Showing posts with label things we do with our free time. Show all posts
Showing posts with label things we do with our free time. Show all posts

Wednesday, January 1, 2014

12 comments MMQB Review: The Steelers Not Making the Playoffs Has Made Peter Sad Edition

(I will be doing the NFL playoff pick 'em challenge against Bill Simmons and Peter King again this year. I will put up the post as soon as Bill Simmons' picks come out on Friday. If anyone else wants to join in and try to make playoff picks then look out for the post on Friday/Saturday and put your picks in the comments of that post. I think about 8-10 people who want to participate would be the limit. Just wanted to give everyone a head's up.)

Peter King told us last week that franchise quarterbacks come up big in big moments, which is a statement neglects to mention that franchise quarterbacks also can come up big in normal moments so they won't have to come up big in big moments late in a game. Peter also told us through Tweets that Cam Newton had to beat the Saints to justify his selection as the #1 overall pick. There was also a continued amount of mayhem in Peter's Fine Fifteen rankings per usual and he marveled yet again at what a crazy and unpredictable league the NFL is. This week Peter talks about the Browns firing their head coach, runs the risk of alienating his BFF Brett Favre by talking positive about Aaron Rodgers and just doesn't understand why Americans choose to take pictures of things that King Peter King doesn't think Americans should take pictures of. No mainstream writer gets all up in the business of perfect strangers like Peter King.

Not much happened on the last day of the regular season Sunday. 

There were no Hollywood endings this week! 

The greatest regular-season game of Aaron Rodgers’ career.

Naturally, Brett Favre had better greatest regular season games in his career.

“Then this game. Today’s in the top three of all of my games. It was special, for so many reasons.” Including some eye-opening words about the team physician we all assumed he hated.

Here goes this "we" shit again. Does Peter have multiple personalities and that's why he says "we" or does he just want to say "we" when he is personally wrong to make himself feel better about being wrong by pretending everyone thinks the exact same things that he thinks? I think Peter's ego can't handle being wrong so he says "we" as a group thought Rodgers hated the Packers team doctor.

Can you imagine what it must have been like to be lifelong Browns fan and 2013 Browns coach Rob Chudzinski Sunday night around 9, getting blindsided by the rumors of your firing after the last game of the season in Pittsburgh, wondering on the two-hour bus ride home if they could possibly be true, and then listening to club president Joe Banner destroy your dream, dismissing you after just 352 days of a four-year contract?

I would think "Damn, I'm making $10 million for not doing anything over the last three years of this contract and no one is going to think any less of me for being fired by the Browns because it's assumed the Browns as an organization doesn't seem to know what direction it needs to go in. I'm going to go cry into my $10 million dollars now. Later bitches."

I told the news to one of the stalwart Browns, linebacker D’Qwell Jackson, at 9:55 Sunday night. “We fired Chud? Are you kidding me?” he said, stunned. Wish I was.

Chud probably should not have been hired by the Browns in the first place. His Panthers offensive players didn't like the way he called the offensive plays and weren't sad to see him go, but if you are going to hire a head coach then don't fire him because he couldn't turn a team with a revolving quarterback situation around. It's just bad form and not fair.

In the Year of the Blown Call, it’s fitting that as two officials from the Bill Leavy crew stared at a blatant violation on a 41-yard field-goal that would have won the game for Kansas City, neither threw a flag. The kick went wide right. Ryan Succop should have had a second chance from five yards closer, but he didn’t, and San Diego won in overtime. If Succop had converted, there’d have been a five-way tie for the sixth playoff seed in the AFC at 8-8, and the Steelers would have won the tiebreaker.

These officiating failures are fun and games until one of Peter's favorite Northeast teams misses the playoffs due to an officiating failure. At that point, something needs to be done.

And Pittsburghers wake up this morning, read this, spit out their coffee and wonder, “Is this karmic payback for The Immaculate Reception?”

Or perhaps more accurately these are the type of things that happen when you don't play well during the season and end up with an 8-8 record. 

Peyton Manning finished his assault on history. He broke the record for passing yards in a season (5,477) by a single yard over Drew Brees, and extended his record of touchdown passes in a season to 55 with a four-TD first half at Oakland. He’ll need 18 touchdown passes next season, at 38, to pass Brett Favre’s career-TD record of 508.

Manning is going to have to work really hard to break Favre's interception record though. That's going to take a lot of bad throws for Manning to surpass Favre there.

Déjà vu all over again. Every one of the wild-card games is a rematch from playoff games past.

Nearly every wild card game is a rematch from a game played earlier this year too. Only the New Orleans-Philadelphia matchup isn't a rematch from a game played earlier this year.

Aaron Rodgers is grateful for Pat McKenzie.

BREAKING NEWS: An NFL player appreciates and doesn't hate the team doctor that helped him heal and come back in time during the season to help his team make the playoffs.

Rodgers bearhugged McKenzie.
 
“I’ll keep what was said between us,” he told me. “But I will say it was a good moment. I have so much respect for that man.”

Waitwhat?

Very few people other than you, Peter, thought that Aaron Rodgers hated the Packers team doctor. You thought this for some reason, and this wasn't a universally shared opinion, yet "you" think "we" also believed Rodgers inexplicably hated the Packers team doctor.

No clearance in Week 13. None in Week 14, None in Week 15. None in Week 16. As time went on, you could see the frustration in coach Mike McCarthy, and you could practically hear the grinding of the teeth when Rodgers would make his public pronouncements. The season was slipping away, and Rodgers wanted to play. Though Rodgers said most of the right things in front of the cameras, there were whispers that he thought McKenzie was being too cautious with him.

These whispers turned out to just be the careless whispers of Brett Favre's memory trying to create uncertainty in the mind of Peter King and create controversy on the Packers team where there may be none.

It paid off because Rodgers wasn’t in pain during the game, he said. “I felt really good,” he said. “I never took any big shots all day.” He was sacked three times, but never a shot that landed him on the area that was hurt 48 days earlier. The game was an odd one for Rodgers, because though he wasn’t and didn’t feel rusty, he made two uncharacteristic throws in the first 16 minutes that got intercepted and threatened to put Green Bay too far behind.

If this were Brett Favre who made the throws then Peter would say Favre was "Tossing the ball around the field in a fit of joy much like a precocious child eager to get back on the field and help his team." It's not that Favre was careless with the football, he just cared too damn much. That's the ticket.

It helped that James Starks and Eddie Lacy were so effective (68 of 80 yards on a third-quarter scoring drive came on the ground), and Rodgers didn’t have to do everything himself.

It's almost like football is a team game or something.

As Julius Peppers steamed in, unblocked, from Rodgers’ left, Kuhn dove at him to try to save the sack. Good move. Rodgers spun out of it and Peppers just got one hand on him.

Or as Peppers probably said after the game, "Well, I got one hand on him, but couldn't tackle him. No big deal, life goes on. I still get paid, right?"

safety Chris Conte sat near the first-down line, the Bears 40, stunned to see Randall Cobb—in his first game back, too, after rehabbing a broken leg—streak past him.

Conte thought Cobb's leg was still broken and there was NO WAY Cobb could get behind him while playing on crutches.

And so now 12-4 San Francisco comes to 8-7-1 Green Bay for a late Sunday afternoon game. The long-range forecast is for snow showers Saturday and a wind-chill temperature between zero and 5 degrees at kickoff Sunday.

I understand the NFL wants to reward teams for winning their division, but it's silly to me that a 12-4 team has to go on the road to play a 8-7-1 team simply because the 12-4 team played in a tougher division. There were three teams in the NFC West that would have had a better record than the Packers, yet the second place team in the NFC West has to go on the road to play the Packers in the playoffs. Those are the rules I guess. I get rewarding a team for winning their division, but it just doesn't feel like the Packers earned a home playoff game to me.

