15 comments Don Banks Makes A Power Poll Based on Each Team's Record Last Year

It is Fantasy Football time again. If anyone is interested in me starting up a BotB fantasy football league again, just tell me in the comments or email me and I will set it up if we have enough interest. I would like to do one this year because Fantasy Football is my favorite sport. So anyone who wants to play, just tell me and I will set the league up. I currently have interest from one person.

Donnie (Brasco) Banks has released his first NFL power poll of the year. I am sure one person rejoiced about this. Unfortunately, his power poll looks a lot like it was made based on how each NFL team did last year. He doesn't project the team's records for this year at all. I find this disappointing and a little bit lazy to be honest. To give him credit, he does list why he ranks each team the way he does, but I don't know if his power poll rankings are realistic. It's like he didn't want to project how good each team would be this year so he just stuck with the status quo from last year.

Before I get to that article, I want to talk about the most important topic in the history of this blog. I am shocked to hear that Terrence Cody is not in shape. Who would have thought a guy who couldn't stay in shape in college when he wasn't getting paid (as far as we know), can't stay in shape in the NFL either? I don't know what the conditioning test for a defensive tackle requires, but I have a feeling it isn't the most strenuous set of exercises required for a human being to perform. So in conclusion, Cody has just re-affirmed exactly why he was taken in the second round and taken off many team's draft boards. This is the end of the shocking news. A fat guy who has never been able to stay in shape, isn't able to stay in shape.

Okay, back to the Don Banks power poll for the day. It took possibly 2 minutes for him to get this power poll together.

When you do your first set of NFL power rankings as training camps open, the tendency is to make it an exercise in looking backward, at the season that wrapped up almost six months ago. After all, what else do we have to judge by other than the most recent games and results?

The tendency is to base power rankings on how the teams finished last year, so that is exactly what Don Banks did here.

But of course that's all wrong.

Yet he did it anyway.

Of course, he is a Starwood Preferred member so he can do whatever the hell he wants.

At this time of year we should be looking forward, and trying to figure out where the NFL landscape has changed without any games -- other than the hiring, firing and personnel acquisition kind -- having been played.

We should be looking forward, but who cares about that? Let's just list the teams in the first power poll of the year based on how they did last year. Otherwise there is a lot of work involved. Doing a lot of work is a risk Banks doesn't want to take right now.

So here's an early attempt to divine the relative strengths and weaknesses of teams as they report to camp,

The strengths? Same as last year.

The weaknesses? Same as last year.

and keep in mind these aren't predictions of what will be in 2010 as much as they're a snapshot of where I perceive teams are right now in late July.

It appears that Don Banks perceives these teams are all in the same place right now as they were last year. Actually, Banks is correct (in theory) that the power poll he got together is how the NFL teams should be ranked because no games have been played, but he did say he was looking to project how some teams would do this year, so he failed miserably in my mind. Besides, no one wants to read a power poll that just has the rankings of how strong the teams were at the end of last year.

Even knowing these aren't predictions for the upcoming year, why put together a power poll that basically says, "nothing has happened that would change the order from the end of last year?" I know these aren't predictions, but there haven't been games played yet this year and this is how strong Don Banks sees these NFL teams...so this power poll is a different form of predicting what will happen this year.

As always, your results may vary.

Or not vary if the results are based on the 2009 NFL results like this power poll seems to be. Here are the records of the teams Don Banks listed from #1-#32. You will find the better teams of 2009 are near the top, while the worst teams from 2009 are near the bottom.

There is nothing wrong with doing a power poll this way, but the NFL is pretty unpredictable and teams often switch places in the standings from year-to-year, so I feel like Don Banks should have moved some teams around due to this. So knowing NFL teams often aren't consistent (in regard to record) from year-to-year this isn't a very well thought-out power poll. He may not be predicting, but he also isn't saying a whole lot has changed since last year.

The record of the teams and their ranking in his power poll:

1. 9-7 (The Jets, who were in the AFC Championship game last year)
2. 13-3
3. 9-7
4. 14-2
5. 11-5
6. 13-3
7. 12-4
8. 11-5
9. 9-7
10. 10-6
11. 11-5
12. 8-8
13. 10-6
14. 9-7
15. 8-8
16. 10-6
17. 7-9
18. 9-7
19. 8-8
20. 8-8
21. 8-8
22. 4-12
23. 7-9
24. 5-11
25. 5-11
26. 7-9
27. 2-14
28. 3-13
29. 4-12
30. 5-11
31. 6-10
32. 1-15

Sorry for that wall of numbers, but I wanted everyone to see how much like a copy of last year this power poll seemed to be. The Jets are a 9-7 team at #1, but they are also a team that made the AFC Championship last year and are a sexy pick for this year as well.

Here are my problems with this power poll:

1. There isn't a team with a losing record last year among his top 16 teams. So he is essentially saying no teams with a losing record last year will appears to be able to make the playoffs this year. That doesn't seem likely.

2. Number 22 through 32 are all teams with losing records last year. When does the NFL have teams with such consistent good/bad records from year-to-year? Rarely ever. The NFL is known for it's parity and how each year teams can be very good or very bad. Either Don Banks was lazy or he is going to look like a genius. You can guess which one I think.

3. Of the ten teams from spots #1-10, nine of them made the playoffs last year. History is not on Don Banks side for this to repeat.

4. The lowest Banks has a playoff team from last year is #16. That team is the Bengals. Otherwise, the other two playoff teams are #11 and #13. So basically Don Banks has 10 of the 12 playoff teams making the playoffs again. Again, I know these aren't predictions, but with no games having been played this poll is as good as a prediction at this point.

So either the NFL is pretty much going to repeat itself from last year and Don Banks seems to think the best and worst teams in the NFL are going to be the best and worst this year...or this power poll is going to look way off by December.

I'm not asking Don Banks to try and shake things up intentionally, but history doesn't bode well for a power poll that essentially has the best and worst teams in the NFL repeat this pattern again the next year. I'm not saying the power poll is wrong, because I can't predict the future, but I am saying Don Banks perhaps should have done some more research into what each team did positively and negatively in the offseason and not rely on what teams did last year so much.

