Skip Bayless was probably salivating, waiting for the Clippers to lose in the NBA Playoffs so he could write about how bad Chris Paul sucks. Skip has this ability to take a team game and make it all about one player. LeBron James isn't clutch so that's why his teams can't win titles. He won two NBA titles? Well, he still passes the ball when it comes crunch time. LeBron made a game-winning basket? FINALLY! This only makes up for all of the other mistakes LeBron made during the game. Kevin Durant needs to play angry and that's why the Thunder don't have four NBA titles right now. Today, Skip takes aim at Chris Paul for having the audacity to not lead his team to the Western Conference Finals. Skip thinks of a cutesy, bullshit nickname for Paul as he always tends to do. There's not much else to say at this point. It's Skip Bayless and he's a shitty troll and a shitty writer. Now he has taken aim at Chris Paul.
After 10 years in the NBA, at age 30, his greatest achievement remains
his "twin brother" commercials, Chris and Cliff Paul, both played so
convincingly by him.
And after 60 years on this Earth, Skip Bayless' greatest achievement is that he has dedicated his life to make sure as many people as possible hate him. Chris Paul has also earned a ton of money to where his family won't ever have to work again. There's that accomplishment too.
If only Chris Paul
played basketball a little less like if he were Cliff Paul, who
dedicates his life to helping State Farm customers in need of insurance
"assists."
Because helping teammates score baskets is a definite negative to Chris Paul's game. How can Paul be a superstar if he's setting up his teammates to score points? Only Chris Paul's points count towards a Clippers victory, don't you know? By the way, Paul averaged an assist-and-a-half below his 2014-2015 per game average in the playoffs, as well as scored three points more above his 2014-2015 per game average during the playoffs. Paul also averaged a shot-and-a-half more per game during the 2014-2015 playoffs than he did during the 2014-2015 season. So, he did try to score more and pass less in the playoffs.
Obviously, Skip did zero research prior to writing this column. He would never dare do anything like research for his columns (which I'm sure ESPN probably doesn't care about, which is sad to me), but if Skip had done research, he would see Paul too more shots, scored more points and passed the ball less during the 2014-2015 playoffs. So he didn't provide "assists" to his teammates just as Skip requested that he do. Perhaps if Skip thought before he wrote then he would see he sounds ridiculous.
If only when Chris Paul's team needed him most -- in a Game 6 or 7
against Houston -- he played less like his nerdy alter ego in
black-framed glasses, trim little mustache and Argyle sweaters and more
like the quick-tempered CP3 known for hitting big shots and taking
below-the-belt shots.
Paul had 57 points, 12 rebounds, 21 assists, and 4 steals in those two games. He played pretty fucking good basketball in those last two games, yet somehow Skip Bayless is pointing the finger at Paul for the Clippers loss to the Rockets. Of course. Skip would never change his tune in the face of clear evidence he is incorrect. He just doubles down on his stupidity.
They mostly got low-key good guy Cliff.
Unless you want to consider the statistics he put up in those two games, the Clippers got low-key good guy Cliff that played really well in those two games.
His nature is to pass the basketball, which is why he has led the NBA in
assists four times, including the past two seasons. Yet his coach keeps
pleading with him to shoot more, to be a little more selfish, to take
over more and take it to the opposition.
And this is exactly what he did during the NBA playoffs this year. He shot more, assisted less and even hit a game-winning shot against the Spurs. Because the Clippers lost to the Rockets in seven games, Skip Bayless forgets all about this.
As a purely pass-first point guard, Chris Paul is a star, an eight-time
All-Star. But when his eyes flash anger and he starts attacking, using
his fullback's physicality and ballerina's balance to create space for
his jump shot, he can be a superstar.
What is Skip's fascination with athletes "playing angry." It's like some juvenile, 5th grade criticism that Skip has for every athlete. He thinks LeBron, Kevin Durant, and Chris Paul should all play "angry" and that makes them become a superstar. It's a ridiculously simplistic way of looking at it.
CPZero, I've called him. As in, zero rings.
HILARIOUS! Get it? Chris Paul hasn't won an NBA Title and his nickname is "CP3" so Skip Bayless calls him "CPZero" in the long line of fun nicknames Skip has given NBA players. "Princess Bosh" and "CPZero" are fantastic nicknames. Two points for cleverness.
Let's see, maybe I should join in the creativity and call Skip Bayless "Bullshit Bayless" or "Skip Clueless."
A superstar gets to at least one conference final in his first 10 seasons.
Maybe he does. A smart sportswriter looks at all the reasons a superstar hasn't reached one conference final in his first 10 seasons. A smart sportswriter doesn't blame the superstar solely for his team not making a conference final in his first 10 seasons. Obviously Skip isn't smart so I wouldn't expect him to do either of these things.
CP3 has yet to get past the second round. A superstar refuses to let his
team, up 3-1 in a second-round series against an inferior foe, lose
three straight games by a combined 46 points.
A superstar can't force his teammates to play well or hit their three-point shots. A superstar can only do whatever he can do in order to help his team win games. Chris Paul was injured for the first two games of the series against the Rockets (after hitting a game-winning shot against the Spurs) and played well over the last three games against the Rockets. J.J. Redick (and other Clippers players) did not play well and the Clippers don't have a very deep bench, which eventually did them in.
For sure, a superstar sees to it that his team does not blow a 19-point
lead late in the third quarter of a closeout Game 6 at home.
A superstar can try, but when four Clippers players go a combined 14-46 from the field (Redick, Barnes, Rivers, Crawford), then that superstar can only do so much. Paul took 19 shots in that game, so it is not as if he didn't shoot the ball enough. But again, what good are facts when Skip just wants to ignore these facts and just push through an uninformed opinion?
And if it does come down to a Game 7 back in Houston -- a game Chris
Paul's team was favored to win by two points -- a superstar does not
allow his team to trail from start to finish and lose by 13, not to a Houston Rockets team it had beaten by 16 in Game 1 (without CP3), by 25 in Game 3 and by 33 in Game 4.
And again, a superstar can only do so much when those same four guys shoot 11-36 in this Game 7. Chris Paul shot 20 times in this game, so it's not like he was too busy dishing out assists to propel his team to victory. In the last two games of the Clippers series Chris Paul played well while the Clippers four shooters went a combined 25-82 (30.4%!) from the field. Let's re-think who may actually be the reason for the Clippers losing to the Rockets. I'll give Skip a hint, it wasn't entirely Chris Paul's fault.
Chris Paul, president of the NBA Players Association, can lead an entire league but can't lead his team when it really counts.
Chris Paul can try to lead his team, but there isn't much he can do if his team doesn't play well enough for him to have success while trying to lead them. What would it take for Skip Bayless to drop the act and understand that basketball is a team game? Chris Paul and Blake Griffin can't outscore the Rockets on their own. They need help from their shooters to score points and stretch the Rockets defense. Four of the Clippers' shooting guards and small forwards did not do this in two straight games. Therefore, because basketball is a team game, the Clippers lost to the Rockets in a 7 game series.
Feel free to blame coach Doc Rivers for the Clippers' epic Game 6 collapse. He deserves some blame for failing to push the right psychological or strategic buttons.
I wonder if Skip knows there aren't real psychological or strategic buttons? Like, there aren't real buttons that Doc Rivers could push and simply "playing angry" isn't going to allow Chris Paul to actually "play better." These are things that are pure hyperbole and couch potato criticism that Skip is engaging in. Doc Rivers deserves some blame, but Chris Paul deserves most of the blame for not using mind control to force the basketball into the basket when shot by his teammates. Skip Bayless needs to see more Chris and less Cliff Paul. Perhaps Skip would have been satisfied if Paul shot the ball 30 times instead of 20 times in Game 7?
By sheer force of will, Chris Paul couldn't say or do the right thing to inspire his teammates to snap out of it?
Again, this is real life. In real life inspirational words don't automatically make a team or group of players perform better. If this were true, all coaches would do is give inspirational speeches and teams would never practice.
No doubt, Chris Paul, as usual, put up superstar numbers in this year's 12 playoff games: 22.1 points and 8.8 assists while shooting 50 percent from the field and 42 percent from 3. But his team was 6-6. His overall playoff record is now 28-37.
Chris Paul played well. Chris Paul's team still lost. Basketball is a team game. The only natural conclusion to be drawn is that Chris Paul is at fault for his team losing the series to the Rockets. Obviously.
You can argue Blake Griffin (who plays full-tilt to a fault) wore down and finally out by Game 7. You can argue J.J. Redick (2-for-9 from 3 with six turnovers), Jamal Crawford (3-for-9 from 3) and Matt Barnes (0 points in 22 minutes) just ran out of mental gas. All are fair points.
Right, you COULD argue that Chris Paul's teammates did their part in preventing the Clippers from winning the playoff series against the Rockets, but where is the hot take potential in that? There's no need to be logical and even handed when there is an easy "Chris Paul isn't a winner" hot take ready and waiting to be debated.
But the larger point is that "little" Chris played biggest only after a shocking event occurred in the second quarter of Game 7 at home against the Spurs in round one: He felt his hamstring begin to pull late in the first quarter. At first, he appeared devastated, as he sat on the bench with his head in his hands. He went to the locker room, then, just as shockingly, returned to the game five-and-a-half minutes into the second quarter.
Returned mad. Returned with the attitude, "No way I'm going to let this stop me." If the hamstring had torn, no amount of courage could've overcome it. But apparently, it was just strained, and he gutted through the pain and fear of a potential tear to play his greatest playoff game.
See, Chris Paul played angry and that's why he led the Clippers to the playoff victory over the Spurs in Game 7. This victory had nothing to do with Rivers/Crawford/Redick/Barnes shooting 19-42 and scoring 47 points in that game. It's just coincidence that the Clippers won that game while these four players performed well and the Clippers lost when these four players didn't perform well. Obviously, the real determination on whether the Clippers will win a game or not is if Chris Paul plays angry and provides inspirational speeches. Without those 47 points the Clippers still would have won the Game 7 against the Clippers. This goes without saying.
Skip Bayless is the worst. I can't emphasize this enough.
The stars get along OK but don't exactly love each other. Jealousy and finger-pointing sometimes rear their ugly heads behind the scenes. And sometimes on the court, CP3 wears on teammates with his constant complaining to refs and occasional complaining to them about blown assignments.
What one would call "leadership" where Paul tries to get his teammates to stop missing assignments, Skip Bayless would call "complaining" to them about their missed assignments. There's a thin line between complaining and leadership sometimes and that line is often drawn based on whether a team wins or loses a game or series.
Yet CP3's damn-the-hamstring demeanor in Game 7 against the Spurs inspired his teammates in ways he couldn't against Houston in Games 6 and 7. The Spurs had seen this CP3 once before, in Game 7 in New Orleans in 2008. Then, Spurs insiders told me they feared CP3 because he could channel his psycho side -- his rage to win -- into a virtually unstoppable offensive force.
Skip's insistence that athletes "play angry" all the time is exhausting. Playing motivated or playing with more vigor can be a good thing, but Skip's lazy fallback to explaining why an athlete's team win or lost inevitably goes back to whether that athlete "played angry" or not. It's just such lazy analysis...not that I expect anything more from Skip.
This is where I disagree with my First Take debate partner, Stephen A. Smith, who always reminds me Chris Paul is only 6 feet tall, so his "superstar" ceiling is lower.
If you watch "First Take" then you are aiding and abetting obnoxious, ridiculous discussions such as this one. Chris Paul is short, so his "superstar" ceiling is lower. Okay then.
Stephen A. calls Chris Paul a superstar point guard but not a superstar, period.
Considering Stephen A. says a lot of stupid shit, this is a really stupid comment, but not up there with his pantheon of dumbass comments. If Stephen A. says it, just assume it's stupid. That's how I work.
Take it from a Spurs fan: Every time the ball left CP3's hand in this year's Game 7, I thought it was going in. He made nine of 13 shots, including 5-of-6 from 3. He was just too quick and shifty, even protecting his hamstring. He got a "superstar" call with 13 seconds left -- on the great Tim Duncan, no less, who was called for not giving CP3 room to come down on his jump shot. Of course, he made both free throws (he was 48-for-51 in the playoffs).
Paul must have shot his free throws angry. I love how Skip attributes to Clippers winning Game 7 of the Spurs series to Paul playing angry and well, while Paul played well in Game 7 of the Rockets series, and the Clippers lost. I like it because Skip ignores the variable in there that the supporting cast around Paul played well against the Spurs in Game 7 and didn't play well against the Rockets in Game 7. There is one constant in both series and variables changed in both series, yet Skip thinks something was wrong with the constant that affected the outcome of the series against the Rockets.
Then, with the game tied, Chris Paul ignored the Cliff Paul inside him and took the shot himself, blowing past Danny Green, somehow launching a runner over Duncan's outstretched fingertips with one second left, high off the glass ... and in.
That was the CP3 we failed to see in Games 6 and 7 against the Rockets.
Because the game wasn't close enough to where it was up to Chris Paul to hit a game-winning shot. The game wasn't close enough because Chris Paul was one of the few Clippers players to play well in these two games. Of course, if Paul had played angry then his teammates would have upped their performance as well. This makes sense in the fantasy world where Skip Bayless spends most of his time.
Maybe too often, he tries to live up to being president of the players' association or the twin good guys in the State Farm commercials. Maybe the commercials have done his psyche more harm than good.
Yes, that would explain nothing absolutely perfectly. Maybe two things that have nothing to do with each other do have an impact on each other. When you are Skip Bayless and aren't smart enough to use logic and reason to explain an event, you have to reach for an explanation to make it seem like you know what you are talking about.
Playing for Wake Forest, that CP3 once punched Julius Hodge in the privates midway through the first half at North Carolina State. CP3 eventually won that game with a buzzer-beater.
IF CHRIS PAUL PUNCHED A PLAYER IN THE NUTS DURING EVERY NBA GAME, THEN THE CLIPPERS WOULD GO 82-0. DON'T QUESTION THIS CONCLUSION! IT'S UNASSAILABLE!
This certainly isn't to say Chris Paul needs to do more of that, just that he needs to summon and channel his competitive anger more.
I have an idea...how about Chris Paul's teammates channel their competitive anger more. That way they don't go missing in the middle of important playoff games? If Paul's teammates played angrier then the Clippers would win every series, because after all, playing angry leads to a better performance on the court. Or is this conclusion to partially blame Paul's teammates for the series loss to the Rockets not "hot tak-y" enough and too even-handed?
If not, at this rate, he'll be best remembered for selling insurance.
Or he will be remembered as a Hall of Fame point guard who just happened to never win an NBA title. I realize that Skip is brain dead, but Chris Paul doesn't actually sell insurance and he's probably the best point guard in the NBA. Paul may never win a title, but he's also not 100% to blame for never having won an NBA title. His teammates have to play well too.
Showing posts with label skip bayless. Show all posts
Showing posts with label skip bayless. Show all posts
Saturday, May 23, 2015
Saturday, May 16, 2015
3 comments You May Not Believe This, But Skip Bayless Makes Tim Tebow's Return to the NFL about Skip Bayless
You may not have heard, but Tim Tebow has signed with the Philadelphia Eagles. This news did go under the radar, so I understand how a lot of people may have missed it. Naturally, since he is the chief waver of pom-poms for Tebow's NFL career, Skip Bayless has some thoughts on Tebow's return. Even more naturally, Skip Bayless makes Tebow's return to the NFL just a little bit about himself and his interactions with Tebow. Skip's point is that Tim Tebow could play well as an Eagles player next year. He has to make the team first, of course. Tebow COULD play well (or "fly high"...vomit) as an Eagle, but he also could play the same way he played as a Jet and Patriot. Skip thinks other head coaches haven't utilized what Tebow does best, which is analyze football games (seriously, he was pretty good last year). I have nothing against Tebow as a person, but as a football player what he does best (which I'm still not sure what that would be) requires an offense be so limited that I'm not sure it's worth having Tebow around. But, maybe he can be useful in certain situations. It always annoys me (and the starting quarterback) when the backup gets put in the game for certain offensive packages. If Tebow is used as a goal line QB, then I could see him succeeding. Anyway, Skip says Chip Kelly is the best coach for Tebow, which just so happens to be something he also said about Bill Belichick when Tebow signed with the Patriots.
Funny how the smartest coach in football couldn't figure out a way to use Tebow, but now Skip decides that Chip Kelly is the new smartest coach in football. I almost root against Tebow just to hear Skip Bayless and his next excuse for why Tebow didn't succeed in the NFL.
Before college football's national championship game in January, Tim Tebow joined us on the "First Take" set in Dallas to discuss Ohio State vs. Oregon and the NFL playoffs.
I imagine this was one of the highlights of Skip's career, next to repeatedly calling Troy Aikman a homosexual and never really having solid proof this statement is true.
I thought about asking Tebow why he thought the NFL had rejected him for a second straight season, but that seemed like old news about an old wound. Tebow was an ESPN analyst now and we treated him like one.
Except Skip clearly didn't want to treat Tebow like an ESPN analyst, because he was more obsessed with proving Tebow could play in the NFL than Tebow was.
Backstage after the show, I felt a tap on the shoulder and turned to see Tebow.
Here is exclusive video of Skip's reaction when Tebow spoke with him.
I don't know him well - in fact, the few times I've been around him in groups, I've sensed a coolness
Yes, Tebow has always come off as just really super-rad.
and wondered if Tebow shared the view of my on-air debate partner Stephen A. Smith.
And here we go. Skip Bayless believes that his words have an effect on pro athletes. It's one of the most self-centered beliefs that I can recall any human being actually holding. Skip gives himself credit for when LeBron plays well, when a team responds to play well after criticism from Skip and now he believes all NFL teams did not sign Tim Tebow because Skip advocated for Tebow too hard. This is a real thing that Skip believes. He's the type of person who gives feedback when it's requested and then assumes his counsel and only his counsel was heeded if changes are made. The fact NFL front offices, LeBron James or any sports figure could give two shits about what Skip has to say or believes never crosses his mind at any point.
"You helped ruin Tebow's chances in the NFL," Stephen A. often has said on our show. "You supported him so hard [against an onslaught of on-air ctitics] you helped create a lot of the hype that did him in."