A little more than a year ago, when Jimmy Haslam bought the Browns from Randy Lerner, the most sensible thing he said concerned the coaching merry-go-round the team had been on. Haslam was a minority owner of the Steelers when he bought the Browns, and stability, obviously, was the Pittsburgh way of doing business.

As I've said before, it's easier to be stable when having success. It's a "chicken or the egg" thing about stability. Is a team successful because of stability in the organization or is the success of a team lead to the stability in the organization? The Jacksonville Jaguars have had a decent amount of stability in terms of head coaches and ownership allowing the upper management to run the team as they see fit. The Jaguars haven't had a ton of success of late, despite some sense of stability.

More Haslam, from October 2012: “One thing I learned from watching the Steelers is the importance of consistency in coaching, and how much it sets you back when you’re always making a change. When you change coaches, it can be a three- or four-year deal to get back.”

Actions speak louder than words. It's easy for an owner to talk about what he wants to do, but it is much harder to go out and actually put this into action. A lot of teams would like to copy the Steelers, but if just copying another team led to success then success in the NFL for an owner would be easy.

That brings us to Rob Chudzinski. The new regime led by Haslam and president Joe Banner went through a battery of interviews, clearly preferring Oregon’s Chip Kelly. But Kelly wasn’t ready to commit, and then he committed to Philadelphia, so the Browns turned to Chudzinski, a Browns fan since his youth in Toledo.

Not that the Browns settled of course. They really wanted Chud as their head coach and loved him in that capacity. They loved him so much they had to set him free. If Chud comes back to them, then they are meant to be together.

I expect Cleveland brass will say, politely, that the team simply wasn’t improving. The Browns looked like a strong defensive team in the first month (Cleveland started 3-2) and disintegrated into one that lost 10 of its last 11. 

When hiring an offensive coach who went through multiple quarterbacks in his first year as a head coach, it seems completely fair to judge him based on the defense not improving. Only the Browns would hire an offensive coach and then fire him because he couldn't keep the defense playing at a high level over one season.

If Banner and Haslam tell the truth, maybe they’ll say not everyone is cut out to be an NFL head coach, and maybe Chudzinski was one slot above the job he does best: offensive coordinator.

Make that two slots above what he does best: tight ends coach.

And if they kept Chudzinski, they’d be asking him to develop the next quarterback, along with offensive coordinator Norv Turner. What if there was a disconnect between the quarterback the front office wanted (I hear Cleveland really likes Johnny Manziel, who is not the Aikmanish pocket passer more to Turner’s liking) and the one the coaches preferred?

Then I would ask why the Browns have hired front office personnel that isn't on the same page as the coaching staff the Browns have hired. I would also ask why the front office seems to think they are smarter than Norv Turner, who despite not being a great head coach, has shown he is capable of instructing and helping a quarterback succeed in the NFL. I think the important thing to do is to hire coaches that are on the same page as the front office. Seems simple, but apparently it isn't.

“Three since 1969?” Jackson said. “That’s incredible. Next year will be my ninth season here—and it’ll be my fifth head coach.”

Yeah, but the Browns are going to get it right this time. For sure. When has Mike Lombardi ever failed?

Five things all over the map.

1. Miami sounded Sunday night like a place of change. I wouldn’t be surprised to see coaching staff changes, and I’m hearing mixed messages about GM Jeff Ireland.

But has the Bill Parcells Seal of Approval! How could Jeff Ireland ever be replaced when knowing that Bill Parcells had faith in him?

2. Be careful about making Josh McDaniels the next coach of the Browns.

Okay, we will be sure to not wildly speculate as to who the Browns will hire and leave the wild speculation all up to you, so that when you are wrong you can claim "we" all thought Josh McDaniels was staying in New England.

But he’s not the kind of guy itching to be a head coach, I’m told. He’s happy coaching Tom Brady and working under Bill Belichick, I’m told.

BUT WHAT YOU BEEN TOLD, PETER?

I would bet a small amount of money that Josh McDaniels is looking to stick around New England and poach that job from Bill Belichick in 25 years when he is talking about retiring.

Then Peter does what he will probably do 20 times this offseason, which is update us on the Rams draft situation.

Snead made it clear that, with the second pick, the Rams are open for business. He’d like to get an extra first-rounder out of the deal if possible, and with a major bargaining chip like Jadeveon Clowney or Teddy Bridgewater (if the Louisville quarterback comes out, as expected) in play, he may be able to reach his goal. “There are going to be some teams that want to pick a quarterback,” said Snead, “and that could increase the value of our pick. I have told people I’m not sure I know how to draft without multiple first-round picks, so I’m always going to be interested when it comes to making sure I can continue to do that.”

And really, how can a GM be expected to do this job well if he doesn't have multiple first round draft picks?

5. Remember this about being the top seed. In the last 19 seasons, only once (2009, New Orleans and Indy) have the two top seeds entering the playoffs advanced to the Super Bowl. In the last generation, home-field advantage has become decreasingly important. My two low seeds to watch this year: No. 5 San Francisco and No. 5 Kansas City.

I'll be sure to keep my eye on the 49ers. Pretty risky low seed to watch coming from Peter. Should the general public keep an eye on the 49ers, who made the Super Bowl last year and the NFC Championship Game the year before that? Probably not. Don't bet it all on a risky horse, Peter.

Then Peter updates us again on the Rams draft situation. I wasn't kidding when I said Peter would update us on the Rams draft at least twenty times this offseason. I'm keeping count. We are at two times he has mentioned the Rams 2014 draft at this point and discussed it with some sort of depth.

No, it’s not the Jelly of the Month Club, all you Christmas Vacation devotees. It’s the No. 2 overall pick in the 2012 NFL draft. When the Rams traded down four spots last year, from No. 2 overall to No. 6, it allowed Washington to move up to take Robert Griffin III. In addition to the sixth pick in the ’12 draft, Washington gave St. Louis a second-round pick in 2012 and first-round picks in 2013 and 2014.

I'm confused. This trade looked smart for the Rams initially, then didn't look smart when Robert Griffin led the Redskins to the playoffs and now the trade looks smart for the Rams again. It's almost like time is the real determiner of which team "won" a trade involving multiple high draft picks.

The Rams have made five trades involving the original pick or the tentacles of that pick, and have six players from the trade under contract today.

I'm too lazy to do the skit right now, but let's all watch Peter Kin do Marvin Demoff's bidding and remind the MMQB audience what a great well-run organization the Rams are. Kevin Demoff is the greatest COO in the NFL and Jeff "8-8" Fisher is just a brilliant hire and his career record doesn't at all reflect his skill. Don't doubt it.

But at the end of the day, the original trade down with the Redskins will only be very good for the Rams if Sam Bradford becomes an upper-echelon NFL quarterback.

It's been four years. Peter went all-in on Cam Newton last week saying he had to play well against the Saints to justify his selection as the #1 overall pick in the 2011 draft, but Peter is still holding out hope Sam Bradford will be an upper-echelon NFL quarterback. It seems the key to avoiding criticism from Peter is to kiss the ring and then don't lead your team to the playoffs or close to the playoffs so Peter doesn't raise expectations for you.

And by the time the Rams know whether he will be, the fruits from the trade will already be used up. Bradford, of course, is about six weeks out from ACL surgery and is projected to be fully healthy for the start of training camp in seven months.

