Showing posts with label robert griffin. Show all posts
Showing posts with label robert griffin. Show all posts

Tuesday, August 4, 2015

4 comments MMQB Review: Ronda Rousey Obsession Edition

In last week's MMQB, Peter King struggled a bit with the concept that not everyone thinks Russell Wilson is on the quarterbacking level that Aaron Rodgers is on. He also interviewed Adrian Peterson and nailed down that Adrian Peterson knew he wouldn't leave the Vikings even though he wanted to very badly. Also, he enjoyed his coffee this week and felt it was important to mention this immediately after brief commentary about a theater shooting. This week talks about sobering life lessons, Robert Griffin knowing this is his last chance (probably not), Brady v. Goodell (again), and the NFL has somehow managed to implement the dumbest fucking rule about giving footballs to fans. The NFL is going down a weird road with their Draconian policies. This one could cost Cam Newton $100,000 next year. Oh well, it's not like he can't afford it.

Here’s how football locker rooms have changed before our eyes, per Atlanta quarterback Matt Ryan, who was a rookie in 2008:

“When I came into the league, guys would be playing cards in the locker room, and dominoes,” Ryan said Sunday. “Now, they’re still playing cards … but it’s like, one guy’s sitting at his locker with his phone, and another guy’s at his locker with his phone, and they’re playing poker against each other. That’s the way they’re used to playing cards now.”

NFL camaraderie, 2015.

"Kids these days..."

One of the best special-teams coaches in NFL history, Bruce DeHaven, had to ponder this spring one of the toughest choices a man could ever have.

Whether to continue coaching the 31st ranked special teams unit that somehow managed to have two punts blocked in the same game last year?

A doctor told him in May: It’s likely you have three to five years to live. He didn’t hear the doc say there’s a slight chance you will live for decades, or a slight chance you will live for a few months. He just heard, at 66 and healthy as a mule (or so he thought), that the finish line of life might well be coming about 25 years sooner than he hoped it would. In the next 10 days, DeHaven lost 11 pounds. From the shock of it.

Oh, well that's probably a little bit tougher.

It’s May. Mini-camps are approaching. The owner of the team, the venerable Jerry Richardson, tells DeHaven the team will support him in any way possible. If the prostate cancer and its accompanying spread into your bones makes it too tough to work, Richardson says we’ll get you the best care on the planet, wherever that is; if you want to work, we’ll get you the best care on the planet, wherever that is. Your call.

But first, Richardson made sure that DeHaven didn't have any tattoos, because we all know that Jerry Richardson does not like tattoos.

At home, DeHaven has a son about to go off to college, to his freshman year at Canisius, and a daughter still in high school. He thought about it. He thought about it for a long time. He did nothing but think about it.

Get treated and see how you feel from there. It's not like the Panthers special teams could suck any worse without you. Okay, they could suck slightly worse, but there's a small difference in being 31st and 32nd in special teams play. 

Should I coach this team with a bunch of guys I love? Or should I go home and just be with the ones I love more, just in case the end is near?

For a variety of reasons, I'm not going to downplay prostate cancer. It's a type of cancer that isn't as sexy as breast cancer to talk about curing (saving women's breasts? Yes, please) and it doesn't have the obvious physical effects that lung cancer has, but the mortality rate is about at 10%. That out of the way, the doctor said that Bruce DeHaven had three to five years to live, so it's not like "the end is near" prior to the NFL season starting. Stopping everything and waiting to die is probably the worst option DeHaven could have chosen initially. I understand the question Peter is presenting, but DeHaven wasn't given a definite six months to live. He was given 3-5 years to live as an average. 

But the story that made me stop in my tracks in the past few days happened on the bucolic campus of Wofford College, where the Carolina Panthers have trained for the past 20 summers, since entering the league in 1995. It’s the kind of place—small college, fans sitting on a hill watching practice, fans paying nothing for it, all 90 players signing for beseeching fans (“CAMMMMMM!!!!!!”) after practice—that’s perfect for training camp, and the kind of treatment by a team that’s a model for every camp in the league. 

To be fair, it's a great model, except it takes place in South Carolina. Without that, perfection. There are drawbacks to everything I guess (ducks as South Carolina citizens get angry). 

That’s the environment Bruce DeHaven works in every day. Only the fans don’t know the man with the wide-brimmed white sun hat, keeping the worst of the rays from damaging his fair skin on this typically oppressive 92-degree first day of August, hang-timing his punters while the rest of the team worked out on the adjacent field.

Actually, I would bet more fans than Peter thinks know who Bruce DeHaven is. His cancer diagnosis was covered fairly widely by the Charlotte sports media and it ties in to the whole "Keep Pounding" motto the team uses throughout every NFL season. So most fans probably don't know him, but more fans than Peter thinks probably knows a little bit about his situation.

“Whoa!” DeHaven said Saturday afternoon, watching incumbent Brad Nortman skyrocket a booming punt off the sweet spot of his right foot. Then he waits, and Nortman watches, until the ball falls to earth.

The ball falls to earth behind him because it got blocked? I'm not used to punts from Nortman going forward, so I would have had to see this for myself to believe this punt went forward.

So now you know: DeHaven chose to coach this season. Well, that plus he chose, with Richardson’s approval and that of head coach Ron Rivera, to import one of his best friends in the coaching fraternity, retired NFL special-teams coach Russ Purnell, to help him during the season if his health drooped.

How do you say "no" to this request?

"Hey, I have the cancer you know and I would love to coach this season, but just in case I start feeling bad and potentially start taking a turn for the worse as the cancer starts to eat my bones, can we hire someone else to take over my job? If not, that's cool."

Before the afternoon practice, when DeHaven talked about his lot in life, he tried to explain why he so desperately wanted to keep doing what he did, for a 29th season in the NFL. He’d coached under Hall of Fame coaches Marv Levy in Buffalo and Bill Parcells in Dallas, under Super Bowl-winning coach Mike Holmgren in Seattle.

Then he coached under...Ron Rivera. It's not quite the same as coaching under Hall of Fame coaches, though Marv, Bill, Mike and Ron do sound like first names that members of a 1960's white doo-wop group might have.

“From life on the farm to the NFL … I mean, are you kidding me? Coaching in the Super Bowl? With Hall of Fame coaches? Marv Levy, Bill Parcells. My gosh, I understand what Lou Gehrig said. I honestly feel it. I am the luckiest man on the face of the earth.”

Let's wait until you deal with the 2015 special teams unit before stating how lucky you are professionally. Ron Rivera is called "Riverboat" Ron because he takes gambles during games, like sending his punt unit on the field rather than going for it on fourth down.

After practice, Carolina safety Colin Jones, one of DeHaven’s core special-teamers, considered his coach’s decision this spring. He got very serious. Solemn. “We didn’t have a very good year on special teams last year,” Jones said, “and Bruce knew that. He absolutely would not accept it. He was positive with us, and he had passion every day. But he is not afraid to tell us the truth. I made a mistake in a game last year, and I knew it, and the team knew it.

This "mistake" was being responsible for a punt being blocked. And yes, the replay showed Colin Jones blocked zero people and it was pretty obvious it was all his fault. Not calling him out would have caused DeHaven's sanity to be questioned.

“When I first was getting to know Bruce,” Cam Newton said, “I said to him, ‘Hey coach, you want to get a big raise?’ He said, ‘Sure, we all like money.’ I said, ‘Put me at punt return!’ We both laughed. He says to me I should be ready; you never know what might happen some day.”

That's...uh...a great story, Cam. It's probably one of those stories that you had to be there to enjoy.

Through the years, others felt the way Tasker felt, and the way Colin Jones felt. In 2001, DeHaven was coaching the San Francisco special teams when a young coach from Hofstra came in the office one day to interview for an entry-level job on the defensive staff. The kid was sweating profusely, nervous. Good résumé, but you never know how these things go. But the head coach, Steve Mariucci, liked the kid’s enthusiasm.

Who was this kid? Was it Barack Obama? Peyton Manning? Chip Kelly? 

Dan Quinn was hired.

Ah, the twist. It was Dan Quinn.

On Sunday, Quinn, the rookie Atlanta head coach, recalled the moment. “So I get the job,” he said, “and the next day, Bruce, who doesn’t even really know me, comes up to me with the USA Today sports section. He shows me the ‘Transactions’ column. He says to me, ‘You better save this. This is a big deal for a kid from Hofstra, being in transactions, getting a job in the NFL.’ That’s the kind of guy Bruce is.”

Then DeHaven probably walked away muttering, "This kid from Hofstra, he'll never be anything in this league. Hofstra, who from there makes it big in the NFL?"

In the past few weeks, DeHaven has been touched by scores of men in the coaching fraternity reaching out. Bill Belichick called.

(DeHaven's phone rings and he picks up) "Hello?"

(Bill Belichick) "Hey, Bruce. It's Bill Belichick. I just wanted to let you know that I have heard of prostate cancer, know you have it and wish you didn't. From everything I know it's not good and I hope you get better soon. Well, I'm on to practice."

(DeHaven) "How have you been doing Bill?"

(Belichick) "I don't really have any more information about that. My day just started, so I can't speak to how I'm doing."

(DeHaven) "The kids good?"

(Belichick) "Again, that isn't something I can answer right now."

(DeHaven) "You excited for the season."

(Belichick) "I'm on to practice right now, so I have no further information."

(DeHaven) "How's Tom doing?"

(Belichick) "Again, that isn't something I can answer right now. I'm on to practice."

(DeHaven getting frustrated) "Thanks for calling. Talk again soon?"

(Belichick) "I can't answer that right now. I'm on to practice."

(Both DeHaven and Belichick are quiet as DeHaven waits for Belichick to say "goodbye" and Belichick waits for DeHaven to dismiss him and stop asking questions)

Sean Payton sent a picture of the Saints’ staff, with well-wishes from all. “Heartwarming,” he said, shaking his head. “Sean Payton, with a division rival, reaching out. Just shows you what the fraternity of coaches is like. We compete, but we’re together.”

(DeHaven's phone rings and he picks up) "Hello?"

(Sean Payton) "Hey buddy, I hear you are feeling sick through no fault of mine or the Saints team. We did not cause your injury/sickness and this phone call is being recorded so please just acknowledge we had nothing to do with your cancer diagnosis."

(DeHaven) "Yeah, you guys had nothing to do with my prostate cancer."

(Payton) "Thanks, I am sending a picture of our coaching staff with well wishes. Can you please send me your home address, though we will not be using it to send anyone to your house in order to injure you for money."

(DeHaven) "Just send it to the Panthers office instead."

(Sean Payton) "Will do. Warm wishes to you and we are all thinking about you and hope you get better soon!"

(DeHaven) "Thanks, great talking to you."

(Payton) "You too! Bye."

(Payton thinks DeHaven has hung up, DeHaven hears the following as Payton turns to Rob Ryan and says) "$50,000 to the first defensive player to knock that old man out and off the sidelines when the Panthers come to New Orleans this year. They have a backup special teams coach anyway. Tell your players this."

(Drew Brees is in the room and screams) "I KNOW NOTHING ABOUT THIS!"