This is a real thing that Skip and Stephen A. Smith think? Smith really thinks that Skip Bayless and his opinion on Tebow created so much of the hype around Tebow that NFL teams couldn't see past the hype to fairly evaluate him? Really? This isn't a joke? The Eagles are Tebow's fourth NFL team. At this point he's been on the roster of 12.5% of the NFL teams and been coached by head coaches who have combined been to eight Super Bowls, but it's the hype of Tebow by Skip Bayless that caused them to unfairly evaluate Tebow? This is madness.
Also, what are "ctitics"?
Stephen A. always adds, "That, and the fact he just can't throw."
It was more 98% the fact Tebow couldn't throw and 2% everything else around Tebow that couldn't be ignored because he just can't throw.
But now, backstage in Dallas, Tebow surprised me by saying: "Why didn't you ask me about wanting to continue my playing career?"
Not that Tebow wanted to keep his playing career in the forefront of people's minds even while he was collecting a paycheck from ESPN to not play football. Eyes on the prize.
The truth was I didn't want to further shame him or set him up to seem delusional.
Of course Skip Bayless plays favorite. Would Skip ever worry about asking any other pro athlete a question that would shame him or make the athlete look bad when on "First Take"? Of course not. But this is Skip Bayless and this is ESPN, so of course in the process of "Embracing Debate" it's fine for Skip to also play favorites and antagonize certain professional athletes Skip doesn't like and coddle other athletes that Skip likes better.
But I stammered back something about wishing I'd known and I would've asked.
Simply starstruck.
I must admit I felt sorry for Tebow, who just couldn't come to grips with the end of his football life.
Honestly Skip, I think most people feel sorry for you because you seem to lead a very empty life that mostly revolves around gaining attention for yourself through whatever means possible. Tebow comes off as a much more fulfilled person in his life than Skip comes off as being. Skip is a child who grabs pigtails to gain attention, while Tebow is good at being an analyst and could easily have a career in broadcasting.
At that point, I had no idea Tebow had faithfully returned for 18 straight months (at least twice a month) to Los Angeles to work with throwing guru Tom House, who has refined the mechanics of Tom Brady, Drew Brees, Carson Palmer and many big-league pitchers.
Bottom line from Skip's point of view: Tom House will turn Tim Tebow into Tom Brady.
Nolan Ryan credited House (who pitched for eight big-league seasons) with helping extend his career when House was pitching coach for the Texas Rangers.
And the difference in Tebow and Nolan Ryan is that Nolan Ryan was already a great pitcher when he started working with Tom House. Tebow...not so much a great quarterback.
He told me Monday he has never seen anything like the commitment Tebow made to improving his passing "when he didn't even have a team or the prospect of being on a team. He just kept busting [his tail] and busting it and busting it."
Hard work is great and hard work is how Tim Tebow got to the NFL. Sometimes hard work isn't enough though.
That same week in Dallas, an NFL insider told me about a conversation he had with Eagles coach (and former Oregon coach) Chip Kelly, who insisted he didn't pick a quarterback for his system - but that he could play to the strengths of (and win with) any quarterback.
I have nothing against Chip Kelly and his wisdom, but this is insanity. I've lived through the Jimmy Clausen era in Carolina. I feel very, very certain Chip Kelly couldn't win with Jimmy Clausen as his starting quarterback.
Typical Chip, I thought. He doesn't just think he's the smartest man in every room he's in, but in every stadium, no matter the opposing coach or staff.
Kelly succeeding with Tebow may be the ultimate test that he can win with any quarterback. Okay, maybe not the ultimate test, but a pretty big test to prove he can win with any quarterback.
If conventional NFL wisdom says, "That won't work," Kelly sniffs
Apparently Skip thinks that Chip Kelly does a lot of cocaine.
and says, "Watch this."
But in January, Kelly had been given total control of Eagles' personnel moves. Little did I know how that was about to impact Tebow's NFL future.
It's a good thing that Skip had stopped talking about Tim Tebow in December, because otherwise all of the hype Skip gave Tebow would have affected Tebow's chances of making it in the NFL. Skip has the power to affect Tebow's chances of signing with an NFL team of course.
When Kelly heard Tebow, only 27, still wanted to play and continued to work fanatically on his throwing after two years out of the NFL, Kelly invited him to Philly for a tryout.
This, remember, was before Kelly dumbfounded the NFL in mid-March by trading Nick Foles (27 touchdown passes to only two interceptions in 2013) for an immobile Sam Bradford, the former No. 1 overall pick who has constantly battled injuries through his University of Oklahoma career and his five pro seasons
Clearly the only takeaway from this is that Chip Kelly trading Nick Foles so that he could clear room to sign Tim Tebow a month later. That's the only logical conclusion that can be drawn. Skip had to be very careful not to hype Tebow too much or else cause Kelly to change his mind and sign a different quarterback instead. Because, you know, the hype would drive Kelly's mind crazy to where his opinion of Tebow would be affected by Skip Bayless. Again, this is a real thing that can happen.
Speaking of jokes, a week before the Bradford deal, many Eagles fans considered this trade inexplicably laughable: LeSean McCoy to Buffalo for former Oregon linebacker Kiko Alonso. Kelly had acquired so many Oregon players that the Eagles might as well be renamed the Philadelphia Ducks.
Kelly was a sitting duck for criticism,
This is just terrible writing. I don't want to say Skip should stick to doing television instead of writing for ESPN, so I think Skip should stick to just going the hell away.
The head-shaking turned to belly-laughing on Monday, March 16, when Kelly brought Tebow to Philly for a workout. Kelly was impressed enough he wanted to sign Tebow immediately, but first wanted to maintain leverage in completing a trade for third-string QB Matt Barkley, hopefully to Miami.
Kelly was so impressed that he was going to trade every player on the Eagles roster to ensure Tebow would have a roster spot, but later decided against this.
Tebow's last NFL stop just might be the jumpstart his career needs. Finally, he's playing for a coach who actually wants to utilize what he does best.
Which is what Skip said when Tebow went to the Patriots. How soon he forgets.
That could've been Josh McDaniels, who drafted Tebow 25th overall - then got fired midway through Tebow's rookie year in Denver.
Because Skip is a journalistic clown and only serves to troll others without providing any useful information, he of course leaves out the little fact that Tebow's offensive coordinator when he was briefly with the Patriots was........................Josh McDaniels. So Josh McDaniels could have utilized what Tebow does best with Denver, yet he didn't do this when he coached Tebow in New England. Weird how that works isn't it? The excuses keep coming. Skip keeps saying, "This is the guy who can utilize Tebow best," as if the problem is coaching and not Tebow. Yet, McDaniels had a chance to utilize Tebow in New England and it didn't work out. Tebow even had the advantage of being coached by Bill Belichick while working with Josh McDaniels. We know how that ended.
So Skip always blames the coaching for not utilizing Tebow correctly, but because he has no regard for facts, he doesn't realize how ridiculous he sounds. Skip doesn't deal in reality, I think that's the main issue he has.
It quickly became clear to Tebow that the Jets were more interested in using him as an occasional gimmick to win only New York's back-page tabloid headlines from the Giants.
Of course, the Jets had no interest in winning games. They only wanted to win the headline game. This is how Skip Bayless believes the NFL world works. Skip Bayless gets paid a lot of money to comment on professional sports by the way.
A brittle Bradford, a shaky Sanchez: Is it possible Kelly will give Tebow a legit shot at competing for the starting job? Several NFL sources have predicted to me he will.
Those NFL sources are probably as real as the "facts" that Skip spits out on "First Take" everyday.
Wouldn't Chip Kelly like nothing more than to say "Watch this" to his buddy Belichick?
No. Chip Kelly wants to win fucking football games, not get into a childish pissing contest with another NFL coach to see who can take the most mediocre quarterback and win games with him. Does Skip really believe the sports world works like this? He believes the Jets just want more headlines than the Giants, Chip Kelly would sign a quarterback to show Belichick he can succeed with that quarterback or his own comments about Tebow affects the evaluation of NFL teams? Skip Bayless is better served being an idiot caller on sports talk radio if these are real beliefs he has.
In Kelly's two seasons in Philly, his offense led the NFL in read-option plays with 514. Next was Russell Wilson's Seattle with only 235. In 2011, often running the read option, Tebow took over a 1-4 Denver team and turned it into the NFL's top rushing attack. Tebow runs the option with gut instinct and rare will, and now he'll be playing the ride-and-decide game with the NFL's reigning rushing champ, new Eagle DeMarco Murray.
He'll be playing the ride-and-decide game with Murray for the 10 games that Murray is actually healthy during the 2015 season.
Tebow took that 1-4 team to a divisional title and home playoff win over Pittsburgh.
I don't know how long this is going to be mentioned. Yes, the Broncos were 8-8 and beat the Steelers in overtime on a slant where the safety (the same backup safety I believe that replaced Ryan Clark, who couldn't play in the game due to his sickle cell disease...obviously God wanted Clark to have sickle cell so Tebow could win a playoff game) took a bad angle and Demaryius Thomas took the pass to the house. Funny how Skip doesn't mention what happened in the next playoff game on the road against the Patriots. This always seems to be left out. Tebow was 9-26 for 136 yards in a 45-10 loss. Heck, he didn't even complete 50% of his passes in the epic, never-to-be-forgotten win over the Steelers.
He has always thrown a pretty good deep ball, always a Kelly staple. Hmmm.
I don't know if this is true or not.
All I said before the draft was: If you take him at the bottom of the first round and let him run the read option and throw off its run fakes, he will win games in the NFL. Did he ever.
Yes, but then Tebow didn't win games in the NFL. I've always enjoyed how Skip has completely ignored the failures Tebow has had in the NFL and chalked it up to simply bad coaching. Of course it is bad coaching. Let's just focus on the times Tebow was good and ignore the bad.
He began losing confidence with the Jets, and though House worked briefly with Tebow before he went to camp with the Patriots and raved Tebow was throwing "beautifully," Tebow crumbled under the pressure of sharing a camp field with Brady. He pressed. He choked. He regressed. He gave Belichick (and coordinator McDaniels) no choice but to cut him.
So the lesson to learn is that as long as Tebow doesn't have an NFL-quality starter in front him, then he can be an NFL starter? Just surround him with shitty quarterbacks and Tebow can compete.
Now, no doubt, those who do not believe in Kelly are thinking, "Tebow will get him fired."
Yeah, Chip Kelly isn't going to let Tebow get him fired. Rest assured about that. Tebow will be gone long before Kelly gets fired for hanging on to Tebow for too long.
All I know for sure is, that day in Dallas when Tebow was on our show, I should've asked him about his playing career.
It is all about you, Skip. But think about it. If you had asked Tebow about his playing career it would have only contributed to the hype and then Tebow would not have gotten a chance to play in the NFL again. NFL teams hang on your every word, so they would have gotten lost in the hype of Tebow and only paid attention to the fact that three really good coaches have already given Tebow the boot.
Funny how the smartest coach in football couldn't figure out a way to use Tebow, but now Skip decides that Chip Kelly is the new smartest coach in football. I almost root against Tebow just to hear Skip Bayless and his next excuse for why Tebow didn't succeed in the NFL.
Before college football's national championship game in January, Tim Tebow joined us on the "First Take" set in Dallas to discuss Ohio State vs. Oregon and the NFL playoffs.
I imagine this was one of the highlights of Skip's career, next to repeatedly calling Troy Aikman a homosexual and never really having solid proof this statement is true.
I thought about asking Tebow why he thought the NFL had rejected him for a second straight season, but that seemed like old news about an old wound. Tebow was an ESPN analyst now and we treated him like one.
Except Skip clearly didn't want to treat Tebow like an ESPN analyst, because he was more obsessed with proving Tebow could play in the NFL than Tebow was.
Backstage after the show, I felt a tap on the shoulder and turned to see Tebow.
Here is exclusive video of Skip's reaction when Tebow spoke with him.
I don't know him well - in fact, the few times I've been around him in groups, I've sensed a coolness
Yes, Tebow has always come off as just really super-rad.
and wondered if Tebow shared the view of my on-air debate partner Stephen A. Smith.
And here we go. Skip Bayless believes that his words have an effect on pro athletes. It's one of the most self-centered beliefs that I can recall any human being actually holding. Skip gives himself credit for when LeBron plays well, when a team responds to play well after criticism from Skip and now he believes all NFL teams did not sign Tim Tebow because Skip advocated for Tebow too hard. This is a real thing that Skip believes. He's the type of person who gives feedback when it's requested and then assumes his counsel and only his counsel was heeded if changes are made. The fact NFL front offices, LeBron James or any sports figure could give two shits about what Skip has to say or believes never crosses his mind at any point.
"You helped ruin Tebow's chances in the NFL," Stephen A. often has said on our show. "You supported him so hard [against an onslaught of on-air ctitics] you helped create a lot of the hype that did him in."
This is a real thing that Skip and Stephen A. Smith think? Smith really thinks that Skip Bayless and his opinion on Tebow created so much of the hype around Tebow that NFL teams couldn't see past the hype to fairly evaluate him? Really? This isn't a joke? The Eagles are Tebow's fourth NFL team. At this point he's been on the roster of 12.5% of the NFL teams and been coached by head coaches who have combined been to eight Super Bowls, but it's the hype of Tebow by Skip Bayless that caused them to unfairly evaluate Tebow? This is madness.
Also, what are "ctitics"?
Stephen A. always adds, "That, and the fact he just can't throw."
It was more 98% the fact Tebow couldn't throw and 2% everything else around Tebow that couldn't be ignored because he just can't throw.
But now, backstage in Dallas, Tebow surprised me by saying: "Why didn't you ask me about wanting to continue my playing career?"
Not that Tebow wanted to keep his playing career in the forefront of people's minds even while he was collecting a paycheck from ESPN to not play football. Eyes on the prize.
The truth was I didn't want to further shame him or set him up to seem delusional.
Of course Skip Bayless plays favorite. Would Skip ever worry about asking any other pro athlete a question that would shame him or make the athlete look bad when on "First Take"? Of course not. But this is Skip Bayless and this is ESPN, so of course in the process of "Embracing Debate" it's fine for Skip to also play favorites and antagonize certain professional athletes Skip doesn't like and coddle other athletes that Skip likes better.
But I stammered back something about wishing I'd known and I would've asked.
Simply starstruck.
I must admit I felt sorry for Tebow, who just couldn't come to grips with the end of his football life.
Honestly Skip, I think most people feel sorry for you because you seem to lead a very empty life that mostly revolves around gaining attention for yourself through whatever means possible. Tebow comes off as a much more fulfilled person in his life than Skip comes off as being. Skip is a child who grabs pigtails to gain attention, while Tebow is good at being an analyst and could easily have a career in broadcasting.
At that point, I had no idea Tebow had faithfully returned for 18 straight months (at least twice a month) to Los Angeles to work with throwing guru Tom House, who has refined the mechanics of Tom Brady, Drew Brees, Carson Palmer and many big-league pitchers.
Bottom line from Skip's point of view: Tom House will turn Tim Tebow into Tom Brady.
Nolan Ryan credited House (who pitched for eight big-league seasons) with helping extend his career when House was pitching coach for the Texas Rangers.
And the difference in Tebow and Nolan Ryan is that Nolan Ryan was already a great pitcher when he started working with Tom House. Tebow...not so much a great quarterback.
He told me Monday he has never seen anything like the commitment Tebow made to improving his passing "when he didn't even have a team or the prospect of being on a team. He just kept busting [his tail] and busting it and busting it."
Hard work is great and hard work is how Tim Tebow got to the NFL. Sometimes hard work isn't enough though.
That same week in Dallas, an NFL insider told me about a conversation he had with Eagles coach (and former Oregon coach) Chip Kelly, who insisted he didn't pick a quarterback for his system - but that he could play to the strengths of (and win with) any quarterback.
I have nothing against Chip Kelly and his wisdom, but this is insanity. I've lived through the Jimmy Clausen era in Carolina. I feel very, very certain Chip Kelly couldn't win with Jimmy Clausen as his starting quarterback.
Typical Chip, I thought. He doesn't just think he's the smartest man in every room he's in, but in every stadium, no matter the opposing coach or staff.
Kelly succeeding with Tebow may be the ultimate test that he can win with any quarterback. Okay, maybe not the ultimate test, but a pretty big test to prove he can win with any quarterback.
If conventional NFL wisdom says, "That won't work," Kelly sniffs
Apparently Skip thinks that Chip Kelly does a lot of cocaine.
and says, "Watch this."
But in January, Kelly had been given total control of Eagles' personnel moves. Little did I know how that was about to impact Tebow's NFL future.
It's a good thing that Skip had stopped talking about Tim Tebow in December, because otherwise all of the hype Skip gave Tebow would have affected Tebow's chances of making it in the NFL. Skip has the power to affect Tebow's chances of signing with an NFL team of course.
When Kelly heard Tebow, only 27, still wanted to play and continued to work fanatically on his throwing after two years out of the NFL, Kelly invited him to Philly for a tryout.
This, remember, was before Kelly dumbfounded the NFL in mid-March by trading Nick Foles (27 touchdown passes to only two interceptions in 2013) for an immobile Sam Bradford, the former No. 1 overall pick who has constantly battled injuries through his University of Oklahoma career and his five pro seasons
Clearly the only takeaway from this is that Chip Kelly trading Nick Foles so that he could clear room to sign Tim Tebow a month later. That's the only logical conclusion that can be drawn. Skip had to be very careful not to hype Tebow too much or else cause Kelly to change his mind and sign a different quarterback instead. Because, you know, the hype would drive Kelly's mind crazy to where his opinion of Tebow would be affected by Skip Bayless. Again, this is a real thing that can happen.
Speaking of jokes, a week before the Bradford deal, many Eagles fans considered this trade inexplicably laughable: LeSean McCoy to Buffalo for former Oregon linebacker Kiko Alonso. Kelly had acquired so many Oregon players that the Eagles might as well be renamed the Philadelphia Ducks.
Kelly was a sitting duck for criticism,
This is just terrible writing. I don't want to say Skip should stick to doing television instead of writing for ESPN, so I think Skip should stick to just going the hell away.