-Don Banks' good friend, co-worker, and future Fight Club member, Peter King has his Tuesday mailbag out and he has some advice for Terrell Owens.

In case you were wondering, the advice for Owens from Peter isn't "and you're still an asshole."

Usually I'd say in the case of the Bengals chasing a player with serious baggage, that it's owner Mike Brown forcing a guy into Marvin Lewis' locker room, causing Lewis to roll his eyes and say, "How exactly am I supposed to handle all these divas?''

I have found lately many writers are starting to use the trend of writing things like, "normally I wouldn't do or believe Situation X, but in this case I do." Joe Morgan did it the other day when talking about criticizing Joe Torre. It is as if because Peter King doesn't believe this is a case where Mike Brown is forcing a player on Marvin Lewis, when he usually believes it to be so, this gives his thoughts on the motivation for signing Owens more credibility. It's like using your own opinion to establish credibility for a statement.

But the Bengals' pursuit of Terrell Owens, from all indications, is a Carson Palmer production. Palmer, who slumped badly at the end of last season, wants weapons.

So it is Carson Palmer who is forcing a guy into Marvin Lewis' locker room, causing Lewis to roll his eyes and say, "How exactly am I supposed to handle all these divas?"

Well, that is completely different then. As long as it is not the owner doing the forcing of Owens on Marvin Lewis and a player who is doing this, I am sure this makes all the difference in the world.

Peter posted his advice on Tuesday morning and on Tuesday evening the Bengals signed Owens, so it looks like Owens didn't care for Peter's advice too much. Now the Bengals have a commitment to running the ball with Cedric Benson and three wide receivers in Bryant, Owens, and Johnson that all want the ball. Did I forget to mention they drafted Jordan Shipley also? Adding Owens is supposed to make the Bengals one of the top offenses in the NFL. It's not 2004, so I will wait and see if that happens or not. They have a better passing game now, but that's a lot of guys who aren't elite receivers to keep happy.

Now, part of the issue is the continuing question about Bryant's health. Last year, he struggled with a knee injury all season, even after having what was thought to be minor surgery. The knee was still bothering him at a June minicamp, when he couldn't practice in every session. The coaches won't know exactly what they have in Bryant until they get on the practice field Thursday at the start of training camp in Georgetown, Ky.

I can give the Bengals coaches a hint about what they have in Antonio Bryant. They have a guy who has a ton of talent, doesn't always perform well and wants a new contract. He could be a #1 receiver assuming you could count on him in any way...which the Bengals really can't. He may have 1,200 yards this season or he may play five games of the upcoming season due to injuries or suspension. So signing Owens may have been a good thing if Bryant is injured or it may be a terrible thing if Bryant is healthy because he will want 5 catches per game just like Johnson and T.O. want.

in Cincinnati, playoff consistency is an oxymoron -- and he doesn't want to be sitting there in October thinking, I can't count on Bryant, and I can't trust which way Gresham and Shipley are going at nut-cutting time.

Maybe the reason there aren't a lot of players who want to play for the Bengals is because they have nut-cutting time. I'm just going on a limb here, but "nut-cutting time" doesn't sound like something I would care to be a part of. It sounds like the opposite of fun.

With Cincinnati being a predominant running team, and investing the pick and money in the most athletic tight end in the draft this year, it's entirely possible the leading wide receiver on the team could catch 70 balls -- with the others below 50. I don't care how peaceful Owens is now. If he's catching two or three balls a week, he's not going to be happy.

I know why a team signs Terrell Owens...he produces fairly well still. But WHY would a team sign Terrell Owens? Specifically the Bengals. Is Chad Johnson not a handful enough for them to handle? I know they needed to get better offensively, but was there no other way to do this than sign T.O.? If Antonio Bryant or T.O. are at all demanding the football like Chad Johnson wants the football, it may be hard to keep everyone happy...especially when Cedric Benson wants his carries, Gresham will undoubtedly get some passes thrown his way and this doesn't include Jerome Simpson, Andre Caldwell, and Jordan Shipley, all who have been drafted in the last three years. Have the Bengals given up on Caldwell and Simpson? What about Shipley? He is a perfect slot receiver. Is this going to be a red-shirt year for him?

The Bengals have improved their offense, but only for one year, and I am not sure by how much.

But if I'm Owens, I'm thinking I've got two pretty interesting options: Take the Bengals' offer (it's got to be somewhere in the $2-million-a-year range, with incentives) and be content with a third-receiver role that could morph into something better

I don't think Owens could ever play the third receiver on an NFL team. Well, maybe he could do it for one year, but then at the end of the year he would call Carson Palmer a homosexual and make fun of the entire city of Cincinnati on his VH1 reality television show. It would be better to sign him to a one-year deal for this reason.

or wait until another team doesn't like what it sees in its receivers in camp or gets an injury at the position sometime in August. Unless the Bengals' offer is going to disappear, I think he'd be smart to wait.

This is great advice, but the Bengals offer could disappear. If training camp starts and Jordan Shipley shows he can handle being the 3rd receiver, Gresham shows the potential he has, and Bryant isn't terribly injured then there will be no place for Owens. T.O. knew this could happen and went ahead and signed with the Bengals.

Even if a team has a receiver get injured in camp, there is no guarantee this team would sign Owens. I don't know how desperate a team with no prior interest in Owens would have to be to show interest, but if an NFL team doesn't want Owens on their team after knowing he had 55 catches for 829 yards last year, I am not sure how much an injury to a receiver could change that. It would have to be an injury to an important receiver. I could be wrong, but it seems like many teams just don't have interest in signing a 2nd/3rd receiver who wants $2 million per year plus incentives and brings along some media baggage...other than the Bengals of course.

Before I get to my e-mail, I want to make one correction on Monday's column. I wrote that Tom Brady, Peyton Manning and Drew Brees are all entering the final year of their contracts. Brady and Manning are, but Brees has two years to go. My mistake.