“My problems are down the road, not right now,” he said. “There’s no telling how cancer progresses, and everyone’s immune system handles it differently. I plan on being here for a long time. I plan on something else killing me, way down the road. But whatever happens, I have had a great life.”

This positivity is not allowed anymore in the NFL. Roger Goodell will fine you for excessive celebration of your cancer diagnosis which has allowed you to appreciate life.

Spend a day around the Falcons, as The MMQB did Sunday, and you realize the tremendous early impact rookie coach Dan Quinn has had in his first six months on the job. Case in point: Setting the team’s mindset, daily.

It was no different early Sunday, when Quinn put up on the big screen in the team meeting room a video of UFC Bantamweight Champion Ronda Rousey’s beatdown of Bethe Correia Saturday night in Brazil. It took all of 34 seconds. Now, Quinn has put up lots of sports highlights in front of the team. Boxing, and lots of basketball, and some baseball. But this one got his team’s attention.

And it only cost $59.99 to watch it! What a deal!

The tenor of the meeting room changed from the time the players first saw Rousey to the time they first saw her beat up her foe. “She is fine,” was one of the first reactions when Rousey showed up on the screen.

Lower your standards enough to where you eliminate a lot of other women who aren't really tough and don't participate in MMA and I'm sure she is.

“Man, is she tough,” one player called out.

“There was a genuine respect for her in the room,” Quinn said a few hours later. “I wanted to show them this fight because she is a great example of the fact that there is another level of competitor out there. We’re trying to find that extra level in all of our players. Athletes like her we hope will leave an impression.”

Rousey left an impression in her opponent's face. The Falcons offensive line and defense did not do that last year.

“That,” said quarterback Matt Ryan, “was a unique way to start a meeting. Holy crap. She kicked her ass! Rousey’s so dominant. Such an intimidating factor. You can see when you watch her; she wins before she enters the ring. I really like things like this. I think it’s a great way to tap into a diverse locker room. Guys love it.”

Matt Ryan is so funny. First, he talks about the players in the locker room playing cards like he's an old man or something and now he says "It's a great way to tap into a diverse locker room." Who says things like that?

So far we have learned that NFL players like their new head coach (has this ever happened before?) and NFL players like their coach who has been diagnosed with cancer. It's all love so far.

So it’s year four for Robert Griffin III, and not much has changed since last August. Except the desperation, of course.

The Redskins.

Coach Jay Gruden’s intention is to have Griffin rely far more on his arm and his reads of the defense than he's ever had to do as a pro. It’s something that Griffin will have to adjust to as the summer and fall go on,

While it's so easy to bash Robert Griffin, why would Jay Gruden not play to Griffin's strengths as a quarterback?

Gruden’s not stapling RGIII to the pocket, mind you. But he’s not designing the option-read for him either, as Griffin was allowed to run as a free-wheeling rookie three years ago.

But that is also how he succeeded as an NFL quarterback. So I don't see the reason for changing it up entirely and forcing Griffin to play from the pocket. It's like asking Peyton Manning to run the Seahawks offense. It's just not going to fit his skill set.

It sounds like the Redskins team isn't exactly in love with this idea either and (I'm guessing) think Griffin is being set up for failure.

“It would be difficult for anyone to change the way they play at this level,” said linebacker Keenan Robinson, who came to Washington with Griffin in the 2012 draft. “He has had to change the game he played for 14 years. But I like what I see right now.

Now from Griffin: 

“They are asking me to be basic and take the plays that are there. If that’s what Jay wants me to do, that’s what I am going to do. It doesn’t mean you take everything out of your game. When those opportunities come up to make plays out of the pocket I will do it and not think twice about it. But if they are asking me to do the ordinary, that’s what I am going to have to do.”

Being in this offense for the second year is really going to help. I know how to get us into the best position possible. I can’t worry about where I am going to be next year or where I am going to be 15 years from now. I just have to play.”

Unfortunately for Griffin, using his legs to put more pressure on the defense is how he just goes about playing. Yet, Gruden seems to want to take that away from him. It's almost like he's being set up for failure in some way...

What I wonder about Griffin is this: He has to know that if he doesn’t produce in year four, there is good chance he’ll be gone.

Right, which is why he has to be pretty salty that he's being asked to stay in the pocket and not (supposedly) getting to run some read-option plays.

“If I take all that baggage with me out there on the field, I am not going to be the best player I can be,” Griffin said.

Notice that Griffin doesn't deny all of the other stuff he's dealt with in Washington has been "baggage." What's annoying is the Redskins have a chance to be a very good team if they could (a) find a quarterback or (b) design their offense (for better or worse) around what Griffin does best.

Remember when Big Ben was Oft-Broken Ben? No more. Roethlisberger, who started 16 games once in the first nine seasons of his career, has started every regular season game the past two years, at age 31 and 32.

Steelers fans would like to thank Peter for jinxing it.

I maintain that it’s easy to forget about Roethlisberger—and many in our business and the fan business do just that—when the roll is called of great passers. Rodgers, Brady, Brees, Manning … it’s almost a cliché to not include Roethlisberger. You just can’t do that anymore.

This isn't to take away from Roethlisberger at all, but he's been blessed to have the Steelers dedicate themselves to getting him some good receivers. He has had a shitty offensive line, so that's a credit to Roethlisberger. Now that the Steelers have taken care of his offensive line and he isn't running for his life all day, he's shown he is easily one of the best quarterbacks in the NFL.

Credit the line. Credit offensive coordinator Todd Haley for implementing a scheme that has Roethlisberger throwing earlier, and throwing more high-percentage routes. And credit the most dangerous group of young receivers in the game—a group that, in a rich-get-richer way, adds the speed of Sammie Coates from Auburn in the rookie class this year.

I am jealous of how the Steelers can find receivers in nearly every round of the NFL draft. They are very good at that.

But do not credit a newfangled lifestyle. Roethlisberger’s no born-again eater or sleeper or wheat-grass eater or yoga-practicer.

I said: “Mark Teixeira of the Yankees said he’s gone to a gluten-free diet and feels better than he ever has, and he’s hitting really well. You eating any differently at all?”

“Yeah, I heard about that,” Roethlisberger said. “My wife cooks, we have a chef that cooks, and I’ve had a blood test telling me which foods I digest well and don’t digest well. So I’ve paid attention to that. I’m in bed before 10 o’clock most nights anyway. But the lifestyle isn’t brand new to me the last couple of years.”

So other than the chef that cooks for him and the blood test that tells him which foods he digests and doesn't digest well, Roethlisberger doesn't really do much to change his eating habits in order to stay in good physical condition. You know, he just does the basics.

Whatever it is—fate, luck, Haley’s play-calling, the line, knowing when to get rid of the ball—Roethlisberger’s on the kind of steady run he’s never been on before. He’s not the kind of guy who over-thinks the game. He just plays.

Uh-oh, are we going to have a season of Peter King writing, "BEN ROETHLISBERGER PLAYS LIKE A PRECOCIOUS CHILD" stories?

The affirmation of Tom Brady’s four-game suspension by the NFL leaves these issues in the wake:

1. Both sides want a resolution by opening day. With the presiding judge in the case, U.S. District Judge Richard Berman, ordering that Brady and commissioner Roger Goodell be available to appear at pre-trial conferences in New York on Aug. 12 and 19, it’s clear that he, and both sides, will push to resolve this by the Sept. 10 league opener.

Wait, so Roger Goodell hasn't named himself the judge for this case? I figured he would just go ahead and hear the federal case as well. I mean, because he probably thinks he can do that.

2. Good for the Patriots, publishing some emails to the league last winter, asking the league to clamp down on the leaks to ESPN (at least one patently false) and getting nothing in return.

The letter from NFL vice president David Gardi said that one of the Patriots’ footballs examined by the league at halftime of the game “was inflated to 10.1 psi, far below the requirement of 12-1/2 to 13-1⁄2 psi. In contrast, each of the Colts’ game balls that was inspected met the requirements set forth above.” Huge errors. The Ted Wells Report confirmed that no football measured as low as 10.1 of the Patriots’ balls. Gardi said the Colts’ balls measured within the range required. The Wells Reports said three of them were under the minimum of 12.5 psi. Never corrected. Why? Similarly, when ESPN reported that 10 New England balls were at least two pounds under the limit measured at halftime, the league never corrected that error.

The NFL laughs heartily at Peter's suggestion they should have to acknowledge a mistake or even (the NFL falls down on the floor laughing) admit they made the mistake (busts a gut laughing) and then correct that mistake in any way. The Patriots are working under the assumption the NFL can make a mistake and that's simply not true. If the Patriots would just believe, as the NFL does, that they can not make mistakes and just ignore what ESPN says or broadcasts, then their lives will be easier. The Patriots shouldn't worry their pretty little heads with any lies and the idea these lies should be corrected. Just pay the NFL the money they want and we can all move on.

What is most damaging about this is that these impressions were left as facts, particularly the ESPN claim, for a long period, allowing the public to be convinced the Patriots were guilty. Maybe they were, and are. But this evidence wasn’t factual.

But Peter, this evidence came from the NFL. That in and of itself makes it factual.

I’ve asked a few high-ranking team people in the past few days an open-ended question, with the proviso I wouldn’t use names. The clear sentiment: Teams think league officials are running scared after the Ray Rice verdict backfired on the NFL. 

It's hilarious to me that the NFL thinks being tough on deflated footballs will make up for the initial Ray Rice verdict. Deflated footballs and abused women. It's nearly all the same to the NFL. 

Two thought it was ridiculous how long the Wells report took to finish, one saying if the league is going to hire an outside firm to investigate a case, there has to be a deadline. “Why are we fighting this fight now?” one top team executive said. “We should be getting ready for a new season, but we’ve got our biggest star firing bombs at the league and the league firing back, a month before the season starts. It’s ridiculous. The headlines aren’t football. They’re about a scandal that’s eight months old.” [Not quite eight, but you get the picture.]

It feels like 8 months though. It feels like almost a year at this point. The NFL allowed an outside firm just have as much time as they needed to come to a conclusion that was as concrete as Jello. I'm okay with them needed time to investigate, but holy shit, there has to be an end date given. So now it's August and the same fucking topic that people were writing about in February is still at the forefront, except this time, the Patriots and the NFL are going to court. It's sports, people. Find some perspective on these crimes that Brady is accused of. Is it impossible to just enjoy the NFL games without court drama being in the background of every NFL story?

What happens if, say, the footballs in a northern city on a day when it’s 40 degrees outside lose 1.0 to 1.5 psi between the pre-game measure and the halftime measure? (Which, apparently, science would support.) That’s nearly what happened to the Patriots football that January day in Foxboro. If the NFL’s examination of footballs in 2015 shows that kind of deflation, naturally, on a chilly day, the whole case should be thrown out. But by then, Brady might have already served his four games.

Yeah, but the science behind the Wells Report was so solid that this could never happen. It's all a fiction the NFL could look bad.

The average of the other gauge was 11.11 psi, clearly lower than what the balls should have measured. Average all 22 readings, and you get 11.30 … two-one-hundredths lower than what the Ideal Gas Law would have allowed for balls that started the day at 12.5 psi. It is crazy to me, and just wrong, that the NFL issued a historic sanction when the inflation level of the football is so close to what science says it should be.