Well of course. Because we all know the Rams don't have enough information on Bradford from the 49 games he has started in the NFL to determine whether he is an upper-echelon quarterback or not. How many games does it take to evaluate a quarterback? 65? 80? Peter seems ready to make judgments on other NFL quarterbacks (like the way he has killed Geno Smith this year), yet he seems willing to give Bradford more time to prove himself. Interesting if it wasn't obvious why Peter does this.

As you read further up, St. Louis brass is likely to look to churn the pick again this year. If Cleveland is in love with a quarterback and wants to move up—or if any team is—the Rams will listen and try to turn another high first-rounder into multiple good prospects.  

Of course if other NFL teams know the Rams want to trade a high draft pick for more picks then they may not be willing to make a great offer that the Rams want to accept. The Jaguars are at #3 and so quite a few teams will probably want to leapfrog them to get up to the #2 overall spot. It also happens, and this is my opinion, that I don't think the Rams are going to get another offer of three 1st round picks and a second round pick for a team to move up 2-3 spots (the Browns would have to move up two spots from #4 to #2) in the draft. That is unless the Browns absolutely fall in love with a passer and are convinced the Jaguars are going to take that quarterback. I'm getting a headache. My point is I can't see the Rams getting another offer like the Redskins offered to move up to draft RGIII.

Now Peter begins defending Matt Flynn, which is interesting to me since I made a point a few weeks ago that Peter is all about criticizing Josh Freeman for stealing $2 million from the Vikings this past season, but seems to have no problem with Matt Flynn taking $8 million from the Raiders to do nothing.

I look at Oakland, where Flynn was shipped in the offseason, and I see the Raiders floundering at the position after cutting bait with him nearly three months ago. I see the Bills, who did the same after a short trial with Flynn when E.J. Manuel was down. And I say: You’re telling me Matt Flynn couldn’t have helped either team, either playing or by providing depth?

The quarterback position isn't necessarily a place on the roster teams look to provide "depth." NFL teams look for quarterbacks who know the offense or can quickly pick up the offense and can come in and not embarrass themselves. "Depth" is usually for other parts of the roster.

I say this after watching the Packers for the past month, because Matt Flynn saved their season.

Yes, he did. The Packers have a pretty good set of offensive weapons, even with Randall Cobb injured and neither the Raiders or the Bills had quite the amount of quality veteran players that can help Matt Flynn succeed. The Bills and Raiders needed a quarterback who could make the players around the quarterback better, but Matt Flynn needs good offensive weapons around him to become successful. The Raiders, Bills, and Packers had different needs in a backup QB.

But the cavalier treatment of him, particularly in a quarterback-needy place like Oakland, troubles me. When I was in training camp with the Raiders, I remember GM Reggie McKenzie telling me Flynn wasn’t the most gifted athlete with the biggest cannon, but he was smart, confident and the right guy to lead the Raiders in a time of transition. Boom. Ten weeks later he’s on the street.

Because he was beaten out for a starting spot by Matt McGloin and Terrelle Pryor. The Raiders weren't going to keep Flynn around to be the third-string quarterback. They didn't treat Flynn cavalierly, Flynn didn't earn a starting quarterback or backup quarterback job with the Raiders. Bottom line. I find it interesting Peter continues to criticize Josh Freeman for stealing $2 million of the Vikings money, while he thinks Matt Flynn (who was also beaten out at the quarterback position for a roster spot) was in some way treated cavalierly by the Raiders when they released him and paid him $8 million to fail. Not that Peter plays favorites of course.

Finally back in his comfort zone, Green Bay, Flynn orchestrated a tie and two wins in his five games. He was good, not great. But I would submit that if you watched Flynn in the second half of the Minnesota tie and the two wins (Dallas and Atlanta), you’d see a quarterback who belongs on the roster of a good team, and starting for some teams.

Matt Flynn is a really good backup QB who needs a good set of offensive players around him to become successful. Flynn knew the Green Bay system well and thrived when put back into that system. He clearly didn't grasp the Raiders or Bills system quickly enough to earn a roster spot. The same goes for Josh Freeman. They aren't the same quarterback, but both players have a comfort zone and seem to need time to pick up new offensive systems. For some reason, Peter portrays Freeman has a huge villain and Flynn has having gotten a raw deal.

Bottom line: If you know what Flynn is as a quarterback—and former Packer exec McKenzie did know what he was—why be impatient with him? Especially when the realistic goal of the Raiders this year should have been to get the quarterback right for the future.

You be impatient with Flynn if you aren't sure you will get 2-3 more years to turn the Raiders team around. If Flynn is getting paid $8 million to play quarterback then he needs to come into the Raiders training camp and produce. No quarterback making $8 million per year should be given a few years to produce. Why is it fine for Flynn to get time and deserve patience, but Josh Freeman doesn't? I don't like Josh Freeman, but it seems Peter is contradicting himself here.

Based on the last month, Oakland has zero idea who its quarterback is for 2014.

And keeping Flynn on the bench this year or allowing him to fail on the field would have corrected this problem? Flynn was beaten out by McGloin and Pryor in training camp. This is well-documented.

Fine Fifteen

1. Seattle (13-3). That is some bitter relationship between Seattle and St. Louis. Glad no one was hurt out there.

The Seahawks are just jealous of the Rams super-awesome drafting abilities and incredibly bright future. Seattle wishes, given one or two more years of incredible coaching by Jeff Fisher, they too could make the playoffs.

5. New England (12-4). Think of the agonizing four losses the Patriots have had in this four-loss season … 13-6 in a torrential downpour in Cincinnati, 30-27 with that push-the-pile penalty against the Jets, 24-20 on the wrongly picked-up flag in the end zone in Carolina, 24-20 with four shots into the end zone to win in Miami. Amazing how close this team came to the best record in football with the mayhem it dealt with at the skill positions all year.

Yeah, the Patriots are expected to be good so there's no way Bill Belichick did a good job of coaching. After all, a great coach can't do a great job of coaching a team that is expected to have success.

13. Arizona (10-6). What an admirable team, with a great future.

So the 49ers and Seahawks are built for success in the future, the Cardinals have a great future, and the Rams are putting together a young team that Peter expects to compete in the future? Peter does realize it's not possible for all four of these teams to have super-bright futures right? One of these teams is going to underachieve and get a coach fired. It's just not possible for four teams from one division to make the playoffs. These four teams will play each other and beat each other up even if all four have bright futures. Something has to give.

14. Pittsburgh (8-8). I wish they’d gotten in.

We know, Peter. We know. You really wanted to see the Steelers in the playoffs over the Chargers and I'm going to lazily blame it on East Coast bias.

Offensive Players of the Week
 
Aaron Rodgers, quarterback, Green Bay. Rodgers has had better days numerically that this one: 25 of 39, 318 yards, two touchdowns, two interceptions, 85.2 rating. But the great ones play great when it’s most important.

It's the NFL where there are only 16 games. Every game is important.

Goats of the Week

Ryan Succop, placekicker, Kansas City. Missed the 41-yard field goal that would have beaten the Chargers in regulation and sent the Steelers to the playoffs.

The Bill Leavy officiating crew. Missed the illegal formation penalty against the Chargers on Succop’s 41-yard missed field goal attempt that would have given Succop another try, from 36 yards.

Two things:

1. It's quite clear that Peter really, really wanted to see the Steelers make the playoffs. The idea of the Chargers playing the Bengals doesn't excited him enough. And really, the NFL playoffs should be about what teams Peter wants to see play each other and not based on merit.