The head-shaking turned to belly-laughing on Monday, March 16, when Kelly brought Tebow to Philly for a workout. Kelly was impressed enough he wanted to sign Tebow immediately, but first wanted to maintain leverage in completing a trade for third-string QB Matt Barkley, hopefully to Miami.
Kelly was so impressed that he was going to trade every player on the Eagles roster to ensure Tebow would have a roster spot, but later decided against this.
Tebow's last NFL stop just might be the jumpstart his career needs. Finally, he's playing for a coach who actually wants to utilize what he does best.
Which is what Skip said when Tebow went to the Patriots. How soon he forgets.
That could've been Josh McDaniels, who drafted Tebow 25th overall - then got fired midway through Tebow's rookie year in Denver.
Because Skip is a journalistic clown and only serves to troll others without providing any useful information, he of course leaves out the little fact that Tebow's offensive coordinator when he was briefly with the Patriots was........................Josh McDaniels. So Josh McDaniels could have utilized what Tebow does best with Denver, yet he didn't do this when he coached Tebow in New England. Weird how that works isn't it? The excuses keep coming. Skip keeps saying, "This is the guy who can utilize Tebow best," as if the problem is coaching and not Tebow. Yet, McDaniels had a chance to utilize Tebow in New England and it didn't work out. Tebow even had the advantage of being coached by Bill Belichick while working with Josh McDaniels. We know how that ended.
So Skip always blames the coaching for not utilizing Tebow correctly, but because he has no regard for facts, he doesn't realize how ridiculous he sounds. Skip doesn't deal in reality, I think that's the main issue he has.
It quickly became clear to Tebow that the Jets were more interested in using him as an occasional gimmick to win only New York's back-page tabloid headlines from the Giants.
Of course, the Jets had no interest in winning games. They only wanted to win the headline game. This is how Skip Bayless believes the NFL world works. Skip Bayless gets paid a lot of money to comment on professional sports by the way.
A brittle Bradford, a shaky Sanchez: Is it possible Kelly will give Tebow a legit shot at competing for the starting job? Several NFL sources have predicted to me he will.
Those NFL sources are probably as real as the "facts" that Skip spits out on "First Take" everyday.
Wouldn't Chip Kelly like nothing more than to say "Watch this" to his buddy Belichick?
No. Chip Kelly wants to win fucking football games, not get into a childish pissing contest with another NFL coach to see who can take the most mediocre quarterback and win games with him. Does Skip really believe the sports world works like this? He believes the Jets just want more headlines than the Giants, Chip Kelly would sign a quarterback to show Belichick he can succeed with that quarterback or his own comments about Tebow affects the evaluation of NFL teams? Skip Bayless is better served being an idiot caller on sports talk radio if these are real beliefs he has.
In Kelly's two seasons in Philly, his offense led the NFL in read-option plays with 514. Next was Russell Wilson's Seattle with only 235. In 2011, often running the read option, Tebow took over a 1-4 Denver team and turned it into the NFL's top rushing attack. Tebow runs the option with gut instinct and rare will, and now he'll be playing the ride-and-decide game with the NFL's reigning rushing champ, new Eagle DeMarco Murray.
He'll be playing the ride-and-decide game with Murray for the 10 games that Murray is actually healthy during the 2015 season.
Tebow took that 1-4 team to a divisional title and home playoff win over Pittsburgh.
I don't know how long this is going to be mentioned. Yes, the Broncos were 8-8 and beat the Steelers in overtime on a slant where the safety (the same backup safety I believe that replaced Ryan Clark, who couldn't play in the game due to his sickle cell disease...obviously God wanted Clark to have sickle cell so Tebow could win a playoff game) took a bad angle and Demaryius Thomas took the pass to the house. Funny how Skip doesn't mention what happened in the next playoff game on the road against the Patriots. This always seems to be left out. Tebow was 9-26 for 136 yards in a 45-10 loss. Heck, he didn't even complete 50% of his passes in the epic, never-to-be-forgotten win over the Steelers.
He has always thrown a pretty good deep ball, always a Kelly staple. Hmmm.
I don't know if this is true or not.
All I said before the draft was: If you take him at the bottom of the first round and let him run the read option and throw off its run fakes, he will win games in the NFL. Did he ever.
Yes, but then Tebow didn't win games in the NFL. I've always enjoyed how Skip has completely ignored the failures Tebow has had in the NFL and chalked it up to simply bad coaching. Of course it is bad coaching. Let's just focus on the times Tebow was good and ignore the bad.
He began losing confidence with the Jets, and though House worked briefly with Tebow before he went to camp with the Patriots and raved Tebow was throwing "beautifully," Tebow crumbled under the pressure of sharing a camp field with Brady. He pressed. He choked. He regressed. He gave Belichick (and coordinator McDaniels) no choice but to cut him.
So the lesson to learn is that as long as Tebow doesn't have an NFL-quality starter in front him, then he can be an NFL starter? Just surround him with shitty quarterbacks and Tebow can compete.
Now, no doubt, those who do not believe in Kelly are thinking, "Tebow will get him fired."
Yeah, Chip Kelly isn't going to let Tebow get him fired. Rest assured about that. Tebow will be gone long before Kelly gets fired for hanging on to Tebow for too long.
All I know for sure is, that day in Dallas when Tebow was on our show, I should've asked him about his playing career.
It is all about you, Skip. But think about it. If you had asked Tebow about his playing career it would have only contributed to the hype and then Tebow would not have gotten a chance to play in the NFL again. NFL teams hang on your every word, so they would have gotten lost in the hype of Tebow and only paid attention to the fact that three really good coaches have already given Tebow the boot.
Saturday, April 25, 2015
8 comments Skip Bayless Evaluates Why NFL QB Draft Choices Fail; HAHA! I'm Just Kidding, Skip Bayless Talks about Himself and His Old Opinions of NFL QB Draft Choices
I imagine the home of Skip Bayless isn't really a home. I imagine it has approximately 500 mirrors and mostly serves as a shrine to Skip's favorite person, himself. Every article he writes at ESPN.com is really just about Skip's opinion and the opinion of others regarding Skip's opinion. There's no substance to any of Skip's writing, instead it is mostly "Here is my opinion and what others thought about my opinion and do you mind if we talk about me a little bit more?" So under the guise of figuring out why quarterbacks taken in the first round of the NFL Draft miss the mark in the NFL, Skip reviews the quarterbacks who he believed would succeed and discusses how sometimes he's right and sometimes he is wrong, but mostly it's just another shrine to Skip Bayless and his opinions. The use of the words "I," "I'm," and "I've" in this article is so prevalent only the most noble and bored of adventurers would take on the expedition of counting how many times Skip uses these words.
I'll admit it's getting a little eerie. Six times before NFL drafts, I've taken a stand for quarterbacks doubted by many. For a while, they've all made me look like a genius.
It's eerie that Skip really doesn't know what the fuck he is talking about. Weird, isn't it?
Then ...
Things have gone wrong.
They have gone wrong for a variety of reasons, but mostly because Skip was never right and NFL defensive coordinators found a way to game plan around stopping the strengths of these quarterbacks. It's much in the same way that Skip would build a bridge and claim "for a while" it was a work of genius until one day the entire bridge fell and killed dozens of people and hundreds of innocent water creatures. Skip will still insist "for a while" that bridge worked really well, while ignoring that isn't the mark of success at all.
In each case I wound up publicly pilloried as a madman, a football fool, a quarterback hack who is daft when it comes to the draft. I still believe I deserve credit for always being so initially right. You decide.
It's all about Skip and the reaction of the public to the idiotic words he speaks because ESPN inexplicably gives him a forum to speak these words. And no, there is no credit being given for being initially right, because being initially right where a quarterback plays well for a season or two isn't correctly predicting that quarterback will succeed in the NFL. Success isn't determined over a short span of time. There's really no debate that can be had on this. Skip isn't right because Tim Tebow fooled defensive coordinators for almost an entire season, at least until they caught on to how to game plan around him.
But as we go case by case, you'll see a common cause of eventual failure -- one I can't account for pre-draft.
Skip tries to blame outside forces for the reason each quarterback didn't succeed in the NFL, in order to cover up for the fact "He isn't a good quarterback" could not have been accounted for prior to the draft. Skip can try and talk around it all he wants, and I will admit it's a guessing game whether some of these quarterbacks will succeed in the NFL, but the bottom line is that Skip went hard all-in on some of these quarterbacks and has ended up being wrong. He can talk around it, but that's the bottom line.
Most of these quarterbacks wound up with franchises whose executives and coaches were dangerously split on them. I was all-in. The team that drafted them was not.
Of course, it is the franchise's fault for not being all-in on these quarterbacks. Naturally. It's not that those executives and coaches who argued against the drafting of these quarterbacks were right, it's just they were only right because they argued against drafting these quarterbacks based on legitimate reasons that ended up being correct. But the reasons wouldn't have been correct if they had just been all-in on the quarterback. It all makes sense if you turn your brain off.
You'll also see a common flaw: Several of "my guys" failed to handle their success and/or failure in unstable and uneasy situations.
And really, who could have seen that coming? Johnny Manziel partied a lot in college and was drafted by an organization that seems somewhat dysfunctional? Who could have seen that he wouldn't succeed?
You can argue I've been much more long-term accurate on which quarterbacks are being dangerously overrated. I said on air JaMarcus Russell and Sam Bradford were very bad ideas for No.1 overall picks, that Alex Smith would never live up to being taken No. 1 and that Matt Leinart, Brady Quinn, Jake Locker, Blaine Gabbert and Christian Ponder were not first-round picks.
You could argue that, but it wouldn't mean Skip wasn't wrong about these other six quarterbacks.
Those weren't popular stances.
Skip is a rebel and takes unpopular stances, based on the fact Stephen A. Smith disagrees with him. As is well known, Stephen A. Smith speaks for the majority opinion of the sports-loving world.
Neither were these ...
2006: I said on air the Houston Texans should take Vince Young No. 1 overall, in part because he grew up in Houston and had just led the University of Texas to the national championship with the greatest individual performance in title-game history.
Does Skip remember how popular Vince Young was coming out of Texas? It was not popular to say he would be successful in the NFL? I do disagree. Also, you can see from the start this isn't a column about WHY NFL quarterbacks taken early in the draft fail, as promised in the column title, but is about Skip Bayless and what he has said on the air. One other thing, to indicate the Texans should have taken Young simply because he grew up in Houston and led the University of Texas to a national championship is very bad reasoning for taking Young #1 overall.
Houston shockingly opted for defensive end Mario Williams, leaving Reggie Bush for the New Orleans Saints and Young for the Tennessee Titans general manager Floyd Reese and Titans owner Bud Adams,
It was shocking in that Mario Williams really worked out well for the Texans and Bush never really was the running back he promised himself to be in college. So it's almost like the Texans knew what they were doing.
One big problem: coach Jeff Fisher was against drafting Young.
Jeff Fisher is never wrong and you take it back right now.
Still, Young often made me look pretty good. He was offensive rookie of the year. He made two Pro Bowls. He went 30-17 as Tennessee's starter.
And that's really what this is all about isn't it? Which quarterbacks made Skip look good and which quarterbacks didn't make Skip look good. Vince Young did have success for a while, but this doesn't mean Skip was right about him. I think Mario Williams was the right pick for the Texans.
But predictably, he often clashed with Fisher. It appeared Fisher helped turn some in the local and national media against Young. His skin grew thin.
IT WASN'T YOUNG'S FAULT HE FAILED IN THE NFL! IF HE HAD JUST GOTTEN ANOTHER SHOT WITH ANOTHER NFL TEAM HE WOULD HAVE SUCCEE---
Incredibly, after a season in Philadelphia and a camp with the Buffalo Bills and another with the Green Bay Packers, the league rejected Young at age 30.
This is shocking that Skip blames Young's failures on the environment in Tennessee and Young goes to another NFL team and continues to not be a good quarterbacks. It's almost like, and I almost dare not say it, Vince Young wasn't really a great quarterback and Skip was wrong about Young. But no, I'm sure the issues Jeff Fisher had with Young followed him to Philadelphia, Buffalo and to Green Bay. That makes more sense than Skip just outright being wrong.
What if Fisher had wanted to draft Young, had publicly invested his pride in him, had supported him through the growing pains? Young was too good for it to go so wrong.
What if Vince Young had success early in his career and this pretty much rejects the idea the biggest issue with Young's progress in the NFL is that he wasn't supported enough, because it doesn't make sense for him to play well at the beginning of his career and suddenly need more nurturing as he played more NFL games? I'm sure the Titans could have done something to help Young more, but three other teams took a look at Young and rejected him.
Another quarterback taken in that 2006 draft made the Pro Bowl in his second full season of starting. When Jay Cutler was a junior at Vanderbilt (my alma mater) I began raving about him on air, predicting he'd be a "franchise quarterback." Of course, that proclamation was met with chuckles. A Vandy quarterback?
As always, it is about Skip Bayless. Sense a trend that permeates Skip's entire writing style?
"Here's a quarterback. Here's what I thought about that quarterback. Here's what others thought about my thoughts about this quarterback. Here's an excuse for why I was wrong, but this doesn't mean I was wrong and others were right."
Cutler was the "lucky" one of the six debatable quarterbacks I loved before their drafts. (He's also the most prototypical pocket passer who least relied on his legs.) Shanahan really wanted him. So did the Bears. I certainly wasn't wrong about Cutler's ability. He's no bust. But he is what he was at Vandy: a little more interested in pulling off the occasional "wow" throw than winning.
Skip wasn't wrong about Cutler's ability? Is Cutler a franchise quarterback? No? Skip said Cutler was a franchise quarterback and he isn't, so that leads me to the conclusion Skip was wrong.
2009: I said on air that Mark Sanchez was being overrated. He went fifth to the Jets. I also raved about Josh Freeman and said the Tampa Bay Bucs stole him at No. 17.
Ah yes, the inconsistencies of Skip come to the forefront. He uses "games won" to make a case for why Vince Young could have been a great quarterback if it weren't for that meddling Jeff Fisher. All of a sudden he skips over that Mark Sanchez went to two AFC Championship Games as the starter for the Jets. Sure, I wouldn't give Sanchez credit for that, but in his eagerness to show how right he was about Sanchez, Skip changes the metric he uses for quarterback success. All of a sudden "games won" doesn't hold as much meaning to Skip when he's talking about a quarterback he thought wouldn't succeed in the NFL. Weird how that works.
I'd watched Kansas State's 6-6, 240-pound Freeman play big in his biggest games against Texas and Oklahoma.
No one else saw this. Only Skip saw Freeman play big in his biggest games against Texas and Oklahoma. (By the way, notice how Skip's love for the University of Texas seems to play a part in his evaluations?)
In his first full season as Tampa Bay's starter, he made me look pretty great by throwing 25 touchdown passes to only six interceptions and leading the Bucs to a 10-6 record. He was a Pro Bowl alternate.
Then ... it all fell apart in 2011. Rumors swirled. Maybe Freeman let success go to his head (or stomach). Maybe Raheem Morris lost control of the team as it went from 3-1 to 4-12. Morris was fired.
Freeman played pretty well in coach Greg Schiano's first season -- 27 touchdown passes, 17 interceptions -- but the team went 7-9.
Welp, it seems using team performance to evaluate a quarterback means something important again.
After three starts in 2013, the Bucs tried to trade Freeman, couldn't and released him. After one horrendous Monday night start for the Minnesota Vikings, a 23-7 loss at the New York Giants, Freeman was out of football at age 25.
You still hear speculation Freeman will get another shot. But how could he go from 2010 to this? Again: so right, so wrong.
Probably the same reason a rookie baseball player can have a fantastic rookie year and then fail to improve on or reach those heights for the rest of his career. Opponents adjust to the rookie's tendencies, and when the player's true talent comes to light after opponents have adjusted, it turns out he isn't the star people thought he could end up being.
2010: I said on air I would take Tim Tebow late in the first round. "If you let him run the read option he ran at Florida," I said, "he'll win games in the NFL. He'll never make a Pro Bowl, but he can win games as a starting quarterback."
He'll "win games," which is exactly the type of thing you want your first round pick quarterback to do. Just don't suck and win a few games.
Under John Fox, the Broncos began the next season 1-4, and a new Broncos regime (led by John Elway) that clearly didn't believe in Tebow threw him into the fire, at Miami, out of desperation. I was asked on air what I thought Tebow's record would be the rest of the season. I said 7-4. Chuckles.
Tebow went 7-4, led Denver to the AFC West title, led the NFL in QBR in the last five minutes of games and turned the Broncos into the NFL's No. 1 rushing attack.
And let's be clear that the Broncos HAD to become the NFL's No. 1 rushing attack with Tebow as the quarterback, because he wasn't going to win games by throwing the football. Regardless of whether the Elway regime believed in Tebow or not, it doesn't mean they stunted his growth. Tebow failed in New York, where Rex Ryan took Mark Sanchez (the same Sanchez that Skip didn't like as an NFL QB) to two AFC Championship Games and he flamed out in New England. I would think if Belichick could have used Tebow in any productive way then he would have.
That offseason the Broncos replaced Tebow with ... Peyton Manning! No shame there. Tebow was traded to the Jets, with whom he was never even given a shot at starting.
That's funny. Tebow was in New York the season that Mark Sanchez was horrible and the Jets needed someone, anyone, to come in and play well at the quarterback position. Even going up against the quarterback that Skip thinks sucks, Mark Sanchez, Tebow couldn't win the starting job on a team desperate for a starting quarterback. So yeah, he was never given a shot. That's the lie that Skip will go with.
Tebow began to doubt himself and drifted from one throwing guru to another.
Maybe he started doubting himself because he's really not that good at throwing the football?
It's still possible the Philadelphia Eagles' Chip Kelly will sign Tebow, but again, I was so sensationally right ... and ultimately condemned as so dead wrong.
No, not at all. You were so sensationally wrong. Tim Tebow is now a co-worker of Skip's at ESPN. Tebow is not in the NFL anymore, so Skip was right for a brief period of time, but in the longer span of time he was absolutely wrong about Tebow. Again, simply because a bridge holds up for a brief span of time before it collapses does not mean it was a safe bridge to cross for that brief span of time.