Blame it on the Starwood Preferred member asshole. He's a real piece of shit and had Peter all distracted-like with anger yesterday while recalling the epic battle of words they engaged in.

"Do you see a number of similarities between the Packers handing the reins to Aaron Rodgers and the Eagles doing the same to Kevin Kolb, feeling that the time is right for a title within a few years?''
-- Mark G., Folsom, Pa.

Except for the fact Donovan McNabb didn't retire/unretire, he didn't refuse to be traded and acted like a complete professional as he was essentially replaced by Kolb these two situations are exactly alike. Also, McNabb didn't attempt to force the Eagles to trade him to a certain team of his choosing, so there is that difference in the Favre-Green Bay quarterback situation also.

PK: But there's one difference: The Packers would have let Favre return for the 2008 season had he chosen in March to say he'd play rather than retire.

Like I just said, the only big difference is that Donovan McNabb didn't try to exert complete control over the team's direction at the quarterback position and force the Eagles to cater to whatever whim he felt on that certain day.

By the time he was certain he wanted to play, it was early July 2008, and the Packers, who'd already promised the job to Rodgers, felt they'd had enough of Favre's waffling and wouldn't reverse course.

Was Favre ever certain he wanted to play at any point in the summer of 2008? I am still not sure if Favre is certain he wants play in the summer of 2010. I don't believe Brett Favre is ever certain he wants to play. I think usually the NFL season is about to begin and Favre sees he will be back in the spotlight and figures he may as well play one more year. It is two years later after the Packers-Rodgers-retirement/unretirement situation and Favre is STILL not sure if he wants play football again. He'll be glad to tell a reporter that too, if you want to send one down to Mississippi and interview him about this issue.

"I'm a little surprised about your response to Dez Bryant. Attitude is one thing when you are talking about attitude against opposing players, but against your own team? For Bryant to take the stance that he is more important than the team is alarming, to say the least. Bryant should be willing to do whatever it takes to win. And part of that is forsaking individual pride for the team. It's the whole purpose of rookie hazing -- to bring them in as part of the team, to build trust and friendship. He's already put a wedge between himself and the team. And no matter how good he is, if he isn't part of the team, they can't use him.''
-- David, Arvada, Colo.

I was a little surprised Peter sided with Bryant as well. I thought Bryant would get a solid 50 word chiding from Peter...but I thought wrong.

PK: But I think you're overstating the story a bit. Bryant never said or implied that he "is more important than the team;'' he said he wasn't going along with the tradition of rookies carrying the vets' pads.

There isn't any overstating the story (okay, maybe a bit, but anything involving the Cowboys is overstated). Inherent in Bryant refusing to carry the pads is him forsaking the rookie hazing for individual pride. That's the problem with this gesture by Bryant, it isn't just a stupid tradition of carrying pads, it is Bryant saying, "other rookies may do this, but I am not any other rookie. I don't subscribe to rookie traditions and don't care to take part in these traditions just to be a part of the team."

The actual act of not carrying the pads is not the problem, it is what not carrying the pads seems to indicate about Bryant. It indicates he may not be willing to do everything he is told. Yes, it sounds stupid to jump to this conclusion, but it isn't a far leap. The player-player relationship is supposed to be a fraternity in the NFL, much more so than the coach-player relationship. Players understand what each other are going through as an NFL player, so if Bryant is willing to separate himself out from his peers like this, is he willing to do so when Wade Phillips asks him to do something?

It is a stupid tradition, but it is also a stupid tradition that builds support among teammates. What is Dez Bryant going to think in 2013 when a highly drafted Cowboys rookie refuses to carry Bryant's pads off the field? Will he understand or expect the rookie to do it? I think he would expect the rookie to do it and not refuse to do so because at that point Bryant will understand the reasoning behind the hazing.

And the point about Bryant not being able to be part of the team if he doesn't go along with this -- I just don't buy it. There will be some vets who hate him, and he could make it easier on himself by carrying the pads. But this story is a tempest in a teapot. It will pass.

This will pass. Simply because this will pass doesn't mean there isn't something in here about Dez Bryant we can't learn.

And when Bryant makes plays to help the Cowboys win -- and I think he will, early in the season -- no one's going to care much about this.

This is a stupid point. Anytime there is success on a team little things like this are forgotten. Success helps to make everything better, but even with success happening for the Cowboys, things that happen on the Cowboys team tends to get magnified a bit. The Cowboys and Terrell Owens were successful together and that didn't prevent problems from occurring did it?

Not that Bryant will turn into a huge distraction, but this is such a small thing Bryant had to do. I don't understand why he just didn't carry the pads.

"I enjoyed your reaction to Mr. Starwood Preferred, but I'd like to know what your wife thought about it since she presumably was standing right there.''
-- Jeffrey, Peoria, Ill.

PK: She thought that should have been the end of the story. But then I had to open my big mouth and make the situation an incendiary one. I understand her point, and we're both hardcore pacifists. Having said that, I felt I had to take a stand (as corny as it sounds, for all the people in line with us) and I don't regret it, because the guy had it coming.

Having said that? Here's one of my favorite "Curb Your Enthusiasm" scenes about that phrase.

"I don't understand how you can completely dismiss teams from being able to compete. I am a Bucs fan and I find it absolutely ridiculous to dismiss them or any other team already. When the Falcons drafted Matt Ryan, everyone was saying the Falcons may win 3-4 games and then they went to the playoffs so anything can happen. Now let me clarify: I don't think that the Bucs will be undefeated or anything crazy like that, but to dismiss a team that you barely cover or mention at all is dumb. Thank you for listening to the ravings of a Bucs fan tired of his team getting no national love or exposure.''
--Travis, Miami

I guess Travis missed the part where Peter King was going down to the Bucs training camp...for a half day. Peter is spending a full day at every other camp, but he is only giving the Bucs a half day. I am sure that would have angered Travis as well if he had caught that in Peter's MMQB for this week.

PK: Duly noted. We'll see.

