8 comments Fresh Off a Week of Blaming Tom Coughlin for Using a "Safe" Strategy, Gregg Talks About How NFL Coaches Should Stop Playing It Safe

Gregg Easterbrook made his non-triumphant return to writing TMQ, albeit for a different news outlet, last week. I haven't met the person who is really excited that TMQ is back, but maybe I run in company that all think like I do. This week Gregg talks about how moving the extra point back hasn't been the cure-all to get NFL coaches to be more aggressive as some (umm...Peter King) thought that it might. For some reason, the "Times" hasn't updated the picture of Gregg beside his column. This really shouldn't bother me, but it does for some reason. Find a newer picture of Gregg and not one taken when he was in his early-40's. The new, shorter TMQ is a much easier read, but I don't understand why he is explaining his ridiculous nicknames for each NFL team. Those people who have read TMQ at ESPN are probably still reading it and don't need him to explain his ridiculous team nicknames. If Gregg does the explanation for new readers, well there were probably new readers every week at ESPN.com and he didn't explain the ridiculous nicknames on a weekly basis, so why explain them now? Actually, how about just calling each NFL team by it's real nickname? I guess that's not annoying enough.

The N.F.L.’s new try rule — “try” is the correct term, not point-after attempt, which applies only to kicks —

Don't be so pretentious about correcting what the right term would be to use. Pretend for a second you like sports and aren't an academic.

is having the desired effect of making after-touchdown placement attempts no longer automatic. In the 2014 season, there were eight missed extra-point kicks. Already this season, with extra-point attempts snapped from the 15-yard line instead of the 2, there have been nine.

Great success! The NFL can fix anything once they put their mind to it. You know, except for their inconsistent disciplinary policy.

But the flip side of the new rule — encouraging the deuce — has not panned out. This season there have been 15 two-point tries. That’s not the landslide expected by those who backed the rules change, considering an average of seven two-point tries in the first two weeks of the previous 10 seasons.

(ahem, Peter King)

NFL coaches are going to suddenly become less conservative after the extra point was moved back from being a 99% probability of success to a 90%-95% probability of success. That's exactly what will happen.

At work may be the same risk-aversion that causes N.F.L. coaches to order punts on fourth-and-short. A deuce try is essentially fourth-and-goal from the 2

Nooooooooooo, you think Gregg? You don't think the same coaches who punt on fourth-and-short are afraid to try for a two-point conversion, do you? It's not like the two-point conversion was moved up, so coaches still see a guaranteed point as better than trying the two-point conversion. The idea there would be initially be a substantial increase in two-point tries amuses me. That wasn't happening with the current attitude NFL coaches have towards the two-point conversion, so why would it change if the extra point was moved back slightly? 

If the coach sends in the kicker for the singleton attempt, he’s doing the “safe” thing. If the coach orders a deuce try that does not succeed, the coach is criticized.

Gregg believes that coaches make every decision based on avoiding criticism. This is his belief. Unlike Gregg, I can't read the minds of people, so I'm not sure if this is a correct assumption or not. I do believe NFL coaches are too conservative, but also that they see the advantage of kicking the extra point and guaranteeing that his team gets an additional point. The belief is the two-point conversion won't be converted at such a high rate as to justify kicking a two-point conversion rather than an extra point. When Gregg spends time in TMQ pointing out how the Bears couldn't get the ball in the end zone on four tries during Week 1, it doesn't help conservative coaches like John Fox to believe going for the two-point conversion is worth it.

I know they aren't totally analogous situations, but I can't help but laugh at Gregg and how he eviscerated the Giants for going for a touchdown, as opposed to doing the "safe" thing and running the clock out in Week 1 versus the Cowboys. Tom Coughlin didn't do the "safe" thing and was criticized. He essentially tried a two-point conversion to ice the game (except it would have been a touchdown) and Gregg thought this was a terrible decision. Remember this when Gregg talks about how NFL head coaches should go for two more often.

Chip Kelly, case in point. At Oregon, where Kelly was worshiped by the local media, he often went for two. This season, Kelly, who is getting hammered by the Philly sports press, has not ordered a deuce try.

Yeah, but..............

Of course it’s not as if he’s had a lot of touchdowns to work with.

"Here is my criticism of Chip Kelly and I want you to take it seriously, despite the fact I'm about to point out the fallacy of my criticism. The larger point is to ignore that Kelly hasn't had a lot of touchdowns to work with and take my observation from a two game sample seriously and see how it proves my larger point." 

What do the numbers show so far? Eight of 15 on deuce tries, 146 of 155 on extra-point kicks. This suggests 100 two-point attempts would produce 106 points, while 100 extra-point kicks would produce 94 points. That seems a strong case for attempting a deuce.

I mean, it does seem like a strong case for attempting the two-point conversion league-wide when using a sample size of 100 touchdowns. I don't think this information can be viewed in this way though. Each team may have different success rates on the two-point conversion over a sample of 100 touchdowns. It's like saying college basketball teams should never shoot a two-point shot because the average 3-point percentage is 38.6%, while the average 2-point percentage is 47.0%. So if a team only shot 3-pointers for 100 shots then that team will score 116 points, while they would only score 94 points if they only shot two-point shots. These percentages aren't necessarily true for every single college basketball team, and in terms of football, each team won't convert a two-point conversion at a rate of 53%. Like much of the reason a college basketball team might make 38.6% of 3-point shots is because some of these are open shots and teams are selective when taking these shots, an NFL team may try a two-point conversion because they have a two-point conversion play they feel they can run effectively against a certain team's defense.  

Because the N.F.L. is pass-wacky, coaches who do go for two are showing an inclination to throw.

Gregg will provide information below about the percentage of successful two-point conversions when teams pass and when they run the ball. At no point will he provide information on how many times teams attempted to pass and attempted to run the ball on two-point conversions. So who knows if teams are showing an inclination to throw? Gregg never provides information showing this.

Sunday, the Steelers and the Packers went with empty backfields on deuce attempts. Rushing for two might up the odds of success, making the deuce more attractive.

Or it might not. Gregg will see the results of teams running the ball on two-point conversions and then base his opinion on the outcome, like he normally does. 

Scott Kacsmar of Football Outsiders — by a huge margin the best independent football website —

A huge margin. It's a landslide. Football Outsiders is 47.62% better than any other independent football website. Wait, did I use too much specificity for Gregg when rounding to the hundredth decimal?

recently analyzed all N.F.L. two-point tries from 1994 to 2014. He found that 44 percent of passing deuces were successful, while 56 percent of rushing deuces were.

I would be interested to know how many two-point attempts were rushes and how many were passing attempts. I feel like this would be interesting information for me to know in order to decide if the rushing attempts were successful because defenses predominantly are used to facing passing attempts on two-point conversions. 

The numbers show that N.F.L. coaches ought to try for two, and ought to do so by rushing. Instead they are avoiding the deuce, or when they do try for two, are ordering passes. This is National Football League resistance to change in a nutshell.

Yes, the NFL is resisting changing to a running league. For decades, passing has been the law around the NFL, while rushing has been given the short stick. But now, NFL teams need to run the ball more, despite the entire history of the NFL being a passing league and that's how touchdowns have traditionally been scored. 

The Steelers’ try succeeded, putting Pittsburgh ahead, 8-0, and firing up the home crowd. Seeing their coaches go all-in to win, rather than stick with “safe” tactics, seemed to fire up Steelers players, too, setting in motion a runaway victory.

These aggressive tactics fired up the Steelers team and that's why they won the game. The natural question would be why the aggressive tactics that Tom Coughlin showed the week before when trying to score a touchdown rather than running out the clock didn't fire up the Giants, but don't worry about the failure of non-"safe" tactics in helping the Giants lose a game and just focus on when "safe" tactics win games for NFL teams. There's no need to pay attention to when Gregg's contentions don't seem true and he instead criticizes a head coach for not playing it "safe." Do whatever ends up working, that's all Gregg asks for head coaches to do.

Did Bill Belichick Stage the PSIcheated Scandal to Get Brady Fired Up? Last season’s No. 1 pass defense was Seattle, and the No. 3 unit belonged to Buffalo. At the Super Bowl, Tom Brady threw for 328 yards against the best pass defense; Sunday, he torched the third-best pass defense for 466 yards. At times, Brady was toying with the Boastful Bills.

It's almost like Tom Brady is a really good quarterback or something. 

He completed 18 passes for 210 yards and three touchdowns to Rob Gronkowski and Julian Edelman, and it just never seemed to occur to Buffalo that Gronkowski and Edelman were being targeted.

OR, Gronkowski and Edelman are really good football players who find a way to get open when running the offensive plays called by Josh McDaniels, who is most likely calling plays in an effort to get these two players open. Simply because a team knows a certain receiver is being targeted doesn't mean that team can stop that receiver from catching the football. If that were true, then the best wide receivers in the NFL would barely catch any passes. There is a difference in knowing these two players are targeted and actually being able to stop these two players from catching the football. Because Gregg makes everything black and white, I wouldn't expect him to understand this difference. 

At Buffalo, the recent waiver-wire acquisitions Dion Lewis and Scott Chandler combined for nine receptions for 121 yards. Lewis, dubbed a bust by the Eagles, the Browns and the Colts,

Dion Lewis was a 5th round pick. I don't think any team will call a 5th round pick a "bust" by any stretch of the imagination. Gregg consistently fails to understand that some running backs fit the system one team may run better than he fits the system another team may run. The Patriots like pass catching running backs and lost Shane Vereen in free agency. The Eagles had Darren Sproles to catch passes and LeSean McCoy to run the football, so they didn't need Lewis on the team. I can't speak for the Browns and Colts, but maybe the Patriots know how to utilize Lewis better within their system. Either way, not one of those three teams think a 5th round pick is a "bust."

blitz-blocked well and ran two perfect “wheel” routes, the most challenging pass pattern for a tailback.

Yes, this wheel route is the most challenging pass pattern for all tailbacks. Every single one of them believe this. There are no exceptions and don't question this. 

Two undrafted free agents started on the New England offensive line and noticeably outperformed Buffalo’s megabucks defensive line of three Pro Bowlers.

How did the left tackle and right tackle for the Patriots do in this game? You know, the first and second round picks who have a combined cap hit of $12.6 million. Did they do okay during the game or they don't merit a mention since they aren't undrafted players? 

What is Belichick injecting these guys with? I’m guessing grape Ovaltine. But I’m still trying to confirm that story.

This is remarkably unfunny and incoherent. 

Stop Me Before I Blitz Again! Jersey/A leading Atlanta 20-17 with 1:53 remaining, the host Giants big-blitzed, leaving Julio Jones single-covered deep for a 38-yard touchdown reception that gave the visitors the lead.

Yeah, but why would any team double-cover Julio Jones? He's just a highly-paid glory boy who doesn't block in the run game and is singlehandedly to blame for the Falcons not making the playoffs in a given season.

I still love how Gregg considers Jones to be one of the best receivers in the NFL when it was just last year Gregg was discussing how the mega-trade for Jones didn't work out for the Falcons because of the team's record since drafting Jones. Gregg wants his readers to choose to not remember or simply forget about all the things he's written about Julio Jones since 2011. 

Defensive Tackles Cash In, Zone Out. Coming into the season, defensive tackles Ndamukong Suh and Marcell Dareus signed mega-contracts, each with around $60 million guaranteed. Both are celebrating by seeming to take the 2015 season off. Sunday, Suh’s stat line was one tackle, nothing else, as Miami lost to the woeful Jaguars. Sunday, the Bills’ Dareus was totally outplayed by the undrafted New England free-agent rookie David Andrews.