I do really like how Skip talks about how he was right about Tebow winning games as an NFL quarterback, while also ignoring that Tebow couldn't beat out the quarterback Skip proudly beats his chest in this article for correctly stating wouldn't be successful (Mark Sanchez). Ignore that which makes Skip look dumb. That's A LOT of ignoring.
2012: On air long before the draft, I said Robert Griffin III would prove to be an even better pro than Andrew Luck. The Washington Redskins traded three first-rounders and a second to move up from No. 6 to No. 2 to take RG III. Way too much? Not to me.
It's hard for Skip to talk his way out of this one. He'll try to do so by ignoring the issue he himself brought up when arguing for Griffin. The issue Skip presented was that Griffin will be a better quarterback than Andrew Luck. He's not and he won't ever be. Skip was wrong.
Still, In RG III's rookie season, at age 22, he went superstar on the NFL. Offensive rookie of the year, 20 touchdown passes to just five interceptions, led the league in yards per pass attempt and per rush, led his team to the NFC East crown, had a better QBR than Luck -- 71.4 to 65.2.
FOR ONE YEAR! ONE SOLITARY SEASON!
RG III sprained his knee late in the season, then tweaked it just before his team jumped out 14-0 on the Seattle Seahawks in a home playoff game, then wrecked it late in that eventual loss. And he has spent the past two seasons looking like a sad shell of a guy who no longer trusts his legs or eyes or arm.
I like how Skip always blames outside forces for the failure of these quarterbacks. It's never, "Griffin got injured and his lack of mobility revealed him as a one-read quarterback who just couldn't grasp the passing concepts required to be an NFL quarterback." Skip reasons that Griffin no longer trusted his leg or arm after his injury. Of course, because Skip could never be wrong with his evaluation of Griffin's abilities.
He clashed with Shanahan and failed to click with new coach Jay Gruden. Now ESPN's John Clayton is reporting new GM Scot McCloughan will take Mariota if he's there at No. 5.
Now it feels like RG III's best bet is to start over with another team in another town.
Where when/if Griffin fails there, then Skip will conveniently ignore that Griffin was away from the Redskins' toxic environment and he still couldn't succeed.
2014: I said on air the Texans would forever regret not taking Texas native Johnny Manziel, the Heisman winner from Texas A&M, with the No. 1 overall pick.
And so far, the Texans have been correct twice when Skip has claimed they would regret not taking a quarterback that Skip suggests they draft.
I was told the Texans were considering Manziel until they asked him to lay low and behave himself in the month leading up to the draft. Manziel attended the Masters, had too much to drink and -- the Texans were told -- made a spectacle of himself. They were out.
Again and again I said before the draft: If alcohol proves to be an ongoing issue for Manziel, I'm out.
Skip is blaming alcohol for Manziel's poor rookie season, while acknowledging that he thought alcohol could be an issue for Manziel prior to his being drafted. This sort of contradicts what Skip said earlier in this column:
But as we go case by case, you'll see a common cause of eventual failure -- one I can't account for pre-draft.
Oh, except Skip did account for Manziel's alcohol use pre-draft. I wouldn't expect Skip to stay consistent.
Loggains showed the text to owner Jimmy Haslam, who encouraged GM Ray Farmer, coach Mike Pettine and coordinator Kyle Shanahan to trade up to take Manziel. The Browns did, from 26 to 22.
But the GM, coach and coordinator were not sold on Manziel. I said on air the next morning this was the wrong place for a quarterback whose coaches and execs must be united in their belief in him and his crazy-competitive playmaking genius. This, I said, will not work.
Me, me, me, me. Skip said this or that "on air." I wonder if Skip could write a column without once referencing his own opinion or in any way trying to bring the subject of the column back around to himself? Most definitely not. Remember, Kyle Shanahan was the offensive coordinator for Robert Griffin when he had his great rookie season. I'm not entirely sure what this means, so forget I brought it up.
The Browns lost last year's starter, Brian Hoyer, a Pettine favorite, to free agency but have signed Josh McCown and Thad Lewis and recently (according to an ESPN report) tried to trade for Bradford. Manziel no longer appears to be in the Browns' plans -- and shouldn't have been in the first place.
Manziel needs a second chance with a GM and coach who completely buy in. Maybe he'll prove to be nothing but a bust. The other five did not.
The other five quarterbacks that Skip caped up for weren't busts, but neither were quarterbacks that Skip proudly tells his readers he never liked and look at how right he was about that. Mark Sanchez wasn't a bust if Tim Tebow wasn't a bust, Sam Bradford hasn't been a bust, and Alex Smith is a lot of things, but he's also been a better quarterback than the six Skip has listed here as QB's he was temporarily right about.
I can't predict injury or addiction or sorry situations. But I must admit, if I were a hotly debated draftee, I wouldn't want me pushing for me.
It's not like Skip is a well-known personnel genius or anything like that. He's just a guy with a hot take who likes to take guesses and then make excuses if he is wrong. But yes, I wouldn't want you speaking about me at all if I were a draftee. I would prefer you just disappear or try to write a column that isn't simply about you.
I'll admit it's getting a little eerie. Six times before NFL drafts, I've taken a stand for quarterbacks doubted by many. For a while, they've all made me look like a genius.
It's eerie that Skip really doesn't know what the fuck he is talking about. Weird, isn't it?
Then ...
Things have gone wrong.
They have gone wrong for a variety of reasons, but mostly because Skip was never right and NFL defensive coordinators found a way to game plan around stopping the strengths of these quarterbacks. It's much in the same way that Skip would build a bridge and claim "for a while" it was a work of genius until one day the entire bridge fell and killed dozens of people and hundreds of innocent water creatures. Skip will still insist "for a while" that bridge worked really well, while ignoring that isn't the mark of success at all.
In each case I wound up publicly pilloried as a madman, a football fool, a quarterback hack who is daft when it comes to the draft. I still believe I deserve credit for always being so initially right. You decide.
It's all about Skip and the reaction of the public to the idiotic words he speaks because ESPN inexplicably gives him a forum to speak these words. And no, there is no credit being given for being initially right, because being initially right where a quarterback plays well for a season or two isn't correctly predicting that quarterback will succeed in the NFL. Success isn't determined over a short span of time. There's really no debate that can be had on this. Skip isn't right because Tim Tebow fooled defensive coordinators for almost an entire season, at least until they caught on to how to game plan around him.
But as we go case by case, you'll see a common cause of eventual failure -- one I can't account for pre-draft.
Skip tries to blame outside forces for the reason each quarterback didn't succeed in the NFL, in order to cover up for the fact "He isn't a good quarterback" could not have been accounted for prior to the draft. Skip can try and talk around it all he wants, and I will admit it's a guessing game whether some of these quarterbacks will succeed in the NFL, but the bottom line is that Skip went hard all-in on some of these quarterbacks and has ended up being wrong. He can talk around it, but that's the bottom line.
Most of these quarterbacks wound up with franchises whose executives and coaches were dangerously split on them. I was all-in. The team that drafted them was not.
Of course, it is the franchise's fault for not being all-in on these quarterbacks. Naturally. It's not that those executives and coaches who argued against the drafting of these quarterbacks were right, it's just they were only right because they argued against drafting these quarterbacks based on legitimate reasons that ended up being correct. But the reasons wouldn't have been correct if they had just been all-in on the quarterback. It all makes sense if you turn your brain off.
You'll also see a common flaw: Several of "my guys" failed to handle their success and/or failure in unstable and uneasy situations.
And really, who could have seen that coming? Johnny Manziel partied a lot in college and was drafted by an organization that seems somewhat dysfunctional? Who could have seen that he wouldn't succeed?
You can argue I've been much more long-term accurate on which quarterbacks are being dangerously overrated. I said on air JaMarcus Russell and Sam Bradford were very bad ideas for No.1 overall picks, that Alex Smith would never live up to being taken No. 1 and that Matt Leinart, Brady Quinn, Jake Locker, Blaine Gabbert and Christian Ponder were not first-round picks.
You could argue that, but it wouldn't mean Skip wasn't wrong about these other six quarterbacks.
Those weren't popular stances.
Skip is a rebel and takes unpopular stances, based on the fact Stephen A. Smith disagrees with him. As is well known, Stephen A. Smith speaks for the majority opinion of the sports-loving world.
Neither were these ...
2006: I said on air the Houston Texans should take Vince Young No. 1 overall, in part because he grew up in Houston and had just led the University of Texas to the national championship with the greatest individual performance in title-game history.
Does Skip remember how popular Vince Young was coming out of Texas? It was not popular to say he would be successful in the NFL? I do disagree. Also, you can see from the start this isn't a column about WHY NFL quarterbacks taken early in the draft fail, as promised in the column title, but is about Skip Bayless and what he has said on the air. One other thing, to indicate the Texans should have taken Young simply because he grew up in Houston and led the University of Texas to a national championship is very bad reasoning for taking Young #1 overall.
Houston shockingly opted for defensive end Mario Williams, leaving Reggie Bush for the New Orleans Saints and Young for the Tennessee Titans general manager Floyd Reese and Titans owner Bud Adams,
It was shocking in that Mario Williams really worked out well for the Texans and Bush never really was the running back he promised himself to be in college. So it's almost like the Texans knew what they were doing.
One big problem: coach Jeff Fisher was against drafting Young.
Jeff Fisher is never wrong and you take it back right now.
Still, Young often made me look pretty good. He was offensive rookie of the year. He made two Pro Bowls. He went 30-17 as Tennessee's starter.
And that's really what this is all about isn't it? Which quarterbacks made Skip look good and which quarterbacks didn't make Skip look good. Vince Young did have success for a while, but this doesn't mean Skip was right about him. I think Mario Williams was the right pick for the Texans.
But predictably, he often clashed with Fisher. It appeared Fisher helped turn some in the local and national media against Young. His skin grew thin.
IT WASN'T YOUNG'S FAULT HE FAILED IN THE NFL! IF HE HAD JUST GOTTEN ANOTHER SHOT WITH ANOTHER NFL TEAM HE WOULD HAVE SUCCEE---
Incredibly, after a season in Philadelphia and a camp with the Buffalo Bills and another with the Green Bay Packers, the league rejected Young at age 30.
This is shocking that Skip blames Young's failures on the environment in Tennessee and Young goes to another NFL team and continues to not be a good quarterbacks. It's almost like, and I almost dare not say it, Vince Young wasn't really a great quarterback and Skip was wrong about Young. But no, I'm sure the issues Jeff Fisher had with Young followed him to Philadelphia, Buffalo and to Green Bay. That makes more sense than Skip just outright being wrong.
What if Fisher had wanted to draft Young, had publicly invested his pride in him, had supported him through the growing pains? Young was too good for it to go so wrong.
What if Vince Young had success early in his career and this pretty much rejects the idea the biggest issue with Young's progress in the NFL is that he wasn't supported enough, because it doesn't make sense for him to play well at the beginning of his career and suddenly need more nurturing as he played more NFL games? I'm sure the Titans could have done something to help Young more, but three other teams took a look at Young and rejected him.
Another quarterback taken in that 2006 draft made the Pro Bowl in his second full season of starting. When Jay Cutler was a junior at Vanderbilt (my alma mater) I began raving about him on air, predicting he'd be a "franchise quarterback." Of course, that proclamation was met with chuckles. A Vandy quarterback?
As always, it is about Skip Bayless. Sense a trend that permeates Skip's entire writing style?
"Here's a quarterback. Here's what I thought about that quarterback. Here's what others thought about my thoughts about this quarterback. Here's an excuse for why I was wrong, but this doesn't mean I was wrong and others were right."
Cutler was the "lucky" one of the six debatable quarterbacks I loved before their drafts. (He's also the most prototypical pocket passer who least relied on his legs.) Shanahan really wanted him. So did the Bears. I certainly wasn't wrong about Cutler's ability. He's no bust. But he is what he was at Vandy: a little more interested in pulling off the occasional "wow" throw than winning.
Skip wasn't wrong about Cutler's ability? Is Cutler a franchise quarterback? No? Skip said Cutler was a franchise quarterback and he isn't, so that leads me to the conclusion Skip was wrong.
2009: I said on air that Mark Sanchez was being overrated. He went fifth to the Jets. I also raved about Josh Freeman and said the Tampa Bay Bucs stole him at No. 17.
Ah yes, the inconsistencies of Skip come to the forefront. He uses "games won" to make a case for why Vince Young could have been a great quarterback if it weren't for that meddling Jeff Fisher. All of a sudden he skips over that Mark Sanchez went to two AFC Championship Games as the starter for the Jets. Sure, I wouldn't give Sanchez credit for that, but in his eagerness to show how right he was about Sanchez, Skip changes the metric he uses for quarterback success. All of a sudden "games won" doesn't hold as much meaning to Skip when he's talking about a quarterback he thought wouldn't succeed in the NFL. Weird how that works.
I'd watched Kansas State's 6-6, 240-pound Freeman play big in his biggest games against Texas and Oklahoma.
No one else saw this. Only Skip saw Freeman play big in his biggest games against Texas and Oklahoma. (By the way, notice how Skip's love for the University of Texas seems to play a part in his evaluations?)
In his first full season as Tampa Bay's starter, he made me look pretty great by throwing 25 touchdown passes to only six interceptions and leading the Bucs to a 10-6 record. He was a Pro Bowl alternate.
Then ... it all fell apart in 2011. Rumors swirled. Maybe Freeman let success go to his head (or stomach). Maybe Raheem Morris lost control of the team as it went from 3-1 to 4-12. Morris was fired.
Freeman played pretty well in coach Greg Schiano's first season -- 27 touchdown passes, 17 interceptions -- but the team went 7-9.
Welp, it seems using team performance to evaluate a quarterback means something important again.
After three starts in 2013, the Bucs tried to trade Freeman, couldn't and released him. After one horrendous Monday night start for the Minnesota Vikings, a 23-7 loss at the New York Giants, Freeman was out of football at age 25.
You still hear speculation Freeman will get another shot. But how could he go from 2010 to this? Again: so right, so wrong.
Probably the same reason a rookie baseball player can have a fantastic rookie year and then fail to improve on or reach those heights for the rest of his career. Opponents adjust to the rookie's tendencies, and when the player's true talent comes to light after opponents have adjusted, it turns out he isn't the star people thought he could end up being.
2010: I said on air I would take Tim Tebow late in the first round. "If you let him run the read option he ran at Florida," I said, "he'll win games in the NFL. He'll never make a Pro Bowl, but he can win games as a starting quarterback."
He'll "win games," which is exactly the type of thing you want your first round pick quarterback to do. Just don't suck and win a few games.
Under John Fox, the Broncos began the next season 1-4, and a new Broncos regime (led by John Elway) that clearly didn't believe in Tebow threw him into the fire, at Miami, out of desperation. I was asked on air what I thought Tebow's record would be the rest of the season. I said 7-4. Chuckles.
Tebow went 7-4, led Denver to the AFC West title, led the NFL in QBR in the last five minutes of games and turned the Broncos into the NFL's No. 1 rushing attack.
And let's be clear that the Broncos HAD to become the NFL's No. 1 rushing attack with Tebow as the quarterback, because he wasn't going to win games by throwing the football. Regardless of whether the Elway regime believed in Tebow or not, it doesn't mean they stunted his growth. Tebow failed in New York, where Rex Ryan took Mark Sanchez (the same Sanchez that Skip didn't like as an NFL QB) to two AFC Championship Games and he flamed out in New England. I would think if Belichick could have used Tebow in any productive way then he would have.
That offseason the Broncos replaced Tebow with ... Peyton Manning! No shame there. Tebow was traded to the Jets, with whom he was never even given a shot at starting.
That's funny. Tebow was in New York the season that Mark Sanchez was horrible and the Jets needed someone, anyone, to come in and play well at the quarterback position. Even going up against the quarterback that Skip thinks sucks, Mark Sanchez, Tebow couldn't win the starting job on a team desperate for a starting quarterback. So yeah, he was never given a shot. That's the lie that Skip will go with.
Tebow began to doubt himself and drifted from one throwing guru to another.
Maybe he started doubting himself because he's really not that good at throwing the football?
It's still possible the Philadelphia Eagles' Chip Kelly will sign Tebow, but again, I was so sensationally right ... and ultimately condemned as so dead wrong.
No, not at all. You were so sensationally wrong. Tim Tebow is now a co-worker of Skip's at ESPN. Tebow is not in the NFL anymore, so Skip was right for a brief period of time, but in the longer span of time he was absolutely wrong about Tebow. Again, simply because a bridge holds up for a brief span of time before it collapses does not mean it was a safe bridge to cross for that brief span of time.
I do really like how Skip talks about how he was right about Tebow winning games as an NFL quarterback, while also ignoring that Tebow couldn't beat out the quarterback Skip proudly beats his chest in this article for correctly stating wouldn't be successful (Mark Sanchez). Ignore that which makes Skip look dumb. That's A LOT of ignoring.
2012: On air long before the draft, I said Robert Griffin III would prove to be an even better pro than Andrew Luck. The Washington Redskins traded three first-rounders and a second to move up from No. 6 to No. 2 to take RG III. Way too much? Not to me.
It's hard for Skip to talk his way out of this one. He'll try to do so by ignoring the issue he himself brought up when arguing for Griffin. The issue Skip presented was that Griffin will be a better quarterback than Andrew Luck. He's not and he won't ever be. Skip was wrong.
Still, In RG III's rookie season, at age 22, he went superstar on the NFL. Offensive rookie of the year, 20 touchdown passes to just five interceptions, led the league in yards per pass attempt and per rush, led his team to the NFC East crown, had a better QBR than Luck -- 71.4 to 65.2.
FOR ONE YEAR! ONE SOLITARY SEASON!
RG III sprained his knee late in the season, then tweaked it just before his team jumped out 14-0 on the Seattle Seahawks in a home playoff game, then wrecked it late in that eventual loss. And he has spent the past two seasons looking like a sad shell of a guy who no longer trusts his legs or eyes or arm.