Why even publish this question if you are going to give a four word answer that tells us nothing?

How do my questions to Peter not get published? I am always on my best behavior in the wording of the question and have great in-depth questions for him.

7 comments ABANDON THE KYLE ORTON SHIP!

It's back. And this time it's more recent than ever. Ladies and Gentleman, Faceoff.

Carolina or Miami: Which rising long shot has the better chance to sneak back into the playoff picture with a win Thursday?

it's clearly Miami. They are just having a hard luck season, happens to every team eventually, Seattle had one a few years ago, had like tackling bags playing tight ends at one point. But we'll get to this later, as Clark Judge always picks the wrong thing in these, always. Without fail. I'm banking on it. And I'll stake my Miami hard luck rant on it.

Prisco: Can I say neither?

no, not really. It's just asking "better chance". Stop being an indecisive, whiny little girl. Pick! Johnny Mathis or Diet Pepsi?

I had to make a choice it would be the Dolphins. Why? Schedule. Have you taken a look at the Carolina schedule? It is brutal. After facing the Dolphins, they play at the Jets, home against Tampa Bay -- two winnable games -- but then close at New England, home against Minnesota, at the Giants and home against the Saints.

reminiscent of his "Colts last undefeated team" against the Saints when both were 4-0. I still believe in that pick (and regardless of the last week, the logic was better). Peyton Manning...you don't wanna go against Peyton Manning, end of story. But this whole, referencing the schedule thing, boring though it indubitably is, nevertheless is a solid strategy. Let's have a look here, I can give you Minny on the tired Farve theory, but Carolina is 25th against the rush this year.

And I got bad news - Peterson is much fresher than last year, he's on pace for 40 less carries, has a higher YPA and already has eclipsed last years TD total. He also has matched his reception total from last year. Adrian Peterson is becoming an even better player than you and I are familiar with. Also, Minny is 4-1 on the road (nothing unexpected there) but the wins are by 12, 28, 14 and 14.

The Panthers...nah, I don't wanna spoil it.

Good luck. Miami's schedule is a tad softer. The Dolphins have games left with Buffalo, Tennessee and Jacksonville, and their tough games are at home against Houston, New England and Pittsburgh. So my choice is Miami. But the reality is I don't think either one will make it.

Miami, I have a soft spot for, after that loss to Indy, how could you not. They are a lot of fun to watch. In addition, their losses are to Indy,@Atlanta, @San Diego, New Orleans, @New England. How could they be anything but 4-5, honestly.

Judge: I'll take Carolina even though the Panthers just lost Thomas Davis and Jordan Gross, and here's why: They're beginning to get their act together

yes, "getting their act together" right. In comparison, the vaunted Panthers have had a loss at home to Buffalo, in the middle of this alleged "hot" streak (including wins @Washington and Tampa).

committing few mistakes

4 turnovers against Buffalo four weeks ago, 3 against New Orleans two weeks ago.

letting DeAngelo Williams and Jonathan Stewart -- not Jake Delhomme -- win games

well if it took John Fox three games to learn that, then I don't know what to tell you. It's true in games where they have rushed more than passed (the last six straight), Carolina is 4-2. But it's also true that when they rush at least 30 times they are just 4-3. And if you think ball control is gonna get 'er done against the Colts, have a chat to the Dolphins, and if you think Belichick isn't gonna work out the "yeah, we like...run and stuff", I don't know what to tell you either. And if you think missing one of the best tackles in the game isn't gonna change this equation I am also at a loss for words - me!

That is critical because the Panthers can't win by relying on the inconsistent arm of Delhomme, and they know it.

how do you hold your head up Judge, with that big brain of yours?

So they do what they do best, which is run the ball -- and the last three games they're averaging 212 yards per start. More important, they're not committing turnovers.

three against New Orleans, didn't you hear me? Yes, alright, none against Zona and Atlanta. This is reasonably impressive, as Zona and Atlanta have 33 between them, until you realise it's a result of a 39/78 pass/rush ratio. Which if you know football, and Clark Judge does not, you know cannot stand, and you < mark scheffler >cannot win in the NATIONAL FOOTBALL LEAGUE < / mark scheffler >rushing 67% of the time. You just can't. Eventually someone will be better than you, and you will have to throw. To compound the issue, as I mentioned above, the Panthers cannot stop the run. Get up ten on them and you win. And why the hell can't you get up on them? Carolina have only held one team to under 20 this year, and it was Washington.

They have three in three games. Opponents have 10. They've beaten Arizona and Atlanta the past three weeks, too, and barely lost out to New Orleans. That tells me they're getting confident as they build momentum. The clincher, though, is Miami's loss of Ronnie Brown. You can beat Carolina on the ground, but the Panthers' pass defense is effective. Losing Brown puts undue pressure on Chad Henne, and he doesn't need it. Not here. Not now.

alright, I admit I kind of misread the question and thought it was about season long prospects but still - it's the system stupid. I argued this before, and they still have Ricky Williams. It's a pretty closely run (ha! puns are fun) thing by the way between Brown vs Gross/Davis. Smiley and Fasano hurt mind you. Whatever, you can go mad doing this.

Henne's also been ok, way, way, way better than Delhomme, 5TD/3INT, 191.6YPG. His QB rating this year is ten points higher than Delhomme. That's what they call an "edge". Begone with you Judge!

Calvin Johnson, Steven Jackson or Terrell Owens: Who is the most talented player wasting away on a last-place team?

Owens? Are you serious? How dare you anonymous questioner. Seriously. He's got one fucking touchdown! He's averaging forty yards a game! Johnson is averaging more than 50% more yards, and yes, only one touchdown, but on a 1-8 team. And here's the other thing - Lee Evans has more yards per game than Owens and five TD's. What the hell are you talking about.