2. Why is Ryan Succop a goat? The Chiefs weren't trying to win the game by benching most of their best players and the Chiefs are already in the NFL playoffs. Does Peter really think Succop gives a flying fuck if the Steelers aren't in the playoffs or are in the playoffs? Succop is mad he missed the kick, but it's not like Andy Reid and the Chiefs were trying extraordinarily hard to win the game. Plus, whether the Steelers or Chargers make the playoffs is irrelevant to Succop. He's not a goat.

If Succop had been given the second shot and made it, well, that would have put Pittsburgh in the playoffs, not San Diego. The worst part of this: Two officials—who appear from the tape to be side judge Keith Parham and umpire Ruben Fowler—were staring straight at the line from behind the Chargers rushers before the snap of the ball. They had to see the seven Chargers on the line to the right of the ball, which is illegal. Teams can have only six men on either side of the ball when it is snapped on a field-goal try.

Bad missed call. Much like when the overtime rules helped the Chargers win a playoff game without Peyton Manning getting to touch the ball in overtime, now that one of Peter's favorites has been harmed by a missed call or a bad rule, he is all up in arms about that rule.

“I was shaking and sweating. There were tears in my eyes. It was really weird. Here was this Heisman Trophy winner, giving me a ball that he scored with.”



—Law Waddill, 10, of Raleigh, N.C., the first young fan Cam Newton handed a ball to after scoring a touchdown in an NFL game, from a terrific story in Sunday’s Charlotte Observer.

Scott Fowler of the Observer spent a month searching for kids who’d been gifted a football by the Carolina quarterback after he scored a touchdown. That’s been a Newton tradition since he became an NFL player in 2011; he’s done it between 40 and 50 times. Fowler found 16 of them, including a girl with ADHD and hearing aids who was profoundly inspired by the gift. Fowler gathered them for a photo at Bank of America Stadium in Charlotte, and Newton surprised them by showing up and spending 30 minutes with them.

Winning cures everything. Just last year Peter was focused on Newton's "Superman" act after scoring a touchdown (which he still does this silly act and it's no big deal, why?...the Panthers are winning games) and ignored that Newton gave the ball to a young fan after scoring the touchdown. Now that the Panthers are playing well, Peter forgets about the "Superman" act and starts to focus on what Newton does with the football after scoring a touchdown. Winning cures everything and sportswriters love to change a narrative about a player after a team starts winning games. 

“It’s a conversation between me and the coaches.”

—Quarterback (we think that’s the position he plays still) Josh Freeman of the Vikings, to the St. Paul Pioneer Press, on why he has been buried on the Minnesota quarterback depth chart for most of the three months he’s been employed by the team.

(checks watch) Yep, it's time for Peter to bash Josh Freeman for daring to be paid $2 million and be inactive every week. I don't get Peter's issue with Freeman. The Vikings wanted to see if Freeman could be their quarterback of the future and paid him a one year contract of $2 million to find this out. Freeman is not the QB of the future and the Vikings are out $2 million this year only and don't have to re-sign Freeman. I find it impossible to understand why Peter is infatuated with Freeman being such a waste of a roster spot.

He is active for two others but doesn’t play. He is inactive for the other nine, including Sunday’s finale against Detroit. After he played the one game, he did have a concussion, but Freeman has reportedly been ready to play but not used for the last nine weeks.

Nice work if you can get it: One bad football game, 11 on the bench, $2 million.

Writing like this, where Peter is very clearly playing favorites, is what is wrong with modern sports journalism. $2 million to sit on the bench. It's not the end of the world.

Freeman will be an intriguing, and mysterious, prospect for some team in 2014: a 26-year-old quarterback with a 4,000-yard season under his belt, left to rot by two bad teams in 2013.

Matt Flynn was also left to rot by two bad teams in 2013. The fact he ended up back with the Packers in an offense he knows well means he is exempt from criticism from Peter. Of course, prior to rejoining the Packers Peter wasn't criticizing Flynn anyway and had plenty of criticism for Freeman, so there's that too.

I greatly dislike Josh Freeman and like Matt Flynn, but Peter's reaction to these two players' season is very interesting to me.

So you want to be a football coach, eh?

No, no I don't.

Mr. Starwood Preferred Travel Note of the Week

Holiday time in New York. Tourist season. I was at Grand Central Station the other day, doing a little shopping in the concourse. The place was mobbed.

Was it busier than Grand Central Station, Peter? Meanwhile with all of these people around Peter immediately took it upon himself to stare at strangers and criticize their behavior while they are minding their own business.

There’s a huge Apple store there, and as I walked by, there was a crowd at the bottom of the stairs leading to the entrance of the store. Logjam. People couldn’t get by. And I looked up to see a line of tourists waiting to take photos with the Apple logo. Sometimes I don’t get America.

I don't get America either. Why can't a person simply shop for his Christmas gifts without worrying about what everyone else is doing? America is so weird. Americans like Peter are so odd in that he just can't mind his own business.

It's the Apple logo. Tourists take a picture of it. Let them do it. Don't be a big city snob and act like "It's just the Apple logo and I see it everyday" and make it seem like tourists (tourists, people who come from out of town  to visit New York and take pictures) are odd for taking pictures of things they want to take pictures of.

Ten Things I Think I Think

1. I think this is what I liked about Week 17:

a. Ryan Tannehill, on his second-quarter touchdown throw to Mike Wallace, showed precisely what very good quarterbacks in the league have to show: accuracy and smarts under intense pressure, against a free rusher. He’s become a very impressive quarterback this year.

But has Ryan Tannehill become a very impressive quarterback this year? Look at the NFL passing leaders and try to find a category of substance that Tannehill ranks in the Top 15 in. He's 11th in completions (but 7th in attempts), 10th in passing yards, tied for 12th in touchdown passes, tied for 7th in interceptions, first in sacks taken, and 13th in yards per game. He's improved this year, but I don't know if I would consider him to be very impressive quite yet. Give him an offensive line and another year, then I will see if I could call Tannehill impressive.

Peter lauds Tannehill on a day where he goes 20-40 with 1 TD and 3 INT's. Of course, why would Peter let reality on this day interfere with his perception of Tannehill's play as exemplified by one pass? 

b. Good luck, Scott Green. You’ve been a good ref. The game will miss you. Sunday in Cincinnati was Green’s last regular-season game.

Thanks for explaining, Peter. Your readers are so stupid they probably thought Scott Green had died and needed you to tell us Green was retiring.

j. The Tony Romo story is why Adam Schefter’s so good, people.

Now Schefter has to work on getting his BFF Mike Shanahan another NFL head coaching job.

n. Good point from ESPNBoston’s Field Yates: Scott Pioli, my NBC partner this season,

And good friend, don't forget Pioli is Peter's good friend. Not that it would EVER affect Peter's reporting of course. Never.

had a role in drafting seven Pro Bowlers—four for the Chiefs and three for New England.

This is Peter King advocating for Scott Pioli to get another NFL GM gig. Because all a GM has to do is draft good players and has no other job responsibilities and we should ignore that the Chiefs went from having the #1 overall pick under Pioli to making the playoffs the very next season. Yep, choosing a good head coach is also the job of a GM. Peter is silent on the Chiefs improvement under a competent head coach hired by a competent GM in Kansas City of course.

I understand Peter wants his buddy to get another NFL coaching job, but a GM's job is more than just drafting good players. The Panthers old GM drafted all five of the team's 2013 Pro Bowlers, but this doesn't mean he deserves another shot to be an NFL GM.

2. I think this is what I didn’t like about Week 17:

b. Matt Cassel failing to make a Metrodome memory in the last game ever there, missing a wide open Jared Allen (yes, Jared Allen) in the end zone in what would have been a second-quarter touchdown.

Hey, didn't Scott Pioli trade a 2nd round pick for Cassel? I guess Peter only brings that up when Cassel plays well.

f. Jeff Fisher has to get control of his team. Way too chippy.