I like how Skip always blames outside forces for the failure of these quarterbacks. It's never, "Griffin got injured and his lack of mobility revealed him as a one-read quarterback who just couldn't grasp the passing concepts required to be an NFL quarterback." Skip reasons that Griffin no longer trusted his leg or arm after his injury. Of course, because Skip could never be wrong with his evaluation of Griffin's abilities.
He clashed with Shanahan and failed to click with new coach Jay Gruden. Now ESPN's John Clayton is reporting new GM Scot McCloughan will take Mariota if he's there at No. 5.
Now it feels like RG III's best bet is to start over with another team in another town.
Where when/if Griffin fails there, then Skip will conveniently ignore that Griffin was away from the Redskins' toxic environment and he still couldn't succeed.
2014: I said on air the Texans would forever regret not taking Texas native Johnny Manziel, the Heisman winner from Texas A&M, with the No. 1 overall pick.
And so far, the Texans have been correct twice when Skip has claimed they would regret not taking a quarterback that Skip suggests they draft.
I was told the Texans were considering Manziel until they asked him to lay low and behave himself in the month leading up to the draft. Manziel attended the Masters, had too much to drink and -- the Texans were told -- made a spectacle of himself. They were out.
Again and again I said before the draft: If alcohol proves to be an ongoing issue for Manziel, I'm out.
Skip is blaming alcohol for Manziel's poor rookie season, while acknowledging that he thought alcohol could be an issue for Manziel prior to his being drafted. This sort of contradicts what Skip said earlier in this column:
But as we go case by case, you'll see a common cause of eventual failure -- one I can't account for pre-draft.
Oh, except Skip did account for Manziel's alcohol use pre-draft. I wouldn't expect Skip to stay consistent.
Loggains showed the text to owner Jimmy Haslam, who encouraged GM Ray Farmer, coach Mike Pettine and coordinator Kyle Shanahan to trade up to take Manziel. The Browns did, from 26 to 22.
But the GM, coach and coordinator were not sold on Manziel. I said on air the next morning this was the wrong place for a quarterback whose coaches and execs must be united in their belief in him and his crazy-competitive playmaking genius. This, I said, will not work.
Me, me, me, me. Skip said this or that "on air." I wonder if Skip could write a column without once referencing his own opinion or in any way trying to bring the subject of the column back around to himself? Most definitely not. Remember, Kyle Shanahan was the offensive coordinator for Robert Griffin when he had his great rookie season. I'm not entirely sure what this means, so forget I brought it up.
The Browns lost last year's starter, Brian Hoyer, a Pettine favorite, to free agency but have signed Josh McCown and Thad Lewis and recently (according to an ESPN report) tried to trade for Bradford. Manziel no longer appears to be in the Browns' plans -- and shouldn't have been in the first place.
Manziel needs a second chance with a GM and coach who completely buy in. Maybe he'll prove to be nothing but a bust. The other five did not.
The other five quarterbacks that Skip caped up for weren't busts, but neither were quarterbacks that Skip proudly tells his readers he never liked and look at how right he was about that. Mark Sanchez wasn't a bust if Tim Tebow wasn't a bust, Sam Bradford hasn't been a bust, and Alex Smith is a lot of things, but he's also been a better quarterback than the six Skip has listed here as QB's he was temporarily right about.
I can't predict injury or addiction or sorry situations. But I must admit, if I were a hotly debated draftee, I wouldn't want me pushing for me.
It's not like Skip is a well-known personnel genius or anything like that. He's just a guy with a hot take who likes to take guesses and then make excuses if he is wrong. But yes, I wouldn't want you speaking about me at all if I were a draftee. I would prefer you just disappear or try to write a column that isn't simply about you.
Monday, December 8, 2014
4 comments Skip Bayless Wants To Clear Up That He Doesn't Hate Andrew Luck; Only Manages To Reinforce That He Loves Skip Bayless
There are very few redeeming qualities that Skip Bayless has. He's a troll, but he's also good for amusement. He's such a joke, that it is amusing. So that's his one redeeming quality. He's fun to laugh at and makes me feel better about myself. Skip Bayless has written another column that is essentially about Skip Bayless. Sure, it's about Andrew Luck, but it's about how Skip Bayless doesn't hate Andrew Luck. I'm pretty sure Skip Bayless farts into a glass and then smells it.
Not long ago I had the unexpected pleasure of meeting Mike Wells in ESPN's cafeteria. I read every word Mike writes about the Indianapolis Colts for ESPN.com. And right away I thought, "He's as good a guy as he is a reporter."
That's a great story, Skip. I bet Mike Wells' version of the story goes this way:
"Not long ago, I saw Skip Bayless in ESPN's cafeteria. I tried to avoid him by running over to the salad bar, but he saw me and then approached me. He was nice to say he likes my writing, but then began to ask me why I have never written about Andrew Luck not being the quarterback Tim Tebow could have been. He got distracted halfway through the conversation by seeing his reflection in a mirror, then said I should consider writing about how overrated Andrew Luck is because he isn't in the Hall of Fame, yet 'everyone' says he's already a first-ballot Hall of Famer. I asked him why he hated Andrew Luck and then Skip turned bright blue yelling about LeBron James. I pretended I was choking and got taken away by ambulance just to get away from him."
But then he turned his investigative skills on me. "I have to ask you something I get asked so often by Colts fans," he said. "Why do you hate Andrew Luck?"
And Skip immediately thought, "That's a great column idea! It could be about ME not liking Andrew Luck. I was wondering when the next column idea about myself would come to me."
I'm sure it sometimes seems that way to Colts fans who watch "First Take." Allow me to explain.
I DO NOT HATE ANDREW LUCK.
Oh, well allow me to explain then. I DO NOT CARE ABOUT YOU. GO AWAY.
It's true I love the previous Colts quarterback, guy named Peyton, far more than I do Luck so far.
And of course, based on the fact he is supposed to be an objective observer, Skip should base his criticisms and praise on which players he likes the most and least. Obviously.
And it's true I like (or liked) Robert Griffin III slightly more than I do Luck.
Jump off that RG3 bandwagon as quickly as possible, Skip! Hurry!
But that's as a quarterback, not as a guy.
Again, "as a guy" shouldn't matter when discussing RG3's performance on the field. Well, it shouldn't matter to an objective observer who doesn't enjoy creating narratives, strawman arguments, leaps in logic, and poor conclusions of an athlete's skill based on how much this observer personally likes the athlete. Once the objective observer starts basing conclusions on feeling and opportunities to troll, they turn into what Skip Bayless is. It's a sad state to be in.
From all I read and hear, Andrew Luck just might be the finest young man ever to be a star NFL quarterback. Not an ounce of RG-Me in him. No Johnny Manziel "money" signs or bad signs after hours. None of Colin Kaepernick's chip-on-shoulder-pads.
But he does have a disgusting beard. That's not the sign of a fine young man.
No Twitter or Instagram blunders -- Luck doesn't even have an account.
And of course having a flip phone, no Twitter or Instagram blunders means that Andrew Luck is a good person. He doesn't publicize his blunders or choose to show his life in a very public manner, so that makes him a fine young man.
No relentless national-TV ads for Nationwide-is-on-your-side or Papa John's or Buick, like that former Colts quarterback.
So let's be clear about the logic Skip Bayless is using. Skip likes Peyton Manning more than he likes Andrew Luck due to on the field reasons. The reason Skip thinks Luck is a fine young man compared to other quarterbacks is because he doesn't do commercials like these other quarterbacks (including Peyton Manning), who apparently aren't fine people, are seen doing. So Skip bases his opinion of Andrew Luck on his on-the-field abilities, except for RG3, who doesn't perform as well as Luck on or off the field, but Skip still likes him better. Skip likes Peyton Manning best of all because he performs well on the field, except when Skip decides Manning doesn't perform well on the field. So Skip thinks Manning doesn't have the legacy he should because he hasn't won only a single Super Bowl, and isn't a fine man because he does commercials. Meanwhile, Skip wants to wait for Andrew Luck to win a Super Bowl (presumably so he can criticize Luck for not winning more Super Bowls), but thinks he's a fine young man because he doesn't do national commercials. I'm just confused as to how Skip judges these NFL quarterbacks. One minute he cares about what Manning does on the field, while also stating Manning needs to do more, the next minute he is stating he won't give Luck credit until he achieves what Peyton Manning has achieved.
Obviously nothing to hate there.
And yet, Skip by his own admission likes RG3 more, even though Griffin isn't on Luck's level on or off the field. Go figure.
But what I do not like -- and cannot fathom -- is the premature enshrinement of Andrew Luck. Seriously, it's as if he already has been inducted into Canton's Hall of Fame.
Skip Bayless is taking a page from the Jemele Hill school of sportswriting where he attempts to disprove something that few people believe. No one is prematurely enshrining Andrew Luck into the Hall of Fame. Luck's eventual ascent to one of the NFL's best quarterbacks is simply being acknowledged, that's all. Of course, if Skip didn't overstate his opposition's opinion then HE would seem like the one who is exaggerating. He can't have that. So Skip paints the opinion of others that Luck is becoming an elite quarterback as an exaggerated stance of putting Luck into the Hall of Fame already in order to cover up for his own exaggerated position on Luck.
Again and again I hear analysts refer to him as a cinch first-ballot Hall of Famer.
Where the fuck are you reading this stuff? Are the voices in your head saying these things, Skip?
A Google machine search shows this isn't being discussed. In fact, THIS ARTICLE came up as one of the first hits on the search. Sounds like Skip is making up his opponents' argument.
He's "already a top five quarterback" and some experts make the reverential case he just might already be the NFL's best QB.
There are a lot of arguments being made. There is also a huge leap from "cinch first-ballot Hall of Famer" to "already a top five quarterback." It's an epic leap that must be taken to get there.
Call him Andrew Lock, as in Hall of Fame Lock. Fans everywhere -- not just Indy fans -- have been conditioned to believe Luck is well on his way to becoming The Greatest Ever.
Very few people are writing or saying this. This argument exists only in the head of Skip Bayless, which is probably one of the most frightening places in the world to exist. Again, Skip is making the opposition to his position seem to have their own extreme opinion when this isn't true.
That's all they hear on TV.
This is a lie.
No doubt the young man, in his third NFL season, is almost as good on the field as he is off it. But -- and it's quite possible I dreamed this -- didn't Andrew Luck throw SEVEN INTERCEPTIONS in two playoff games last January?
Yes, he did throw seven interceptions in two playoff games in January. He threw six touchdowns as well, but he threw seven interceptions in two games. That's two fewer interceptions than completions Tim Tebow threw the last time he appeared in a playoff game.
Did anyone but me notice this?
No Skip, you are the ONLY ONE who noticed this.
Most fans, if their QB threw seven picks in two playoff games, would be more inclined to believe that QB belonged in Canton, China, instead of Canton, Ohio.
Yeah, maybe. But again, very few people are making the argument that Andrew Luck should be a first-ballot Hall of Famer. This seems to be an argument that Skip Bayless is making up.
It's now out of bounds, even un-American, to exercise the slightest objectivity when it comes to Andrew Lock, who just might be the most media-protected third-year QB in NFL history.
That's a rather specific criteria there Skip.
Notice the rather Bayless-ian argument Skip is making here. He's saying he doesn't dislike Andrew Luck, he just doesn't like the argument by others (which doesn't exist) that Luck is a first-ballot Hall of Famer already. This makes him not like Andrew Luck...yet. So Skip's opinion of Andrew Luck is entirely formed based on his perception of others' opinion of Andrew Luck.
"I don't like 'NCIS: Los Angeles' because my mom thinks it's one of the best shows on television right now."
See how insane that argument sounds? That's Skip's argument. It's not that Skip has an argument against Andrew Luck, he has an argument against his perception of the argument others have IN REGARD to Andrew Luck. Skip is his own special kind of crazy.
CAN WE PLEASE WAIT UNTIL THIS JANUARY TO CORONATE THIS KID, JUST TO MAKE SURE HE CAN WIN ONE PLAYOFF GAME WITHOUT TURNING THE BALL OVER?
Right, because that's the only criteria that matters. Luck could go 4-24 for 45 yards, but as long as he doesn't turn the ball over then he's all good with Skip Bayless. Sure.
He's now all of 1-2 in the postseason -- six touchdown passes to eight interceptions. I certainly don't hold his first playoff game against him -- that was Luck's rookie year and that was The Return of Ray Lewis, in Baltimore, and the Ravens were about to go on a Super Bowl roll. Luck was only 28-of-54 for 288 yards, no TD passes and one interception.
Yes, he "only" threw for 288 yards as a rookie quarterback starting a road playoff game against the team that won the Super Bowl.
For that matter, I'm willing to disregard a rookie season in which Luck completed a surprisingly low 54 percent of his passes and finished second in the NFL (to Mark Sanchez) in total turnovers.
Yes, I can see it's forgiven. Thanks be to Skip Bayless for his forgiveness.
Peyton Manning completed 56.7% of his passes during his rookie year, while leading the NFL in interceptions.
Irsay basically told the NFL world that Luck would be better than an aging Peyton Manning with a surgically repaired neck, maybe even in the short term.
No, he did not. He said he wanted to draft a younger franchise quarterback rather than try and get a few more years out of Peyton Manning and then go searching for a franchise quarterback that may not be available at that time.
Still, during his second season last year, Luck continued to play surprisingly subpar games that nobody (but me) seemed to notice. His QBR (scale of 0-100) was only 42.5 in Week 6, a 19-9 Monday night loss at San Diego ... only 13.6 in Week 10, a 38-8 home loss to St. Louis ... 21.9 in Week 12, a 40-11 loss at Arizona ... and 37.1 in Week 13, a 22-14 home win over Tennessee.
Yes Skip, you are the only one who notices these things. Thank God (or should I say, "Thanks be to You, Skip Bayless") that you are around to notice these things.
As of the time Skip wrote this, Luck also had QBR's of 83.1 against Denver, 89.3 against Philadelphia, 94.1 against Jacksonville, 96.7 against Tennessee, 62.0 against Baltimore, 91.4 against the Texans, 73.5 against the New York Giants, and 74.7 against the New England Patriots during the 2014 season. But why talk about Luck's third season when Skip can point out how a quarterback whose greatness is based on his projected improved play didn't play at times well during his second season?
By the way, Luck's QBR against the Chiefs in the playoffs last year was 93.5. This won't be mentioned by Skip because he's too focused on Luck's interceptions, while ignoring the QBR criteria he himself used to prove Luck isn't very good.
Then came the home playoff game against Kansas City last Jan. 4. Luck threw his second interception on the first play of the second half. Moments later, the Chiefs led 38-10. He threw his third interception later in the third quarter, setting up a Chiefs field goal that kept the Colts in a 41-24 hole.
From then on Andrew was very good ... but very Lucky. The Chiefs lost their top two running backs, Jamaal Charles and Knile Davis. They lost their fastest receiver, Donnie Avery. On defense, they lost two of their best players, sack artist Justin Houston and cornerback Brandon Flowers, and bookend pass-rusher Tamba Hali was also hurt. Luck was pressured on only two of 25 second-half dropbacks. A goal-line fumble bounced right back to Luck, who dived home for a touchdown.
Indy won 45-44.
Sure, he got lucky. That's fine. He also had a QBR of 93.5. Stick to the criteria you yourself use to judge Luck.
But at New England the following Saturday night, Luck went from three to FOUR interceptions and somehow the Patriots stayed healthy enough to hang on to a 43-22 win.
"Somehow" the Patriots stayed healthy enough. It wasn't luck they stayed healthy enough, because luck only kicks in when Skip Bayless needs it to in order to prove his point.
And please feel free to focus on my personal biases when it comes to Luck.
That's all that needs to be focused on, because that's the main reason Skip Bayless evaluates professional athletes in the way he does. His personal biases ARE his evaluation of a player.
I watched a lot of Luck at Stanford, and before his draft, I could not forget the awful second half at Oregon his junior year, the late pick-six he threw at USC his senior year and that he got outplayed by Brandon Weeden (three TD passes, one interception to two TD passes, one interception) while losing his final college game in the Fiesta Bowl.
I like how Skip conveniently skips the different offenses these two quarterbacks were running. Colt Brennan outplayed a lot of quarterbacks when he was in college. Weeden ran a spread, quarterback-friendly offense at Oklahoma State. You know, a similar offense that led to Weeden and Geno Smith being drafted in the first and second rounds respectively, while Luck ran a pro-style offense at Stanford.
I'd like to hear from Skip on how Luck's line of 27-31 for 347 yards with two touchdowns and one interception was him getting outplayed by Weeden's line of 29-42 for 399 yards with three touchdowns and one interception. Luck had a rating of 196.0 to Weeden's 167.7. Luck had 52 fewer yards on 11 fewer pass attempts.
By the way, Tom Brady didn't even start full-time in college and Peyton Manning couldn't beat Florida. Bringing up shit that happened in college isn't always the best indicator of a quarterback's ability in the NFL.
I predicted Robert Griffin III would prove to be the slightly better pro -- and for a season I was right.
For a season Skip was right, which means to the rest of the population that Skip was wrong. But Skip can't be wrong because he was right for a really short period of time. Skip wants readers to focus on that short period of time instead of the larger period of time where Griffin has regressed while Luck has progressed.
For now, RG III has lost confidence in his injured legs, has lost some of his teammates and has been in danger of losing his job. But RG III vs. Luck isn't over. Not yet.
Okay, no one said RG3 v. Luck was over yet. Notice how Skip is desperately trying to turn this discussion of Andrew Luck into a debate over RG3 versus Luck. It's all he knows. Debate, debate, debate where facts don't matter if the volume of your voice is loud enough.
On air, I also took this stand the day Irsay parted ways with Peyton: big mistake. Peyton, I said, would give the Colts a better shot at winning the Super Bowl in each of the next three seasons. I believe I've been right about that, too.
And Skip was making the fallacy of assuming the switch from Manning to Luck was a short-term move, which it clearly wasn't. So as usual, Skip is arguing on the wrong points in the hopes of scoring points by changing the frame of the discussion through making assumptions that help to prove his point.
But remember, I'm now forced to evaluate Luck by "top five" standards.