Judge: Steven Jackson. A few weeks ago we were asked to choose the best running back not named Adrian Peterson. I would like to amend my answer and say Steven Jackson. I can't fathom how he is doing what he is doing this season, and what he is doing is just about everything. He is the NFL's third-leading rusher, behind Chris Johnson and Adrian Peterson. He averages five yards a carry. He has three straight 100-yard performances. He's the Rams' leading receiver. Basically, he does it all, and he does it with a bad football team beginning to show signs of life because ... well because Steven Jackson is carrying the Rams. Frankly, I don't know how he motivates himself, but he does. And he's doing it right. Imagine what happens if and when St. Louis surrounds him with talent. The guy already is a load. When opponents have to concentrate on others he'll be the NFL version of a nuclear weapon.

where have you been for the last six years you idiot? This will be his fifth straight 1000 yard rushing season as well as catching 3.4 balls a game. He's good. He's already been good. The last five weeks should not have to convince you. You vex me Judge.

Eagles, Giants or Broncos: Which team is closest to the brink of collapse?

*yawn* you're so predictable internet.

Judge: Broncos. And I say that knowing Denver still have Oakland and Kansas City (twice) on their schedule. But here's the problem: If you can't beat Washington you might not be able to beat Kansas City -- especially in Kansas City, where the Broncos have lost three of their last five.

is that even bad? 40% over a tiny five game sample in one of the hardest stadiums in the NFL? Frankly, even if Denver have blown their load (and they almost certainly have), I'm comfortable giving them these three. That's nine wins. They need one more...this is a big game this week, but let's not start throwing people off the boat just yet. After all, almighty media, they have Kyle Orton. The Great Kyle Orton. Remember him media?

Also, two of the best things ever on ESPN;

Frank Gore (eyelid)

Twilight star talks ice cream - bad for any site, unforgivable for ESPN. (you may have to rush for this one, it's one some weird link I can't directly link to, and will change tomorrow, presumably out of humilation)

11 comments T.O. and Buffalo: We All Know How This Is Going To End

Let me start this post off with bitching about something that is completely not related to this post. Remember this post I made last Monday? Where Peter King said no one in the Colts organization is worried about Howard Mudd and Tom Moore leaving the team because Peyton Manning is like a coach on the field? Well scratch that, because there have been rumors that's not quite the case. Peyton is not happy with how things played out. My question is this...where the hell is Peter King with this new information? Why isn't he getting to the bottom of this? He is reporting on Tom Brady's recovery, telling us how great the Eagles' draft has been, and even taking choice quotes from the GM of the Colts Bill Polian about how things are not going to change with Moore and Mudd gone, but he doesn't take the time to comment or even acknowledge this story (as Friday afternoon). Why is that? He is too afraid it might make his original story sound wrong or is he afraid it may shine a bad light on Peyton or the Colts organization in a bad light? I would like to think he is going to wait until Monday to do a follow up, but that may be wishful thinking on my part.

This is a natural follow up column for Peter to do...like right now. This is why I have very little respect for him as an NFL reporter, because he only reports on who and what he wants to report on and I think he consciously tries to not write negative columns about certain teams and players. Brett Favre is clearly one of those people he tends to protect and I think he is trying to protect the Colts organization here. One and a half weeks ago he writes an organizational puff piece for the Colts and now the Utopia he presented is not completely true...and Peter King is missing to weigh in (as of Friday afternoon when I wrote this). So either Peter is consciously avoiding printing the negative information, did a crappy job of gathering information for his original column (which really there is no excuse for), he never interviewed Peyton Manning for the MMQB column or the Colts tried to keep this dissension away from him when he visited with them. Take your pick.

Now onto the column for the day. Calvin Watkins feels the need to re-write a story from the Associated Press and add his own spin to it. Spin being defined as "making small changes." Either way, I don't really blame him, at least he is not re-writing his old stories like Rick Reilly is doing. What else is there to say about Terrell Owens at this point? Different town, different team, same beginning, middle and ending.

Let's check out the T.O. and Buffalo experiment in its early "We are glad he is here and think he could be misunderstood, so we will convince ourselves he is misunderstood because the head coach is desperate to keep his job and we need to win games at some point or else we are all fucked" stage.

Terrell Owens is trying to smile these days.

He should because he now has 6.5 million reasons to live.

I think it's a forced smile. He doesn't want to be in Buffalo. Nothing personal. Buffalo isn't Dallas. The Cowboys are where Owens wanted to be. The Cowboys are where Owens wanted to retire. But the Cowboys thought he was too much of a disruptive force to remain.

Here is my first problem with this article. After three different stints with three different teams, the Cowboys did not "think" that Owens was too much of a disruptive force, they KNEW he was a disruptive force. At what point can we stop acting like Terrell Owens very possibly could be misunderstood? He has played with three Pro Bowl quarterbacks, thrown three Pro Bowl quarterbacks under the bus, and complained about the same quarterbacks as he left town to go to a new city full of suckers.

The Cowboys did not think he was a disruption, they knew he was a disruption. They waived him accordingly based on this.

So, he was let go and now the Bills have to take his 1,052 receiving yards and 10 touchdowns from the 2008 season and hope he parlays that into more in the cold of Western New York.

They also hope he isn't at the top of the leader board in dropped passes again.

For that matter, Owens has to get it against New England where Shawn Springs, who has shut him down the last few years, is waiting for him.

Springs was waiting for him when he played in the NFC East for the past 5 years as well. This is really not that different for Owens.

Things will be different now for Owens. He has to compete in a tough AFC East where the Patriots and Dolphins know him well.

For the last three years he has been competing in the NFC East, which is as tough of a division, if not tougher, than the AFC East. Not to mention I would doubt the Dolphins and Patriots know Owens as well as the Philadelphia Eagles knew him when he played for the Cowboys, since he played for the Eagles for 2 years and was in the NFC East for 5 years overall. I don't think the Dolphins and Patriots know him as well as the NFC East teams do. So it's not like his level of difficulty in opponents he will face has increased tremendously, or possibly not increased at all.

It doesn't seem like things will be that much different for Owens. He is still in a tough conference but he is going against teams that actually may not know him as well as the NFC East teams did.