And yep, that's my basic point too. It hurts to agree with Peter, but the NFL came down hard on the Patriots for an inflation level that isn't too far off where it should be.

“We are going to open Pandora’s box. Last year, we just tickled it.”

—Cincinnati offensive coordinator Hue Jackson to the Cincinnati Enquirer’s Paul Dehner Jr.

I guess that means Andy Dalton’s going to be wildly imaginative this year. Or something.

It's fun to bash Andy Dalton, but he isn't the one that needs to be imaginative when it comes to play-calling and deciding how a certain play should be run. Dalton has to execute the play-call, so this comment is simply an acknowledgement from Hue Jackson that he wants be more imaginative. We'll see if Dalton can execute the play-call, but the snark about Dalton is a little misplaced.

The Seattle Seahawks will soon find out if it’s possible to stay great with the game’s ultimate salary star system. They now have 10 cornerstone players signed at least through the end of the 2017 season.


Player Position Ave. salary per year Last year of contract
Russell Wilson QB $17.82m 2019
Richard Sherman CB $14.0m 2018
Marshawn Lynch RB $10.8m 2017
Bobby Wagner LB $10.75m 2019
Earl Thomas FS $10.0m 2018
Jimmy Graham TE $9.0m 2017
Cliff Avril DE $7.13m 2018
Michael Bennett  DE $7.13m 2017
Kam Chancellor SS $7.0m 2017
K.J. Wright LB $6.75m 2018















That's $97.38 million per year invested in these players. Obviously some of this money will be renegotiated to a lower cap hit at some point, but this is the downside of keeping a young team together. It can get expensive and drafting good players becomes just as important as it always was. There's nothing wrong with a top-heavy roster as long as the Seahawks continue to draft well and are smart in free agency. One thing that sticks out to me is that there isn't a single wide receiver on this list. Though Jimmy Graham is pretty much a wide receiver.

Mr. Starwood Preferred Member Travel Note of the Week

Three of them:

First-week tally from the road: Six camps, four baseball games. Now, most were drive-by, 50-minute visits … like our two-inning stay at Camden Yards on Thursday night, or the three-inning stint on the drive from Latrobe to New York on Monday night to see the Eastern League Altoona Curve host the Richmond Flying Squirrels (other than the Hartford Yard Goats, is there a finer minor-league franchise name?).

Three comments:

1. Where is the fun in a two or three inning stay at a baseball game?

2. So Peter paid for tickets to a MLB game, paid for parking and then stayed for two innings?

3. Why? Why? Why?

Okay, those were all questions, not comments.

Team MMQB got into a Fairfield Inn here, 45 minutes south of Panther camp and 75 minutes north of Falcons camp, just in time for UFC 190, because Robert Klemko and Emily Kaplan are mesmerized by Ronda Rousey. They researched, and found that the Hooters across from the Fairfield Inn would be showing the mixed-martial-arts event, with Rousey fighting from Brazil. “We walked over,” said Klemko, “and Hooters had a capacity of 150 people, and there wasn’t an empty seat anywhere, and there were a dozen people waiting to be seated. We asked for a table, and they said it would be a two-hour wait. So, we came back to the hotel and found a pirated version online, realized the championship fight wouldn’t come on till at least midnight … and we realized it would probably be a 30-second fight anyway, and figured we would just watch it in the morning.” Prescient, that Klemko. Fight lasted 34 seconds.

A pirated version online...I have no issue with that, though I probably wouldn't broadcast that I'm stealing the fight from a pirated site. Also, if Peter King can spend $15 on a ticket (probably more) on a ticket to an MLB game, can't he shell out the $60 required for his friends/employees to watch the fight without having to fight for a spot at Hooters or steal video of the fight online?



All across the country (and world, I imagine), households were paying $59.99 to see Rousey, in a woman’s Ultimate Fighting bout. Times sure have changed when a woman is coaching a pro football team (even as an intern), and the best quarterback in football is staying up late at training camp to watch women joust. Wow.

What a country!

Peter is obsessed with Ronda Rousey in this MMQB. He mentions her five separate times in this MMQB. She's a great fighter, but it's clear Klemko's obsession with Rousey rubbed off on Peter.



This was 60 minutes after I Tweeted: “Russell Wilson and the Seahawks have agreed to a 4-year, $87.6-million extension, per source,” and 50 minutes after Wilson himself Tweeted he was “blessed” to be a Seahawk four more years.

It sounds like Robert Klemko wasn't the only one trying to steal something over the past few days. This is just normal attribution practice by ESPN. Nothing to see here. Talk to the Ombudsman that doesn't work there anymore and therefore hasn't posted anything recently.

I didn’t realize the time involved until Awful Announcing reported ESPN’s bizarre attribution and reporting practices Friday morning. But there’s no excuse for it.

Peter, this is ESPN. There doesn't need to be an excuse for it. They do what they want when they want...unless the NFL tells them not to do something, in which case ESPN does what they want when they want on behalf of the NFL.

Ten Things I Think I Think

1. I think the smartest thing the Broncos can do—and, apparently, are doing—would be to take some of the offensive pressure off quarterback Peyton Manning, and shorten the game by playing more clockball on offense.

Random font change from Peter! Don't worry, it changes back in a minute...then changes again.

And I have no idea what "clockball" is, but it sounds like a dumb way to say "run the ball and work the clock." 

They should be running more. And Manning, who has averaged 613 passes a game in his three Denver seasons, wore down late last year. “The running game will be Peyton’s best friend,” Denver GM John Elway said the other day.

This may be the first and only time in his lifetime that John Fox will be accused of not running the ball enough. If it were up to Fox, he wouldn't even have a quarterback on the field. In fact, there was a game in 2006 (I believe) against the Falcons where he basically didn't even line up a quarterback and had DeAngelo Williams run the Wildcat for the entire game. This was a dream scenario for Fox. So his teams not running the ball enough is quite the accusation that Fox will take seriously and rectify this upcoming season when the Bears' quarterbacks throw a grand total of 100 passes on the season. 

2. I think Marvin Lewis sure is bold these days. He told the Cincinnati Enquirer“I want to hand [club owner Mike Brown] the Lombardi Trophy, then walk away.” Lewis’ career playoff record: 0-6. That’s a man with some confidence in himself.

If Lewis didn't have confidence in himself and his team then he wouldn't be a very good head coach would he? What's he supposed to say? "I don't think we can win a playoff game this year, so why even try?"

3. I think in a league of silly sanctions, I’d be most furious about this one if I were a player: If you toss a football in the stands to a fan, or toss it into the stands out of celebration, you get fined $5,787.

This is the dumbest fucking rule ever implemented by the NFL. Cam Newton hands a football to a kid after every rushing touchdown (and passing too, though it only happened 18 times last year, so it's hard to remember for sure). So if the Panthers or Newton score 20 touchdowns this year then he is going to be shelling out almost $180,000 this year when handing out a football to fans (I'm hoping for 30 touchdowns, that doesn't seem to much to ask). It's a really cool thing that fans enjoy, especially the kids who receive the football. Maybe Newton should hand out IOU's and then mail the fan a signed football.

Either way, this is a ridiculously stupid fucking rule. It's not like the NFL can't afford new footballs. Maybe players should deflate the football by 0.5 PSI and then hand it to the fans. That way the NFL doesn't want the football back because it's been tarnished forever.

7. I think it strikes me that six games is a fortunate break for Aaron Kromer. In other words, the Buffalo offensive line coach is lucky to have gotten a six-game unpaid ban by the Bills as a punishment for an altercation with three boys over beach chairs in Florida last month.

If I'm the Bills then I'm probably more concerned with the fact Kromer, as the Bears offensive coordinator, threw Jay Cutler under the bus anonymously and then later admitted to doing it. It's hard to gain trust when you have a history of bashing your players.

9. I think it was a fun exercise to imagine what would be different about the NFL if the 2012 draft's top two picks were flipped: Robert Griffin III to the Colts, and Andrew Luck to Washington. Klemko and I discussed that while on the bus, and you can listen here:

I think Andrew Luck would still be successful in the NFL and Mike Shanahan would probably still be the Redskins coach, while basking in the glory of having finally produced another franchise quarterback who can reinforce his reputation as a quarterback guru.

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

a. We have a 2015 The MMQB NFL Training Camp Tour anthem: “Shut Up and Dance With Me,” by Walk The Moon.

I would murder myself if I had to be on the bus during a time when this song is the anthem. I have a list of songs I put on CD (shut up) last September and this was one of those songs. It's August of the next year and the song was played out back in May. Though I guess it makes sense for Peter to be late to the party. It's like how my mom tells me she watches "Downton Abbey" as if this is a new, cutting edge television show.

c. Re the baseball trading deadline: Toronto gets Troy Tulowitzki and David Price. Amazing how major a makeover a team can make in such a short time.

Yes, it's shocking what players a team can acquire when they trade away many of their good prospects. Just look at what the Padres built this past offseason!

e. First baseman Lucas Duda’s last nine hits have been home runs for the Mets, the strangest baseball team we have seen in a while.

Not really. Not that I wouldn't expect Peter to think a team from New York is the strangest team "we" have seen in a while, but the Mets always had great pitching and they are finally hitting the baseball of late. It's not strange, it's an obvious, easy fix. They upgraded their offense and now they are winning games because they are scoring runs. 

f. Midway through last week, the Mets stunk. Infielder Wilmer Flores on Wednesday believed he had been traded, having been told as much by a fan while he waited in the on-deck circle to bat.

Right, but Flores wasn't crying because the Mets were selling off players due to thinking they were out of the running for the Wild Card (or "a" Wild Card) or to win the division. The Mets were trading Flores because they had upgraded their offense by trading for Carlos Gomez. So the Mets didn't just magically get better, they were actively trying to improve the offense by trading Flores for a better offensive player.

Two days later, the Mets trade for needed power hitter Yoenis Cespedis.

It's "Cespedes" you big baseball fan. Also, the Mets traded for Cespedes because the first try they had at upgrading the offense, trading Flores for Carlos Gomez, fell through. So the Mets were trying to upgrade for three days, they didn't just magically become a better team over a span of two days and then decide to trade for Cespedes.

And the Mets swept the Nationals at home to tie Washington for first place in the National League East. What a long strange trip this year has been for the Mets.

All they needed was to acquire some hitting, but sure, go ahead and do your own thing Peter. See if I care...clearly since you can't spell Cespedes name correctly you know exactly what you are talking about.

g. Our video man, John DePetro, was talking about his girlfriend’s dog the other day.

That's a great fucking story, Peter. Listen I have to go do something else...

Our conversation:

Me: “What’s his name?” DePetro: “Paddington.” Me: “What do you call him for short?” DePetro: “Paddington.” Me: “Got any funny names for him?” DePetro: “Paddington.’’

Without these little nuggets of comedic conversational exchanges I don't know how I could go on laughing through life. I should probably just be happy that Peter didn't eavesdrop on someone else's conversation and is relaying this eavesdropped conversation to his MMQB readers. For that, I should be more thankful. 

i.  Beernerdness: The gem of the first week of the camp tour, from a Saturday night trip to Fluor Field in Greenville, S.C., home of the Single-A Greenville Drive: Son of a Peach (R.J. Rockers Brewing Company, Spartanburg, S.C.), a wheat ale lightly tinged with peach, is one of the easiest-drinking, flavorful and pleasant beers I’ve had in a while.