Yes, Suh is paid to get tackles, but that's not really all he does as a defensive tackle. Same thing for Dareus, but I get Gregg's point based on a one game sample size.

In the Dolphins’ opener, the cloak of invisibility was draped over Suh by the Washington rookie Brandon Scherff.

What else would you expect from a highly-paid, glory boy like Brandon Scherff? Though the Redskins are now 1-2, so the Redskins decision to draft Scherff has not paid off with wins. Using Gregg's logic to criticize Julio Jones, this must mean that Scherff was not worth the draft pick.

Sunday, Scherff neutralized Aaron Donald, who has been playing well.

Here is a great example of Gregg Easterbrook lying to his readers and hoping that no one has the energy to look his lie up. Welp, I have the energy and Gregg is a liar. Donald's line from the game:

0.5 sacks and three tackles. Is the really "neutralizing" Aaron Donald? At that rate, he would end the season with 8 sacks and 48 tackles. I'm pretty sure that would make him one of the best DT's in the NFL if those were his statistics over a full season.

N.F.L. received wisdom is that guards should not go high in the first round. Chosen fifth in the 2015 draft, Scherff is the highest-drafted guard since 1975, when Ken Huff was selected third over all.

Facts are so annoying! The Redskins drafted Scherff as a tackle and not a guard. Yes, he is currently playing tackle, but the plan was for Scherff to be a tackle in the NFL. So he can play both positions, but he wasn't drafted as a pure guard. 

All units, all units, be on the lookout for the Seattle Seahawks, who stretching back to last season have lost three straight. Then again, in 2014 the Seahawks opened 3-3 and looked blah: They ended that season one snap away from a Lombardi Trophy.

"Here's the point I want to prove about the Seahawks, they are just not very good, but don't listen to me because they have been not good in the past before and almost won the Super Bowl. Well, do listen to me, but don't listen to the parts I don't want you to pay attention to, which is mostly that you shouldn't be listening to me." 

All units, all units, be on the lookout for an explanation for the Washington defense, currently ranked No. 1.

After two games against the Rams and Dolphins. That was before they gave up 363 yards to the New York Giants. 

Undrafted and in the News. Undrafted Seth Roberts of Division II West Alabama — school of undrafted Malcolm Butler, Super Bowl hero — caught the winning touchdown pass as Oakland upset Baltimore.

Who threw the ball? Oh yeah, highly-paid glory boy second round pick Derek Carr. Nice how Gregg leaves that out.

Bot Meets Barbie. Maybe The Upshot’s 4th Down Bot should ask A.I. Barbie out. Their first-date conversation:

4th Down Bot: How’s your burrito? Hey, can you believe Chip Kelly punted on fourth-and-1 at midfield against the Cowboys?

A.I. Barbie: I love what you’ve done with your grappling hooks! And those new treads really complement your look.

4th Down Bot: People say I’m just a machine. Nobody understands me. You’ve been dealing with “she’s just a doll” for like 50 years. How do you handle it?

A.I. Barbie: I believe in gurl power! Why don’t you use your parents’ credit card to order some genuine Mattel fashion accessories for me?

This is shockingly unfunny. There's no punchline and no point to it. 

Johnny Football Report. Last season, Johnny Manziel started a game for the Browns in which his team had 38 snaps, a season low for the league. (N.F.L. teams average 64 snaps per game.) Sunday, Manziel started and the Browns won, with just 47 snaps. Nearly all of Cleveland’s passing offense came on two plays, completions of 60 and 50 yards. Defenses are choking up to stop Manziel from scrambling, which allows the occasional deep throw. But if Cleveland doesn’t snap the ball more, the Browns won’t go far.

I mean, yes and no. Yes, they won't go far if they don't snap the ball much because their defense is on the field and the offense can't manage to stay on the field. But no, they could go far if the Browns are possessing the football on long drives that lead to points on the board for the offense. 

I’d Rather Be Blue. Boise State is on a 94-4 run when playing at home. This has something to do with its recruiting edge over many opponents — the Broncos just had their way with lower-division Idaho State — and with Boise’s 2,700-foot elevation. But T.M.Q. thinks the blue turf is a factor. 

Yet all N.F.L. turf remains standard-issue. The City of Tampa Buccaneers (see explanation below) could make their ugly new video-game-icon uniforms less visible by playing on Creamsicle orange turf that harks back to the founding of the franchise. The Cleveland Browns could make their new kids-pajamas uniforms less visible by playing on turf that’s Tootsie Roll brown. The 49ers could install black turf as camouflage for their Black-Widow-inspired new unis. Why don’t N.F.L. teams explore the possibilities?

Because the NFL has a strict dress code about players can wear their socks and what celebrations a player can and can not do after a touchdown. Does Gregg really think the NFL will allow the Colts to paint their turf all blue? The NFL had a six month investigation into whether a football was missing air by a few tenths of the regulation PSI, but they are going to let the Saints have a gold field? Get the fuck out of here if this is a real question. 

Ye Gods. The Eagles have 70 yards rushing this season. DeMarco Murray has carried 21 times for 11 yards. At Dallas, Murray played behind the league’s best offensive line. Maybe his Boys stats were a reflection of the blocking.

Maybe a running back's statistics are partly dependent on how well his offensive line blocks for him! This is such an obvious observation I have no doubt that Gregg will have an entire TMQ dedicated to trying to figure out the answers. Yes, maybe the fact the Cowboys have the best offensive line in the NFL does have something to do with DeMarco Murray's great rushing statistics last year. Look for Gregg to explore this idea further in an upcoming TMQ. I have no doubt he will. 

Does Belichick Have Hillary’s Missing Emails? Bill Belichick is so paranoid that the team’s website says UNOFFICIAL DEPTH CHART lest an opponent glean some minute tactical advantage from knowing who’s third string at tight end.

Or he just wants everyone to know the Patriots have no official depth chart and will start certain players (especially running backs) depending on the matchup and which players he perceives will give the Patriots an advantage. I'm not sure Belichick is paranoid about opposing teams knowing the depth chart more than he wants people to be aware the depth chart changes on a weekly basis at times. 

College Punting Follies. Hosting Florida State in a high-profile N.C.A.A. game, Boston College punted on fourth-and-2 at midfield, then punted again on fourth-and-2 at midfield. Just to prove it was no fluke, the Eagles also punted in Florida State territory. With five minutes remaining and the visitors up, 14-0, then Boston College went for it. This demonstrates a pattern in coaching decisions on fourth down. Early in the game, when going for it on fourth down might help a team win — but also would expose the coach to criticism if the conversion attempt fails — coaches do the safe thing and order punts.

Yes, it was a "high-profile" NCAA game. I don't know if I understand what "high-profile" means in this situation, other than Florida State is a highly ranked team, but I don't think even Gregg knows what he's talking about much of the time. 

Adventures in Officiating. In the closing seconds of Texans at Panthers, there was confusing over whether a throwing motion was a pass or fumble; whether if a pass, it was grounding; whether Houston could avoid a 10-second runoff by calling a timeout after the fact; and what the clock should be reset to. Zebras required 6 minutes 15 seconds to figure out the spot, down and time remaining.

The official did go to the review booth I believe, so there seems to have been four separate things that needed to be determined on this play. So it's not shocking that it took over six minutes to figure it out, given the fact the official went to the replay booth and had to determine four separate issues on this play. 

Many big-college football coaches, including Nick Saban, yell four-letter-words at players on the sideline, behaving in abusive ways that would get a college professor suspended. Many college football coaches seem to view themselves as little gods;

Probably because the school treats them like little gods and therefore they end up viewing themselves that way. When the coach is the highest paid person at a university and he gets almost anything he wants, then you can see how he would view himself as a god. 

St. Louis at Washington Note. Since the 2012 RG3 mega-trade, Les Mouflons and the Potomac Drainage Basin Indigenous Persons are a combined 38-61-1, with only one above-.500 season in the six between these two clubs. This suggests the transaction was lose-lose.

This is partly why Gregg wrote last year in TMQ that mega-trades don't work. Except for that mega-trade for Julio Jones, which Gregg doesn't talk about anymore because the ridiculous bullshit he asserts about Jones being responsible for the Falcons record is even now too ridiculous and bullshitty for even Gregg to keep asserting.

Rex Ryan Boast of the Week. Ryan is nothing if not entertaining — his news conferences should have an opening monologue. Before the New England game, he mocked the Steelers for a blown coverage that left Rob Gronkowski uncovered, then assured “we’ll have somebody on him.” When Gronkowski flanked wide left in a goal-to-go situation — usually he flanks wide right — the Buffalo defense was confused. Cornerbacks were gesturing and shouting at one another; Ryan did not call a timeout. 

Maybe Rex Ryan should have called a timeout. That's a possibility. The problem is a team only has so many timeouts per half and coaches really don't like burning these timeouts. There's no way for a head coach to predict that if he doesn't call timeout then the other team will score a touchdown. Maybe I'm being too kind to head coaches, but by the time he sees the confusion then it's possible the offense has snapped the ball or he can't the attention of an official to call timeout. Gregg's suggestion is always just "Call a timeout" when that's not always a reasonable solution that can take place. 

Clearly the Patriots have zero respect for Ryan’s boasting, and hoped to increase the victory margin. Ryan talks a great game, Belichick barely talks at all. Which approach works?

Probably the approach that has Tom Brady as his team's quarterback. That is the approach I would take. 

T.M.Q. Lexicon Note. Tampa is the name of the place where the Buccaneers perform. Tampa Bay is a body of water. Thus to T.M.Q. this franchise is the City of Tampa Bucs. Since Green Bay is the city name, Green Bay Packers is fine.

Congratulations, Packers! Your name is fine and Gregg won't rename you with some stupid nickname that is the Gregg Easterbrook version of Peter King's Adieu Haiku. 

The Washington franchise name is offensive. The Potomac Drainage Basin Indigenous Persons nicely captures the spirit of the team, plus it’s pleasing to see Dan Snyder’s name near the word “drainage.”

I don't know why Gregg insists on giving an origin story for why he calls NFL teams these ridiculous nicknames. I'm just thankful that we missed the TMQ NFL season preview that really isn't a preview because all it does is talk about what happened with these NFL teams last year.

6 comments MMQB Review: Peter King Knew The Patriots Would Blow Out the Colts, Except When He Thought Colts-Patriots Would Be a Close Game

Peter King described how the Cowboys got screwed by the officials in last week's MMQB (they didn't get screwed by the officials IN MMQB, but had a call against them in a game against Green Bay and Peter discussed it in MMQB) and named some poor guy who shouldn't be starting in the NFL as his "Goat of the Week." This week Peter talks about the Seahawks "suddenly" being super like they weren't the #1 seed in the NFC, again fucks up his "Goat of the Week" award, and appreciates it when a coffee shop cradles his balls just a little bit.

In the Seahawks’ locker room, maybe 45 minutes after the NFC Championship Game ended, I stood and looked around.

Where the defensive backs dressed, there was Richard Sherman grimacing as his father, Kevin, helped him put his shirt on, gingerly maneuvering his hyperextended left elbow. “Dressing him just like when he was a little boy,” a bystander said.

Okay, you got him. That bystander was Peter and he followed this observation up by saying, "Isn't it so precocious seeing Sherman's father dress him?" to nearly everyone he could find in the locker room. No one agreed.