Nope, that's a standard you set by claiming others set this standard.
That's the context in which Luck is often reverently ranked on "First Take."
This doesn't mean this is the context on which Luck is ranked everywhere else. "First Take" is an outlier because it has two moronic mouth-breathing trolls debating each other. You can't assume you are skinny just because you are the lightest one at fat camp. Being the tallest midget doesn't mean you can dunk a basketball on a ten foot goal.
Remember, too, our show is two hours of live, unscripted debate five days a week. We defend our positions with often stubborn pride and passion -- sometimes twice a show on an issue such as Luck vs. Peyton or Luck vs. RG III. "Hating" Luck is more about hating losing a debate.
As I have said previously, the debate over Luck has nothing to do with his performance, but has to do with Skip's ego and which way his personal biases steer him.
But I'm starting to wonder who has lost more objectivity about Luck -- me or his universe of supporters. Just about every analyst I know (as well as Stephen A.) dug in on Luck's future greatness before he was drafted.
Nobody, Skip. Nobody could ever have more objectivity than the guy who admits he lets his personal biases against Luck affect his opinion of Luck. Who could be more objective than a person who admits his personal biases play a part in his player evaluations?
They all want to be proved right.
Said Skip Bayless while talking about himself.
Heck, many fans surely root for Luck just because he comes across as such a humble, normal guy who happens to be star quarterback.
Earlier in this column Skip stated that Luck was a good guy because he came across as a humble, normal guy. So it's not okay to cheer for Luck because of this. It's interesting that Skip thinks these people lose objectivity of Luck's performance because they personally like him, while Skip thinks his own objectivity isn't marred by the fact he doesn't personally like Luck for reasons created in Skip's own head.
But, at the risk of committing heresy, is it fair to ask if Luck has a weird propensity for almost inexplicably losing focus for a quarter, or a half, or even a game and throwing what-was-he-thinking interceptions?
No, it's not heresy if you can name specific situations where this has occurred. It's relevant in regard to Luck's performance. Stop acting like a victim and misframing the opposition's argument.
I (for one) need to see Andrew Lock win a few more playoff games.
Of course you do, Skip. You ragged on Peyton Manning and his legacy after he won a few more playoff games. Keep moving the goalposts, Skip, so that you can save your ego from the possibility that you may ever be wrong. Once Luck wins a few more playoff games it will be, "Why hasn't Luck won more Super Bowls?" Also, no one said Luck is a lock for the Hall of Fame, so don't call him "Andrew Lock."
And this could (even should) be his turn and time. He now has a running game (thanks to Ahmad Bradshaw)
He's injured now.
Who knows? Luck's team could wind up with home-field advantage all the way to the Super Bowl. If he pulls off what Russell Wilson did last playoffs, I'll be the first to stand and applaud.
No, you won't. You will move the goalposts again in an effort to not be seen as wrong. Then you'll screech some bullshit on "First Take," and the only idiot in the media ESPN could find who can't out-debate Skip Bayless, Stephen A. Smith, will screech bullshit back and we all lose.
Until then, alone, I will wait and see.
You are not alone. No one said Andrew Luck was a first-ballot Hall of Famer. You make things up. Go away.
Not long ago I had the unexpected pleasure of meeting Mike Wells in ESPN's cafeteria. I read every word Mike writes about the Indianapolis Colts for ESPN.com. And right away I thought, "He's as good a guy as he is a reporter."
That's a great story, Skip. I bet Mike Wells' version of the story goes this way:
"Not long ago, I saw Skip Bayless in ESPN's cafeteria. I tried to avoid him by running over to the salad bar, but he saw me and then approached me. He was nice to say he likes my writing, but then began to ask me why I have never written about Andrew Luck not being the quarterback Tim Tebow could have been. He got distracted halfway through the conversation by seeing his reflection in a mirror, then said I should consider writing about how overrated Andrew Luck is because he isn't in the Hall of Fame, yet 'everyone' says he's already a first-ballot Hall of Famer. I asked him why he hated Andrew Luck and then Skip turned bright blue yelling about LeBron James. I pretended I was choking and got taken away by ambulance just to get away from him."
But then he turned his investigative skills on me. "I have to ask you something I get asked so often by Colts fans," he said. "Why do you hate Andrew Luck?"
And Skip immediately thought, "That's a great column idea! It could be about ME not liking Andrew Luck. I was wondering when the next column idea about myself would come to me."
I'm sure it sometimes seems that way to Colts fans who watch "First Take." Allow me to explain.
I DO NOT HATE ANDREW LUCK.
Oh, well allow me to explain then. I DO NOT CARE ABOUT YOU. GO AWAY.
It's true I love the previous Colts quarterback, guy named Peyton, far more than I do Luck so far.
And of course, based on the fact he is supposed to be an objective observer, Skip should base his criticisms and praise on which players he likes the most and least. Obviously.
And it's true I like (or liked) Robert Griffin III slightly more than I do Luck.
Jump off that RG3 bandwagon as quickly as possible, Skip! Hurry!
But that's as a quarterback, not as a guy.
Again, "as a guy" shouldn't matter when discussing RG3's performance on the field. Well, it shouldn't matter to an objective observer who doesn't enjoy creating narratives, strawman arguments, leaps in logic, and poor conclusions of an athlete's skill based on how much this observer personally likes the athlete. Once the objective observer starts basing conclusions on feeling and opportunities to troll, they turn into what Skip Bayless is. It's a sad state to be in.
From all I read and hear, Andrew Luck just might be the finest young man ever to be a star NFL quarterback. Not an ounce of RG-Me in him. No Johnny Manziel "money" signs or bad signs after hours. None of Colin Kaepernick's chip-on-shoulder-pads.
But he does have a disgusting beard. That's not the sign of a fine young man.
No Twitter or Instagram blunders -- Luck doesn't even have an account.
And of course having a flip phone, no Twitter or Instagram blunders means that Andrew Luck is a good person. He doesn't publicize his blunders or choose to show his life in a very public manner, so that makes him a fine young man.
No relentless national-TV ads for Nationwide-is-on-your-side or Papa John's or Buick, like that former Colts quarterback.
So let's be clear about the logic Skip Bayless is using. Skip likes Peyton Manning more than he likes Andrew Luck due to on the field reasons. The reason Skip thinks Luck is a fine young man compared to other quarterbacks is because he doesn't do commercials like these other quarterbacks (including Peyton Manning), who apparently aren't fine people, are seen doing. So Skip bases his opinion of Andrew Luck on his on-the-field abilities, except for RG3, who doesn't perform as well as Luck on or off the field, but Skip still likes him better. Skip likes Peyton Manning best of all because he performs well on the field, except when Skip decides Manning doesn't perform well on the field. So Skip thinks Manning doesn't have the legacy he should because he hasn't won only a single Super Bowl, and isn't a fine man because he does commercials. Meanwhile, Skip wants to wait for Andrew Luck to win a Super Bowl (presumably so he can criticize Luck for not winning more Super Bowls), but thinks he's a fine young man because he doesn't do national commercials. I'm just confused as to how Skip judges these NFL quarterbacks. One minute he cares about what Manning does on the field, while also stating Manning needs to do more, the next minute he is stating he won't give Luck credit until he achieves what Peyton Manning has achieved.
Obviously nothing to hate there.
And yet, Skip by his own admission likes RG3 more, even though Griffin isn't on Luck's level on or off the field. Go figure.
But what I do not like -- and cannot fathom -- is the premature enshrinement of Andrew Luck. Seriously, it's as if he already has been inducted into Canton's Hall of Fame.
Skip Bayless is taking a page from the Jemele Hill school of sportswriting where he attempts to disprove something that few people believe. No one is prematurely enshrining Andrew Luck into the Hall of Fame. Luck's eventual ascent to one of the NFL's best quarterbacks is simply being acknowledged, that's all. Of course, if Skip didn't overstate his opposition's opinion then HE would seem like the one who is exaggerating. He can't have that. So Skip paints the opinion of others that Luck is becoming an elite quarterback as an exaggerated stance of putting Luck into the Hall of Fame already in order to cover up for his own exaggerated position on Luck.
Again and again I hear analysts refer to him as a cinch first-ballot Hall of Famer.
Where the fuck are you reading this stuff? Are the voices in your head saying these things, Skip?
A Google machine search shows this isn't being discussed. In fact, THIS ARTICLE came up as one of the first hits on the search. Sounds like Skip is making up his opponents' argument.
He's "already a top five quarterback" and some experts make the reverential case he just might already be the NFL's best QB.
There are a lot of arguments being made. There is also a huge leap from "cinch first-ballot Hall of Famer" to "already a top five quarterback." It's an epic leap that must be taken to get there.
Call him Andrew Lock, as in Hall of Fame Lock. Fans everywhere -- not just Indy fans -- have been conditioned to believe Luck is well on his way to becoming The Greatest Ever.
Very few people are writing or saying this. This argument exists only in the head of Skip Bayless, which is probably one of the most frightening places in the world to exist. Again, Skip is making the opposition to his position seem to have their own extreme opinion when this isn't true.
That's all they hear on TV.
This is a lie.
No doubt the young man, in his third NFL season, is almost as good on the field as he is off it. But -- and it's quite possible I dreamed this -- didn't Andrew Luck throw SEVEN INTERCEPTIONS in two playoff games last January?
Yes, he did throw seven interceptions in two playoff games in January. He threw six touchdowns as well, but he threw seven interceptions in two games. That's two fewer interceptions than completions Tim Tebow threw the last time he appeared in a playoff game.
Did anyone but me notice this?
No Skip, you are the ONLY ONE who noticed this.
Most fans, if their QB threw seven picks in two playoff games, would be more inclined to believe that QB belonged in Canton, China, instead of Canton, Ohio.
Yeah, maybe. But again, very few people are making the argument that Andrew Luck should be a first-ballot Hall of Famer. This seems to be an argument that Skip Bayless is making up.
It's now out of bounds, even un-American, to exercise the slightest objectivity when it comes to Andrew Lock, who just might be the most media-protected third-year QB in NFL history.
That's a rather specific criteria there Skip.
Notice the rather Bayless-ian argument Skip is making here. He's saying he doesn't dislike Andrew Luck, he just doesn't like the argument by others (which doesn't exist) that Luck is a first-ballot Hall of Famer already. This makes him not like Andrew Luck...yet. So Skip's opinion of Andrew Luck is entirely formed based on his perception of others' opinion of Andrew Luck.
"I don't like 'NCIS: Los Angeles' because my mom thinks it's one of the best shows on television right now."
See how insane that argument sounds? That's Skip's argument. It's not that Skip has an argument against Andrew Luck, he has an argument against his perception of the argument others have IN REGARD to Andrew Luck. Skip is his own special kind of crazy.
CAN WE PLEASE WAIT UNTIL THIS JANUARY TO CORONATE THIS KID, JUST TO MAKE SURE HE CAN WIN ONE PLAYOFF GAME WITHOUT TURNING THE BALL OVER?
Right, because that's the only criteria that matters. Luck could go 4-24 for 45 yards, but as long as he doesn't turn the ball over then he's all good with Skip Bayless. Sure.
He's now all of 1-2 in the postseason -- six touchdown passes to eight interceptions. I certainly don't hold his first playoff game against him -- that was Luck's rookie year and that was The Return of Ray Lewis, in Baltimore, and the Ravens were about to go on a Super Bowl roll. Luck was only 28-of-54 for 288 yards, no TD passes and one interception.
Yes, he "only" threw for 288 yards as a rookie quarterback starting a road playoff game against the team that won the Super Bowl.
For that matter, I'm willing to disregard a rookie season in which Luck completed a surprisingly low 54 percent of his passes and finished second in the NFL (to Mark Sanchez) in total turnovers.
Yes, I can see it's forgiven. Thanks be to Skip Bayless for his forgiveness.
Peyton Manning completed 56.7% of his passes during his rookie year, while leading the NFL in interceptions.
Irsay basically told the NFL world that Luck would be better than an aging Peyton Manning with a surgically repaired neck, maybe even in the short term.
No, he did not. He said he wanted to draft a younger franchise quarterback rather than try and get a few more years out of Peyton Manning and then go searching for a franchise quarterback that may not be available at that time.
Still, during his second season last year, Luck continued to play surprisingly subpar games that nobody (but me) seemed to notice. His QBR (scale of 0-100) was only 42.5 in Week 6, a 19-9 Monday night loss at San Diego ... only 13.6 in Week 10, a 38-8 home loss to St. Louis ... 21.9 in Week 12, a 40-11 loss at Arizona ... and 37.1 in Week 13, a 22-14 home win over Tennessee.
Yes Skip, you are the only one who notices these things. Thank God (or should I say, "Thanks be to You, Skip Bayless") that you are around to notice these things.
As of the time Skip wrote this, Luck also had QBR's of 83.1 against Denver, 89.3 against Philadelphia, 94.1 against Jacksonville, 96.7 against Tennessee, 62.0 against Baltimore, 91.4 against the Texans, 73.5 against the New York Giants, and 74.7 against the New England Patriots during the 2014 season. But why talk about Luck's third season when Skip can point out how a quarterback whose greatness is based on his projected improved play didn't play at times well during his second season?
By the way, Luck's QBR against the Chiefs in the playoffs last year was 93.5. This won't be mentioned by Skip because he's too focused on Luck's interceptions, while ignoring the QBR criteria he himself used to prove Luck isn't very good.
Then came the home playoff game against Kansas City last Jan. 4. Luck threw his second interception on the first play of the second half. Moments later, the Chiefs led 38-10. He threw his third interception later in the third quarter, setting up a Chiefs field goal that kept the Colts in a 41-24 hole.
From then on Andrew was very good ... but very Lucky. The Chiefs lost their top two running backs, Jamaal Charles and Knile Davis. They lost their fastest receiver, Donnie Avery. On defense, they lost two of their best players, sack artist Justin Houston and cornerback Brandon Flowers, and bookend pass-rusher Tamba Hali was also hurt. Luck was pressured on only two of 25 second-half dropbacks. A goal-line fumble bounced right back to Luck, who dived home for a touchdown.
Indy won 45-44.
Sure, he got lucky. That's fine. He also had a QBR of 93.5. Stick to the criteria you yourself use to judge Luck.
But at New England the following Saturday night, Luck went from three to FOUR interceptions and somehow the Patriots stayed healthy enough to hang on to a 43-22 win.
"Somehow" the Patriots stayed healthy enough. It wasn't luck they stayed healthy enough, because luck only kicks in when Skip Bayless needs it to in order to prove his point.
And please feel free to focus on my personal biases when it comes to Luck.
That's all that needs to be focused on, because that's the main reason Skip Bayless evaluates professional athletes in the way he does. His personal biases ARE his evaluation of a player.
I watched a lot of Luck at Stanford, and before his draft, I could not forget the awful second half at Oregon his junior year, the late pick-six he threw at USC his senior year and that he got outplayed by Brandon Weeden (three TD passes, one interception to two TD passes, one interception) while losing his final college game in the Fiesta Bowl.
I like how Skip conveniently skips the different offenses these two quarterbacks were running. Colt Brennan outplayed a lot of quarterbacks when he was in college. Weeden ran a spread, quarterback-friendly offense at Oklahoma State. You know, a similar offense that led to Weeden and Geno Smith being drafted in the first and second rounds respectively, while Luck ran a pro-style offense at Stanford.
I'd like to hear from Skip on how Luck's line of 27-31 for 347 yards with two touchdowns and one interception was him getting outplayed by Weeden's line of 29-42 for 399 yards with three touchdowns and one interception. Luck had a rating of 196.0 to Weeden's 167.7. Luck had 52 fewer yards on 11 fewer pass attempts.
By the way, Tom Brady didn't even start full-time in college and Peyton Manning couldn't beat Florida. Bringing up shit that happened in college isn't always the best indicator of a quarterback's ability in the NFL.
I predicted Robert Griffin III would prove to be the slightly better pro -- and for a season I was right.
For a season Skip was right, which means to the rest of the population that Skip was wrong. But Skip can't be wrong because he was right for a really short period of time. Skip wants readers to focus on that short period of time instead of the larger period of time where Griffin has regressed while Luck has progressed.
For now, RG III has lost confidence in his injured legs, has lost some of his teammates and has been in danger of losing his job. But RG III vs. Luck isn't over. Not yet.
Okay, no one said RG3 v. Luck was over yet. Notice how Skip is desperately trying to turn this discussion of Andrew Luck into a debate over RG3 versus Luck. It's all he knows. Debate, debate, debate where facts don't matter if the volume of your voice is loud enough.
On air, I also took this stand the day Irsay parted ways with Peyton: big mistake. Peyton, I said, would give the Colts a better shot at winning the Super Bowl in each of the next three seasons. I believe I've been right about that, too.
And Skip was making the fallacy of assuming the switch from Manning to Luck was a short-term move, which it clearly wasn't. So as usual, Skip is arguing on the wrong points in the hopes of scoring points by changing the frame of the discussion through making assumptions that help to prove his point.
But remember, I'm now forced to evaluate Luck by "top five" standards.
Nope, that's a standard you set by claiming others set this standard.
That's the context in which Luck is often reverently ranked on "First Take."
This doesn't mean this is the context on which Luck is ranked everywhere else. "First Take" is an outlier because it has two moronic mouth-breathing trolls debating each other. You can't assume you are skinny just because you are the lightest one at fat camp. Being the tallest midget doesn't mean you can dunk a basketball on a ten foot goal.
Remember, too, our show is two hours of live, unscripted debate five days a week. We defend our positions with often stubborn pride and passion -- sometimes twice a show on an issue such as Luck vs. Peyton or Luck vs. RG III. "Hating" Luck is more about hating losing a debate.
As I have said previously, the debate over Luck has nothing to do with his performance, but has to do with Skip's ego and which way his personal biases steer him.
But I'm starting to wonder who has lost more objectivity about Luck -- me or his universe of supporters. Just about every analyst I know (as well as Stephen A.) dug in on Luck's future greatness before he was drafted.
Nobody, Skip. Nobody could ever have more objectivity than the guy who admits he lets his personal biases against Luck affect his opinion of Luck. Who could be more objective than a person who admits his personal biases play a part in his player evaluations?