Peter should just stop drinking beer and start drinking fruit juice. It's probably cheaper for him in the long run. I have a feeling we are a few weeks away from Peter recommending Mike's Hard Lemonade or one of the various other beers in that beer family.

j. Shane Victorino, you’re everything that’s good about sports. Good luck in Anaheim. Thanks for lots of things, especially the Game 6 grand slam against Detroit that got the Red Sox into the 2013 World Series. (Boston traded him to the Angels last week.)

Thanks for stating "Good luck in Anaheim" to Victorino AND THEN explaining Victorino got traded to the Angels. It's smart to assume your readers aren't bright enough to figure out that Victorino is going to play baseball, his chosen profession, in Anaheim, as opposed to you wishing him luck at his new gig playing Donald Duck at Disneyland. Also, good job spelling his name correctly.

n. I am still ticked off at that Minnesota dentist, days later.

Explain, Peter! Your readers are too dumb to understand this reference.

The Adieu Haiku                 

Ronda Rousey rocks
Klemko's got a crush on her
As does the U.S.

I do not have a crush on Ronda Rousey. I feel like she is an excellent MMA fighter. If only Rousey could crush the use of the Adieu Haiku in MMQB.

Saturday, April 25, 2015

8 comments Skip Bayless Evaluates Why NFL QB Draft Choices Fail; HAHA! I'm Just Kidding, Skip Bayless Talks about Himself and His Old Opinions of NFL QB Draft Choices

I imagine the home of Skip Bayless isn't really a home. I imagine it has approximately 500 mirrors and mostly serves as a shrine to Skip's favorite person, himself. Every article he writes at ESPN.com is really just about Skip's opinion and the opinion of others regarding Skip's opinion. There's no substance to any of Skip's writing, instead it is mostly "Here is my opinion and what others thought about my opinion and do you mind if we talk about me a little bit more?" So under the guise of figuring out why quarterbacks taken in the first round of the NFL Draft miss the mark in the NFL, Skip reviews the quarterbacks who he believed would succeed and discusses how sometimes he's right and sometimes he is wrong, but mostly it's just another shrine to Skip Bayless and his opinions. The use of the words "I," "I'm," and "I've" in this article is so prevalent only the most noble and bored of adventurers would take on the expedition of counting how many times Skip uses these words.

I'll admit it's getting a little eerie. Six times before NFL drafts, I've taken a stand for quarterbacks doubted by many. For a while, they've all made me look like a genius.

It's eerie that Skip really doesn't know what the fuck he is talking about. Weird, isn't it?

Then ...

Things have gone wrong.

They have gone wrong for a variety of reasons, but mostly because Skip was never right and NFL defensive coordinators found a way to game plan around stopping the strengths of these quarterbacks. It's much in the same way that Skip would build a bridge and claim "for a while" it was a work of genius until one day the entire bridge fell and killed dozens of people and hundreds of innocent water creatures. Skip will still insist "for a while" that bridge worked really well, while ignoring that isn't the mark of success at all.

In each case I wound up publicly pilloried as a madman, a football fool, a quarterback hack who is daft when it comes to the draft. I still believe I deserve credit for always being so initially right. You decide.

It's all about Skip and the reaction of the public to the idiotic words he speaks because ESPN inexplicably gives him a forum to speak these words. And no, there is no credit being given for being initially right, because being initially right where a quarterback plays well for a season or two isn't correctly predicting that quarterback will succeed in the NFL. Success isn't determined over a short span of time. There's really no debate that can be had on this. Skip isn't right because Tim Tebow fooled defensive coordinators for almost an entire season, at least until they caught on to how to game plan around him.

But as we go case by case, you'll see a common cause of eventual failure -- one I can't account for pre-draft.

Skip tries to blame outside forces for the reason each quarterback didn't succeed in the NFL, in order to cover up for the fact "He isn't a good quarterback" could not have been accounted for prior to the draft. Skip can try and talk around it all he wants, and I will admit it's a guessing game whether some of these quarterbacks will succeed in the NFL, but the bottom line is that Skip went hard all-in on some of these quarterbacks and has ended up being wrong. He can talk around it, but that's the bottom line.

Most of these quarterbacks wound up with franchises whose executives and coaches were dangerously split on them. I was all-in. The team that drafted them was not.

Of course, it is the franchise's fault for not being all-in on these quarterbacks. Naturally. It's not that those executives and coaches who argued against the drafting of these quarterbacks were right, it's just they were only right because they argued against drafting these quarterbacks based on legitimate reasons that ended up being correct. But the reasons wouldn't have been correct if they had just been all-in on the quarterback. It all makes sense if you turn your brain off. 

You'll also see a common flaw: Several of "my guys" failed to handle their success and/or failure in unstable and uneasy situations.

And really, who could have seen that coming? Johnny Manziel partied a lot in college and was drafted by an organization that seems somewhat dysfunctional? Who could have seen that he wouldn't succeed? 

You can argue I've been much more long-term accurate on which quarterbacks are being dangerously overrated. I said on air JaMarcus Russell and Sam Bradford were very bad ideas for No.1 overall picks, that Alex Smith would never live up to being taken No. 1 and that Matt Leinart, Brady Quinn, Jake Locker, Blaine Gabbert and Christian Ponder were not first-round picks. 

You could argue that, but it wouldn't mean Skip wasn't wrong about these other six quarterbacks.

Those weren't popular stances.

Skip is a rebel and takes unpopular stances, based on the fact Stephen A. Smith disagrees with him. As is well known, Stephen A. Smith speaks for the majority opinion of the sports-loving world.

Neither were these ...

2006: I said on air the Houston Texans should take Vince Young No. 1 overall, in part because he grew up in Houston and had just led the University of Texas to the national championship with the greatest individual performance in title-game history.

Does Skip remember how popular Vince Young was coming out of Texas? It was not popular to say he would be successful in the NFL? I do disagree. Also, you can see from the start this isn't a column about WHY NFL quarterbacks taken early in the draft fail, as promised in the column title, but is about Skip Bayless and what he has said on the air. One other thing, to indicate the Texans should have taken Young simply because he grew up in Houston and led the University of Texas to a national championship is very bad reasoning for taking Young #1 overall.

Houston shockingly opted for defensive end Mario Williams, leaving Reggie Bush for the New Orleans Saints and Young for the Tennessee Titans general manager Floyd Reese and Titans owner Bud Adams,

It was shocking in that Mario Williams really worked out well for the Texans and Bush never really was the running back he promised himself to be in college. So it's almost like the Texans knew what they were doing.

One big problem: coach Jeff Fisher was against drafting Young.

Jeff Fisher is never wrong and you take it back right now.

Still, Young often made me look pretty good. He was offensive rookie of the year. He made two Pro Bowls. He went 30-17 as Tennessee's starter.

And that's really what this is all about isn't it? Which quarterbacks made Skip look good and which quarterbacks didn't make Skip look good. Vince Young did have success for a while, but this doesn't mean Skip was right about him. I think Mario Williams was the right pick for the Texans. 

But predictably, he often clashed with Fisher. It appeared Fisher helped turn some in the local and national media against Young. His skin grew thin.

IT WASN'T YOUNG'S FAULT HE FAILED IN THE NFL! IF HE HAD JUST GOTTEN ANOTHER SHOT WITH ANOTHER NFL TEAM HE WOULD HAVE SUCCEE---

Incredibly, after a season in Philadelphia and a camp with the Buffalo Bills and another with the Green Bay Packers, the league rejected Young at age 30.

This is shocking that Skip blames Young's failures on the environment in Tennessee and Young goes to another NFL team and continues to not be a good quarterbacks. It's almost like, and I almost dare not say it, Vince Young wasn't really a great quarterback and Skip was wrong about Young. But no, I'm sure the issues Jeff Fisher had with Young followed him to Philadelphia, Buffalo and to Green Bay. That makes more sense than Skip just outright being wrong.

What if Fisher had wanted to draft Young, had publicly invested his pride in him, had supported him through the growing pains? Young was too good for it to go so wrong.

What if Vince Young had success early in his career and this pretty much rejects the idea the biggest issue with Young's progress in the NFL is that he wasn't supported enough, because it doesn't make sense for him to play well at the beginning of his career and suddenly need more nurturing as he played more NFL games? I'm sure the Titans could have done something to help Young more, but three other teams took a look at Young and rejected him.

Another quarterback taken in that 2006 draft made the Pro Bowl in his second full season of starting. When Jay Cutler was a junior at Vanderbilt (my alma mater) I began raving about him on air, predicting he'd be a "franchise quarterback." Of course, that proclamation was met with chuckles. A Vandy quarterback?

As always, it is about Skip Bayless. Sense a trend that permeates Skip's entire writing style?

"Here's a quarterback. Here's what I thought about that quarterback. Here's what others thought about my thoughts about this quarterback. Here's an excuse for why I was wrong, but this doesn't mean I was wrong and others were right."

Cutler was the "lucky" one of the six debatable quarterbacks I loved before their drafts. (He's also the most prototypical pocket passer who least relied on his legs.) Shanahan really wanted him. So did the Bears. I certainly wasn't wrong about Cutler's ability. He's no bust. But he is what he was at Vandy: a little more interested in pulling off the occasional "wow" throw than winning.

Skip wasn't wrong about Cutler's ability? Is Cutler a franchise quarterback? No? Skip said Cutler was a franchise quarterback and he isn't, so that leads me to the conclusion Skip was wrong.

2009: I said on air that Mark Sanchez was being overrated. He went fifth to the Jets. I also raved about Josh Freeman and said the Tampa Bay Bucs stole him at No. 17.

Ah yes, the inconsistencies of Skip come to the forefront. He uses "games won" to make a case for why Vince Young could have been a great quarterback if it weren't for that meddling Jeff Fisher. All of a sudden he skips over that Mark Sanchez went to two AFC Championship Games as the starter for the Jets. Sure, I wouldn't give Sanchez credit for that, but in his eagerness to show how right he was about Sanchez, Skip changes the metric he uses for quarterback success. All of a sudden "games won" doesn't hold as much meaning to Skip when he's talking about a quarterback he thought wouldn't succeed in the NFL. Weird how that works.

I'd watched Kansas State's 6-6, 240-pound Freeman play big in his biggest games against Texas and Oklahoma.

No one else saw this. Only Skip saw Freeman play big in his biggest games against Texas and Oklahoma. (By the way, notice how Skip's love for the University of Texas seems to play a part in his evaluations?)

In his first full season as Tampa Bay's starter, he made me look pretty great by throwing 25 touchdown passes to only six interceptions and leading the Bucs to a 10-6 record. He was a Pro Bowl alternate.

Then ... it all fell apart in 2011. Rumors swirled. Maybe Freeman let success go to his head (or stomach). Maybe Raheem Morris lost control of the team as it went from 3-1 to 4-12. Morris was fired.

Freeman played pretty well in coach Greg Schiano's first season -- 27 touchdown passes, 17 interceptions -- but the team went 7-9.

Welp, it seems using team performance to evaluate a quarterback means something important again.

