland surrendered a first-round draft pick and three decent players for a second-round draft pick and Euro-stashed gents who are long shots to bounce a ball in the NBA. But Cleveland got rid of Jack's and Zeller's contracts, which could not have happened without Boston supplying its $10 million trade exemption. The Cavs ended up holding extra cap space, which they (and nobody else at that juncture) knew was the final piece of the puzzle to sign LeBron James.
Really Gregg? No one knew? Here is a search for "Tyler Zeller trade to Celtics LeBron James." Doing the work that Gregg refused to do in order to pretend his assertion was correct, one can see it was assumed this trade helped free cap space for LeBron James. So "nobody else at that juncture" knew the trade freed up money for LeBron to sign with Cleveland is just an outright lie.
Tactical Use Of Cheer Babes: With City of Tampa leading Minnesota 13-10, the Vikings had the ball on their 23 at the two-minute warning. The host's cheerleaders ran onto the field, lined up almost in the Vikings' huddle and began to shake their booties in hopes of distracting the visitors.
Gregg hates how the NFL exploits these people he calls "cheer babes."
This Year's Human Development Report: Football columns are not likely to be your best source of global development news.
Or in the case of TMQ, a football column is not likely to be the best source of NFL news.
Luckily, Tom Brady Has A Bye Week In Which To Do Some Modeling: When the Flying Elvii struggled at home versus Oakland then were blown out at Kansas City, sports pundits were asking if the New England golden age were over.
Ah yes, more dishonesty. Gregg refers to "sports pundits" as a group and doesn't mention his part.
Is The Sun Setting On Tom Brady? A week ago before their home crowd, the Patriots barely outlasted the woeful Raiders. Monday night they were ground up into burger meat -- "Of course we're speaking in the figurative sense," as Weird Al would say -- by the Chiefs. Is New England's Brady-Belichick Golden Age drawing to a close?
Brady was openly frustrated throughout the contest. Every star athlete must deal with nationally televised defeat -- just ask LeBron James -- but rarely has Brady lost badly. His life with the Flying Elvii has been all news conferences, endorsements, championship rings and supermodels, 'til last night, when the Patriots looked like the Raiders East.
Gregg hates it when "sports pundits" do things like this. Of course, he isn't honest enough to mention he is the one asking if the "golden age" of Brady-Belichick was over, because that would require he admit he was wrong and made a knee-jerk reaction to a Patriots' loss. It's amazing to me how much Gregg misleads his readers and how he leaves important pieces of information out in order to protect his own ego.
Since that juncture, the Patriots have won four straight.
I can't wait for January when Gregg writes "sports pundits" said the Seahawks could miss the playoffs this year, while ignoring he is that "sports pundit" and he wrote this conclusion the Seahawks won't make the playoffs just last week.
Next Week: Will AIG issue credit-default swap insurance on NBA salary-cap trades?
I wish someone at ESPN would stop allowing Gregg to write TMQ. Or just maybe stop him from misleading his readers and only including information that makes him look correct, while leaving out information that shows when he is wrong.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)