Don't make Marvin Demoff call you, Peter. He will do it.

4. I think I would not like to be officiating boss Dean Blandino when he goes into his meeting with senior staff, including Roger Goodell, today at the league office in New York. Too many mistakes, easily spotted ones, keep happening in the league. How on earth can you be an umpire or side judge staring at the defensive line and see seven players on one side of the center—clearly in violation of a league rule that says six is the most players on the line of scrimmage on either side of the center before a field goal or PAT—and not throw a flag?

Dammit, Peter is not letting this travesty go. He is going to sit down at a Cincinnati lobster restaurant and have a heart-to-heart with Roger Goodell (after first taking a picture of them wearing lobster bibs together of course) and explain how a missed call should NOT have kept the Steelers out of the playoffs.

A missed call like this is obviously inexcusable, but Peter has harped on it quite a bit. The Chiefs should have gotten another chance to make this field goal. More than just this missed call kept the Steelers from the making playoffs this season though.

The league owes the Steelers and the people of Pittsburgh a mea culpa.

No, the world as a whole is owed a mea culpa. 

And I’m beginning to think the offending officials on such obvious plays like that should have to sit a game. It’s just too important a situation for the only consequences during the season to be an offending official not making the playoffs. Coaches bench players if they don’t perform. Blandino should be able to bench officials if they don’t perform.

It's all fun and games until a team doesn't potentially make the playoffs because of a missed call.

7. I think—no, I know—that Greg Schiano has not been in contact with Penn State, and he is telling the truth when he says he has the only job he wants right now.

Oh, this is awkward. Mr. Schiano, you have been fired. How about having some interest in the Penn State job now?

The Penn State job would be a lot more desirable if it wasn’t facing two or three years more of mediocrity. That’s why you see Bill O’Brien exploring NFL jobs. He knows he’ll struggle to win there over the next couple of years, and by the time the program turns, he might not be the hot college name anymore.

I would imagine that if Bill O'Brien turned the Penn State program around and caused them to be nationally relevant and ranked in the Top 25 consistently again then he would be an even hotter coaching name. What do I know though?

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

e. Coffeenerdness: I went to a Dunkin’ Donuts with Tom Curran of CSN New England on Friday. His order: “Medium hot coconut, with milk, three Splenda, four ice cubes.” Wh-wh-what? 

Yeah, screw you Tom Curran. How dare you have the option of choosing a drink that Peter King finds to be odd and then taking that option and ordering the drink! America is such a weird place.

I then grilled Curran on his choice.

Of course he did. No one in America is allowed to make a decision without first explaining to Peter King why that decision was made. We are all subject to explaining ourselves and actions to Peter.

Re the coconut: “Gives the coffee a tropical feel.” Re the ice cubes: “Stops the coffee from being mind-bendingly hot so I don’t have to wait a half-hour to drink it.” Whatever you say, Tommy.

Oh, you jester! Peter would have to be the worst person to spend a day with. He would ask questions and force you to explain why you do anything that you do during that day. It would be like spending the day with an inquisitive five-year old who considers himself to be morally superior to every other human being.

f. Beernerdness: I’ll be back with this next week.

Don't come back and we will call it even.

The Adieu Haiku
London Fletcher, gone.
He loved the name I gave him.
“The Black Seau.” Thoughts?


I'm thinking you are probably a little racist...just overall. 

Monday, December 16, 2013

5 comments Bill Simmons Does a Thanksgiving Mailbag So Everyone Knows How Thankful His Readers Are That He Exists

Bill Simmons has finally provided his readers with a new mailbag and he did it just in time for Thanksgiving. Perhaps the holidays have Bill down and he needs a mailbag full of his readers telling him just how damn smart and creative he is to make him feel better. Mailbags are a writing crutch of sorts for Bill. He knows he gets plenty of email from his lemming readers and he can use mailbags to as his column for the week, as a source of stealing new ideas from his readers and a way to pretend EVERYONE wants a mailbag from him. I feel like most of Bill's mailbags start off with him running an email from a reader who really, really, really wants Bill to do a mailbag and then Bill relents in giving the readers a mailbag while being all like "If that's what the readers want so badly because I am so popular, then I can provide it." Of course now that I have said that, Bill doesn't start this mailbag out this way, but it's still chock full of his readers trying to write like they are him and worshiping him as much as possible. Mailbags do Bill's ego good.

Oh, and not that Bill is out of ideas for columns, but put up a mailbag two weeks prior to posting this one. I wish Bill would just stop writing if he's going to half-ass what little he does write.

Can I interest you in a Thanksgiving trip to Dr. Simbeau's Island?

Bill has given himself a nickname for the bad picks he makes. If you don't know why Bill calls himself Dr. Simbeau, then trust me, you are better off not knowing.

Before we feast on a 25-pound turkey that was bred with a deer, let's bang out Week 13 picks and some of your emails.

Always with the "us" and "we" stuff. Bill seems to use the plural form more and more of late.

For a holiday special, we're answering a whopping 49 emails this week, so we're going to be moving quickly.

EVERYONE LOOK AT HOW MANY EMAILS I GET AND HOW MANY I ANSWER IN A WEEK! BOY AM I TIRED FROM ANSWERING ALL THESE EMAILS!

And "we're" going to be answering a whopping 49 emails? Who is "we"? Is there someone guest-writing this mailbag for Bill or is he just now using the plural form to write about himself? Does he have a squirrel in his pocket that helps him answer the emails?

As always, these are actual emails from actual readers.

Which, as always, is a little sad upon reading the hero worship these actual readers have for Bill.

Packers (+6.5) over LIONS
 
Q: If the Giants are the All-Time "Nobody believes in us" team, then are the Lions the All-Time "everyone believes in us" team?  The moment people think or say their good, they lose.
—Crocker J., Fort Collins


Dear Crocker,

No. Just no.

That is all,

Bengoodfella

SG: Very true.

Extraordinarily true. Everyone believes this is true.

I can't lay a TD against a Packers team playing for its whole season, even with the words "Mike McCarthy," "Matt Flynn" and "super-short rest" involved. How 'bout the Packers? They just lost their best player for a solid month, they didn't win a single game, their coach made history with the first-ever OT screw-up under the new rules that confounded/angered/antagonized the advanced-metrics guys, and they're somehow hanging around in the NFC North.

What an amazing feat this is. It's almost like another NFC North team lost their starting quarterback for a good portion of the season and the other two teams in the division are the Lions and the Vikings.

Couldn't you see them eking this one out, followed by Packers fans hopping online on Black Friday looking for deals on "FLYNN LIVES" and "FLYNN KNOWS" T-shirts?

No, I can't see this. I can see Bill shoehorning a pop culture reference into every answer from his mailbag though.

Q: Liked your Megatron article. As a Cowboys fan, I did not even hate him while putting up record yardage on Dallas.

See? Bill was right about Calvin Johnson being universally loved and not hated. This one dude who is a Cowboys fan proves it as true. That's all the proof Bill needs that he is 100% correct no one hates Calvin Johnson.

So who was the last universally beloved NFL player?  They seem super rare.  I had to go back to Walter Payton.  Am I missing anyone else?
—MC Wright, Fort Worth


If MC Wright had read Bill's column on Calvin Johnson then he would know it is Barry Sanders.

SG: By my calculations, only five NFL players achieved a 100 Percent Approval Rating: Megatron, Sweetness, Barry Sanders, Gale Sayers and someone who was eventually banned from the list … that's right, Mr. Orenthal James Simpson.