After three starts in 2013, the Bucs tried to trade Freeman, couldn't and released him. After one horrendous Monday night start for the Minnesota Vikings, a 23-7 loss at the New York Giants, Freeman was out of football at age 25.

You still hear speculation Freeman will get another shot. But how could he go from 2010 to this? Again: so right, so wrong.

Probably the same reason a rookie baseball player can have a fantastic rookie year and then fail to improve on or reach those heights for the rest of his career. Opponents adjust to the rookie's tendencies, and when the player's true talent comes to light after opponents have adjusted, it turns out he isn't the star people thought he could end up being.

2010: I said on air I would take Tim Tebow late in the first round. "If you let him run the read option he ran at Florida," I said, "he'll win games in the NFL. He'll never make a Pro Bowl, but he can win games as a starting quarterback."

He'll "win games," which is exactly the type of thing you want your first round pick quarterback to do. Just don't suck and win a few games.

Under John Fox, the Broncos began the next season 1-4, and a new Broncos regime (led by John Elway) that clearly didn't believe in Tebow threw him into the fire, at Miami, out of desperation. I was asked on air what I thought Tebow's record would be the rest of the season. I said 7-4. Chuckles.

Tebow went 7-4, led Denver to the AFC West title, led the NFL in QBR in the last five minutes of games and turned the Broncos into the NFL's No. 1 rushing attack. 

And let's be clear that the Broncos HAD to become the NFL's No. 1 rushing attack with Tebow as the quarterback, because he wasn't going to win games by throwing the football. Regardless of whether the Elway regime believed in Tebow or not, it doesn't mean they stunted his growth. Tebow failed in New York, where Rex Ryan took Mark Sanchez (the same Sanchez that Skip didn't like as an NFL QB) to two AFC Championship Games and he flamed out in New England. I would think if Belichick could have used Tebow in any productive way then he would have.

That offseason the Broncos replaced Tebow with ... Peyton Manning! No shame there. Tebow was traded to the Jets, with whom he was never even given a shot at starting.

That's funny. Tebow was in New York the season that Mark Sanchez was horrible and the Jets needed someone, anyone, to come in and play well at the quarterback position. Even going up against the quarterback that Skip thinks sucks, Mark Sanchez, Tebow couldn't win the starting job on a team desperate for a starting quarterback. So yeah, he was never given a shot. That's the lie that Skip will go with.

Tebow began to doubt himself and drifted from one throwing guru to another.

Maybe he started doubting himself because he's really not that good at throwing the football?

It's still possible the Philadelphia Eagles' Chip Kelly will sign Tebow, but again, I was so sensationally right ... and ultimately condemned as so dead wrong.

No, not at all. You were so sensationally wrong. Tim Tebow is now a co-worker of Skip's at ESPN. Tebow is not in the NFL anymore, so Skip was right for a brief period of time, but in the longer span of time he was absolutely wrong about Tebow. Again, simply because a bridge holds up for a brief span of time before it collapses does not mean it was a safe bridge to cross for that brief span of time.

I do really like how Skip talks about how he was right about Tebow winning games as an NFL quarterback, while also ignoring that Tebow couldn't beat out the quarterback Skip proudly beats his chest in this article for correctly stating wouldn't be successful (Mark Sanchez). Ignore that which makes Skip look dumb. That's A LOT of ignoring.

2012: On air long before the draft, I said Robert Griffin III would prove to be an even better pro than Andrew Luck. The Washington Redskins traded three first-rounders and a second to move up from No. 6 to No. 2 to take RG III. Way too much? Not to me.

It's hard for Skip to talk his way out of this one. He'll try to do so by ignoring the issue he himself brought up when arguing for Griffin. The issue Skip presented was that Griffin will be a better quarterback than Andrew Luck. He's not and he won't ever be. Skip was wrong.

Still, In RG III's rookie season, at age 22, he went superstar on the NFL. Offensive rookie of the year, 20 touchdown passes to just five interceptions, led the league in yards per pass attempt and per rush, led his team to the NFC East crown, had a better QBR than Luck -- 71.4 to 65.2.

FOR ONE YEAR! ONE SOLITARY SEASON!

RG III sprained his knee late in the season, then tweaked it just before his team jumped out 14-0 on the Seattle Seahawks in a home playoff game, then wrecked it late in that eventual loss. And he has spent the past two seasons looking like a sad shell of a guy who no longer trusts his legs or eyes or arm.

I like how Skip always blames outside forces for the failure of these quarterbacks. It's never, "Griffin got injured and his lack of mobility revealed him as a one-read quarterback who just couldn't grasp the passing concepts required to be an NFL quarterback." Skip reasons that Griffin no longer trusted his leg or arm after his injury. Of course, because Skip could never be wrong with his evaluation of Griffin's abilities.

He clashed with Shanahan and failed to click with new coach Jay Gruden. Now ESPN's John Clayton is reporting new GM Scot McCloughan will take Mariota if he's there at No. 5.

Now it feels like RG III's best bet is to start over with another team in another town.

Where when/if Griffin fails there, then Skip will conveniently ignore that Griffin was away from the Redskins' toxic environment and he still couldn't succeed.

2014: I said on air the Texans would forever regret not taking Texas native Johnny Manziel, the Heisman winner from Texas A&M, with the No. 1 overall pick.

And so far, the Texans have been correct twice when Skip has claimed they would regret not taking a quarterback that Skip suggests they draft.

I was told the Texans were considering Manziel until they asked him to lay low and behave himself in the month leading up to the draft. Manziel attended the Masters, had too much to drink and -- the Texans were told -- made a spectacle of himself. They were out.

Again and again I said before the draft: If alcohol proves to be an ongoing issue for Manziel, I'm out.

Skip is blaming alcohol for Manziel's poor rookie season, while acknowledging that he thought alcohol could be an issue for Manziel prior to his being drafted. This sort of contradicts what Skip said earlier in this column:

But as we go case by case, you'll see a common cause of eventual failure -- one I can't account for pre-draft.

Oh, except Skip did account for Manziel's alcohol use pre-draft. I wouldn't expect Skip to stay consistent.

Loggains showed the text to owner Jimmy Haslam, who encouraged GM Ray Farmer, coach Mike Pettine and coordinator Kyle Shanahan to trade up to take Manziel. The Browns did, from 26 to 22.

But the GM, coach and coordinator were not sold on Manziel. I said on air the next morning this was the wrong place for a quarterback whose coaches and execs must be united in their belief in him and his crazy-competitive playmaking genius. This, I said, will not work.

Me, me, me, me. Skip said this or that "on air." I wonder if Skip could write a column without once referencing his own opinion or in any way trying to bring the subject of the column back around to himself? Most definitely not. Remember, Kyle Shanahan was the offensive coordinator for Robert Griffin when he had his great rookie season. I'm not entirely sure what this means, so forget I brought it up.

The Browns lost last year's starter, Brian Hoyer, a Pettine favorite, to free agency but have signed Josh McCown and Thad Lewis and recently (according to an ESPN report) tried to trade for Bradford. Manziel no longer appears to be in the Browns' plans -- and shouldn't have been in the first place.

Manziel needs a second chance with a GM and coach who completely buy in. Maybe he'll prove to be nothing but a bust. The other five did not.

The other five quarterbacks that Skip caped up for weren't busts, but neither were quarterbacks that Skip proudly tells his readers he never liked and look at how right he was about that. Mark Sanchez wasn't a bust if Tim Tebow wasn't a bust, Sam Bradford hasn't been a bust, and Alex Smith is a lot of things, but he's also been a better quarterback than the six Skip has listed here as QB's he was temporarily right about.

I can't predict injury or addiction or sorry situations. But I must admit, if I were a hotly debated draftee, I wouldn't want me pushing for me.

It's not like Skip is a well-known personnel genius or anything like that. He's just a guy with a hot take who likes to take guesses and then make excuses if he is wrong. But yes, I wouldn't want you speaking about me at all if I were a draftee. I would prefer you just disappear or try to write a column that isn't simply about you. 

Thursday, December 4, 2014

10 comments Gregg Creates a Metric To Predict the Super Bowl Matchup, Then Decides He May Ignore His Metric In Order To Make a Different Prediction

Gregg Easterbrook continued to mislead his readers in last week's TMQ. He managed to criticize the Lions for playing poor defense, while in his description of the Lions' poor defense he got the yardage, type of defense the Lions were playing, and the location of the defensive players incorrect. It must be nice to go through life pointing out other's faults while creating your own reality where you can present facts in the way you see them and not as they occurred in reality. This week Gregg reveals the last four weeks of the season will determine which teams make the playoffs, uncovers the previously unknown information that the NFL schedules divisional games down the stretch, updates his Authentic Games standings and hilariously still insists ESPN Grade means something. Gregg finds the NFL to be very Darwinian. Well yeah, that's sports in general.

If Charles Darwin were alive today he'd be an NFL fan because the final month of the season shapes up as a contest of survival of the fittest for wild-card invitations.

If Charles Darwin were alive today he would be a fan of many sports due to the survival of the fittest mentality. He would probably have an issue with some of the size of athletes since evolution wouldn't indicate that human beings could be so fast and strong without some outside help that doesn't involve hitting the weight room. Darwin also probably wouldn't know what a weight room is or why he is reading words Gregg Easterbrook writes on a screen that seems to create these words from nowhere.

Down the stretch, 11 good-record teams are competing for four wild-card slots. By quirk of the schedule, these teams spend the final month mainly playing each other. 

Oh poor Gregg. It's not a quirk of the schedule, but a specific attempt by the NFL to have games during the last stretch of the season mean something important for playoff positioning. This is why teams play other teams within their own division during the last weeks of the season. It's intentional, not a quirk. It's sad for Gregg that he thinks this is a quirk of the schedule. 

Often, December in the NFL is the month of mismatches, with dominant teams tuning up for the playoffs against losers that are already eliminated.

It's very creative of Gregg to make things up so early in his column. Usually Gregg waits until the middle portion of his column to start making shit up in order to prove a point, but he gets it out of the way early in this TMQ. The NFL can't predict which teams will be good during the season and which teams won't, but they certainly do try.

Here is the schedule for Week 14 last year. The Colts played the Bengals, Panthers played the Saints, and the Seahawks played the 49ers. Games that looked like they would be tough inter-conference games to decide playoff positioning (prior to the season of course) include Packers v. Falcons, Cowboys v. Bears, and Dolphins v. Steelers.

Here is the schedule for Week 15 last year. The Chargers played the Broncos and the Bengals played the Steelers. Games that looked like they would be tough inter-conference games to decide playoff position include Patriots v. Dolphins, Cowboys v. Packers, and Texans v. Colts.

Here is the schedule for Week 16 last year. The Saints played the Panthers, the Patriots played the Ravens, and the Steelers played the Packers. Games that looked like they would be tough inter-conference games to decide playoff positioning include 49ers v. Falcons, Bears v. Eagles, Cardinals v. Seahawks, Cowboys v. Redskins, and Giants v. Lions.

Here is the schedule for Week 17 last year. The Ravens played the Bengals, Packers played the Bears, the 49ers played the Cardinals, and the Chiefs played the Chargers. Games that looked like they would be tough inter-conference games to decide playoff positioning include Redskins v. Giants, Panthers v. Falcons, and Eagles v. Cowboys.