Tight end Luke Willson, the shaggy Canadian, regaled one wave of the media (there would be others) with the story of an amazing two-point conversion that will go down in Seahawks lore—as will so many things that happened on a windswept and rainy championship Sunday. Willson had a goofy look on his face, like he still couldn’t believe what happened.

It was a goofy, precocious look to be exact.

Then, in middle of the lockers in the corner of the room, Russell Wilson, his face still streaked with tears and eyeblack, the happiest guy in the room,

Because he wasn't very good for 55 minutes of the game and then pulled off a great comeback with the Packers' help.

Oh, many things. Thirty-one seasons I’ve covered the NFL, going back to a training camp in 1984 in Wilmington, Ohio, covering Paul Brown’s Bengals and watching many a hot summer practice alongside Brown. And I started to think of the great games I’ve covered and how they’d compare to this one. The only one that came to mind, standing there in the Seattle locker room, was the ridiculous Houston-Buffalo wild-card game 22 years ago, with Buffalo down 35-3 in the third quarter playing a backup quarterback and, of course, coming back to win.

This may have been the best comeback in NFL recorded history. Including, you guessed it, THE TRIASSIC PERIOD.

But this game … this was different from anything. It was the suddenness. It was Seattle being awful for 55 minutes, as bad as they’d been in any Pete Carroll Era game of consequence, Russell Wilson capping the worst game of his high school, college or pro football career with his fourth interception with 5:04 left. At that moment, Green Bay led 19-7, and it shouldn’t have been that close.

But it was that close because of constant dumbassery and stupidfuckery by the Packers, who apparently weren't concerned about scoring any more points on offense or on defense when they intercepted Russell Wilson for the fourth time. Who needs more points? Let's just pump the brakes, slow the game down and play not to lose. That'll work.

Wilson came to the sideline and made a beeline for offensive coordinator Darrell Bevell.

“We’re gonna win it,” Wilson said. “I know we’re gonna win it.”

And he said he had a play he knew was going to work.

It is the quarterback's job to keep everyone on the sidelines motivated and with their mind still in the game. So naturally, Russell Wilson would say this. Also, how many times has a quarterback come to the sidelines and said, "I know we're going to win it" and the team ended up losing and nobody cared what the quarterback said because his team lost? Probably an innumerable amount of times. When that quarterback's team wins, he's calling his shot. It's not exactly like that. As always, sportswriters can't just let a great moment be a great moment. There always has to be a little something that makes it extra special.

Something historic is going to happen in 13 days in Arizona, now that we know that the two top seeds in the 2014 playoffs—14-4 New England and 14-4 Seattle—will be meeting in Super Bowl 49.

Any time the Super Bowl is played something historic happens because a team wins the Super Bowl, thereby making history.

Either the Seahawks will become the first team in a decade, and the ninth team all-time, to win back-to-back Super Bowls. Or the Patriots, in their sixth Super Bowl appearance, will finally win their fourth title of the Brady-Belichick Era after a decade of knocking at the door and not winning one.

Align your narratives and stories now! Will the Patriots win a fourth Super Bowl or will the Seahawks win back-to-back Super Bowls? Which is a more historic and momentous accomplishment? Skip and Stephen A. will debate this point and more after the break!

Super Bowls are more often duds than scintillating affairs, and this matchup promises nothing.

This is not entirely true. Maybe in the 80's and 90's this were more true, but since 1998 there have been only four Super Bowls that I wouldn't describe as interesting to watch where the teams played a non-competitive game. So I don't really know what Peter is talking about, other than he always has an recency bias where the last event to happen was THE SINGLE MOST IMPORTANT EVENT THAT WILL SET THE STANDARD FOR ALL OF THE EVENTS TO FOLLOW and because last year's Super Bowl was a blowout, the next one will be too.

On the surface you’d give the Patriots a ton of credit for eviscerating a team in the conference championship game, but the Colts were such paper tigers that it’s hard to know if New England is the 2007 Patriots or just a team that took advantage of a weak foe.

Oh, now Peter is saying the Colts were paper tigers. Is that why he wrote a column asking if the game would come down to a kick and predicted the score as 30-27 saying Rob Gronkowski would help the Patriots "eke one out"? Paper tigers and all, right? What a crock of shit. It's hilarious how Peter changes his tune about the Colts after they get blown out. Ignoring how close he claimed the game would be, Peter always knew the Colts were a weak opponent. He just didn't know that he knew. It must be one of those things he thinks that he thinks.

We’ll get to New England pounding the rock and routing the Colts … and to the other news of the week in the NFL—including the reunion of the first and 197^th picks of the 1983 NFL Draft. (Bet you can’t figure that one out.)

Bet I don't care.

But come back to gusty Seattle, and see, chapter and verse, why Russell Wilson got so teary-eyed Sunday night.

Bet I know why without reading why Russell Wilson got so teary-eyed Sunday night and it's not because he learned his ex-wife won't be able to get a portion of the new contract he signs with the Seahawks.

Then Peter goes play-by-terrible-play by the Packers to show how the Seahawks won the NFC title when the Packers collapsed.

The Seahawks had gotten the ball back at their own 46 on a punt. On their first play, Wilson fired over the middle, and the ball deflected off of Kearse’s hands, right to Burnett. Oddly, with at least five yards of green in front of him, Burnett took just a couple of steps after the interception and then dived down and covered up. He didn’t want to fumble there or get the ball stripped. But the game wasn’t over. I looked for Burnett in the Packers’ locker room after the game to talk to him, but I never saw him. I’d love to know why he didn’t try to gain some yards, even if it was with both arms protecting the ball like an old-time fullback. What safety in the open field doesn’t want to try to score?

Two issues here:

1. I didn't know why Morgan Burnett didn't try to score either. At the time I thought he should have and I know he wishes he had. It makes sense when there is below two minutes left to slide, but not in that instance.

2. Burnett's slide could be irrelevant because he probably figured what I figured at the time. The Green Bay offense, the best offense in the NFL, could get a few first downs and milk the clock. But since Mike McCarthy decided it would be best to not trust the NFL MVP to throw the football, the Packers did not get a first down and everything became broken and terrible. Burnett's decision to slide to the ground then came into play. His decision was dumb, but it didn't lose the game any more than the Packers terrible offensive play-calling lost the game.

Seattle stacked the box, and Mike McCarthy, desperately trying to run out the clock, took the ball out of the efficient Aaron Rodgers’ hands. McCarthy played clockball. Lots of coaches would have done the same, to be sure. But the drive after Burnett’s interception was beyond fruitless. Seattle stopped Eddie Lacy for minus-four on first down. Timeout, Seattle. Lacy again, against a stacked box. Minus-two. Timeout, Seattle. Lacy again, against a stacked box, gain of two. No timeout. Punt. Seattle ball at its 31, 3:52 to play.

This is the second time in three years that a dumbass head coach took the ball out of an elite quarterback's hands. John Fox did it to Peyton Manning three years ago when he didn't let Manning drive down the field for a field goal against the Ravens with one timeout left, instead choosing to kneel the ball down. For God's sake, trust your elite quarterback. It doesn't have to be this hard.

“I’m not questioning [the play-calling],” said McCarthy. “I came in here to run the ball. One statistic I had as far as a target to hit … was 20 rushing attempts in the second half. I felt that would be a very important target to hit for our offense.”

Even Mike Shula and his playbook of 15 offensive plays wouldn't be dumb enough to say something like "I've targeted this amount of running plays" as a goal that somehow means more than winning the fucking game. This is madness. This is also why the Patriots are so good. Belichick has no target for running plays. He has one target, winning the game. How he wins? Who cares?

“You mean the Whirly Bird Two-Pointer?’’

That’s what Luke Willson, the tight end from Ontario (Canada, not California),

Even though I never would have gotten this confused, thanks for clearing up a misconception I never would have had. Thanks again, Peter King (the sportswriter, not the Congressman).

Wilson, from the far sideline at the 18, knowing he was going to get blasted, threw a high-arcing prayer. That’s what it was. A 1-in-50 Hail Mary.
“If you run that two-point 100 times,” Wilson was asked later, “how many times do you make it?”

Peter apparently believes the Seahawks would make it twice, hence the "1-in-50 Hail Mary" comment. Maybe Peter didn't share that stat with Wilson. As a graduate of Wisconsin (the university, not the state) I know Wilson could figure out the answer if Peter King had provided the statistic to him.

“I was shocked to see it coming,” Willson said. “I’m not involved in that play—at all.”
Willson boxed out the Green Bay coverage, caught the ball at the 1, and burst into the end zone.

The Seahawks' end zone, Willson didn't burst into the Packers' end zone. Peter wants to clear that up.

It shouldn’t have been this easy. But because Lynch was so productive in the second half (he had 120 of his 157 rushing yards after halftime), Green Bay decided to crowd the box and force Wilson to beat them. On a third-and-seven from the Seattle 30, Baldwin got behind Green Bay corner Casey Hayward, and Wilson lofted a perfect ball over his shoulder. Gain of 35.

Which as I said in my preview is the exact type of shit the Seahawks wanted the Packers to do so they could loft a pass into single coverage. Why must Dom Capers be so stupid?

Wilson’s choice here was clear, as he approached the line to get the snap. If even one of Green Bay’s safeties stayed deep, the call was a run to Lynch. If both were sneaking toward the line, he’d audible to a deep throw, to Kearse.

Then the Packers did it again. Just gave the Seahawks single coverage with no safeties over the top. It's maddening to me.

Wilson let go of the ball at the Packer 43. It came down at the one, leading Kearse perfectly. The coverage was tight—borderline interference, in fact, with Williams’ hands going around Kearse’s neck as the ball arrived. “I felt I was in good position,” Williams said. “But he made the throw, and I couldn’t get the ball out. The guy made a good catch, Russell made a good throw. Good read.”

Good read and also exactly what the Seahawks wanted. They don't mind running the football, but it's those chances to take a shot deep they love almost equally as much.

I found Wilson afterward, and asked him about the four picks, and going from the worst game of his life to the most exhilarating in the span of eight minutes of game time.

“That’s God setting it up, to make it so dramatic, so rewarding, so special,” he said,

Since God is deeply involved with the plan on how the game will end up, then why did God give the Packers four interceptions and then take the game away from them? Clearly, God hates the Green Bay Packers. I just need to know why His plan was to screw them over. I'm sure it has something to do with Olivia Munn.

You get the feeling watching the Patriots, and listening to them after the 38-point rout of the Colts in the AFC Championship Game, that the pressure is on. Reaching a sixth Super Bowl in 14 years won’t be enough. They’ve got to win this one.

This is as opposed to the other two Super Bowls that the Patriots lost which sportswriters insisted the Patriots just HAD to win.

“This team,” said Tom Brady on Sunday night, “is going to have to win one more important game to kind of leave our legacy.”

And as Gregg Easterbrook so astutely points out, this is why Bill Belichick made it a specific purpose to try and win as many games as possible this past season.

I’ll have more an analysis of where the Patriots stand Tuesday. But I’m really looking forward to the Super Bowl. I could see the Patriots in a rout. I could see the Seahawks in a rout.

Most likely Peter will predict it to be a close game and then call one of the teams a "paper tiger" after that team gets blown out in the Super Bowl.

And, judging by what we’ve seen with the Patriots’ tackle-eligible play, and Seattle throwing touchdown passes to rookie tackles, coaching will be a very big part of Super Bowl 49.