They all want to be proved right.
Said Skip Bayless while talking about himself.
Heck, many fans surely root for Luck just because he comes across as such a humble, normal guy who happens to be star quarterback.
Earlier in this column Skip stated that Luck was a good guy because he came across as a humble, normal guy. So it's not okay to cheer for Luck because of this. It's interesting that Skip thinks these people lose objectivity of Luck's performance because they personally like him, while Skip thinks his own objectivity isn't marred by the fact he doesn't personally like Luck for reasons created in Skip's own head.
But, at the risk of committing heresy, is it fair to ask if Luck has a weird propensity for almost inexplicably losing focus for a quarter, or a half, or even a game and throwing what-was-he-thinking interceptions?
No, it's not heresy if you can name specific situations where this has occurred. It's relevant in regard to Luck's performance. Stop acting like a victim and misframing the opposition's argument.
I (for one) need to see Andrew Lock win a few more playoff games.
Of course you do, Skip. You ragged on Peyton Manning and his legacy after he won a few more playoff games. Keep moving the goalposts, Skip, so that you can save your ego from the possibility that you may ever be wrong. Once Luck wins a few more playoff games it will be, "Why hasn't Luck won more Super Bowls?" Also, no one said Luck is a lock for the Hall of Fame, so don't call him "Andrew Lock."
And this could (even should) be his turn and time. He now has a running game (thanks to Ahmad Bradshaw)
He's injured now.
Who knows? Luck's team could wind up with home-field advantage all the way to the Super Bowl. If he pulls off what Russell Wilson did last playoffs, I'll be the first to stand and applaud.
No, you won't. You will move the goalposts again in an effort to not be seen as wrong. Then you'll screech some bullshit on "First Take," and the only idiot in the media ESPN could find who can't out-debate Skip Bayless, Stephen A. Smith, will screech bullshit back and we all lose.
Until then, alone, I will wait and see.
You are not alone. No one said Andrew Luck was a first-ballot Hall of Famer. You make things up. Go away.
Monday, October 27, 2014
3 comments Skip Bayless Knew The Dallas Cowboys Would Win The NFC East This Year Except For When He Said They Would Go 6-10
Skip Bayless is a joke. He's a clown and should have no place in the sporting world with his ridiculous views and junior high debate class antics. He has no point of view or belief outside of whatever point of view or belief he thinks will get him the most attention. He's the 6th grader pulling girls' hair and pretending to fart in class solely for the basis of gaining attention for himself. Unfortunately, Skip is a grown 62-year old man and not in 6th grade. Skip thrives on attention, which means he can often contradict himself when he espouses two opposing viewpoints that both eventually lead to him getting attention. So Skip says the Cowboys are for real, just a few months after saying they were going 6-10. Life as a sportswriter must be fun and easy when you have no determined beliefs and can change your opinion as often as the wind blows.
You may not believe this, but Skip makes the Cowboys' hot start completely about him. I know, it's shocking that Skip brings the focus back on himself.
Feel free to dismiss me as just another desperate Dallas Cowboys fan again falling for America's Tease.
I will feel free to dismiss you totally as another desperate attention-seeking troll who insists on playing the villain because it beats working hard for a living.
I talked my uncle, a high school football coach, into taking me to my first Cowboys game, at the Cotton Bowl on Nov. 5, 1961, when I was in fourth grade. Quarterback Eddie LeBaron's Cowboys lost to the St. Louis Cardinals 31-17 -- hey, Eddie Football was only 5 feet, 7 inches tall -- but I was hooked for life.
Great story, don't care. This isn't about you, it's about the Dallas Cowboys.
But I did manage to maintain objectivity in writing three books about America's Team -- three inside looks far too revealing for some fans.
What Skip may mean about "far too revealing" is he stated that Barry Switzer claimed Troy Aikman was gay, and Skip found no proof this was true and Aikman denied it, but Bayless included this in his third book on the Cowboys anyway because controversy equals book sales. A whore has to put out and a shill has to shill.
So maybe I'm not writing just with my heart when I say I believe in this Cowboys team more than any since the 1995 Super Bowl champion about which I wrote my last book.
Skip KNOWS the Cowboys are for real this year. He didn't know earlier during the summer, but he totally knows now.
This team is different from the many since then that have inspired predictions (and delusions) of grandeur.
You know how Skip knows this Cowboys team is different? They are winning games. It's a dead giveaway only he can notice.
This team -- if it stays reasonably healthy -- will win the NFC East.
Skip has to put that qualifier on there, just in case the need to backpedal at a furious speed should the need arise.
That's what I predicted on air on the Thursday this NFL season opened. My prediction so stunned and disgusted Stephen A. -- who grew up a Cowboys-hating New York Giants fan -- that he got up and walked off the set babbling about how I had lost my mind.
So dramatic! So scandalous! It's like the "Jerry Springer Show" for sports. Stephen A. had to walk away because Skip's view was so stunning. I'm so dismayed I couldn't view this circus first hand, but will have to settle for not watching it on YouTube.
He had no idea that was coming because I had spent the entire preseason saying this Cowboy team had 6-10 written all over it.
But you knew this team was different. You...you...you...are going all-in on the Cowboys winning the NFC East like you knew this would be happen, but your words didn't always back this prediction up. This is what is known as "flip-flopping" and having a contradictory opinion. Skip will get no credit for stating the Cowboys will win the NFC East because he said all preseason the Cowboys would go 6-10. He can't have it both ways. Now if the Cowboys suffer injuries (and I like how Skip throws in the qualifier that the Cowboys have to say "reasonably healthy" as if they hadn't been hit hard by injuries on defense before the season began), Skip can weasel out of this prediction and fall back on his "Dallas Cowboys will go 6-10" prediction. I'm sure there will be a gratuitous mention of Tim Tebow in there somewhere.
So why did I suddenly reverse field and book it that Dallas would go 10-6 and win the division?
Because you are a clown who holds no opinion which doesn't gain attention for yourself and you thought stating the Cowboys would go 10-6 was a good way of self-promotion?
It started two days earlier, during a round of golf, when a friend listened to my rant about how last year's historically bad Cowboy defense (which allowed an NFL-record 40 first downs at New Orleans) could be even worse without Sean Lee, DeMarcus Ware and Jason Hatcher.
Remember, Skip is working under the theory the Cowboys will win the NFC East if they stay reasonably healthy. So naturally, his conclusion the Cowboys will win the NFC East is reached based upon knowing the Cowboys most important defensive player is lost for the season.
My friend's response was so simply profound that I cold-topped my next shot: "You wonder if those guys will finally get so sick and tired of hearing how historically bad they are."
Wait, he was talking while you were putting? Or is Skip being overly-dramatic again like he was when he mentioned Stephen A. walking off the set so stunned by Skip's prediction the Cowboys would win the NFC East? I'm guessing the latter. Either way, this is how Skip Bayless works. Reason goes out the window for the sake of hot sports takes and attention-seeking comments.
Herm said: "Trust me on this: Rod will get them to play hard. If they don't" Herm's famed emotions rose. "... Rod WILL get in their face."
Oh, well I didn't know Rod Marinelli would get in his players' faces. That totally changes my opinion on the Cowboys. If I had known Marinelli would get in his players' faces in the same manner that helped him achieve a 10-38 lifetime heading coaching record in the NFL then I would have predicted the Cowboys to go 16-1. Yes, the Cowboys players would be so motivated by their coach yelling at them they would play an extra game during the season just so they could claim they won 16 games.
For the first time in forever, nobody was picking the Dallas Cowboys to do anything. At least, nobody I knew of...Seriously, you'd have to go back to 1989 and 1990, the first two expansion-like seasons of the Jimmy Johnson/Jerry Jones Cowboys, to find a year in which nobody thought the Cowboys had a chance.
So then Skip Bayless saw a void where he could troll and knew he had to fill that void. He can get attention, not by bashing the Cowboys as he had done all preseason, but predicting them to win the NFC East. Skip was going to differentiate himself by being positive about the Cowboys rather than negative, because that's how he could get attention. He would just ignore that he said they looked like a 6-10 team in the preseason, because who cares?
Leading up to this season, many of their own fans had given up on them. That's why, for the home opener, JerryWorld appeared to reporters to be half-filled with 49ers fans, and why during the home game against Houston, Texans fans made so much noise they forced Tony Romo to resort to a silent count.
At "HOME!"
The Cowboys were 3-1 when they faced the Texans. It seems kind of funny that Skip is using reasoning like Cowboys fans giving up on the team as the reason Texans fans made so much noise.
Perfect: Zero expectations for this Cowboy team.
Yeah, but Skip didn't know that Cowboys fans had given up on the team when he made the 10-6 prediction. That prediction came before the 49ers and Texans games. So he couldn't have known then the fans gave up on them and this wouldn't have affected his prediction. Seems like Skip is working hard to link a narrative to his trolling attempt at getting attention. He's taking information he knows now and tries to pretend he knew it before the season began when he could not have. That is unless Skip Bayless is omniscient or psychic. Obviously he is not.
When I reminded Stephen A. that if Romo hadn't hurt his back in the big win at Washington, the Cowboys very possibly would've beaten Philadelphia in the 2013 regular-season finale at home and would've gone 6-0 in the division, Stephen A. reminded me they went 8-8. Again.
Well, it is all about you and conversations you have with Stephen A. Smith.
Yet ... even with that historically bad defense, in week 7 last year the Cowboys somehow held Chip Kelly's attack to three points in Philly, winning 17-3. Hmmm. Wasn't last year's near-flawless division record a quiet little building block toward winning this year's East?
Apparently you didn't think so, because you said the Cowboys looked like a 6-10 team during the preseason. Aren't all of these observations simply hindsight on your part? And focusing on one game where the Cowboys defense played badly with Demarcus Ware and Jason Hatcher doesn't explain how the "building block" game involved this same Cowboys defense giving up 31, 49, 31, 45, and 37 points after Week 7. This explanation for the Week 7 game being a "building block" makes not of sense.
I plunged. Eli Manning and Robert Griffin III had struggled through preseason games, and I was sure the Eagles would ultimately miss DeSean Jackson's deep speed, so I predicted the Dallas Cowboys would go 10-6 and win the division "by default."
That was as insanely bold as I could go.
But now that Skip sees he could end up being correct, he's doubling down and explaining why he believed all those things he didn't believe at the time which led to him making his prediction the Cowboys would go 10-6. This wasn't simple trolling on Skip's part, it was him knowing things that either (a) he couldn't know, like Cowboys fans had given up on the team or (b) claiming conclusions that don't make sense, like the Cowboys defense had a "building block" game in Week 7 of last year, while ignoring all the points the defense gave up after that week.
But it happened again, two Sundays later at St. Louis. Murray fumble, Romo pick-six: Rams, 21-0. Final score: Dallas, 34-31.
Last year, Dallas would've lost that game. Last year's Cowboys would've lost to Houston after blowing a 17-7 fourth-quarter lead and finding themselves in overtime. Dallas 20, Houston 17.
This was a resilient Cowboys team, which Skip knew when he made his prediction of the Cowboys winning the NFC East "by default." By the way, the Cowboys were tied with the Eagles for the NFC East lead when Skip wrote this, so they weren't even winning the NFC East as he had predicted and the Eagles do not miss DeSean Jackson's deep speed, as Skip predicted. Skip would rather we focus on his correct predictions though, while ignoring any prediction that may have been off-base a little bit.
This year's Cowboys keep facing down past demons. On a Sunday night last season in New Orleans, they suffered what I called "the biggest humiliation I can ever remember as a Cowboy fan" -- Saints, 49-17. On a Sunday night this season, they led the Saints 24-0 at half on the way to 38-17 retribution. Backbone. Then, at Seattle last Sunday, they basically recreated past nightmares up there -- blocked punt for a TD, fumbled punt, fumbled snap -- and bounced right back to bully the bullies in their backyard 30-23.
It's always fun how the conclusion here can't simply be, "The Cowboys are a good team who are getting a great year rushing the football from DeMarco Murray with a surprisingly good defense," there has to be a narrative running through all of these victories. They got retribution on the Saints, they were getting over past nightmares against the Seahawks. That's the narrative Skip wants to further.
Cowboy glitz has turned back into Cowboy guts. The primary architect of the new resolve: Marinelli, a far better coordinator than he was a head coach in Detroit. Same for play-caller Scott Linehan, who failed as a head coach in St. Louis. Bill Callahan had his moments as a head coach, but he just might be the NFL's best offensive line coach. Head coach Jason Garrett? Shaky play-caller but not a bad buffer between the team and frustrated coach Jerry Jones.
Everything is awesome now! Skip knew the Cowboys would bounce back this season because of these coaches, it's just he didn't know it earlier in the preseason when he thought the Cowboys, with these exact same coaches, looked like a 6-10 team. It turns out one of Skip's trolling attempts has turned out to be correct so far.
Skip is full of shit. He's very much full of shit. He's so full of shit that he's not actually full of shit, but he's just made of shit and it's overtaken his body to where all he is now is shit. Skip claims that the Week 7 game in 2013 was a turning point. Yet, on November 1, 2013 Skip Bayless wrote a column stating "Why Jerry Jones' team won't win." He made the following points (and I'll try to keep my comments to a minimum because you guys are smart enough to see the contradictions in his current position and his position less than a year ago after the "building block" game in Week 7):
That said, I've reached this painful conclusion: I'll be surprised if one of Jerry Jones' teams ever even comes close to winning another Super Bowl.
His Cowboys remain America's Team, in large part, because Cowboys lovers and the many, many Cowboys haters know that just when they start looking like a Super Bowl team, oh my god, did you see that?
The Cowboys fan in me is getting increasingly sick and tired of watching Jerry Jones enable his team to lose without fear. Super nice guys Romo, Jason Garrett, Jason Witten and DeMarcus Ware now lead the league in post-loss patience -- in handling tougher and tougher media questions with shrugging imperturbability -- because they aren't afraid of being held accountable by the owner.
Who really cares? Jerry is still able to sell the illusion of hope because -- gusher luck! -- his team still leads the NFL's worst division at .500. But it isn't really based on quality. The Cowboys have lost to four over-.500 teams and beaten four under-.500 teams.
The Cowboys were 3-0 in the division at this point. They had their "building block" game that Skip didn't recognize as a "building block" game at the time.
And don't forget that Skip was on the Johnny Manziel train and wanted the Cowboys to trade Tony Romo to draft Manziel.
And this bullshit about the Cowboys winning the NFC East by default because the NFC East isn't strong? Well, that's typical bullshit from Skip because he was singing a different tune in May. From Skip:
“It says that the oddsmakers have little to no respect for next year’s NFC East, because the oddsmakers are saying that only one team in the East is even going to be slightly above .500 when all is said and done,” Bayless said.
So the Cowboys would win the division "by default" at 10-6? But there's more...
“That would be the Eagles at around 9-7, and yet I think the oddsmakers at this moment … are overestimating Dallas to win eight games and go 8-8 again. I think that’s high. And I think the Redskins at about seven-and-a-half wins — projected — I think that’s low. Right now, if you backed me into a corner, I’m picking the Redskins to win the NFC East.
As if you needed proof that Skip was changing his position on the Cowboys. Remember, the Cowboys had Linehan, Callahan, and Marinelli on the coaching staff at this point. Also, remember that Skip moved the Cowboys up from 6-10 to 10-6 after a bad preseason, but then moved the Redskins down from 8 or more wins because of a bad preseason from Robert Griffin. So the preseason matters to Skip, unless the preseason doesn't matter at all to Skip. It depends on which way he wants to troll.
I think that will really help mold that defensive secondary and I like where they’re headed if RGIII is RGIII, and I believe with all my heart he will bounce completely back. So I have the Redskins winning 10 games next year.”
Smith also predicted the Cowboys will finish in last place and Bayless said he can’t see Dallas winning more than six games.
Boy, this is awkward.
It's almost like all these things Skip claims he knew which would lead to success for the Cowboys during the 2014 season, the Cowboys having a "building block" game in Week 7 against the Eagles, the Cowboys having a good coaching staff and almost going 6-0 against the NFC East during the 2013, are things he knew prior to making the 6-10 prediction in May prior to the preseason. Yet, Skip still thought the Cowboys would win 6 games in May. That is, until he saw a chance to troll and differentiate himself from everyone else for the sake of gaining attention and claiming the Cowboys would win the NFC East. When it turned out Skip looked smart when the Cowboys started the season 5-1, but OF COURSE he knew the Cowboys would win the NFC East. Look at all these reasons on why his prediction was fact-based and not attention-based! Too bad reality doesn't match up with Skip's claims. Of course Skip isn't interested in reality, he is interested in attention.
Yep, Romo's offense leads the NFL in third-down conversions. Something also is different about Romo this season. Maybe he faced his NFL mortality for the first time. At 34, as he underwent his second back surgery, he had to suffer through owner/general manager Jones' painfully public fascination with Johnny Manziel -- and the regret Jones expressed over not drafting Manziel, sometimes within earshot of Romo.
Yes, Tony Romo is totally different now due to Jerry Jones' painful public fascination with Johnny Manziel. Remember when Jones said:
"If Texans would take Romo for Manziel, I'd do it in a heartbeat. Romo will tease w/ near-greatness then break your heart. Manziel=winner."
Ugh, that is a painful public fascination. I can't believe Jerry Jones said that. Wait, Jerry Jones didn't say that! That was Skip Bayless who said those words.
Maybe Romo is finally worried enough about losing his job that he's no longer treating it with shrugging carelessness.
Romo has a great running game and a defense that is stopping the opponent from scoring, so naturally this means Tony Romo has changed in some way. Narratives, people! Stick to the narratives! It all has to come back to how Romo has changed. Do not focus on how anything around Romo may have changed.
On third-and-8 in overtime against Houston, his spin-away heave was high and far enough that only power leaper Dez Bryant had a shot at coming down with it. And his third-and-20 escape at Seattle -- the NFL's play of the year so far -- was thrown where only Terrance Williams could snag it and toe-tap it in bounds.
Romo, finally matching his talent and toughness with ... maturity?