December will feature game after game pitting winning teams in must-win situations.

That's the intent nearly every single year.

San Diego plays four of four versus other contenders: the Patriots, Broncos, 49ers and Chiefs. Six of the strong teams play three of four versus other contenders. Kansas City faces Arizona, Pittsburgh and San Diego. Seattle faces the Eagles, Niners and Cardinals. Santa Clara meets the Seahawks, Chargers and Cardinals. Pittsburgh faces Kansas City and plays in Cincinnati before finishing the season at home against the Bengals. The Browns play Indianapolis, Cincinnati and Baltimore. The Bills face Denver, Green Bay and New England.

While celebrating the fact this December may be the MOST EXCITING DECEMBER OF FOOTBALL EVER, please keep in mind that this isn't a quirk of the schedule, but how the NFL schedulemakers want the season to end. There's a reason the Chargers are playing two of their three toughest conference foes, that Seattle will face the 49ers twice in a short span of time, the Steelers play the Bengals twice in a short span of time and the Cowboys and Eagles will play each other at the end of the season...again. That reason is the NFL wants tough divisional matchups at the end of the year in order to create drama for playoff positioning. 

The fact that December offers so many strong-on-strong pairings ensures the contenders will inflict defeats on each other, causing some to fall by the wayside. Just like in natural selection!

Yes, the parallel to Darwinism still holds true. Very insightful. 

Now about that NFC South. If the season ended today, 5-7 Atlanta would host a playoff game as division champion, while the NFC East's 8-4 Cowboys would be denied the postseason. For years

YEARS, Gregg tells us. YEARS!

TMQ has advocated a seeded tournament as the alternative to the NFL's goofy anti-meritocracy playoff format. But perhaps revolutionary change is just too much for the league's hidebound ownership class.

Or maybe this year is sort of an outlier and the owners don't see a reason to change the playoff structure based on one year's results? Or maybe the owners see that a 7-9 Seahawks team beat the Saints and a 8-8 Chargers team beat the Colts in the playoffs a few years ago and figure it's annoying a team with a bad record has made the playoffs, but it just means there could be a huge upset in the playoffs.

Reader Michael Donnelly ‏of Ridgefield, Connecticut, suggests that a division winner should get an automatic qualifier to the postseason only if it finishes above .500. Otherwise the first-in-division slot that year would become another wild card.

While I don't want to support mediocrity, more than just a team's talent goes in to what that team's record ends up being. An 8-8 team could play in a difficult division and could have had a difficult out of division schedule, while a 9-7 team could get the Wild Card while feasting on an average division and by playing the 2014 version of the NFC and AFC South.

If in effect today, the NFL bowl-eligible concept would mean no playoff slot for the NFC South; Seattle, next-best if Atlanta is eliminated, would host a playoff contest; Dallas would make the playoffs on the road as a wild card. That's a far stronger postseason field.

It is a stronger postseason field, but also ignores that Atlanta had to play the AFC North this season, while the Cowboys got to play the AFC South. A team's record is a team's record at the end of the season, but if the Cowboys end up 9-7 and the Falcons end up 8-8, then wouldn't make it sense that the Falcons were hurt by having to play a division that currently has no teams with a losing record, while the Cowboys played a division that has one team with a winning record?

The Falcons suck, but is that really a stronger postseason without them? It may be, it may not be.

In spinning-scoreboard news, what if your team put up 66 points and lost? I'm not talking about your rec-league basketball team, I am talking about your nationally ranked major college football team.

Then I would say my team needs to learn to play better defense. That seems pretty simple to me.

Stats Of The Week No. 5: Since the start of 2013, the Chiefs are 3-7 in their division, 15-4 versus all other teams, including playoffs.

This helps support my point that just because the Chiefs are 8-8 at the end of this year it doesn't mean they aren't a better team than a Steelers team that makes the playoffs with a 9-7 record under Gregg's idea for using the bowl-eligible concept.

There is no "fair" way to do the NFL Playoffs and I think any attempt to change the current format will simply result causing a whole new set of problems. These new problems may be better problems, so perhaps that's preferable.

Sweet Play Of The Week: TMQ loves the tactic of bringing in a guy who never plays, then giving him the ball on a big play. With the Bills leading Cleveland 20-10 in the fourth quarter, the Browns were energized by the arrival of Johnny Football and a quick touchdown. Now Buffalo faces third-and-1. If Cleveland gets a stop, as it did on an earlier third-and-1, momentum shifts the visitors' way.

Unless the Bills choose to go for it on fourth down of course. Even if they fail to convert, this will put momentum right back on the side of the Bills.

Little-known MarQueis Gray -- an undrafted free agent with three career receptions for 24 yards entering the contest -- came in, apparently as an extra blocker. Play-fake then a pass to the uncovered Gray, whose 41-yard catch-and-run set up the field goal that made the score 23-10.

MarQueis Gray was a quarterback at Minnesota and tried out at the Combine as a quarterback. He only ended up playing tight end in the NFL after it was clear he couldn't be a quarterback. So the fact he has three career receptions is interesting, but mostly because Gray has only played tight end for a short period of time. So Gray was undrafted as a quarterback. That's my point.

Sour Play Of The Week: Leading San Diego 30-27, Baltimore faced third-and-4 at the Bolts' 13 with 2:32 remaining and the Chargers out of timeouts. A rush might get the first down, but at least keeps the clock moving to the two-minute warning. Instead: incompletion, clock stops, field goal; the extra time keeps San Diego's comeback hopes alive. 

What Gregg leaves out is that the Chargers scored the game-winning touchdown on the next drive with 38 seconds left on the clock. So even if the Ravens had run the ball, not gotten the first down and had to punt after the two minute warning, the Chargers could have had enough time to score the game-winning touchdown. There would have been six seconds left on the clock rather than 38 seconds.

What Gregg fails to mention is that if the Ravens throw the ball and convert the first down, the game was over. I guess fortune no longer favors the bold? This brings up the next play that Gregg discusses, which occurred at the end of the Patriots-Packers game.

Sweet 'N' Sour Plays: TMQ lauds the Patriots for always having something they haven't shown. Two can play at that game! With Green Bay leading 13-7, the Packers, facing third-and-5, lined up wide receiver Randall Cobb in the backfield, with a trips right. At the snap all the trips guys went shallow left to drag away the secondary, while Cobb ran a wheel right -- covered by a linebacker, 33-yard reception setting up a field goal. Sweet.

Cobb also caught the third-down short-yardage pass at the two-minute warning that allowed the Packers to send in the victory formation.

The Packers threw the ball on third down? Why didn't they run the football and let the clock tick down as much as possible? That's exactly what Gregg suggested the Ravens do in nearly the exact same situation in the paragraph above, yet here the flip side of the coin is that the Packers completed the pass and were able to run the clock out. In fact, notice the lengths Gregg goes to cover up for how the situation the Packers and the Ravens were in are very, very similar, but he doesn't want to make it seem like his criticism of the Ravens for throwing the football was off-base in any way. Gregg writes in generalities so his audience doesn't know he is only criticizing the Ravens based on the outcome of the pass being negative, while he has no criticism for the Packers because the outcome was positive. As I always say, Gregg bases his criticism of an NFL team nearly entirely on the outcome of a certain play and not on the thought process that led to the play-call decision.

Gregg says Cobb caught a "third down short-yardage pass." Yes, it was third-and-4. The same down-and-distance the Ravens faced when they decided to throw the ball instead of running it.

The Packers were on their own 43-yard line, which means they couldn't even line up to try a field goal and would have to punt the ball with a six point lead had the pass attempt failed. The Ravens were at their own 13-yard line and a successful field goal would put them up six points if the pass on third down failed.

Gregg says it was "at the two minute warning" but it was with 2:28 left in the game. The Ravens had 2:32 left in the game when they made their pass attempt.

These two situations are very analogous, yet Gregg criticizes the Ravens for choosing to pass the ball and stop the clock, while he doesn't have the same criticism for the Packers. Why is that? Because the Packers completed the pass, allowing them to send in the victory formation, while the Ravens did not. Gregg's criticism of the Ravens is based entirely on the outcome of the play. He's such a hack. I wish his readers would look into his criticism more so they could see that Gregg treats them like idiots who will just accept what he writes as the gospel.

But classic defense never goes out of style! With Green Bay leading 26-21, New England reached first-and-10 on the Packers' 21 with 4:10 remaining. Big blitzes? Funky fronts? Green Bay stayed in a vanilla 4-3-4 with straight four-man rush. Result: run for 1 yard, incompletion, sack, missed field goal. On the sack, New England had five to block four: linebacker Mike Neal overpowered New England left tackle Nate Solder off the snap, creating the game's decisive down. Sweet for the home team, sour for the visitors.

Again, every team would only rush four guys if they could get to the quarterback with just four men. NFL teams don't blitz just because they really like leaving receivers open in the secondary. They blitz to create pressure and if they can create pressure without blitzing then they wouldn't blitz as often.

Sweet Special Teams Plays: TMQ's law of blocked punts holds -- rush seven if you want to block that kick. Watch how NFL teams line up versus punts. They rarely send more than a token rush: Not risking roughing-the-kicker is the "safe" move, and NFL coaches love "safe" tactics. The result is that when an NFL team does go after the punter, the kicking team is shocked.

In the first quarter versus Carolina, Minnesota rushed seven, blocking a punt and returning the ball for a touchdown. Now it's the second quarter, the Cats seemed to reason: They'd never go after our punter twice in the same game! Minnesota rushes eight, block, touchdown.

These punt blocks occurred due to missed assignments, not necessarily because the Vikings rushed seven or eight men.

And if it works, the autonomous vehicle may revolutionize how we think about cars. A family group won't need two or three. In the morning, the car will drive one parent to work, return and drive a kid to school, come back and drive the other parent to work, then repeat the process to pick them up later. Two families or some friends could share a car, if the vehicle could deliver itself wherever required.

And the potential decrease in car sales for companies like GM and other car companies that the federal government has taken such a large hand in ensuring succeed is why I believe we are a long, long, long way from an autonomous vehicle. That is unless driving a car with a human being the wheel is made illegal and then car makers could jack prices up as high as they would like to see them go, which isn't something I would discount either. But at this point, I doubt autonomous cars will be in the near future since it would involve a family choosing to only have one vehicle.

Traveling and commuting will become less stressful if you can read or nod off as the car controls itself. No longer will senior citizens dread the moment when the car keys are taken away: They'll be more mobile and independent.

Now senior citizens could nod off in a car, and instead of being behind the wheel, the senior citizen would just be asleep in the car as it idles waiting for them to exit the vehicle.

People may be uncomfortable with driverless 18-wheelers barreling down the highway. But if electronic trucks eliminated the risk of crashes like this one -- 10 people killed by a truck driver who'd been on the road 11 hours and probably fell asleep -- autonomous trucks could be seen as a boon, at least to those who aren't truck drivers.

For the record, I'm uncomfortable with an 18-wheeler that has a human driver or is driverless. Either way, I'm not going to be comfortable.

Daimler is targeting 2025 for sales of drone trucks that drive themselves on highways, with an operator -- sort of a harbor pilot -- taking over for city streets, according to Wired Magazine.