You heard it hear first. Coaching will be a very big part of Super Bowl 49. This probably comes as a big shock to you like it did me.

One final thing: Bob Kravitz of WTHR reported this morning that the league would investigate the Patriots for deflating some footballs Sunday night in the championship game. We’ll see how that develops today. I didn’t hear about this until well after midnight, so I’m not sure about its significance. But if true, theoretically doing so could—could, not would—make a football easier to throw and catch. Again, we’ll see if this has any legs today.

It didn't affect the outcome of the game, but because it's the Patriots then I'm sure it will be a big deal of sorts.

Some coaching thoughts, including the most pressure-packed job by far.
 
SAN FRANCISCO 49ERS

I bring up Van Gorder because Jim Tomsula—to those outside the Bay Area, and to some inside it—is just such an unknown figure, a hire that screams, “What? Are you kidding? A defensive line coach, ascending to head coach one of the league’s flagship teams?”

It has nothing to do with Tomsula being a defensive line coach, but more to do with the fact he seems like a lackey for Trent Baalke and has made a terrible impression in terms of meeting with the media and public so far.

But now, add to that what we saw during and after the introductory press conference in Santa Clara, and in an interview with Comcast Bay Area that was, to put it kindly, an unmitigated disaster.

Which makes a person wonder if he is ready for the job as the 49ers head coach. Maybe he just sucks at talking and is a coaching savant. Part of being an NFL head coach is making decisions and from what I've seen from Tomsula so far I wouldn't let him order me a burrito at Chipotle.

I know the 49ers PR staff, and there’s little question in my mind they had Tomsula well-prepared for his opening act.

Except he clearly wasn't well-prepared, Peter. It was obvious in the interviews he did where he stammered and came off as standoff-ish that either was not prepared or is terrified of speaking to other humans.

If you’re Jed York, you want Tomsula to succeed or fail on his own merits, on the football bottom line, not on how he deals with the media.

Actually, if you are Jed York, you want Tomsula to succeed like Harbaugh did but just not be as big of a pain in the ass.

Last spring, Bears coach Marc Trestman and quarterback Jay Cutler flew to New York to meet with a consultant, Dov Seidman, whom the NFL had retained to teach teams about winning with good core values and a positive culture. Trestman didn’t say as much, but clearly he was looking for ways for Cutler to become a better leader, and for the team to embrace a no-hazing, positive-locker-room culture. “I wanted to find out what else we could do to keep growing,” Trestman told me then. This is no criticism of that; not at all. I like Trestman’s efforts. But I see John Fox teaching accountability and responsibility more the old-fashioned way, stressing hard work and handling misbehavior with an iron fist rather than a gloved one.

Well, sort of. It depends on whether it is a player that John Fox likes and needs in order to win games or not. He never really ruled Steve Smith with an iron fist because Smith was his best receiver. I could write a book on John Fox and my thoughts on him. He has to be one of the best/most frustrating NFL head coaches I've ever seen.

As for the style of football, I though former NFL defensive back Matt Bowen put it very well in the Chicago Tribune on Sunday, saying playing against a Fox team involved a series of “downhill collisions in the hole that felt like a train wreck.” Wrote Bowen: “I’m talking about old school stuff when you lined up versus those squads … put on your big boy pads and got ready to hit. You were in for a fight. Tough, nasty football—with nowhere to hide. Those were the most physical games I can remember playing during my journeyman career in the league. Fox will bring that physical style to Chicago as the Bears coach. I can guarantee that. You want to see a shift, a change in the football culture from Marc Trestman’s Bears? This is it.”

That wasn’t what the Denver Broncos were at the end of Fox’s tenure. One of the reasons Elway didn’t mind shaking up the team is he didn’t see the passion he’d hoped to see, particularly with the offense struggling in the last few weeks of the 2014 season.

That's not my memory of Fox either. I remember a lot of playing off receivers and the opposing team's tight end constantly killing the Panthers. I also remember Fox's refusal to adjust tactics mid-game because, dammit, this is his plan and he's sticking to it. I also remember a lot of fourth down punting.

All five head-coaching openings before Sunday had been filled by defensive coaches.

I’m not prepared to say this is some major shift in the game. Even with the likelihood that six of the seven openings will be filled by men with a defensive background, it doesn’t mean the game is changing. I don’t believe it.

Well, of course not. It's not as if from now on teams will hire only defensive coaches to be that team's head coach. It's just a recent trend. Sometimes Peter struggles with a trend and how that trend may not mean a major shift in the game of football. Glad to see that may not happen here.

I’m leaning toward this being more of a coincidence than anything else, after speaking to some of the decision-makers. Tomsula has been a longtime favorite of COO Jed York and GM Trent Baalke. Ryan was the kind of leader and community beacon the Buffalo front office was seeking. Oakland owner Mark Davis loved Del Rio from their first interview. Bowles had all the right answers for the Jets—who, by the way, have hired six defense-based head coaches in a row.

It also so happens the best candidates for NFL head coaching jobs are currently defensive guys. It may be no more than that.

So it’s fairly close. Defense 17, Offense 14, with one job open. The two on Atlanta’s short list are defensive coordinators—Quinn and Teryl Austin of Detroit. It’s not a landslide for the defense, certainly. Just something to monitor. The next question is this: Is there any reason why the more charismatic leaders are on defense, assuming they are?

I think playing defense is more of an attitude which plays into defensive head coaches getting their guys ramped up, while offensive coordinators are seen as more of the type of coaches who are more strategic and aggressive in a different way.

Maybe I’m the only one who finds this stuff interesting.

Regarding the future of pro football on television, I asked NFL executive vice president/media Brian Rolapp, also the president and CEO of NFL Network, about it recently. We could be a decade away from real change in the way we watch football. A snippet of our conversation:

Not that Peter being the only one who finds something interesting would ever keep him from covering that topic in MMQB of course.

Rolapp: “We spend a lot of time talking to [Google and Facebook] about when will the Internet be ready to distribute live NFL games. That’s always a question I get: ‘Well, when is Google going to carry a game package?’ I think the answer is once an Internet player can sustain 30 million users at the level and the quality that they expect to get on television. Five years ago, we were like, We don’t see that. Now? That might be possible as we sit with the Google guys.”
Me: “When?”

Peter, that's the question he just answered for you. Here it is in case you were leering at someone taking a picture in front of the Apple logo while listening to the original answer:

I think the answer is once an Internet player can sustain 30 million users at the level and the quality that they expect to get on television.

So naturally after getting that answer Peter follows up with the question of, "When?"

Me: “With the Google experiment, how would that work? They would obviously want exclusive regular season games. So, is that realistic to think that you would put some of your games someday on a platform like that versus an over-the-air television network?”

Because Rolapp is going to commit to Google being able to do regular season games on a computer when he doesn't know when the technology will be available for this to even happen. Rolapp doesn't know when the technology will be available, but he knows for certain that it's realistic for Google to air regular season games. That makes sense.

Rolapp: “Look, our broadcast contracts go through 2022. We’ve made our bed. And in 2023? I don’t know. I don’t know the answer to that.

Then Peter started paying attention again and asked, "Do you know when you plan on having Google air regular season games?"

The Fine Fifteen

T-1. Seattle (14-4).I don’t know how Vegas makes a line for Supe 49.

I don't know why the "r" in "Super" and the word "Bowl" are missing from this sentence. Maybe Peter is trying out some new slang.

Peter doesn't know who will win Supe 49, but he knows the New Patrio and the Seat Seaks are going to both be very excited and ready to play in Supe 49 and Ari is going to make a fantastic host.

T-1. New England (14-4). You can look at it like Seattle escaped and New England dominated, but let’s be real: The Colts were not worthy of being in the NFL’s final four. They did earn a spot in the AFC title game, so good for them. But they are not the fourth-best team in football. They’re fortunate to be fifth.

Again, Peter had the Patriots winning by only 3 points and said they would "eke out" the victory. He's talking boldly about the Colts today when he wasn't so bold about how the Colts weren't worthy of being in the AFC Championship Game last week. I guess "we" learned something "we" didn't know this past weekend.

Peter didn't mention in last week's MMQB how unworthy the Colts were either, instead writing:

5. Indianapolis (12-6). Andrew Luck in the Final Four. It was a matter of time, and Year 3 seems just right.

Now all of a sudden the Colts were phonies.

And New England’s really, really good. I think it has the potential to be an all-timer of a Super Bowl in Arizona.

Then if the Patriots blow the Seahawks out Peter will point out what a paper tiger the Seahawks were and how they needed a miracle to even make the Super Bowl.

6. Indianapolis (13-6). That’s a more depressing and non-competitive playoff loss by the Colts than the 43-22 job last year. The worrisome thing for Indy is that the Patriots show the Colts what’s coming—the pounding ground game, and the mirror of the left-tackle-eligible play they ran three times successfully the previous week … and the Colts are too weak to stop it. This is a big off-season for GM Ryan Grigson. He’s got to find some answer for that defensive front seven, which gets embarrassed every time it plays the Pats.

It might help first if their first round pick from two years ago who is a defensive end isn't inactive for a playoff game.

9. Carolina (8-9-1). I wonder how the Panthers will value Cam Newton in contract talks.

I don't even know what this means. They will probably value him as their starting quarterback and offer him a deal similar to what Andy Dalton or other younger quarterbacks have received. If Peter had paid attention then he would know the Panthers GM has already stated repeatedly that he feels Newton is a franchise quarterback. So they go from there.

11. Cincinnati (10-6-1). Scout the quarterbacks at the Senior Bowl, Bengals.
12. Houston (9-7). You too, Texans.

Peyton Manning to the Texans. Every NFL writer would orgasm when Manning throws a touchdown pass to J.J. Watt. But seriously, I think that's a good landing spot for Peyton. They have a good running game, young receivers and a really good defense.

The Award Section

Offensive Player of the Week

Russell Wilson, quarterback, Seattle. No Offensive Player of the Week in my column, I feel sure, has ever been as bad as Wilson was in the first 55 minutes of a game … and I doubt as exhilarating in the final few.

I guess Wilson is a good choice. Of course he wouldn't have had to be exhilarating over the last five minutes if he had not been so terrible for the first 55 minutes. It's funny, because if Wilson were great in the first five minutes of the game and then struggled for the other 55 minutes of the game then he wouldn't get Offensive Player of the Week. It's all about struggling at the right time in order to receive this award from Peter.

Coach of the Week
 
Bill Belichick, coach, New England. In meaningful games since Oct. 1 (I am not counting Week 17 against Buffalo), the Patriots are 12-1. That means Belichick, since the 41-14 beatdown at Kansas City in Week 4, knew precisely what he was doing when he traded Logan Mankins for Tim Wright and a fourth-round pick (which will be about the 101^st overall pick this spring), and when he experimented with line combinations throughout September.

Which is why your and your fellow sportswriters' freaking out about the Patriot Way no longer working or whether this was the end of Belichick and Brady was so funny at the time and still is very funny in retrospect. It's not like Belichick has a history of knowing what he's doing or anything.

Goat of the Week
 
Brandon Bostick, tight end, Green Bay.