By Bill's "calculations" he came up with these five players. By "calculations" Bill means "some bullshit I made up just now after five minutes of thinking about it and there isn't really a way to calculate the answer to this question anyway, but I'm going to pretend there is an actual calculation that goes into this in order to make it seem more factual as opposed to this simply being my opinion...which I think my opinion is fact anyway so it doesn't matter I guess."

As for coaches — you'd think John Madden had a 100 percent approval rating as a coach, but people held the Raiders thing against him.

Yes, "PEOPLE" do this. "They" hold this against Madden. If you can't see how Bill's writing has gotten progressively more and more lazy than you either don't want to see or are illiterate. He consistently falls back on a writing style that uses words like "we" and "people" to prove his points as being correct. It's remarkably lazy, yet he gets away with it. It's frustrating to read because Bill is making shit up as he writes and then hopes it all makes sense as he edits his columns. He's like the writers of "Lost" where he throws a bunch of shit together that doesn't make sense if you take the time to think about it. "You'd" think Madden had a 100% approval rating but "people" held the Raiders "thing" against him. A sentence like this written with such vagueness and lack of empirical evidence the sentence is true is purely the product of lazy writing.

You know which coach may have gotten there? Dick Vermeil. Who didn't enjoy Dick Vermeil breaking down like it was the last 10 minutes of Brian's Song in the locker room after every win? Poor Dick missed out on the YouTube era — he would have been the Justin Bieber of football coaches.

This is another lazy writing tool that Bill overuses. The YouTube clip. Bill's mailbags have a general format they follow when he answers a question.

1. Response to the question.

2. Elaboration from Bill on the topic.

3. Useless bullshit Bill makes up about the topic.

4. Pop culture reference.

5. YouTube video.

6. Bill checks to make sure the response is long enough to make it look like he's done a ton of work in answering the question and then moves on to the next question.

Q: In your Calvin Johnson piece you stated that only 5 non-QB players ever felt like their game had no ceiling, and yet you didn't mention Randy Moss. Seriously??? YOU (like me) WATCHED HIM FOR THREE YEARS WITH THE PATRIOTS AND SAW HOW EFFING GOOD HE COULD BE.

This SimmonsClone is attempting to write exactly like Bill does right down to the use of the word "Effing" in all caps. Get your own writing style.

I'd love to hear your defense for omitting the greatness that is Randy Moss from that list because as of right now, I'm 100% baffled. I thought I liked you Simmons, I really did.
—Charlotte, NC


SG: I blew it. Just forgot to throw him in there.

Bill didn't not include Moss intentionally, he just forgot to include him. So Bill is as smart as you Charlotte, NC (or is it Charlotte from NC?), but he just forgot to include Moss. He wasn't wrong, let's be clear about that. You don't believe Bill was wrong do you? He wasn't, he just forgot to include Moss.

(Bill inserts a YouTube clip of Randy Moss catching the greatest pass ever caught in an NFL game)

Without stopping. When this specific moment happened (in Week 1), I remember thinking, Oh my god, Randy Moss might catch 40 touchdowns this season.

And Bill was exactly almost right. Who would have thought Bill would relay a story about something he thought six years ago that ended up with him being right? What a shock.

(He ended up with 23. Still a record.) I remember calling my dad right after the catch — my dad answered the phone cackling like Vince McMahon. Afterward, I wrote that "the ceiling has been removed for the 2007 Patriots." So … yeah. I think that moment qualifies.

Wait, that moment qualifies? I thought the discussion was about five players who Bill felt like their game had no ceiling? Now Bill is talking about moments that made Bill think these players' game had no ceiling. So is he talking about players who continuously make great plays that makes Bill think their game has no ceiling or is he talking about moments that made Bill think a player's game had no ceiling? There is a difference.

Q: A full column dedicated to the brilliance of Megatron … immediately followed by Calvin coughing up the football to lose the Tampa game. You not only sprayed Calvin with your stink, you wiped with his jersey afterward. Feel free to walk into oncoming traffic, Simmons. You have no idea what it's like to be a Lions fan. Imagine being stuck with the '90 Pats for your entire adult life … that's what it's like being a Lions fan. Every time you bitch about how your poor Patriots got screwed, or how bad your receivers are, I want you to know the Lions have made it to the NFC championship game ONCE and NEVER played in a Super Bowl. God may hate Cleveland, but he flat out ignores the Lions. 
—Tad Dixon, Portage, MI

I'm torn between telling Tad to stop whining and laughing because Tad has pointed out Bill's incessant whining about the Patriots team that has been incredibly successful over the last 13 seasons.

By the way, Bill ignores the second part of his semi-question and focuses on whether he is a jinx or not. This is how Bill thinks. It all comes back to him and whether he is a jinx or not. The correct answer to nearly every question is to make the answer about Bill.

Q: If Derrick Rose turns out to be the second coming of Penny Hardaway after this injury, then I'm completely devastated already. By the way you picked the Bulls to win the title — YOU F--KING JINXED US SIMMONS!!!!!!!! 
—Taylor, St. Louis
 
SG: Dammit. Forgot about that one.

It's all about Bill. Bill claims to not have powers that can jinx, but the proof shows otherwise.

SG: Why do I have a feeling that, three years from now, I'll be suing someone who made a smash-hit horror film about a sports columnist loosely based on me (Will Bimmons? Simon Williams?) who begrudgingly realizes that he's a cross between the SI Curse and the Madden Jinx, then starts using his powers for evil?

Why do I have a feeling Bill is trying to be passive-aggressive in getting one of his devoted SimmonsClones to write this film and present it to Bill in the next mailbag in order to soothe and massage Bill's ego? Bill has to be the most egotistical writer I've ever read and that means a lot considering I have read quite a few Jason Whitlock columns. Bill is great, and don't you forget it or try to forget it, because he will remind you of how well-regarded he is. Just ask Jimmy Kimmel or Mike Lombardi, they will tell you.

I feel like the increase in Bill's ego has coincided with his transition from him starting out as "Guy who writes about sports like he is a voice of the fan while mixing in pop culture references" to "Sports personality who writes about sports tangentially to pop culture topics while believing he is the sole voice of the fan." At some point, Bill has become a voice of the fan to believing he is the voice of the fan.

Q: So what's the over/under on Prince FielderTexas BBQ jokes that we can expect from you in the next four months? My guess would be somewhere over the number of Khloe Kardashian BBQ jokes but under the Andy Reid Kansas City/rib jokes that you have used. 
—Bryce, Atlanta

SG: I can't make fun of Prince after what he did for my beloved Red Sox in the 2013 ALCS. 

I get the feeling Bill didn't watch the Red Sox until August of this year. I don't know this for a fact, but Bill tends to write about sports he watches (see: his few columns on hockey once he---I mean Grantland---got season tickets to LA Kings games) and he didn't post anything about the Red Sox until August. So I'm not sure they are as "beloved" to him as they used to be.

Then Bill answers two more questions while posting YouTube videos of hard hits that took place on the football field. Bill really does have a formula when answering his mailbag questions and lately he has incorporated a lot of YouTube videos into this formula.

Q: From ESPN: "Flacco didn't hide his dislike of the Wildcat when he lined up at wide receiver. He was so disinterested that he kept his hands in his front pouch and barely moved off the line after the ball was snapped." Now. Substitute "Dez Bryant" for "Joe Flacco." Watch the sportswriters salivate. 
—Scraps, Seattle

SG: I've always said this about Scraps — he speaks the truth. My newest B.S. Report character, Talking Head Guy, would have been fired up about this email:

I don't listen to the B.S. Report, but it doesn't shock me at all that Bill has a "character" and that character is called "Talking Head Guy." It sounds like the comedy found in this character is on-par with Rob Riggle's comedy on FOX's pregame show. Riggle's comedy act takes place during a brief respite from the talking heads on the pregame show, which means Bill is essentially becoming part of what he mocks when creating this character.