I find it interesting the three things that really are different are not mentioned. First, he won't have a Pro Bowl quarterback throwing him the ball, second, he is in a colder climate than he may be used to, and finally this is the first time there is an established potential #1 receiver on a team when he has joined that team. Lee Evans is still going to want the ball. As far the weather is concerned, I know Philly gets cold, but not quite as cold as Buffalo, plus Buffalo plans on playing even further north in Canada for a few games.

Following a Wednesday afternoon organized team activity, Owens sounded confident that building a strong relationship with Edwards wouldn't be a problem.

Owens has never had a problem building a relationship with a quarterback, it's keeping that relationship and not calling that quarterback gay or fat after he leaves the team that is a problem for him.

"Oh yeah, definitely, again, that's what the OTAs are about," Owens said. "Even with the rookies coming in, it's all about trying to see who plays well with what guys and the system.

Already Terrell Owens is brainstorming ideas of what to call Trent Edwards after this year. I have a feeling T.O. may say that Edwards was the worst quarterback he has played with since high school. I am probably wrong, it's so hard to guess what a bipolar person like Terrell Owens will do or say.

Owens built a nice relationship with Tony Romo in Dallas, but it died last year with the wide receiver griping about the type of throws he was getting and the direction of the offense. Owens was right about several things in the Cowboys' offense.

I don't think Terrell Owens was right about the Dallas offense. He just said that he needed the ball more and that the offense was not featuring him enough. Sure, he may have made some cryptic comments about how the offense was predictable, but he wasn't talking about overall, he was talking in reference (like he always does) to him, and when he gets the ball.

Even Romo, following the regular-season loss to the Eagles, said that the team's offense got exposed.

I will never make excuses for the Cowboys, but I really believe part of the problem with the offense is that many different people were calling for the ball and eventually Romo and Garrett tried to please everyone, which never works. I think the offense was simple and was exposed because teams knew who Romo was going to try and get the ball to, and when he would try to get the ball to a certain player. Certainly this is not all T.O.'s fault, but we can't overlook the fact other teams knew T.O. would get the ball at certain times or else he would pitch a fit when looking at the horrible offensive execution over the last couple of games.

There's no telling what Owens might say about Edwards, who isn't nearly as accomplished or talented as Romo.

He isn't nearly as accomplished or talented as any of the quarterbacks Owens has played with in the past. I am giddy to watch this all fall apart. Dick Jauron had better get his resume together. Not only is Owens going to want the ball at the expense of Lee Evans, he will probably find a way to tear the team apart in one year...which would be an incredible amount of destruction in such a short period of time, even for him.

"The last few years, the quarterbacks that I've had, I've communicated well with them," Owens said.

Yes, they have all been able to hear his public comments and criticisms after he left the team and when he was on the team they heard his constant whining for the ball, while seeing him ignoring the fact he dropped the ball a lot. This type of communication was definitely made.

I realize Owens is a talented receiver but there is never a time I would think his talent could overcome the amount of baggage he brings to the table, at least in my mind.

Romo was so tired of Owens that he wouldn't even say his name last week when asked about him.

"I could care less," Owens said. "I mean, he doesn't say my name, that's fine. What about it? Bill Parcells didn't call me by my name either, so what's the difference?"

Good point. There is no difference, because they both hate you.

The Cowboys are still the third-best team in the NFC East with or without Owens. The Bills got better with him but still remain behind New England and Miami in the AFC East.

You know, I realize the Eagles and Giants have done a lot in the offseason to improve the their respective teams, but I can't help but think the Cowboys are going to be a little bit more competitive than Calvin Watkins is giving them credit for. It may just be a hunch and I am not always great at predicting, but if they can establish a second receiver who can step up and play well, they have some pieces in place to compete in the NFC East.

He does help an offense and sell jerseys but he wears out his welcome in about three years. Buffalo signed him for one year and if Owens is to get another contract with the Bills or anyplace else he has to leave the Dallas stuff alone.

Which he has already shown that he can't seem to do.

Owens has to move on.

He will move on. He will move on to talking shit about Trent Edwards and trying to pull another team apart after his year in Buffalo is done. Whether he will pull Buffalo apart in one year remains to be seen, but I wouldn't put it past him.

20 comments MMQB Review: Peter Drops All Pretense And Just Moves To Boston; Citizens Ready Their Torches

Today is the 1 year anniversary of this here blog. I have eaten some birthday cake in celebration, so please no gifts. I started it last year so I could have someone to bitch to because everyone in my life was tired of hearing me talk and make the same points over and over, so I thought I would make strangers suffer instead. I enjoy writing here but I still don't know if it is at the point I want it to be yet. I write encyclopediac posts and then think I should write smaller posts, but then I would write them more frequently and no one would have time to comment on what I wrote previously (which still happens), so it is a mindfuck for me. Thanks to everyone for reading and commenting either critically or non-critically of me and what I wrote.

I would go through a year long perspective of a couple fun events that have happened in this space over the past year but its Monday, which means Monday Morning Quarterback and we learn Peter King is moving to Boston. Starbucks has opened four new stores in anticipation and local municipalities are making sure all stop signs are visible at four way stops.

"T.O.''

Bills chief operating office Russ Brandon woke up sometime after midnight Friday morning and noticed there was a text message on his cell phone. So he reached over and looked. It was from Trent Edwards, the quarterback of the Bills. "T.O.''

That's all it said.

Brandon shot back with this: "?''

"T.O. was released. Go get him,'' Edwards texted back.

Trent Edwards is incredibly bossy. If I were Russ Brandon I would have texted back, "Who is going to throw the ball to him? You? Haha...maybe will win run single wing with Lynch...haha..."

I am kidding of course, because I like Trent Edwards, and he made some real progress as a quarterback this year, but really, should he be telling the front office what to do?

ESPN donated 7 minutes to this Saturday night and was mentioning that now the Bills are going to be on national television more because of T.O. Is that really necessary? Is there anyone in the world not tired of him? During ESPN's 7 minute documentary on Terrell Owens there was a group of clips that showed his antics over the years and then of course it showed the two anchors who were speaking of Owens in a semi-condescending manner, like he was just a side show. I found it terribly ironic because they had spent nearly 7 minutes of their show talking about a man who they clearly had no respect for, but he gave them ratings so they talked about him. I just found it odd and I don't know why.