He should have just done his job and blocked for Jordy Nelson. Still, this is the third straight week that Peter screws up his "Goat of the Week." Bostick was no more of a goat than Morgan Burnett, Mike McCarthy or any of the other Packers players who had a hand in their fourth quarter collapse. Bostick wouldn't have had to be on the hands team for an onside kick if Burnett hadn't dove to the ground and Mike McCarthy had not called overly-conservative plays to run the play clock down when he has Aaron Rodgers as his quarterback. And the Packers wouldn't have lost the game in overtime if Dom Capers had not called a defense that gave the Seahawks the man coverage with no safety in the middle of the field that Russell Wilson wanted.

With the Packers nursing a five-point lead with 2:09 to play and only one timeout left for Seattle, the Seahawks onside-kicked. Bostick’s job on the play was to block and allow the more sure-handed players behind him (most notably Jordy Nelson) to catch the ball. But Bostick jumped for it, the ball went though his hands, and the Seahawks recovered. If Bostick or Nelson had recovered, Green Bay could have run out the clock by getting just one more first down.

This was a bad play, but one bad play in a stretch of bad plays by the Packers. To say Bostick is a goat could be accurate if there weren't other reasons the Packers were even in this situation to have to recover an onside kick in the first place. Maybe the Packers' defense could have not allowed the Seahawks offense to just move the ball at will over the last five minutes of the game. Maybe Mike McCarthy shouldn't have played the entire game not to lose. Blame Bostick some, that's fine, but he's not the "Goat of the Week" just because his screw-up was easy to point out. The Packers wouldn't have been in this situation if it weren't for the other screw-ups. 

“I will be shocked if he retires.”
—ESPN analyst Trent Dilfer, on the Colin Cowherd radio show last week, about Denver quarterback Peyton Manning.

Mind you, Dilfer has no inside information. He's just talking out of his ass like he is prone to doing.

By the way, when Manning pulled out of the Pro Bowl on Sunday, my first thought was: Good for him—because had he played, 300 writers would have swarmed him after the game to ask him if he was retiring. He’s not ready to talk about it, because his body’s not telling him anything yet.

Someday soon, hopefully before the Broncos have to pay him his bonus in March, Peyton Manning's body will come calling and he'll know what to do then.

“Whose staff is this? It’s our staff. I get tired of the same questions all the time relative to who’s got final say, whose pulling the trigger? We’re doing it. I can’t emphasize that enough. Not one person is going to make every decision in this building. There’s different people in different roles and at different times different people are going to be responsible for a final decision. The one thing I’m confident of is we’re going to do this together. We’re going to do it together from day one on.”
—San Francisco GM Trent Baalke, on the decision-making process atop the 49ers with the naming of Jim Tomsula as head coach.

It's decision-making that is done together, except for when Jim Harbaugh and Baalke made decisions together, which isn't what Baalke wanted anymore. Decisions are made together, but once the decision is made, the 49ers need a head coach who will go along with the decision. 

Mr. Starwood Preferred Member Travel Note of the Week

My January travel trail so far:

Fri., Jan. 2: New York to Pittsburgh, fly. Sun, Jan 4: Pittsburgh to New York, fly.
Tue, Jan 6: New York to Las Vegas, fly.
Wed, Jan 7: Las Vegas to New York, fly (redeye).
Thu, Jan 8: New York to Providence, train. Car to Foxboro.
Sat, Jan 10: Car from Foxboro to Providence. Providence to New York, train.
Tue, Jan 13: New York to New Orleans, fly.
Wed, Jan 14: New Orleans to New York, fly.
Fri, Jan 16: New York to Detroit; Detroit to Seattle, fly.
Today: Scheduled for Seattle to Detroit; Detroit to New York, fly (redeye).

Whee!

Can I get your paycheck so far during the month of January? I'm sure that would make me feel better about all the travel.

A note about the Detroit airport: It might have become my favorite one.

This is big, if true.

It sounds strange, the airport in Detroit being the best in the country, but it just might be.

Why in the hell would it be strange for the Detroit airport to be the best in the country? How is this strange at all? It's in Detroit and airports in Detroit should suck?

A note about one of the hidden gems of Seattle: I joined a large party of writers and non-writers Friday night at Betty, a restaurant in the Queen Anne neighborhood. (The MMQB’s Robert Klemko and Emily Kaplan came.) It’s the third or fourth time I’ve been there, and it gets better. Good, homey food (I had the bouillabaisse special and it was fabulous)

This is even bigger, if true.

Bill Belichik Pressers are just as funny as Marshawn Interviews but the funniest thing about it is they are dead ass serious. Ha
— Tyrann Mathieu (@Mathieu_Era) January 16, 2015

The Arizona safety, apparently live-Tweeting the Bill Belichick press conference Friday and drawing comparisons to Marshawn Lynch’s stupid press conferences.

Thanks for pointing out the Tweet was drawing comparisons to a Marshawn Lynch interviews while watching a Bill Belichick press conference. I couldn't have figured it out since the Tweet made a direction comparison between the two.

Ten Things I Think I Think

1. I think this is what I liked about Championship Sunday:

a. Carolina linebacker Thomas Davis, San Francisco wideout Anquan Boldin and Green Bay quarterback Aaron Rodgers, the three finalists for NFL Man of the Year. Worthy choices. Great volunteerism.

More like lofty volunteerism. Apparently the only NFL players who were eligible for this award are those whose team lost to Seattle twice this NFL season.

g. In what turned out to be losing efforts, the play of Ha Ha Clinton-Dix, free safety, and Morgan Burnett, strong safety, of Green Bay. Clinton-Dix, avenging a poor game in Seattle in the season-opener, had two first-half interceptions of Russell Wilson and had a third one go through his hands in the fourth quarter; Clinton-Dix also stopped a scrambling Wilson a yard short of the end zone in the final three minutes, forcing Seattle to waste important seconds down the stretch. Burnett had an interception too, but his impact was felt more in run support and inducing Kam Chancellor-caliber punishment.

Burnett also slid to the ground after his interception rather than get the Packers offense in good field goal range or score another touchdown. Not that this means he didn't play well, but if Peter is going to be naming Brandon Bostick as the "Goat of the Week" and lauding Burnett's play...

h. Most of the 45 separate pieces on the Seahawks making plays, right down to Chris (Not the MSNBC Guy) Matthews recovering an onside kick.

Again, thanks for clearing that up for me. I thought the guy from MSNBC played for the Seahawks because I'm the mouth-breathing moron that Peter expects most of his readers to be.

2. I think this is what I didn’t like about Championship Sunday:

e. Not sure what we saw in Seattle was a choke job by the Pack, but Seattle scoring no offensive touchdowns in the first 57 minutes, then the Packers allowing three touchdowns in the last six minutes plus the recovery of an onside kick … okay, I will call it a choke job by the Pack.

The Packers gave up three touchdowns in the last six minutes of the game, but blame the guy who didn't recover the onside kick for all of this. That seems completely fair.

l. Mike McCarthy not going for it at the half-yard line in the first quarter. I will never, ever think that’s smart with a back as ferocious and powerful as Eddie Lacy.

I'm no Gregg Easterbrook, but when playing a road playoff game I tend to think it's smart to come out and be aggressive while trying to win the game. The entire offensive game plan in the second half seemed tentative and afraid to lose. I think the Packers have to go for it on the half-yard line I think. I know McCarthy trusted his defense, but maybe he should trust his offense too. 

3. I think Ray Lewis is going to have to get used to something, working in the media. We record things. We keep them around.

While true, when the media doesn't want to record and keep things around then those things are better off forgotten. Remember the time Peter wrote a column about Ray Rice that turned out to be (a) fairly insensitive to the situation and (b) factually incorrect based on a source that lied? I do.

It would be a good idea for the ESPN PR people to remind him of that, in fact. Lewis, the other day, said this to Stephen A. Smith: “The first time we created something called a tuck rule, it’s the only reason we know—I’m just being honest!—the only reason we know who Tom Brady is, because of a tuck rule!”

He said something stupid. This will be forgotten and never held against him as his career progresses. Peter thinks that Ron Jaworski walks on water and he's said some pretty stupid things during his time at ESPN. One of those I recall is that Colin Kaepernick could be the best QB in NFL history. But anyway, I won't defend Ray Lewis, but Peter needs to stop lecturing and realize "things" are recorded but usually forgotten after time.

You get called out for saying dumb things, Ray Lewis, and, well, I don’t need to say any more.

Because it's well known that Peter hasn't ever written anything dumb.

4. I think new coach Todd Bowles has every intention of giving Geno Smith a thorough chance to win the starting quarterback with the Jets. That couldn’t have hurt him with Woody Johnson.

After trying to win games with Ryan Lindley as the Cardinals' quarterback it would probably be a relief to have Geno Smith.

7. I think, not to pick at a week-old scab, but the one thing lost in the justifiable criticism of the Dez Bryant catch reversal is this: Say the catch was ruled good. Say Dallas had first-and-goal from the Green Bay one, and say Dallas scored within a play or two to make it 27-26, Dallas. The Cowboys would have gone for two. And so with somewhere around four minutes left, Green Bay would have gotten the ball back, down either one or three, with one timeout left. Here were the Packers’ previous three possessions: six plays, 47 yards, field goal; seven plays, 95 yards, touchdown; eight plays, 80 yards, touchdown. So if you want to say the Bryant reversal jobbed the Cowboys out of a chance to win, that’s fine. But please do not say the Bryant reversal cost the Cowboys the win. That didn’t happen.

Yeah Cowboys fans, don't say that happened. Because hypothetically, Aaron Rodgers would have led a comeback where the Packers would have scored a touchdown to win the game and hypothetically there wouldn't be enough time left for Tony Romo to win the game with a drive of his own. If the Packers didn't score a hypothetical touchdown then they would have at least kicked a hypothetical field goal and hypothetically won the coin toss in overtime and then won the game anyway. So don't give Peter that crap about how the catch cost the Cowboys the game, because hypothetically this isn't true.

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

e. With all the good entertainment options at home, there’s still a place for a great movie in the theater.

Exactly. Why watch a movie at home with people you know and like when you can watch a movie on a sticky floor with strangers, overpay for food and drinks, worry that those people behind you won't shut up by the time the movie starts, and pay more than you would pay for a movie at home?

g. Nice piece by NBC Nightly News on J.J. Watt over the weekend.

For God's sake, it's the offseason. Make him go away, just for a few months. I'm officially tired of J.J. Watt love.

h. Coffeenerdness: Thanks to the ladies at the illy coffee shop inside Detroit’s airport for being prompt, cheerful and making one heck of a triple latte, the barista asking me after my first sip: “Is it okay?”

The barista cupped Peter's balls and wanted to make sure everything was okay. This is just how Peter likes it! If more people would just kiss Peter's ass so that he doesn't unfairly bash their establishment in MMQB based on his one experience at said establishment then the world would be a better place. Treat Peter King kindly, the world responds favorably.

No it’s not okay.

Oh no! What's wrong?

It’s fantastic.

OH!!!!!!!!!!!! YOU GOT US THERE, PETER! YOU OLD RASCAL WITH THE BAIT-AND-SWITCH OF A COMPLAINT INTO A COMPLIMENT!

And that’s rare in the hurry-up-and-take-what-we-give-you service industry in American airports.

People cupping your balls and taking a special interest in you because you happened to order a latte is rare. Yes, it is rare. It's rare because working in the service industry sucks because humans suck and are very, very mean and think they can say whatever they want to you or bitch about whatever they want. If you respond in non-kind fashion then you are the asshole who gets reported to the manager. I don't work in the service industry, but I have before and can testify that some people are assholes. So yeah, there can be a certain hurry-up-and-take-what-we-give-you attitude, but that's because there are other customers waiting and there isn't time to tickle the taint of every customer in line. Because as Peter King as bitched about far too many times, no one likes a long line.