Q: I'm watching Broncos-Chiefs — they just showed Brad Childress in the Kansas City box wearing his K.C. pullover and bad white turtleneck (bar none the worst look in the National Football League).

Oh, I didn't know this was an episode of "Fashion Police." I wonder what the best look in the National Football League (or NFL as it is commonly called) would be?

Then Bill answers another questions and links two more YouTube videos. These YouTube videos take up time and space in Bill's column, both of which are necessary for Bill's readers to be tricked into believing Bill is still producing as much original content as he did prior to the time he became disinterested in writing columns anymore.

Q: Are we all just missing the fact that Peyton's number is 18, or in other words, 6 + 6 + 6?  Clearly this is the final piece of proof that is needed to conclusively identify Evil Manning.

—Zoe, Tampa, FL


Weak. Very weak.

SG: We're getting closer and closer to Evil Manning getting his own website. Here's the picture for the masthead.

Will a SimmonsClone just make a website about Evil Manning so it will appease Bill? If Bill wants it done, then the SimmonsClones will get it done. What Bill requests will be done...eventually.

Q: PRINT SOME EMAILS FROM WOMEN!!!!!!!! I mean that without the intention of sounding like a crazed feminist.
—Rachel, New York


SG: Come on, what about the one from Zoe in Tampa? In all seriousness — I'd love more mailbag fodder from female readers. Just know that I never look at the names until after I pick the emails. It's a meritocracy.

And because Bill is a raging sexist he knows that men are just inherently more funny than women, so that's why women don't get their emails printed in Bill's mailbag. Women aren't funny and are only good for references to them dragging men down in films and for pornstar references. It's science. Don't blame Bill.

Still, I'd love to get enough emails to pull off another Fe-mail Bag. We're nearing the 10-year anniversary of the last one (a two-parter!).

10 years ago Bill had enough emails from female readers to do a mailbag and he doesn't seem to have gotten enough emails from women over the last decade to make an all-female mailbag. Not that the most popular writer on Grantland has a target market of college aged white males or anything like that of course.

SG: Here's our Shakey's Pizza Watch for Week 13:...any expectations my wife has for me tomorrow that go beyond "Sure, I'll leave the TV for two and a half minutes to carve the turkey." 


Women. Always ruining the fun that men are trying to have. Just go make babies and cook dinner ladies, but then read Bill's column so he can get together 10 years of emails from women into a two-part mailbag in an effort to pretend his work appeals to women in any way.

Q: Two people in our fantasy league made a bet and the loser had to start Aaron Hernandez when they played each other.  The loser of the bet paid up and then lost by 0.1 points in Week 12 which knocked him out of our playoffs!  Aaron Hernandez  killing fantasy seasons from behind bars!!!
—Sean, Astoria


Hey bro, that was a great bet. You wouldn't think wasting a roster spot on Aaron Hernandez could in any way negatively affects someone fantasy team. Great job, bro.

Oh, and I'm calling complete bullshit on the loser losing by 0.1. It makes a great story, but I also tend to not believe in coincidences and for the loser to lose by 0.1 sounds like a lie.

Q: If the playoffs started today, Bernard Karmell Pollard's Titans would play the Patriots in the first round! He's coming for you. Hide your kids, hide your wives …
—Eric Bigness, Nashville


SG: Now I'm depressed. Let's just move on. 


This Bernard Karmell Pollard joke got old a few years ago. But hey, the SimmonsClones still seem to enjoy it and I guess any group of people that don't mind reading the same joke over and over again will think the "Bernard Karmell Pollard" joke is still really creative. It's just a recycled joke, which shouldn't shock me since a lot of what Bill writes feels recycled to me.

Q: Where does the Browns first round of 2012 rank in the all-time worst drafts in NFL History? 

—Sean M, Columbus OH


SG: I can't imagine anyone beating it.

You don't have to imagine it because I think it happened. The Colts had the #1 and #2 overall picks in 1992 and came away with Steve Emtman and Quentin Coryatt. That has to be worse than drafting Brandon Weedon and Trent Richardson. I know Emtman had injury issues and Coryatt never lived up to expectations but was solid overall, but having the #1 and #2 picks in the draft and coming up with these two players? Come on, that's worse than the Browns drafting Weedon and Richardson.

Right now, third overall pick Trent Richardson is averaging 2.9 yards per carry (44th out of 47 RBs) and inspiring jokes like, "Should we stop calling him Trent 3.0 if he can't get to 3.0?" and "If this were Pop Warner, the coach would have moved Trent to left guard by now." And 22nd pick Brandon Weeden is 33rd out of 34 QBs in QB rating (66.0), 36th out of 38 in QBR (23.9) and 40th of 41 in DVOA (-40.7)

This certainly isn't a great draft, but I think any team that has the #1 and #2 picks (even in a fairly weak draft) has to come away with at least one Pro Bowler from those picks.

Q: So yesterday, my two-week old son is getting circumcised and I'm in the room trying to remain calm. The doctor is giving us a non-requested play-by-play of what's happening, and as the clamp goes on, I'm still hanging in there. Then, I start imagining things the doctor say that would freak me out. It starts with a soft "Oh no …", then I imagine a loud shriek from my son. Then, for some reason, I imagine the doctor saying "And here comes Brandon Weeden …"

—Joe, Cleveland


It appears that Joe from Cleveland is desperately trying to be a sitcom character. He wants the role of the football-obsessed husband who thinks of inappropriate things at inappropriate times in voiceover. What kind of person would imagine the doctor saying things that would freak you out? Don't be a tool and pretend you think these things so you can email Bill in a desperate attempt for his attention.

(Fine, you caught me — I made this pick with my heart and not my head. I want no part of Pollard in Round 1. None. It's too realistic right now. COME ON, ANDREW THE GIANT! TAKE CARE OF BUSINESS THIS SUNDAY!)

So why are we calling him "Andrew the Giant" again? That's the best that can be done?

Bears (-1) over VIKINGS

Q: I think people are forgetting that Josh McCown is 34 YEARS OLD!!! He was actually the starter for the Cardinals in 2004(!) for 13 games. Here are a few other things that happened on the Cardinals in 2004: Larry Fitzgerald was a rookie, Emmitt Smith ran for almost 1000 yards, and Dennis Green was still the coach. THATS how old Josh McCown is. Even the Vikings wouldn't sign him to a long term deal right now … (thinking) … okay maybe the Vikings would. But nobody else.
—Danny Pelisek, Pasadena


SG: I gotta say, I did a quadruple-take when I read this email.

A quadruple-take nonetheless. Not entirely sure how one does a quadruple-take while reading something, but I'm sure Bill isn't exaggerating.

Josh McCown has been around for so long that I never realized he was THAT Josh McCown.

Which other Josh McCown would he have been? 34 years old isn't really that old and 2004 wasn't that long ago really. I think it is odd that Bill didn't know he was THAT Josh McCown since I'm not sure what other Josh McCown he would be.

Q: I have a new idea to make the NFL 8% more interesting.

I can already tell you are an insufferable person.

I really enjoyed the weather-delayed Chicago-Baltimore game (in Week 11).  It's kind of fun to have a game still in the 1st half at 1:40pm MST. Why couldn't we stagger the start times of the games all day long? I want to add this to the already wildly popular idea of having a 6:30pm MST (NBC game), and having a west coast game starting at 8pm MST (like the Raiders game from a few weeks back). Football all day!!!