1. The Bills think Jauron is the perfect coach -- calm but commanding -- to handle Mount Terrell.

Yes, Steve Mariucci, Andy Reid, Bill Parcells, and Wade Phillips they were not the perfect coaches to handle him, but Dick Jauron he is the guy to do it. Jauren has done such a great job keeping Marshawn Lynch out of trouble I can see how Owens will be no trouble.

Given that it is a one year deal, I don't think Owens will be a problem. That list of coaches who could not control Owens is pretty esteemed though.

2. The organization is sick of perpetually being one weapon away from catching New England (and Miami and the Jets, as it turns out), and it's willing to take the risk of having Owens ruin the locker room so it can have a chance to win the division.

If Bill Simmons wrote this article he would end this sentence with, "Ladies and Gentlemen, your 2009 Buffalo Bills."

It's been 10 years since their last playoff playoff appearance. They're the Washington Generals to the Patriots.

Sure, that reference makes sense. Especially since the Patriots won the division last year. I think if we look at these numbers, we can see the Bills have a lifetime .417 winning percentage against the Patriots and a .400 lifetime winning percentage against the Dolphins. So the Bills are the actually a better example of the Washington Generals to the Dolphins' Harlem Globetrotters. I am sure there is a team in the NFL that has a much worse winning percentage against an NFL team than 40%, so even the Bills-Dolphins are not the most one sided matchup. I was just too lazy to look this up.

Whew! Every week it is so hard to see if Peter's references are true or not and I think I actually got one right.

We'll see. Owens and Lee Evans (last three seasons: 200 catches, 16.0 yards-per-catch) could be a formidable duo, but Edwards is going to find out early that he'll need to throw the ball to Owens more than Evans.

Teams are going to go out of their way making sure Owens doesn't get the ball as well, so maybe the Bills can have a Cowboys type implosion. If Terrell Owens did not like how Jeff Garcia, Donovan McNabb, and Tony Romo got him the ball, just wait until he gets the Trent Edwards experience. Granted it is only one year but Edwards is the most unaccomplished quarterback Owens has played with in a while.

One year is smart. More than that, history tells us, is stupid.

Exactly. This is very right.

Drew Rosenhaus, who I would like to punch in the face, was so not right when he said there was tons of teams who had an interest in Owens. He took a one year deal in Buffalo. Buffalo...for...one...year.

I asked Fitzgerald whether, five weeks later, the Super Bowl loss still stung. It seemed an odd time to ask the question, with him being on the other side of the world and doing some real good, but I asked anyway.

Peter King can't control his own thoughts. I wonder if this is his reasoning for being so in love with Brett Favre over the years.

"I showed up at Brett Favre's family Thanksgiving dinner, knocked on the window while they were in the dining room eating, and though it seemed like a bizarre time to ask him this, wondered if he would move to Montana with me and live like two men are naturally supposed to live."

"I can tell you this,'' he said, chuckling over the phone. "I'll never go the whole first half without a catch again in a Super Bowl.

Now there is a promise an athlete can probably keep. The odds of Fitzgerald going to the Super Bowl again are not great and the odds of his wonderfully brilliant offensive coordinator not making an effort to get him the ball are even worse.

John Kasay promised Panthers fans he would never kick the ball out of bounds in the Super Bowl again and Chris Webber promised he would never call timeout in the National Championship Game again. So far both have been able to live up to their promises.

He has 426 catches. He doesn't turn 26 'til a week before the 2009 season. It sounds heretical, but with that kind of attitude, he's got a chance, if he stays healthy and in the right offense, to make a run at Rice's record of 1,549 catches.

His father would still not stand up in the press box and clap for him if he did this. Though he would write 25 articles per year about his son, but then he is just doing his job and not being an uber-fan.

Kerry Collins will pass Joe Montana on the all-time passing yards list this year if he throws for 3,159 yards. Does anyone else find that amazing?

Dammit, I could not find the link for this, but I pointed this out a few weeks ago. Man yourselves Armageddon is nigh' and the first sportswriter that writes a "Kerry Collins should be in the Hall of Fame" article is getting smacked in head.

"I am going to be the same person that I was for the last three years with the Cowboys. I demand a lot from myself and from the guys around me. I'm sure those guys ... that I was with for the last three years all know that whatever is being said out there, it's not accurate.''--(Terrell) Owens.

I wonder what it is like to go through life and have absolutely no knowledge about what type of person you are and how others perceive you? I see it every day at my job but how out of touch with the world can you be that you don't even know how others perceive you?

I also wonder what it would be like to be able to say whatever random shit that comes out of your life in cliched sentences and not have anyone call you out on it.

My next question as a reporter in this room would be, "so ESPN is lying about your attempts to kill yourself or that you took too many pills...they made all that up, your quotes made on the radio about Jessica Simpson were fabricated, and your teammates will admit they lied about the comments that you divided the locker room? That is what you are saying?"

Factoid of the Week That May Interest Only Me

I wish I could pay more attention to the World Baseball Classic.

This is actually a perfect factoid, which we all know now is a comment that is borderline factual statement. It is actually perfect because Peter gives us no reason why he can't watch the WBC and he apparently can DVR Family Guy and the other shows he likes to watch, so why can't he watch the WBC?

It doesn't really matter to me, I just find it interesting he wants to watch something and feels strongly enough to mention it in his weekly column and he has DVR, but still doesn't watch it.

America's Adam Dunn said after the U.S. hung on Saturday to beat Canada in Toronto, 6-5. "This is the best experience I've ever had in baseball.'' And this is a guy who hits 40 home runs every year.

This is also a guy who has played his entire career for the Cincinnati Reds and is playing for the Washington Nationals this year. You have to understand where he is coming from. Being in playoff contention in August would also qualify for this honor.

The Kings are relocating to Boston.