Gregg enjoys making fun of companies who make outrageous predictions about where they will take technology in the future. I'm betting in the year 2025 Gregg will be mocking Daimler for thinking they could have a drone truck on the highway. He will probably even link this article, but for now, he's perfectly fine thinking 11 years from now drone trucks will drive themselves on highways.

And TMQ's pal James Fallows continues to think that pilotless aircraft are coming. Initially passengers will feel terrified of boarding a plane that has no pilot. Future generations may feel safer on such flying machines.

Yep, no thanks. Flying in a plane can be harrowing enough with there being a pilot present making human error or overriding computer error. I'm not sure I would like to fly without a human being there to override any computer error. So I guess I am one of those people Gregg is talking about.

Autonomous driving, or sailing and flying, could generate benefits for society while costing jobs. Does that mean improving technology should be banned? If improving vehicle technology had been banned in the 1950s, today we'd all be in smog-belching, finned 10 mpg land yachts with no seat belts. A century ago when agriculture was the dominant job engine, Americans would have been horrified to learn that in 2014, only about 2 percent of employment would be in the farm sector. But nearly everyone, including most farmers, is better off as a result.

That's 60 years ago. Gregg seems to be talking about pilotless aircraft, cars and ships in the next decade or so. Also, the movement of American jobs from agriculture to other job sectors isn't exactly analogous to the movement from one form of technology run by humans to the same form of technology run by computers. It's a little different.

Entrants in the initial College Football Playoff will be announced Sunday. Perhaps the selection committee will pause to give lip service to education,

They will not.

But ESPN Grade takes the NCAA and the Power 5 at their word and ranks the top teams as if players were actual student-athletes. ESPN Grade says the final four should be:

1. Alabama
2. TCU
3. Oregon
4. Ohio State

This is the final four as long as you only count teams in the Top 25 of the AP and Coaches Poll. Any college that has great academics, but isn't considered a Top 25 football team doesn't get to participate in ESPN Grade. Therein lies one major issue with claiming ESPN Grade really ranks teams as if players were actual student-athletes. Another issue is that athletics is counted as twice important as academics in the ESPN Grade rankings. Yet Gregg tries to pretend like ESPN Grade really counts academics as much as athletics, when ESPN Grade counts performance in the classroom 50% as important as performance on the field.

ESPN Grade adds the Associated Press and USA Today rankings with a sort of the top programs by graduation rate, giving each the same weight.

Kudos to Gregg that he can point out how ESPN Grade uses two measurements of on field performance and one measurement of off field/classroom performance, then state ESPN Grade is "giving each the same weight." It's an absolute lie, but damn if he isn't going to just keep stating they have "the same weight" in the face of absolutely lying to his readers. It takes balls to do this.

So Alabama is 1 + 1 + 7 = 9, the best ranking. TCU is 4 + 4+ 4 = 12. Oregon is 3 + 3 + 13 = 19. Ohio State 6 + 6 + 8 = 20. Florida State drops out of the picture at 2 + 2 + 21 = 25. Mississippi State plummets at 10 + 10 + 18 = 38.

There are three metrics being used. I add two cups of sugar to a mix, then add one cup of salt. Do salt and sugar have each equal weight? Only an idiot, or someone like Gregg Easterbrook who is trying to push a metric he wouldn't normally believe in, could believe this is giving salt and sugar equal weight.

Sun Setting On RG III?: Sure-to-be-former head coach Jay Gruden benched Robert Griffin III for the Washington at Indianapolis contest.

Jay Gruden isn't immortal, so yes, he will at some point be the Redskins former head coach.

At this point the R*dsk*ns may have a better chance to win with Colt McCoy than with RG III, but the move was also public relations-driven. Luck went first in the 2012 draft, Griffin went second. Luck is a huge success, Griffin's head is barely above water. Had they faced each other, commentary would have focused on how bad Chainsaw Dan Snyder looks for making the king's-ransom Griffin trade. Benching Griffin reduced embarrassment for Chainsaw Dan.

Gregg creates these narratives that he thinks drive decision-making among NFL franchises. The best part about his narratives is that they tend to make huge assumptions based on Gregg's ability to read minds, as opposed to making assumptions based on the facts as they are presented. For example, Griffin was not good in his last game against the 49ers and Jay Gruden had been bashing Griffin publicly all week. So replacing Griffin with Colt McCoy, who had played well in his limited appearances so far this year, seemed an inevitability.

As much as I don't like Dan Snyder, it's not like if Robert Griffin is on the bench then everyone is too stupid to see that the Robert Griffin trade wasn't a good move for the Redskins. Gregg assumes that people who watch football are stupid, so if the viewers can't see Robert Griffin playing on the field then they will totally forget about him. Here are four reasons that Gregg is wrong and his narrative is incorrect:

1. The Redskins didn't draft Griffin over Luck. So the comparison between the two is natural, but Snyder won't look bad for picking Griffin over Luck, because that was not an option for him. So there will be a comparison made, but Snyder doesn't look bad for the Griffin trade in regard to Andrew Luck, because the Redskins never had a shot at drafting Luck.

2. If anything makes the Griffin trade look bad, then it is probably the fact that Robert Griffin is sitting the bench against the Colts instead of starting the football game as the Redskins' quarterback. Of course, Gregg thinks NFL fans are too stupid to notice Griffin still plays for the Redskins if he is on the bench. So Gregg believes with Griffin on the bench then there won't be criticism of the Redskins' trade for him.

3. If the purpose of benching Robert Griffin was to reduce embarrassment then why did Jay Gruden bash Griffin after the game against the 49ers and even prior to that during the season? The head coach bashing the team's franchise quarterback in public is probably pretty embarrassing for Dan Snyder isn't it? If Snyder cared about not embarrassing himself, then Gruden wouldn't bash Griffin publicly.

4. Dan Snyder is a lot of things, but he is not afraid of making himself an embarrassment. This is a guy who has spent a lot of money on public relations in order to fight the changing of the Redskins name. He goes through head coaches frequently and has publicly chided columnists for criticizing him. Snyder is a lot of things, but being afraid of embarrassment publicly he is not.

Washington acquired the 2012 second selection about a month before the draft. At that time, some touts felt Indianapolis would use the first choice on Griffin, leaving Luck to Washington with the second selection. 

Why does ESPN allow Gregg to consistently lie and mislead his readers? Gregg just makes shit up. I don't know who "some touts" are, but once that trade for the #2 overall pick occurred it was widely held that the Redskins would be drafting Robert Griffin. See, the funny thing about the Internet is that those who aren't too lazy to do so can look into Gregg Easterbrook's lies and expose them for being just that. Articles herehere, and here all point out how the Redskins target in the 2012 draft is Robert Griffin, not Andrew Luck. I don't know what generic "touts" Gregg is referring to in order to create a false reality, but Andrew Luck was always the #1 pick by the Colts and it was widely assumed that Griffin was the pick at #2. Of course, Gregg prefers to create a false reality in order to prove the point he wants to prove. He wants to make a direct comparison of Griffin versus Luck and will go to great lengths to do this.

The mindset of Potomac Drainage Basin Indigenous Persons management was that making the deal ensured they'd land one player or the other, and both would become franchise quarterbacks. So although Washington's 2012 draft strategy now looks like a fiasco, had the Colts chosen Griffin, Washington's 2012 draft strategy now would look like the smoothest move of all time.

Except the Colts weren't drafting Griffin and it seems like everyone knew it. Griffin wanted to go #1 overall, but he passed up a chance to privately work out for the Colts. Why? He knew they weren't drafting him.

Nevertheless, the Persons are left with this: Netting several transactions, in the past five years, Washington has invested first-round draft choices, two second-round selections and a fourth-round choice in the quarterback position,

Not entirely, but I'm tired of arguing this point.

and its starting signal-caller is a street free agent. 

Actually, Colt McCoy is a third round pick. I figure if Gregg can count draft choices the Redskins never made as an "investment" in the quarterback position, then he could at least not call Colt McCoy a street free agent when he was a third round pick.

Unless there's a major turnaround, the 2012 pre-draft deal by the R*dsk*ns will go down as among the worst trades in sports annals.

It led to a playoff appearance and it's not like the Rams have built their franchise around those picks quite yet. I think Gregg is overstating the case just a bit.

Future historians may scratch their heads that our generation obsessed about low-likelihood threats while barely even noticing the decline of the No. 1 genuine threat to humanity.

Future historians will then scratch their heads about how they can claim to know billions of people are collectively worried about low-likelihood threats and barely notice the decline of the No. 1 genuine threat to humanity. Future historians will then realize they can't read minds and characterizing the opinion of billions as one collective opinion is ridiculous.

Last week's column detailed the fixation of movies, television and novels on post-apocalyptic futures. This brings to mind the two post-apocalypse TV shows attempted by Gene Roddenberry after the "Star Trek" series concluded. With the 50th anniversary of "Star Trek" approaching in 2016, Unified Field Theory of Creep says to analyze Roddenberry now.

So Gregg is now creating the creep so that he can later complain about it happening.

"It's not the 50th anniversary of 'Star Trek' so why would anyone analyze the series now? Since I'm sure someone will do it, I'll just go ahead and get it over with."

Best Pass Pattern By A Defensive End: With Houston leading 38-14, the Texans had first-and-goal at the Flaming Thumbtacks' 1. Defensive end J.J. Watt, who wears an eligible number, lined up as flex tight end. Tennessee didn't seem to react, though Watt came into the contest with two touchdown receptions. The play was a "rub" pattern, and on rubs, the ball always goes to the second man.

And obviously the Titans should have known this was a "rub" pattern and therefore should have known that Watt was getting the ball.

Earlier, with Houston leading by the new economy score of 24-7, Tennessee starting quarterback Zach Mettenberger was injured. Backup Jake Locker came in cold; Tennessee coaches called a pass on his first play. Interception.

Would it have been better to call a running play in this situation? Maybe, but the Titans are trying to come back and win the game, which is something I would assume Gregg supports based on his past comments in TMQ about coaches being aggressive in order to win a game, and it's not like Jake Locker has not ever thrown a football before.

The Football Gods Promised An Investigation: With Green Bay leading 3-0, New England punted on fourth-and-2 from midfield. Pace the Madagascar penguins, TMQ wanted to grab the person on the Patriots' sideline pretending to be the head coach and say, "What have you done with the real Bill Belichick?" The person pretending to be Belichick did go for it in a similar situation in the fourth quarter, but by then it was too little, too late.

It was the first quarter! Is giving Aaron Rodgers the ball at midfield really the best move in the first quarter?

TMQ's Christmas List: Aren't you hoping Santa leaves you a fake jellyfish aquarium? The print version of the catalog declares it SIMULATES THE GRACEFUL MOTION OF JELLYFISH. The product "shuts off automatically after four hours for safety." For whose safety? The jellyfish are fake!

Because it's plugged into an electrical outlet and having it plugged in with lights and other electronics still active runs the risk of a fire. Trust me, my cat could find a way to get the jellyfish aquarium to catch the house on fire. Why does Gregg ask this obvious question? It's the same reason other electronics shut off after a period of time. It's not for the safety of the device, but the safety of the household the device resides in.