Of course Peter King would say that the service industry in airports is too focused on the next person in line, while at the same time having bitched about long lines at Starbucks and other coffee shops for years. Of course he would. Peter wants his coffee NOW, but it's fine if someone else waits while Peter gets his taint tickled a little.

The Adieu Haiku

Russell Wilson’s tears.  
Those should be shed by all teams
that passed on him. Twice.

I guess these teams should be shedding tears. I guess the assumption is every single NFL team needed a quarterback or Wilson would be successful in every team's offensive system. It's fun to talk about how teams are stupid for passing up Wilson, but a lot of what makes a quarterback successful early in his career is matching him up with the best offensive system for his skill set. Think Wilson would be this successful in Oakland? Where would Wilson be now if New England had drafted him as Brady's backup? It all depends on where a player is selected and if the right team chose Wilson. I know this isn't as interesting as the image of NFL teams shedding tears for not drafting Wilson. 

6 comments Gregg Easterbrook (Not Really) Previews the AFC

Gregg Easterbrook made his return to writing TMQ last week and it was as well-received as I expected it to be. Gregg gave us a lecture on how the NCAA is screwing over student-athletes, but he believes allowing student-athletes to make money off their likeness would cause mayhem. After all, who is going to protect the student-athletes who are going to college and get a degree instead of going to play professional football, you know, the ones who the NCAA isn't making money off? Someone has to protect the players the NCAA isn't exploiting. Gregg believed it is the average college football players who should get paid, though in typical Easterbrookian fashion he doesn't suggest a way to actually do this. This week Gregg talks yet again about the NFL's concussion problem and how the league could set a better example. He also attempts to preview the AFC, but ends up just reviewing what happened last year instead.

At this point, Gregg probably cuts and pastes his old TMQ articles about concussions into new TMQ articles about concussions. It seems this way since Gregg seems to write 1-2 of these every single season. I get the NFL has a concussion problem, but Gregg doesn't have to write about it twice a year. Of course if Gregg couldn't talk about topics tangential to football then he would have to talk about football and that's not his strong suit, despite the fact he writes a weekly NFL column for ESPN.com.

The NFL claims to have seen the light on safety. The unnecessary roughness rule has become stricter. Contact in practice has been reduced. Players are admonished for vicious hits. Money is being donated to brain research. The league is saying all the right things.

BUT THE NFL REFUSES TO CHANGE THE BASIC VIOLENT WAY THAT FOOTBALL IS PLAYED, WHICH IS UNACCEPTABLE!

But as Ralph Waldo Emerson observed, "What you do speaks so loudly I cannot hear what you say."

And making the unnecessary roughness rule stricter, reducing contact in practice, and donating money to brain research are all actions, not words, so...............what's the point of this quote relative to the NFL's mission to reduce concussions?

Just a few minutes into one of the first preseason games, Bernard Pollard of the Tennessee Titans delivered an inexcusable hit, launching himself into the back of a player who was out of bounds. Commissioner Roger Goodell has been throwin' seven different kinds of smoke about cracking down on such behavior. Yet Pollard was only flagged -- penalties mean little to players -- not ejected. If launching into a defenseless player who's out of bounds doesn't lead to disqualification, what hit will?

Come on, Gregg. Robinson was standing beside the sideline still in-bounds and Pollard actually led with his shoulder. This is a penalty, but not worth a disqualification. Stop trying to mislead your readers who are too lazy to click on the video.

Pollard was fined $10,000 -- but do care about suspensions, which threaten their jobs. One single-game suspension per season just isn't enough to change the culture of a sport.

Pollard was fined $10,000 for a hit during a preseason game, which is a game that doesn't count in the standings. You can't tell me Pollard isn't a little bit upset about this.

Stop right there, you might be thinking. NFL players are highly paid adults: If they choose to submit to violent contact, why should anyone in the audience care? Isn't bone-crunching part of the entertainment?

On the surface, that's a fair point.

No, it is a fair point even under the surface. These players agree to play the game knowing the potential results of playing the game. Still, this doesn't mean the sport should not be as safe as possible, but it also doesn't mean one violent hit merits a disqualification.

But NFL players are the wrong focal point for football safety. There are about 2,000 players in the NFL -- versus about three million youth players and about 1.1 million in high school. 

Ah yes, it's always about "the kids." What about "THE KIDS?!" What will they think?

Factoring for college as well, 98 percent of organized tackle football is played by boys (and a few girls) who are, legally, children. They don't receive pay, and only a very small fraction attain athletic scholarships. All risk injuries that may interfere with their education or cause lifelong health problems.

So the theory is that "the kids" will see Bernard Pollard get kicked out of a preseason game for a violent hit and say,

"I need to think more about my safety when playing football because there are repercussions for violent play, including being thrown out of a preseason game that doesn't count. Next time I'm on the football field, I'll try to tackle someone in a softer manner. My life is now changed."

Whom do they look up to?

Their coaches, their siblings, their parents?

The NFL. Whose example do they emulate? The NFL's. What do they see in NFL games? Players laying vicious hits and facing no consequences.

And we all know that junior high and high school children always pay attention to the potential consequences of their actions before taking any action.

My point is that, yet again, Gregg is being supremely vague about exactly what he wants done to NFL players for violent hits. He thinks the NFL needs to do more, but what "more" is he won't say. I thought Pollard's hit wasn't overly-violent, but Gregg thinks that kind of hit would merit a suspension and being thrown out of the game? The NFL would need to expand rosters beyond 53 players if they start suspending players for hits like Pollard's. The problem is that I don't think Gregg has fucking clue what he wants done so "the kids" don't emulate these NFL players. I'm not sure kids would see Bernard Pollard thrown out of an NFL game and think they certainly don't want to ever get thrown out of an NFL game. The bottom line is that football is a violent sport and Gregg's argument that vicious hits have no consequences is a lie. There are consequences, just not severe consequences that Gregg likes.

But the NFL sets the tone for some four million impressionable young people.

This is true, but this is also why the NFL is cracking down on vicious hits. I would love to know more specifics about what Gregg wants the NFL to do, other than do what Gregg does which is take a reactive look at a game played two weeks ago and write, "That player should have been kicked out" without guidance on how to apply this to similar situations as they happen on the field. I'm not sure we are getting that from Gregg. Is changing the type of helmet the NFL uses and forcing players to use a mouthguard the cure-all for concussions? Is that what Gregg believes? I think Gregg wants the NFL to have real reform, but doesn't do a sufficient job of explaining what he means by that.

The big worry about the NFL is that its new safety focus is more public relations than real reform. Consider:

• The $90 million the NFL pledged to concussion and neurology research over the next four years is an impressive number but represents less than one-fifth of one percent of the revenue the league expects in that period. The money should help but is far from a crash program.

So if Gregg makes $100,000 per year and chooses to contribute $200 to a charity this makes him a cheap asshole who doesn't really care about the cause? That's one-fifth of 1% of Gregg's income. If Tom Brady has a guaranteed salary of $33 million over the next five years, so if he contributes $66,000 to a charity then he is a jerk for being so stingy? It's fun to use numbers that are real rather than quoting percentages without giving your readers an idea of what those numbers really add up to.

Youth and high school players see the pros ignoring basic safety by not having mouth guards or four-point chinstraps, then emulate this behavior.

And of course there are no high school or youth coaches who are around to enforce this type of basic safety? Isn't there some culpability on the part of these coaches? That's right, it is easier to blame the NFL for setting a bad example than it is to look at the culpability of high school and youth coaches who choose to coach these players and could potentially force these safety measures to be required.

"SportsCenter" and similar shows aired the Jadeveon Clowney-Vincent Smith hit many times; if any pointed out that Smith's helmet was not secured properly, I missed it.

Again, the people who run those highlight shows are responsible for showing highlights, not giving a lecture on helmet safety.

When high school football kicks off soon, "prohibition of contact to and with the helmet" will be the officiating point of emphasis. Why hasn't the NFL already matched?

Because the NFL wants to do something to reduce concussions, but also don't want to impact the product on the field. That's the cold hard truth and I can't blame them. The NFL makes a shit-ton of money and they don't want to change the product that the consumer clearly likes. So the NFL is giving money for concussion research and doing some things to reduce the impact of violent hits that could cause a concussion, but they don't want to overly change the product and the players probably don't want the product changed dramatically either.

Next winter, the Pro Bowl will eliminate kickoffs to reduce head injuries. All football players hate the wedge -- being in it or busting it -- and kickoffs cause more head injuries than any other type of play. Why doesn't the NFL eliminate kickoffs in the regular season and postseason, too?

Because kickoffs can be fun to watch and the NFL wants the sport to be fun to watch.

High school and youth leagues would follow suit, making football safer for young players who get no sports paycheck and probably never will.

Gregg does realize high school and youth leagues can go ahead and eliminate the kickoff without the NFL doing it first, right? It's not like high school and youth leagues have to obey all current NFL rules and regulations. So while I understand what Gregg is getting at, high school and youth leagues can take the initiative and stop waiting for the NFL to act first.

The nation's most popular and most watched sports league is making some progress on safety, but not enough. And it's large numbers of children, not the small number of pros, who are at risk as a result.

As I wrote last week, I get it, but the leagues these children play in can change the rules so that their sport is safer regardless of what the NFL does. The NFL sets an example, it doesn't set the strict guidelines high school and youth leagues MUST follow.

Now, Tuesday Morning Quarterback's AFC preview:

Again, it's more of a review and there is very little previewing taking place.

The Ravens lost eight starters from their title team, mostly to free agency. In salary-cap terms, Baltimore had to choose between an exodus of veterans or re-signing Joe Flacco. Since quarterback is the most valuable position, the Ravens did what they had to do, keeping the player who would have been hardest to replace.

Trading Anquan Boldin for just a sixth-round draft choice was the odd move. Boldin led the Ravens in receiving the past three seasons, did the hard work over the middle, had several vital plays in their Super Bowl run. Sure he's old (32) by the standards of athletics. Give me an aging gent who gets the job done over a greenhorn any day.

But Gregg...you just said the Ravens had to choose between an exodus of veterans or re-signing Flacco and the Ravens "did what they had to do" and re-signed Flacco. Then you state it was odd for the Ravens to have traded Anquan Boldin. The Ravens had to trade Boldin to free up more cap room to sign Flacco and try to replace the veterans who left in the exodus. You just stated why the Ravens got rid of the veteran players, then you question why the Ravens got rid of the veteran players? But...why?

Gregg claims to know why the Ravens cut rid of the veterans players on their roster and then questions why the Ravens got rid of a veteran player on their roster. This is typical Gregg. 

Until January 2013, the rap on Flacco and John Harbaugh was that together they were 35-7 in Baltimore but 23-23 on the road. Then the Ravens went on a 3-0 playoff road tear, culminating in a Super Bowl victory. This season the Ravens open on the road and have three of their first five contests away. Presumably playing away now favors the Ravens.

Well naturally, the only conclusion that can be drawn is the Ravens will have a better road record than home record during this upcoming season. Count this as a future fact.