That's the narrative. Must stick to it. Romo, finally matching his talent with a good offensive line, good defense and an excellent running game? BORING! Let's talk about how Romo is more mature now. That'll get pageviews.
This team WILL last ... if Murray does. This man sets the backbone tone. Yet, while Cowboy great Emmitt Smith was the greatest I ever saw at avoiding injurious contact, Murray keeps attacking as if his offense and defense need his every punishing yard.
His history and logic would dictate that DeMarco Murray will not make it the entire 16 game schedule at this pace. Once/If Murray gets injured then the "It's the same Tony Romo who chokes in the clutch and is careless with the football" stories can start up again with no sense of irony.
Maybe underrated backup Joseph Randle will stay out of trouble long enough to give Murray just enough rest. Maybe the injury gods will smile on him. Maybe this season is just meant to be for the "historically bad defense" and the "accident waiting to happen" that has been Romo.
Maybe, but Skip certainly didn't think this was true prior to or during the preseason. Only when he saw the opportunity to troll and have a controversial hot sports take did he decide that the Cowboys would win the NFC East. For a guy who makes his living voicing his opinion, Skip's opinion should does fail to stay consistent or even seem to be based on the facts he claims his opinion is based upon when changing his opinion. It's always about attention to Skip.
And maybe I'm being set up for the biggest letdown of my Cowboy-loving life.
Maybe, it is after all completely about you. In your mind, it always will be. Skip Bayless is an embarrassment to AARP members everywhere.
You may not believe this, but Skip makes the Cowboys' hot start completely about him. I know, it's shocking that Skip brings the focus back on himself.
Feel free to dismiss me as just another desperate Dallas Cowboys fan again falling for America's Tease.
I will feel free to dismiss you totally as another desperate attention-seeking troll who insists on playing the villain because it beats working hard for a living.
I talked my uncle, a high school football coach, into taking me to my first Cowboys game, at the Cotton Bowl on Nov. 5, 1961, when I was in fourth grade. Quarterback Eddie LeBaron's Cowboys lost to the St. Louis Cardinals 31-17 -- hey, Eddie Football was only 5 feet, 7 inches tall -- but I was hooked for life.
Great story, don't care. This isn't about you, it's about the Dallas Cowboys.
But I did manage to maintain objectivity in writing three books about America's Team -- three inside looks far too revealing for some fans.
What Skip may mean about "far too revealing" is he stated that Barry Switzer claimed Troy Aikman was gay, and Skip found no proof this was true and Aikman denied it, but Bayless included this in his third book on the Cowboys anyway because controversy equals book sales. A whore has to put out and a shill has to shill.
So maybe I'm not writing just with my heart when I say I believe in this Cowboys team more than any since the 1995 Super Bowl champion about which I wrote my last book.
Skip KNOWS the Cowboys are for real this year. He didn't know earlier during the summer, but he totally knows now.
This team is different from the many since then that have inspired predictions (and delusions) of grandeur.
You know how Skip knows this Cowboys team is different? They are winning games. It's a dead giveaway only he can notice.
This team -- if it stays reasonably healthy -- will win the NFC East.
Skip has to put that qualifier on there, just in case the need to backpedal at a furious speed should the need arise.
That's what I predicted on air on the Thursday this NFL season opened. My prediction so stunned and disgusted Stephen A. -- who grew up a Cowboys-hating New York Giants fan -- that he got up and walked off the set babbling about how I had lost my mind.
So dramatic! So scandalous! It's like the "Jerry Springer Show" for sports. Stephen A. had to walk away because Skip's view was so stunning. I'm so dismayed I couldn't view this circus first hand, but will have to settle for not watching it on YouTube.
He had no idea that was coming because I had spent the entire preseason saying this Cowboy team had 6-10 written all over it.
But you knew this team was different. You...you...you...are going all-in on the Cowboys winning the NFC East like you knew this would be happen, but your words didn't always back this prediction up. This is what is known as "flip-flopping" and having a contradictory opinion. Skip will get no credit for stating the Cowboys will win the NFC East because he said all preseason the Cowboys would go 6-10. He can't have it both ways. Now if the Cowboys suffer injuries (and I like how Skip throws in the qualifier that the Cowboys have to say "reasonably healthy" as if they hadn't been hit hard by injuries on defense before the season began), Skip can weasel out of this prediction and fall back on his "Dallas Cowboys will go 6-10" prediction. I'm sure there will be a gratuitous mention of Tim Tebow in there somewhere.
So why did I suddenly reverse field and book it that Dallas would go 10-6 and win the division?
Because you are a clown who holds no opinion which doesn't gain attention for yourself and you thought stating the Cowboys would go 10-6 was a good way of self-promotion?
It started two days earlier, during a round of golf, when a friend listened to my rant about how last year's historically bad Cowboy defense (which allowed an NFL-record 40 first downs at New Orleans) could be even worse without Sean Lee, DeMarcus Ware and Jason Hatcher.
Remember, Skip is working under the theory the Cowboys will win the NFC East if they stay reasonably healthy. So naturally, his conclusion the Cowboys will win the NFC East is reached based upon knowing the Cowboys most important defensive player is lost for the season.
My friend's response was so simply profound that I cold-topped my next shot: "You wonder if those guys will finally get so sick and tired of hearing how historically bad they are."
Wait, he was talking while you were putting? Or is Skip being overly-dramatic again like he was when he mentioned Stephen A. walking off the set so stunned by Skip's prediction the Cowboys would win the NFC East? I'm guessing the latter. Either way, this is how Skip Bayless works. Reason goes out the window for the sake of hot sports takes and attention-seeking comments.
Herm said: "Trust me on this: Rod will get them to play hard. If they don't" Herm's famed emotions rose. "... Rod WILL get in their face."
Oh, well I didn't know Rod Marinelli would get in his players' faces. That totally changes my opinion on the Cowboys. If I had known Marinelli would get in his players' faces in the same manner that helped him achieve a 10-38 lifetime heading coaching record in the NFL then I would have predicted the Cowboys to go 16-1. Yes, the Cowboys players would be so motivated by their coach yelling at them they would play an extra game during the season just so they could claim they won 16 games.
For the first time in forever, nobody was picking the Dallas Cowboys to do anything. At least, nobody I knew of...Seriously, you'd have to go back to 1989 and 1990, the first two expansion-like seasons of the Jimmy Johnson/Jerry Jones Cowboys, to find a year in which nobody thought the Cowboys had a chance.
So then Skip Bayless saw a void where he could troll and knew he had to fill that void. He can get attention, not by bashing the Cowboys as he had done all preseason, but predicting them to win the NFC East. Skip was going to differentiate himself by being positive about the Cowboys rather than negative, because that's how he could get attention. He would just ignore that he said they looked like a 6-10 team in the preseason, because who cares?
Leading up to this season, many of their own fans had given up on them. That's why, for the home opener, JerryWorld appeared to reporters to be half-filled with 49ers fans, and why during the home game against Houston, Texans fans made so much noise they forced Tony Romo to resort to a silent count.
At "HOME!"
The Cowboys were 3-1 when they faced the Texans. It seems kind of funny that Skip is using reasoning like Cowboys fans giving up on the team as the reason Texans fans made so much noise.
Perfect: Zero expectations for this Cowboy team.
Yeah, but Skip didn't know that Cowboys fans had given up on the team when he made the 10-6 prediction. That prediction came before the 49ers and Texans games. So he couldn't have known then the fans gave up on them and this wouldn't have affected his prediction. Seems like Skip is working hard to link a narrative to his trolling attempt at getting attention. He's taking information he knows now and tries to pretend he knew it before the season began when he could not have. That is unless Skip Bayless is omniscient or psychic. Obviously he is not.
When I reminded Stephen A. that if Romo hadn't hurt his back in the big win at Washington, the Cowboys very possibly would've beaten Philadelphia in the 2013 regular-season finale at home and would've gone 6-0 in the division, Stephen A. reminded me they went 8-8. Again.
Well, it is all about you and conversations you have with Stephen A. Smith.
Yet ... even with that historically bad defense, in week 7 last year the Cowboys somehow held Chip Kelly's attack to three points in Philly, winning 17-3. Hmmm. Wasn't last year's near-flawless division record a quiet little building block toward winning this year's East?
Apparently you didn't think so, because you said the Cowboys looked like a 6-10 team during the preseason. Aren't all of these observations simply hindsight on your part? And focusing on one game where the Cowboys defense played badly with Demarcus Ware and Jason Hatcher doesn't explain how the "building block" game involved this same Cowboys defense giving up 31, 49, 31, 45, and 37 points after Week 7. This explanation for the Week 7 game being a "building block" makes not of sense.
I plunged. Eli Manning and Robert Griffin III had struggled through preseason games, and I was sure the Eagles would ultimately miss DeSean Jackson's deep speed, so I predicted the Dallas Cowboys would go 10-6 and win the division "by default."
That was as insanely bold as I could go.
But now that Skip sees he could end up being correct, he's doubling down and explaining why he believed all those things he didn't believe at the time which led to him making his prediction the Cowboys would go 10-6. This wasn't simple trolling on Skip's part, it was him knowing things that either (a) he couldn't know, like Cowboys fans had given up on the team or (b) claiming conclusions that don't make sense, like the Cowboys defense had a "building block" game in Week 7 of last year, while ignoring all the points the defense gave up after that week.
But it happened again, two Sundays later at St. Louis. Murray fumble, Romo pick-six: Rams, 21-0. Final score: Dallas, 34-31.
Last year, Dallas would've lost that game. Last year's Cowboys would've lost to Houston after blowing a 17-7 fourth-quarter lead and finding themselves in overtime. Dallas 20, Houston 17.
This was a resilient Cowboys team, which Skip knew when he made his prediction of the Cowboys winning the NFC East "by default." By the way, the Cowboys were tied with the Eagles for the NFC East lead when Skip wrote this, so they weren't even winning the NFC East as he had predicted and the Eagles do not miss DeSean Jackson's deep speed, as Skip predicted. Skip would rather we focus on his correct predictions though, while ignoring any prediction that may have been off-base a little bit.
This year's Cowboys keep facing down past demons. On a Sunday night last season in New Orleans, they suffered what I called "the biggest humiliation I can ever remember as a Cowboy fan" -- Saints, 49-17. On a Sunday night this season, they led the Saints 24-0 at half on the way to 38-17 retribution. Backbone. Then, at Seattle last Sunday, they basically recreated past nightmares up there -- blocked punt for a TD, fumbled punt, fumbled snap -- and bounced right back to bully the bullies in their backyard 30-23.
It's always fun how the conclusion here can't simply be, "The Cowboys are a good team who are getting a great year rushing the football from DeMarco Murray with a surprisingly good defense," there has to be a narrative running through all of these victories. They got retribution on the Saints, they were getting over past nightmares against the Seahawks. That's the narrative Skip wants to further.
Cowboy glitz has turned back into Cowboy guts. The primary architect of the new resolve: Marinelli, a far better coordinator than he was a head coach in Detroit. Same for play-caller Scott Linehan, who failed as a head coach in St. Louis. Bill Callahan had his moments as a head coach, but he just might be the NFL's best offensive line coach. Head coach Jason Garrett? Shaky play-caller but not a bad buffer between the team and frustrated coach Jerry Jones.
Everything is awesome now! Skip knew the Cowboys would bounce back this season because of these coaches, it's just he didn't know it earlier in the preseason when he thought the Cowboys, with these exact same coaches, looked like a 6-10 team. It turns out one of Skip's trolling attempts has turned out to be correct so far.
Skip is full of shit. He's very much full of shit. He's so full of shit that he's not actually full of shit, but he's just made of shit and it's overtaken his body to where all he is now is shit. Skip claims that the Week 7 game in 2013 was a turning point. Yet, on November 1, 2013 Skip Bayless wrote a column stating "Why Jerry Jones' team won't win." He made the following points (and I'll try to keep my comments to a minimum because you guys are smart enough to see the contradictions in his current position and his position less than a year ago after the "building block" game in Week 7):
That said, I've reached this painful conclusion: I'll be surprised if one of Jerry Jones' teams ever even comes close to winning another Super Bowl.
His Cowboys remain America's Team, in large part, because Cowboys lovers and the many, many Cowboys haters know that just when they start looking like a Super Bowl team, oh my god, did you see that?
The Cowboys fan in me is getting increasingly sick and tired of watching Jerry Jones enable his team to lose without fear. Super nice guys Romo, Jason Garrett, Jason Witten and DeMarcus Ware now lead the league in post-loss patience -- in handling tougher and tougher media questions with shrugging imperturbability -- because they aren't afraid of being held accountable by the owner.
Who really cares? Jerry is still able to sell the illusion of hope because -- gusher luck! -- his team still leads the NFL's worst division at .500. But it isn't really based on quality. The Cowboys have lost to four over-.500 teams and beaten four under-.500 teams.
The Cowboys were 3-0 in the division at this point. They had their "building block" game that Skip didn't recognize as a "building block" game at the time.
And don't forget that Skip was on the Johnny Manziel train and wanted the Cowboys to trade Tony Romo to draft Manziel.
And this bullshit about the Cowboys winning the NFC East by default because the NFC East isn't strong? Well, that's typical bullshit from Skip because he was singing a different tune in May. From Skip:
“It says that the oddsmakers have little to no respect for next year’s NFC East, because the oddsmakers are saying that only one team in the East is even going to be slightly above .500 when all is said and done,” Bayless said.
So the Cowboys would win the division "by default" at 10-6? But there's more...
“That would be the Eagles at around 9-7, and yet I think the oddsmakers at this moment … are overestimating Dallas to win eight games and go 8-8 again. I think that’s high. And I think the Redskins at about seven-and-a-half wins — projected — I think that’s low. Right now, if you backed me into a corner, I’m picking the Redskins to win the NFC East.
As if you needed proof that Skip was changing his position on the Cowboys. Remember, the Cowboys had Linehan, Callahan, and Marinelli on the coaching staff at this point. Also, remember that Skip moved the Cowboys up from 6-10 to 10-6 after a bad preseason, but then moved the Redskins down from 8 or more wins because of a bad preseason from Robert Griffin. So the preseason matters to Skip, unless the preseason doesn't matter at all to Skip. It depends on which way he wants to troll.
I think that will really help mold that defensive secondary and I like where they’re headed if RGIII is RGIII, and I believe with all my heart he will bounce completely back. So I have the Redskins winning 10 games next year.”
Smith also predicted the Cowboys will finish in last place and Bayless said he can’t see Dallas winning more than six games.
Boy, this is awkward.
It's almost like all these things Skip claims he knew which would lead to success for the Cowboys during the 2014 season, the Cowboys having a "building block" game in Week 7 against the Eagles, the Cowboys having a good coaching staff and almost going 6-0 against the NFC East during the 2013, are things he knew prior to making the 6-10 prediction in May prior to the preseason. Yet, Skip still thought the Cowboys would win 6 games in May. That is, until he saw a chance to troll and differentiate himself from everyone else for the sake of gaining attention and claiming the Cowboys would win the NFC East. When it turned out Skip looked smart when the Cowboys started the season 5-1, but OF COURSE he knew the Cowboys would win the NFC East. Look at all these reasons on why his prediction was fact-based and not attention-based! Too bad reality doesn't match up with Skip's claims. Of course Skip isn't interested in reality, he is interested in attention.
Yep, Romo's offense leads the NFL in third-down conversions. Something also is different about Romo this season. Maybe he faced his NFL mortality for the first time. At 34, as he underwent his second back surgery, he had to suffer through owner/general manager Jones' painfully public fascination with Johnny Manziel -- and the regret Jones expressed over not drafting Manziel, sometimes within earshot of Romo.
Yes, Tony Romo is totally different now due to Jerry Jones' painful public fascination with Johnny Manziel. Remember when Jones said:
"If Texans would take Romo for Manziel, I'd do it in a heartbeat. Romo will tease w/ near-greatness then break your heart. Manziel=winner."
Ugh, that is a painful public fascination. I can't believe Jerry Jones said that. Wait, Jerry Jones didn't say that! That was Skip Bayless who said those words.
Maybe Romo is finally worried enough about losing his job that he's no longer treating it with shrugging carelessness.
Romo has a great running game and a defense that is stopping the opponent from scoring, so naturally this means Tony Romo has changed in some way. Narratives, people! Stick to the narratives! It all has to come back to how Romo has changed. Do not focus on how anything around Romo may have changed.
On third-and-8 in overtime against Houston, his spin-away heave was high and far enough that only power leaper Dez Bryant had a shot at coming down with it. And his third-and-20 escape at Seattle -- the NFL's play of the year so far -- was thrown where only Terrance Williams could snag it and toe-tap it in bounds.
Romo, finally matching his talent and toughness with ... maturity?
That's the narrative. Must stick to it. Romo, finally matching his talent with a good offensive line, good defense and an excellent running game? BORING! Let's talk about how Romo is more mature now. That'll get pageviews.
This team WILL last ... if Murray does. This man sets the backbone tone. Yet, while Cowboy great Emmitt Smith was the greatest I ever saw at avoiding injurious contact, Murray keeps attacking as if his offense and defense need his every punishing yard.
His history and logic would dictate that DeMarco Murray will not make it the entire 16 game schedule at this pace. Once/If Murray gets injured then the "It's the same Tony Romo who chokes in the clutch and is careless with the football" stories can start up again with no sense of irony.
Maybe underrated backup Joseph Randle will stay out of trouble long enough to give Murray just enough rest. Maybe the injury gods will smile on him. Maybe this season is just meant to be for the "historically bad defense" and the "accident waiting to happen" that has been Romo.
Maybe, but Skip certainly didn't think this was true prior to or during the preseason. Only when he saw the opportunity to troll and have a controversial hot sports take did he decide that the Cowboys would win the NFC East. For a guy who makes his living voicing his opinion, Skip's opinion should does fail to stay consistent or even seem to be based on the facts he claims his opinion is based upon when changing his opinion. It's always about attention to Skip.
And maybe I'm being set up for the biggest letdown of my Cowboy-loving life.
Maybe, it is after all completely about you. In your mind, it always will be. Skip Bayless is an embarrassment to AARP members everywhere.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)