I thought he meant the Sacramento Kings at first. Stupid me for being so focused on sports on a sports web site reading a column devoted to sports.

So the fact Peter King is moving to Boston, does that mean I can make fun of him more for being in love with New England and make fun of him for being a Red Sox fan? I think it does.

That incredibly loud gasp you heard was the entire of Massachusetts in shock that now they are going to have the King clan sharing their home state. They need to import a lot more coffee in preparation.

Being a 26-minute walk from Fenway didn't hurt in the deliberations.

It's actually only two blocks away. Peter is not as skinny as Kate Moss and probably gets tired and has to stop in Starbucks twice on the way.

5. Sitting on the back deck on an early-summer night, around June 20th, having the fifth beer, and enjoying the trees and the talk.

Then asking Brett for the fifth time in 10 minutes if he doesn't want to share a tent in the backyard.

6. The Upper Montclair Starbucks. It's sure to close without me propping it up.

He is kidding...I think. It would be funny if it did close after he left though.

I will not miss moving. The pain. The humanity. The sore back.

I find it hard to believe Peter King is moving himself. Either that or Peter King is having pangs of sympathy for other people, in which case this is a very nice thing for him to do. Clearly, I just believe he is lying when he infers he is moving himself.

2. I think the Cowboys had a good week, pressing the ejector button on Owens and signing versatile defensive lineman Igor Olshanky, who is a better buy at $4.5 million a year than Chris Canty at $7 million.

I think that is an incredibly good buy for Olshansky. I like him a lot and if he fit in with my favorite team's defense (4-3 with no blitzing, soft zones, 8 yards off the receiver...basically a prevent defense) I wish they would have tried to sign him. This is why I think the second tier of free agency is much more exciting than the first tier. You get so much more quality at a lower price. It's like Target.

I think if you're still looking at conspiracy theories about why the Patriots would trade Matt Cassel and Mike Vrabel for just a second-round draft choice, and you can't accept the three big reasons I gave you last week...Mike Vrabel had a $1 million roster bonus in his contract on March 1. That's 48 hours after the start of free-agency. The Patriots did not want to pay that bonus, obviously. So a trade had to get done by Saturday night, Feb. 28, and one got done Saturday afternoon, and it was the Chiefs that ended up paying the million to Vrabel.

As I have said repeatedly I don't care what the Patriots do with their players, it is their right, but trading Vrabel and Cassel quickly so you can avoid paying a $1 million dollar bonus to one of those players when there is almost $16 million dollars coming off the books makes borderline sense. Sure you want to get rid of that money, but if you can get an extra draft pick or two by waiting, I say do it. That being said, they did what they wanted and it is done.

5. I think the Redskins didn't get enough criticism the other day for whacking Jason Taylor. Ridiculous -- unless they were sure he couldn't perform at a high level because of his recent injury history.

So Peter wants to criticize the Redskins for cutting a guy who had 3.5 sacks last year, is going to be 35 next year, and only seemed to have a semi-interest in playing football professionally any more? I know Taylor could have a great year but he was also supposed to be make $8.5 million dollars this year. That's a lot for his production last year. I am not completely agreeing with the decision to release Jason Taylor, just pointing this type stuff out in response to Peter's strong response.

If you pay second- and sixth-round picks for a guy one year removed from being defensive player of the year, you define short-sighted. That is no way to build a team.

I don't really agree with releasing Jason Taylor but I disagree with this reasoning much more. Just because you overpay for a guy doesn't mean you should keep that guy on your roster to continue to try and justify this mistake. That is no way to build a team, keeping guys around who you don't believe are going to contribute to the team because you don't want to admit you are wrong. I think Taylor should have had one more year, but for performance reasons, not because the Redskins don't want to have egg on their face.

7. I think if I were Chris Simms, I'd have stayed in Nashville. Kerry Collins has a year, maybe two, left. And I don't see Vince Young playing there long-term. I just don't.

Two great investigative journalism calls here by Peter.

First, he believes Kerry Collins who just signed a new two year contract two weeks ago, will be in Tennessee another year or two. What a brilliant conclusion.

Second, Peter doesn't see Vince Young in Tennessee long term. I don't know whether the fact the Titans just gave a 36 year old quarterback a two year contract to be the starter, Young will have on year left on his contract when Collins' contract runs out, or the fact he will be owed $7.5 million in 2010 and the Titans are not going to pay him that to be a backup quarterback originally clued Peter into the fact that Young has seemingly no future in Tennessee.

Either way, Chris Simms would have been wise to stay in Tennessee, Peter King is correct about that, but this was one of his patented, "I am going to base this conclusion on something obvious but act as if it is not" statements.

8. I think LaDainian Tomlinson to the Saints makes all the sense in the world. Pierre Thomas takes 10 utilitarian carries a game, Reggie Bush gets 15 touches, and Tomlinson fulfills the Fred Taylor role -- the veteran who one game might carry it 23 times and the next might touch it six times. That'd keep him fresh and productive.

Brees, Tomlinson, Bush, and Colston on the same offense. No thanks, I am good. This doesn't have to happen.

If this happens look for a page and a half article by Peter King on how ironic it is that Brees and Tomlinson are playing together again. I am kidding, he hardly knows the Saints exist. If it were another couple of teams, then this could happen, but the only reason he goes near Louisiana is to see Brett Favre in Mississippi.

9. I think Tomlinson staying in San Diego makes no sense. He'll never be a 300-carry guy again, and A.J. Smith cannot pay for production of two and three years ago.

He can't fulfill the Fred Taylor role in San Diego? Why can he do this in New Orleans but not San Diego? If he is willing to take a pay cut, why not just stay where he is and take the pay cut, rather than move?

10. I think I'll many more some non-football thoughts next week, but I'll leave you with this one: Moving, at 51, has a certain energizing quality to it, and I'm excited.

As I said, he is hiring someone to move him. I still have nightmares from my last move from my room to the attic.

Happy Birthday to this crappy blog! I am taking it out later tonight for drinks if anyone wants to come.