Flacco seems to be handicapped in that he lacks Q, the ineffable quotient of personal appeal. Could you imagine Flacco in the DirecTV football-on-my-phone spoof? In contemporary athletic culture, endorsements are the test of graduating from star to superstar status. The Mannings roll in endorsements -- Gatorade, Sony, DirecTV, Nabisco, Samsung, Buick. Flacco endorses gummy bears.

Flacco will never be a great quarterback because he doesn't get enough high-profile endorsements, which is one of the most important factors when it comes to grading a quarterback's on-field performance in the opinion of Gregg Easterbrook.

The Bills have suffered under a succession of bland head coaches and time-server front-office types such as Bumbling Buddy Nix, who seemed perfectly content to lose. Bumbling Buddy squandered the third overall choice of the 2011 draft on Marcell Dareus, a journeyman;

How the fuck can Marcell Dareus be a "journeyman" when he has played in the NFL for three seasons all for the exact same team that drafted him? Look up "journeyman" in the dictionary as it pertains to athletics, Gregg, I don't think it means what you think it means.

Not to mention, Dareus has had 5.5 sacks in each of his first two seasons in the NFL. He's a defensive tackle, by the way, which is a position not well-known for accumulating sacks. So basically Gregg Easterbrook is full of shit and Marcell Dareus is not a journeyman and has played pretty well so far in his NFL career. I can't wait to read how Gregg backtracks on his Marcell Dareus comment when the Bills defensive line blows up this year.

Nix wasted the second choice of the 2011 second round on Aaron Williams, a journeyman;

Again, Williams has played for one team over his entire NFL career. That's not a "journeyman" as the definition goes in sports.

the next two players selected were Pro Bowler Andy Dalton and Super Bowl star Colin Kaepernick.

THE BILLS SHOULD HAVE DRAFTED BOTH DALTON AND KAEPERNICK WITH ONE SELECTION!

Nix threw a second-round choice out the window on Torell Troup, who has two career starts; the next person selected was Pro Bowler Rob Gronkowski, who's even from Buffalo.

Every General Manager can look bad if you go back to a certain draft and say who he should have drafted using hindsight. Also, Gronkowski is from Amherst, which is a suburb of Buffalo, but not Buffalo.

Cincinnati: Tuesday Morning Quarterback contends Marvin Lewis lacks chutzpah as a coach, and lack of chutzpah results in annual fade-outs, the Bengals being 0-4 in the postseason during Lewis' tenure.

I'm sure that's the exact reason the Bengals haven't won a playoff game during Marvin Lewis' tenure with the Bengals.

Game tied in the third quarter, Cincinnati faced fourth-and-inches on the Steelers' 30, and in trotted the kicking unit. Victories don't come in the mail, go win the game! When the field goal boomed, TMQ wrote the words "game over" in his notebook. Needless to say, Pittsburgh won. 

It's needless to say, because otherwise Gregg won't reveal the times he has written "game over" in his notebook and the game wasn't indeed over.

But through no effort of its own: The glamour, money and position of the Windsor crowd is inherited, not earned. Society's admiration should go to those who attain their positions via merit.

I agree completely. If Society's admiration went to those who attain their positions via merit then Gregg Easterbrook wouldn't write TMQ every week.

Fantasies about sports, sex or money help men and women get through their day, and getting through the day is important.

My God, who gave this man permission to write a weekly NFL column? I'm not sure how many people have time to fantasize throughout the day or are so depressed with their life they have to fantasize just to get through the day.

Cleveland: The Browns' draft performance was puzzling. The new management team of Rob Chudzinski at coach and Michael Lombardi at general manager traded away fourth- and fifth-round picks to bank extra selections for 2014. Strong teams bank draft choices, since a rookie might not make the roster anyway; for a weak team to bank draft choices is a head-scratcher.

Unless that team has a long-range plan and they know they can't turn their team around in one year. The 49ers banked an extra first round draft choice in 2010 after an 8-8 season. That helped the 49ers draft another offensive lineman during the 2010 draft. The 49ers had gone 8-8 in 2009, 7-9 in 2008, 5-11 in 2007, 7-9 in 2006, 4-12 in 2005, and 2-14 in 2004.

So the 49ers were a losing team and chose to trade a 1st round pick in 2009. It worked out for them and helped them become a better team.

Norv Turner has a career losing record as a head coach -- 118-126-1 -- but has done well as an offensive coordinator, and is now the Browns' man in this role. Turner calls a California-style passing game: lots of flies and deep posts, actions NFL teams should employ more often.

I'm not sure California-style passing game is a real type of a passing offense. I think Gregg made this up.

Before camp opened left tackle Ryan Clady, an outstanding player, signed a contract that offers several million dollars in incentives for making the Pro Bowl twice in next five years. Clady stands a good chance of attaining those incentives, since he is an offensive lineman who has already made the Pro Bowl more than once.

Clady is also a first round pick which is the type of player Gregg often refers to as a highly-paid glory boy.

The reason for that mention is to create an excuse for the nearby Broncos cheerleader picture of Michelle, an office manager who attended the University Colorado at Boulder.

Gregg writes "nearby" here because the picture of the Broncos cheerleader is not only not directly beside this paragraph, but isn't even the next picture in TMQ. The cheerleader's picture is beside the section "previewing" the Jacksonville Jaguars. Peter is very desperate to show a picture of a cheerleader.

In 2012, Houston opened 11-1 then closed 2-4. Spanning two seasons that's a 21-4 start followed by a 3-8 stumble. Until Thanksgiving, the Moo Cows are to be feared; afterward, are milquetoast. Injuries struck in both seasons, but every NFL team has to deal with injuries. The Ravens sure didn't fold just because Ray Lewis and Ladarius Webb were hurt.

The Ravens did go 5-5 without Ray Lewis in 2012 and were 5-1 with him on the roster. So the Ravens didn't fold, but they also didn't have a winning record without Ray Lewis. Lewis returned to the lineup in the postseason and the Ravens went 4-0.

In personnel terms the Texans seem strong -- they'd be stronger had they not waived Jacoby Jones, eventual Super Bowl hero for the Ravens, before the 2012 season. 

Right, because having Jones on the team from 2007-2011 was such good luck for the Texans. Jones returned one kickoff for a touchdown during this time and returned three punts for a touchdown. Last season he returned two kickoffs for a touchdown and one punt for a touchdown, while still being the #3 receiver at-best that the Texans knew he was. So Jones' performance on special teams last year exceeded how well he had played over the last five seasons for the Texans.

The Texans declared themes for 2013 home dates, and inexplicably are calling their December date with New England the Homecoming game. Given colleges schedule a cupcake for homecoming, this seems a calculated insult to a team that beat the Texans badly twice the year before. Perhaps there will be a pep rally and bonfire on Friday night before the game. Then Houston players and cheerleaders will go to a dance.

See, because that's what people do at Homecoming. They go to a dance with a member of the opposite sex! This is comedy!

The Colts' second and third choices in 2012 were tight ends -- if they emerge in 2013, the Indianapolis passing game could become potent. The offensive line boasts several recent high draft choices -- and its lightest member is center Samson Satele, at 300 pounds.

But if the Colts offensive line boasts several recent high draft choices, then using Gregg's logic that highly-drafted players are lazy and underperform, doesn't that mean the Colts are going to struggle on the offensive line? Because high draft choices are always busts whose performance never exceeds that of hard-working undrafted free agents. 

Jacksonville: The Jaguars were 0-3 in overtime in 2013, but even if they'd had better luck in the fifth quarter, they still would have been a lower-echelon team.

This is some in-depth analysis, people. Stand back so you don't get hurt.

The strident insistence of the Jacksonville front office that this perennially dull losing team will have nothing to do with Tim Tebow, Florida's most popular football player, has gone from odd to downright weird. If Tebow becomes a success at New England -- as a "slash" or perhaps as an H-back or F-style tight end -- Jacksonville's refusal to sign him will look even worse.

Or if Tebow continues to suck at quarterback then Jacksonville's reluctance to sign Tebow will look smart considering they would not waste a roster spot on a useless quarterback who creates more unnecessary media attention anywhere he goes than nearly every other NFL player.

Plus the Jaguars spent a draft choice on Denard Robinson: If he ends up playing the "slash" role that might have gone to Tebow, Jacksonville management will have blundered anew.

This is ridiculous. If Robinson ends up playing the "slash" role for Jacksonville that Tebow could have played then there is nothing lost for the Jaguars. So they spent a draft pick on Robinson rather than sign Tebow, what they lose in the draft pick they gain in athleticism, speed, and less media attention surrounding the team that takes away from the goal of winning.

Tebow does have a traveling-circus problem. A strong, secure coach like Bill Belichick can handle that; a weak, insecure coach like Gus Bradley doesn't want to. 

Clearly Gregg has done his research on Gus Bradley from Bradley's time in Seattle. Gus Bradley wasn't energetic nor a strong defensive coordinator, but he was weak and insecure, which is why the Seattle defense never thrived under him. Great job doing research Gregg!

Many readers including Martha David of Highland Park, Ill., reported receiving the L.L. Bean "First Signs of Fall" catalog on Aug.12.

The catalog isn't called "Hey, Fall is Fucking Here Already" or "It is Officially the Season of Fall So Don't Bother Looking at Your Calendar to Confirm This." It was called "First Signs of Fall" meaning Fall isn't here yet, but the catalog is about the first initial signs of Fall. For God's sake, just use your head.

New offensive coordinator Marty Mornhinweg says he's not worried about Mark Sanchez's 54 percent accuracy last season, that Brett Favre wasn't famous for accuracy. Actually, Favre completed 59 or 60 percent in his three MVP seasons;

I think using Favre's three MVP seasons as a comparison to Mark Sanchez is a little bit unfair. Gregg is choosing three of Favre's best seasons as proof Favre was an accurate quarterback. Favre did have a completion percentage above 60% for the majority of his seasons in the NFL, so in principle Gregg has a point, but using Favre's MVP seasons as the frame of reference seems a bit unfair.

In football, a quarterback must be at or near 60 percent. Had Sanchez in 2012 thrown for the average of the other quarterbacks in his division, he would have completed 23 more passes.

Again, the comparison that Gregg is using for Mark Sanchez is a rookie quarterback, a Hall of Fame quarterback and Ryan Fitzpatrick. Sanchez was terrible last year, but I'm not sure comparing him only to the quarterbacks in the AFC East is a great way to make a comparison.

Now Andy Reid is running the Chiefs' show, backed by a mere 22 assistant coaches, including one with the title "statistical analysis coordinator" and one tasked with "spread game analysis/special projects." Reid seemed burned out at the end of his Philadelphia tenure -- why didn't he take a year off? His predecessor, Romeo Crennel, barely lasted a year; the headmaster before Crennel, Todd Haley, took the Chiefs to a division win in 2010, then didn't even last the entire 2011 season. This job may be a perilous one for a head coach who arrives in low spirits.

I think it was pretty obvious that Andy Reid was burned out by the end of his tenure in Philadelphia and that doesn't necessarily mean Reid was burned out overall. Reid didn't see eye-to-eye with Eagles management over his last year(s) and it took a toll on him. So I think it is a little presumptuous to just say Reid was burned out and is in low spirits. Of course, everything is black-and-white with no gray when it comes to Gregg Easterbrook.

Kansas City gave a high second draft choice to obtain Alex Smith, who, replacing Matt Cassel, becomes the second consecutive Kansas City quarterback obtained for a second-round pick from a team that no longer wanted him.