If you've seen an absurd holiday gift, tweet it to me @EasterbrookG with a URL.

I should email Gregg a link to his latest book as an absurd holiday gift.

The worlds of sports and social media went bonkers over the fantastic catch by the Giants' Odell Beckham versus the Cowboys. Two weeks earlier, Brent Grimes of the Dolphins made a nearly identical catch, and only the world of TMQ seemed to notice. Why the difference? Beckham is a first-round draft choice who plays for the New York media's favorite team, and he made his catch in a prime-time game. Grimes is an undrafted free agent from Division II Shippensburg who made his catch in a contest broadcast regionally. Beckham had the power of the press on his side. The power of the press might not be what it used to be but does still exist.

While true, it also helps that Beckham had 2-3 fingers on the ball and was more perpendicular (you probably caught this, but I should have written "parallel" here...I couldn't think of the word "parallel" and then wrote "perpendicular" for some reason) to the ground when he caught the ball than Grimes was. Both catches were great, but Beckham's happened on national television (which Gregg mentions) and it was just slightly more difficult.

TMQ contends the big threat to football is not litigation against the NFL, which can buy its way out of any problem, but litigation against public high school districts. If public high schools stop participating in football owing to brain-trauma settlements or can no longer afford football liability insurance, the sport will crumble.

Oh. Just a few weeks ago Gregg was talking in TMQ about how NFL teams will continue to get their offensive tactics from high school teams and indicated this will be a further trend. This week, high school football may shut down forever. I guess NFL teams have to find a different place for new offensive tactics.

Although it might seem Philadelphia's defense is playing better this season than the past, the Eagles are still just 24th in yards against and 19th in points against. The difference is takeaways -- Philadelphia already has 22, versus 22 all of the past season. Takeaways are wonderful, but the element of luck involved means they can't be relied on.

While I don't think any NFL team just says, "Forget playing great defense, let's rely on takeaways," there is some element of skill to takeaways as well. Forcing fumbles is a skill that can be taught.

The Niners seem uptight on offense. Colin Kaepernick kept faking the second half, though down by multiple scores and with only 23 yards rushing in the first half. This fooled no one: the second half play calling suggested Santa Clara has a playbook for holding a lead but doesn't have one for comeback situations.

It's almost like they are a run-based team that prefers to be leading so they can run the offense off play-action and don't want to have to throw the ball all over the field while behind. I'm not sure any NFL playbook has a specific section of plays that can be run when the team has to make a comeback.

In this season of wild-card logjam, the Niners' Thanksgiving Day loss at defending champion Seattle all but eliminates the team that made the past three NFC title games. Santa Clara is now fourth in the chase for the two wild-card invites.

The 49ers are one game out of the Wild Card picture with a head-to-head game against the Seahawks still left to be played, as well as a game against the division-leading (and struggling) Cardinals to be played. Don't worry, I won't forget that Gregg counted the 49ers out as being "all but eliminated" from the playoffs. This statement is premature.

The Niners not only need to win out, which is never a good master plan, but winning out would also entail a victory Dec. 14 at Seattle. The Bluish Men Group has won three straight at home versus the Niners and has outscored the Niners 94-33 in those contests.

The Niners are 7-5. I don't think it's a certainty that they have to win out.

A week ago, Kansas City lost to woeful Oakland but did not drop in the Authentic Games standings because the Raiders are not an Authentic opponent. This week, Arizona lost to woeful Atlanta but did not drop in the Authentic Games standings because the Falcons are not Authentic.

Again, any metric supposed to indicate the strength of a team that doesn't take into account a loss to one of the worst teams in the NFL is a metric that isn't doing it right. How can a loss to a bad team not count as a negative in a metric intended to determine how likely a team is to win the Super Bowl?

Denver takes over the pole position. Early front-runner Arizona has dropped two straight, and as Hillary Clinton learned in 2008 and might learn again in 2016, early front-runner status can be the kiss of death. Four games ago, Carson Palmer got hurt. Next man up Drew Stanton played well in a win versus Detroit. I am pretty sure it was Dean Smith who once said when a star gets hurt, the next game is the best game of the year for his teammates -- and then things go downhill. That's been the pattern here, with the game after Palmer going well, then consecutive poor performances versus Seattle and Atlanta.

So Gregg presents his Authentic Games standings as supposedly useful and then starts to bash the results it presents? Denver-Arizona is what Gregg has for this week as his Super Bowl prediction. My Non-Authentic Games metric has come up with the following results so far:

Packers and Broncos
Saints and Dolphins
Packers and Patriots
Eagles and Bills

This week my Super Bowl prediction using the Non-Authentic Games metric is St. Louis versus Houston. My metric is really covering all of the bases required to get a Super Bowl prediction correct. Gregg should consider using my metric.

Bruins alumni and boosters might feel crushed by the surprise loss, but ESPN Grade thinks UCLA is having a fantastic season -- 9-3 in the standings and third in graduation rates among the football powers. The NFL has no purpose other than entertainment, so when NFL teams lose, there's never a silver lining. In college football, entertainment is one of several goals, with the most important being fostering education. UCLA has played well on the field and performed well in the classroom. The Bruins have had one of the best seasons in college football.

And yet, being third in graduation rate isn't enough to put UCLA in the final four according to ESPN Grade. If the Bruins are so good in the classroom, then I wonder why ESPN Grade doesn't reflect a score that shows this? Perhaps because on field performance is measured at twice the amount classroom performance is measured?

With underdog Michigan trailing 28-21 midway through the fourth quarter at Ohio State, Brady Hoke sent in the punt unit at the Buckeyes' 39. At moments such as these, TMQ fairly shouts -- Coach, can you see the scoreboard? Who cares that it was fourth-and-14? Seattle went for it in roughly this situation in last season's NFC title contest and scored a touchdown.

Who cares if your defense has held Ohio State to 28 points at home and the Wolverines are facing a difficult fourth down conversion? One time an NFL team converted fourth down in a similar situation, so that means fourth-and-14 should be easily converted.

What matters is not the line-to-gain, it's not punting in opposition territory when trailing in the fourth quarter.

No, the line-to-gain is very important. The line-to-gain tells a coach the odds of his team succeeding on the fourth down conversion. Punting in opposition territory is never a good thing, but neither is trying to convert a difficult fourth down in place of trusting your defense to stop the opposing offense and flip the field.

You really don't need to know anything more about the game than that Michigan punted in Ohio State territory when trailing in the fourth quarter. Just in case you're interested, the punt netted 19 yards. The Buckeyes needed six snaps to pass the point at which the ball would have been spotted had Michigan tried and been denied.

It took six plays for the Buckeyes to gain 19 yards? Is that supposed to be impressive to me?

The Football Gods Chortled: At Buffalo, Cleveland ran a toss with Jerry Hughes, the end on the playside, strung out. He stripped the ball from the runner, then recovered and returned it for a touchdown. Hughes did this as the man trying to block him was called for holding

What's missing from this description? Oh yeah, what round was Jerry Hughes drafted in? I know, I know! He was drafted in the first round, which makes him a highly-drafted glory boy ex-bust who has found a home in Buffalo. Of course, Gregg can't mention what round Hughes was drafted in because it would ruin his narrative that highly-drafted players don't work as hard as lowly-drafted and undrafted players. Rest assured that if Hughes was undrafted, Gregg would have mentioned this fact in TMQ.

Manly Man Play Of The Week (College Edition): Scoring at the end of the first overtime to pull within 66-65 of heavily favored Marshall at The Joan, Western Kentucky could kick and proceed to a second overtime or accept the challenge of one play to win or lose. Novice head coach Jeff Brohm went for two, 

Brohm is a novice head coach, but he's been coaching at some level for over a decade now.

and fortune favors the bold!

Oh, so NOW fortune favors the bold. Earlier in this very TMQ, Gregg criticized the Ravens by saying they made the "Sour Play of the Week" in being bold while throwing on third down, as opposed to running the ball and running the clock down to the two minute warning. Of course, when the Packers did this nearly exact same thing and it worked, Gregg had nothing negative to say.

Sour Play Of The Week: Leading San Diego 30-27, Baltimore faced third-and-4 at the Bolts' 13 with 2:32 remaining and the Chargers out of timeouts. A rush might get the first down, but at least keeps the clock moving to the two-minute warning. Instead: incompletion, clock stops, field goal; the extra time keeps San Diego's comeback hopes alive. 

I would love to know why fortune didn't favor the bold in this situation? Perhaps because Gregg bases his criticism on the outcome of a play? Or it could be because Gregg constantly contradicts himself by making stupid rules and he doesn't really give a shit because he gets paid handsomely to write this column like he knows what he's talking about and any evidence that he may not know exactly what he's talking about will be ignored by him?

Single Worst Play Of The Season -- So Far: It might have been Frank Gore doing nothing as the man he was supposed to block flushed Colin Kaepernick from the pocket and caused a third-quarter sack. Gore is prone to lecturing his teammates about stepping up. Check the down that begins with 4:31 of the third quarter, when Gore simply stands watching his quarterback in distress.

While Gore was at fault in this situation for missing his block, he didn't just stand there and watch his quarterback in distress. He missed his block and then couldn't help Kaepernick from being sacked after that.



Seahawks Sack 02

And Gore didn't lecture his teammates about stepping up earlier in the season, he simply stated they need to play better as a team.

Worse was Santa Clara's sole red zone snap versus Seattle. The Seahawks led 16-0, and the Niners faced third-and-8 on the visitor's 19 late in the third quarter. Santa Clara had five to block four. Offensive linemen Marcus Martin and Alex Boone stood doing nothing as Michael Bennett came through untouched and forced Kaepernick to step into a sack.

Whatever the excuse du jour, 49ers offensive line, you are guilty of single worst play of the season -- so far.

Not to be too literal, but these are two plays, not a "single worst play." Not that I would expect Gregg to be accurate in his claims of course.

Next Week: TMQ will employ the Authentic Games standings to project the Super Bowl pairing.

Hasn't Gregg been doing this for the past five weeks? What's the point of providing the Authentic Games standings if it wasn't to predict the Super Bowl pairing?

Last year, this metric projected Seattle versus Denver. I've been dining out on that ever since. But given that I've warned this metric is largely hocus-pocus, I might come up with some perfectly legitimate-sounding reason to favor Green Bay over Arizona.

But OF COURSE! Gregg presents the Authentic Games standings over the past five weeks as a metric used to predict the Super Bowl matchup. Gregg states that last year his metric got the Super Bowl matchup correct and he will again use the metric to project the Super Bowl matchup in next week's TMQ. Then Gregg decides if he doesn't like what his metric says then he will just pick his own Super Bowl matchup.

My favorite part is how Gregg clings to his Denver-Seattle prediction last year and doesn't mind bragging about it, while also pointing out how his Authentic Games metric really means nothing. It either means nothing and isn't used or discussed in TMQ, or it means something and Gregg should base his Super Bowl matchup on the metric. Use the metric or don't. Of course, Gregg has an insatiable need to be right and whatever method or however many predictions he has to make in order to get there is all that matters to him. I'm sure if his Authentic Games metric did end up getting the Super Bowl matchup correct then he wouldn't mind bragging about this in TMQ...you know, just like he's done since last year.