The 49ers had Colin Kaepernick as the starter and he according to Ron Jaworski he could be the greatest quarterback in NFL history, while the Patriots had Tom Brady coming back from injury. So while accurate, it is a bit misleading to say the 49ers and Patriots "no longer wanted" these two quarterbacks. They were expendable because they had better quarterbacks already on the roster.

TMQ thinks Smith is the real deal.

Alex Smith was the #1 overall pick in 2005, he has underachieved during his career, and has made a lot of money relative to his performance. Usually, this is the type of player that Gregg hates, so naturally he loves Alex Smith. Once Smith starts struggling look for Gregg to call him a "highly-paid glory boy" sometime in mid-October.

Should Smith play well in Reid's pass-wacky system, this trade will be viewed as the year's steal.

And if Smith struggles in Kansas City like Matt Cassel with the Chiefs did then the trade will look terrible.

In "Skyfall," James Bond is shot twice in the chest, falls off a bridge, goes over a waterfall -- then recovers without medical treatment. And not just any bridge: He is depicted as falling off the 564-foot-high Varda Viaduct in Turkey. The world record for a high dive is 177 feet; Bond falls three times as far with bullets in his chest, and is fine. Later in the flick, he crashes through the ice on a frozen lake and fights a bad guy under freezing water -- it's 1 minute, 24 seconds before he breathes again.

It's a James Bond film. If you are watching a James Bond film look for accuracy (earmuffs little children) then you are a fucking moron who should never watch a movie ever again. If you have never watched a Bond film before and you expect realism, then I will give you a one Bond movie reprieve, but after watching that first film you should never question the realism of a Bond film again. They are not realistic and probably never will be.

As Bond chases the cackling super-villain through a subway tunnel, he detonates explosives that cause a Tube train to fall through the ceiling. But tons of explosives would be required for this in the real world. How did the bad guy put the explosives in position without attracting attention? 

He did it by realizing this is a movie and the script calls for explosives to be placed under the subway tunnel. Then he laughed at moviegoers who were more eager to see realism in a James Bond film as compared to just being entertained for a little over two hours.

Near the climax, when the wizened Scottish gamekeeper runs into the woods with M to hide her from the bad guy, why does the wizened gamekeeper have his flashlight on? Without the flashlight, the bad guy never could have found them.

He has a flashlight on for the same reason any person running into the woods in the pitch dark would have a flashlight on, to see where the hell they are going. If the gamekeeper had run in the woods with M without the benefit of a flashlight Gregg would have questioned how it was so light out since woods don't have any streetlights and questioned the realism of this scene. But because the movie went for realism and tried to prevent M and the gamekeeper from running into trees in the pitch black woods Gregg has to question that.

I hope Gregg runs away from someone into the woods one day and doesn't have a flashlight. The person chasing Gregg would easily catch up after Gregg knocks himself the hell out by running into a tree.

Yet the most ridiculous scene of "Skyfall" was the film's first. Bond goes to an MI6 safe house in Istanbul to pick up an agency computer disc bearing the names of all Western double agents working for foreign powers. Set aside why the disc would be in Istanbul -- why would it exist?

Because the plot requires it to be so.

Miami:

The franchise remains weighed down by the NFL's worst front-office screw-up of the past decade, the 2006 decision to tell Drew Brees he wasn't wanted, then let Nick Saban make a major trade for Daunte Culpepper.

For the one-millionth time, the Dolphins didn't tell Drew Brees he wasn't wanted. They didn't offer him the guaranteed money and length of the contract that he was offered by the Saints. Drew Brees was coming off major shoulder surgery and the Dolphins didn't want to offer him a lot of money when it is possible that Brees' shoulder would not hold up. Blame the Dolphins' doctors if you want, blame the Dolphins inability to take a chance, but just don't say Brees wasn't wanted by the Dolphins. They were eager to gain his services (just like the Chargers wanted to, but they also had Phillip Rivers), but the Saints offered more guaranteed money than Miami.

Instead in two weeks, yours truly will forecast them to win the division. (Bear in mind, I also think ObamaCare will be a success.) The Dolphins will win the division because … because … I have no logical explanation. Once in a while, you go with your feelings.

Along the defensive front, the Dolphins have the third choice of the 2013 draft (Dion Jordan), another recent first-round selection (Jared Odrick), two 2012 Pro Bowl players (Cameron Wake and Randy Starks), a 2011 Pro Bowl player (Paul Soliai), a nice free-agent acquisition (Vaughn Martin) and a young undrafted player to keep an eye on (Olivier Vernon). No front seven is loaded like Miami's.

Hmm...I think San Francisco 49ers fans may argue with Gregg on this one. Gregg is also incorrect that Olivier Vernon is undrafted. He was drafted in the third round of the 2012 draft, but research is just so hard to do, plus Gregg is trying to lie to his audience, so that's why Gregg got this wrong.

Brady never shows wasted motion, while New England blocking schemes support Brady's throwing lanes. If, for instance, the primary receiver is running a short curl right, the right guard and right tackle will ensure there's a clear lane in the pocket for Brady to see that pattern.

I've never heard of anything like this. Perhaps I'm stupid. Either way, it doesn't make sense because what if the primary receiver is covered and the offensive linemen have blocked to where the secondary receiver is open, but Brady doesn't have a clear throwing lane? I'm sure offensive linemen try to block to give the quarterback an open throwing lane, but if Brady is trying throw a short curl right and the defensive lineman moves to Brady's right then the offensive linemen can't always give Brady a clear throwing lane. I tend to think the NFL offensive linemen try to ensure an open passing lane, but not just for the quarterback's primary receiver. I don't know, I feel like this is a great example of Gregg's typical over-simplified understanding of NFL offenses and defenses.

Rhythm-based quick-snap passing tends to succeed in the regular season, when defenders are holding a little something back for the next game, and sputter in the postseason, when there's no tomorrow and defensive backs get into receivers' faces. 

As usual, Gregg claims to somehow know what every NFL player on the field is currently thinking. It just so happens what the NFL players are thinking coincides with helping to prove Gregg's point as being true. Funny how that works. Apparently NFL defenders don't try very hard during the regular season and save their energy for the postseason...well, at least Gregg believes this to be true.

Hall of Fame Tosses the Accused, Keeps the Guilty: When Hernandez was arrested on a homicide charge, his former coaches Belichick and Urban Meyer seemed immediately to assume the worst. Belichick said, "Having someone in your organization that's involved in a murder investigation is a terrible thing." Meyer said "it was a sick feeling" to see media reports linking his name with the jailed tight end.

Writers like Jarrett Bell and Howard Bryant bemoan the Patriots didn't say more to condemn Aaron Hernandez while writers like Gregg Easterbrook are upset the Patriots condemned Hernandez as quickly as they did. You can't ever win with the sports media.

Police leaks to the media often turn out wrong; it could be months or years before the player's guilt or innocence is known. Yet the Patriots immediately waived Hernandez, as if assuming guilt; the NFL immediately yanked his jersey from sale.

Examples please, Gregg. When has an NFL player been accused of first-degree murder and then it turned out he wasn't guilty at all? Ray Lewis wasn't ever actually accused of murder (if I remember correctly) and cut a plea deal. But please name another couple instances where a police leak about an NFL player committing murder was wrong.

But at Denver, Woodson would have played second fiddle to Champ Bailey, while at Oakland, Woodson will be Da Man. Had Woodson gone to the Broncos, and he and Bailey found themselves doubling the same receiver, their ego fields would have interacted,

I really don't believe Gregg understands how NFL defenses work. Champ Bailey and Charles Woodson may have their egos interact, but they would not have doubled the same receiver because, contrary to what Gregg seems to truly believe, NFL players just don't fucking freelance all over the field and do whatever the hell they want. Defensive players, especially those in the secondary, have assignments and if they blow their assignment then the defense could give up a big play. So Bailey and Woodson would not just do whatever the hell they want and cover whoever the hell they want in the Broncos secondary because they have defensive assignments they have to follow. Son of a bitch, Gregg really thinks defensive players just do whatever the hell they want to do.

The Raiders play man coverage more than any other NFL team, so corners mean a lot in their scheme. In addition to signing Woodson, Oakland spent its No. 1 choice on cornerback D.J. Hayden, who suffered a rare and quite serious heart injury at a college practice last November.

We all know Gregg doesn't do research prior to writing TMQ, but here is another mistake that took 10 seconds to correct. Charles Woodson does not play cornerback for the Raiders. He is the Raiders free safety. But the Raiders play man coverage and corners mean a lot, even though this has very little to do with Charles Woodson relative to what his current position is.

Googling "O.co" takes you to the Overstock website. Why a corporation uses a name that looks like a misprint is anyone's guess.

Because "TMQ" is such a catchy name for a football column and all.

The University of Texas at San Antonio, which is Division I-AA and moves up to Division I in 2014, last season played Northwestern Oklahoma State. This fall the Roadrunners face Oklahoma State. As with other universities that shift funds to football, the likely result is a higher public profile for UTSA, followed by academic budget cuts.

Examples, please. Otherwise I will assume you are just lying like you normally do.

While the coaching carousel revolves across most of the league, the Steelers have had three head coaches in the past 44 years. Could lack of turmoil maybe just possibly have something to do with the Steelers also recording the most Super Bowl victories in that period?

Maybe the fact the Steelers have had such few head coaches means these head coaches have been successful enough to not be fired, which means the Steelers could have won a lot of games and Super Bowls with these coaches? It's not like teams that win games on a consistent basis rarely fire their coach or anything. Great insight by Gregg. Could the Packers lack of turnover at the quarterback position have something to do with the Packers winning a couple of Super Bowls over the last 20 years? Probably not.

This year's draft offered bargains at quarterback. Because 10 quarterbacks were taken in the first round during the previous three drafts, few teams were looking for a highly chosen signal-caller, allowing Geno Smith to slip to the second round while Matt Barkley, Ryan Nassib and Landry Jones slipped to the fourth. The same effect applied to running backs. Seven went in the first rounds of the three prior drafts, so few teams were looking for a highly chosen tailback. This dynamic allowed Le'veon Bell, Montee Ball and Eddie Lacy to slip to the late second round.

I think the fact the running back position is being devalued in the NFL due to the proliferation of teams passing the ball had more to do with Lacy, Ball, and Bell falling to the late second round, but I'm sure it has more to do with NFL teams having already drafted a running back recently. Because we all know NFL teams never need more than one good running back.

The play of Philip Rivers has declined, but football is a team sport -- everyone on the San Diego offense went downhill last season. In the San Diego organization, only the cheerleaders could be counted on to bring it.

Gregg's infatuation with cheerleaders is never not creepy.

Tennessee will be goin' nowhere in 2013 if it once again allows 29 points per game.

This is some great analysis.

"If the Titans give up 29 points per game I don't think they can win the Super Bowl!"

Several Titans losses were embarrassing -- a 51-20 defeat at home by the Bears had patrons streaming to the exits early, a 55-7 defeat at Green Bay was an embarrassment. The Titans could be the train-wreck team of the 2013 season.

Or they may not be, who really knows, and Gregg doesn't know and Gregg doesn't want to be wrong so he says the Bills "could" be the train-wreck team of the 2013 season. Any NFL team "could" be the worst team in the NFL, and the reason I nitpick this is because if Gregg is wrong about this he will immediately forget he made this statement. On the other hand, if Gregg is right he will link this comment for the next two years as an example of how he is often correct.

Next Week: TMQ's NFC preview.

Much like this column, it's not really a "preview" by any stretch of the imagination.