—Dean Dominguez, Albuquerque, NM


Games can't be staggered because the networks wouldn't like this. FOX doesn't want to run a pregame show until 11:00am MST and then waste 40 minutes of programming in a certain market (potentially losing the football audience) to show a game at 11:40pm MST. Not every market gets every football game so the Denver market would get two AFC games (the Broncos game and another game) and the NFC game on a certain Sunday. Well, if the two AFC games start at 1:40 MST and 4:00 MST then there would be an overlap in what AFC games are being shown. Throw in the NFC game on FOX that could start at 2:00 MST and now the Denver market is looking at three football games all starting within two hours of each other. FOX and CBS would not like this. Plus, the Sunday Night Football game on NBC starts at 6:25 MST which means NBC won't have a captive football-loving audience to view the game since there are likely games that would still be ongoing when the Sunday Night Football game on NBC begins. Staggering the games sounds like a good idea but probably wouldn't work as it pertains to the schedule and contracts set up with NBC, CBS and FOX. Potentially the games could be staggered through the day to avoid overlapping with Sunday Night Football, but the networks still run the risk of losing their audience from the pregame show. It's just not a feasible idea since not every market can get every NFL game. Of course, Bill loves this idea and decides to improve on the idea since no reader can ever come up with an original idea that Bill doesn't try to top.

SG: Or at the very least, just have the random 2 p.m. ET start time for one of them (just to keep that 5-5:30 stretch lively before the Sunday-night game),

I'm confused. Why is there is a dead period from 5-5:30 when using Eastern Standard Time? Usually there is a football game that goes until 7:20pm EST and then a dead period for an hour. Is Bill talking about halftime from 5-5:30? Again, Bill doesn't seem to realize not every market gets every NFL game so the odds the 2pm EST would be shown in every market in the United States is incredibly low.

followed by the late-night straggler in Oakland, San Diego or San Francisco that starts at 8 p.m. PT. There's no reason we can't watch 13 straight hours of football on Sunday without any break whatsoever. 


So any time the Raiders, Chargers and 49ers play the game will be at 8pm PT or any time these teams play at HOME the game will be at 8pm PT? Because I can guarantee you most people don't want to attend a game on the East Coast that starts at 11pm ET simply because the game involves Oakland, San Diego or San Francisco. I don't see the problem with the current schedule and many markets may not even get the 8pm PT game anyway if that's not the game being shown in their area. And I'm pretty sure the networks wouldn't want to make every Raiders, Chargers or 49ers game a nationally televised game. I just think this is a bad idea.

Q: Here's the solution for Minnesota's QB problem: Sign Tim Tebow, then keep all four quarterbacks on the active roster (Tebow, Ponder, Freeman and Cassel). Each week, have Vikings fans vote to determine who starts, who plays the second quarter, who leads the charge after half time, and who finishes up the game in the all important fourth quarter.

It's "Bad Idea Day" in Bill's mailbag. I can't imagine what could go wrong with making a mockery of choosing a starting quarterback and taking the ability to choose the quarterback out of the hands of the head coach. Also, I would imagine Vikings players wouldn't be too keen on possibly changing quarterbacks in the middle of the game four times. But yeah, if life was a video game then this is a great idea. Actually, I take that back. Even on a video game this is a stupid idea.

Imagine the fantastic entertainment! When are they going to name me Commissioner of the NFL? Or at least General Manager of the Vikings?

—John Farrell, St. Paul


Yes, you are very impressed with your ability to turn the Vikings quarterback issues into a cheap game where the idiot fans get to choose who will quarterback the team.

SG: What a year for John Farrells! First a Red Sox World Series, now this life-altering email. TEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE-BOWWWWWWWWWWWWW! My votes: Cassel, Freeman, Ponder, then Tebow closing out the fourth. There's still time to pull off this plan! It's only Week 13!!!! Don't the Vikings need to distract their fans from another depressing December?

And of course the best way to distract Vikings fans from another depressing December (the Vikings made the playoffs last year by the way, which is a little fact Bill has apparently forgotten..."The Sports Guy" everyone!...in fact, the Vikings have made the playoffs three out of the last six seasons. So I guess "another" depressing December is a relative term) is to remind Vikings fans the quarterback situation is very depressing as well. I'm not sure it will be a big pick-me-up for the Vikings to make a shit show out of the quarterbacking situation.

Tampa will definitely finish with more than three wins. Same for Washington, a team that doesn't have its first-round pick and has the Shanahans trying to save their jobs (so they might keep playing hard).

Or as it turned out, they might not keep playing hard.

My advice to the Vikings: Make sure you blow Sunday's Bears game by having Christian Ponder throw 50-plus times in lieu of Peterson carving up Chicago's putrid run defense, and then it's smooth sailing (at Baltimore, home for Philly, at Cincy and home for Detroit). A 2-13-1 record awaits. That's enough for the no. 1 or no. 2 pick. You can do this.

(And remember … you still have one of the best tanking assets in football right now: the one, the only, Mr. Leslie Frazier! Here, look.)

One of Bill's readers also thinks Leslie Frazier is terrible so this absolutely means it is true. Bill doesn't need the reality of Frazier's record when he has his opinion and the opinion of others that agree with him to serve as empirical evidence that Frazier is a terrible head coach.

Q: While watching a Minnesota Vikings game with my friend, he said "Who is that 'walker' coaching the Vikings?" He was of course referring to the lifeless demeanor of Leslie Frazier. You've had some great Walking Dead cameo ideas, and here is another one for you: CELEBRITIES CAMEO AS WALKERS. 

Hines Ward has already appeared on the show. But great idea that is emphasized as a great idea by using all-caps. Putting something in all-caps immediately makes it a better idea.

Imagine this: Rick decides he needs some time alone to clear his thoughts. He takes one of the cars and goes for a little drive. He ends up on a bridge over a river. While sitting on the hood of his car, a walker comes stumbling across the bridge. He's still wearing the remains of khakis and a purple jacket. Oh, and he still has on his headset!

—Spencer Kraker, Seattle


A joke that only 25% of the "Walking Dead" audience would get? Why not do that? A television show about the zombie apocalypse is the perfect forum to make jokes about the ineptitude of an NFL head coach. I always wonder who still finds Bill to be funny and creative, then I read his mailbags and I realize these are the people who worship Bill and it all starts to make more sense.

Q: Cardinals fans are taking to calling Andre Ellington "Juke" Ellington due to his elusive running style.  We need a figurehead to really get his nickname up and running.
—Rob L, Whitehall, PA


SG: I'm right here! Done! Juke Ellington it is!

See? These mailbags are more about Bill massaging his own ego with how much his readers worship him than they are about anything else. If you want your email published, kiss Bill's ass a little bit by telling him how great he is. He will definitely publish your email at that point. This guy wants a figurehead to get the Juke Ellington name going and Bill likes to be known as a figurehead so he proudly does this. This ego he has...

Q: Relegating your NFL picks to a sidebar (like you did in Week 12) as self punishment misses the whole point.  We don't read your picks every week because they're so good.  We read them because they SUCK!  Now get back in there, and go to it.
—Dan Salvaterra, Roseland, NJ


I don't know how Bill's picks could suck since he introduces so many airtight gambling theories. How could his theories on gambling be so wrong when they are based on facts like Bill's opinion?

I wish the NFL and NBA did a Coach Swap during the first weekend of December. Imagine Casey blowing challenges and timeouts, J-Kidd flatlining on the sidelines, Mike D'Antoni sticking with the run-and-shoot no matter what personnel he had, Mike Brown trying to play 53 guys in one half …

There are eight guys who are inactive, so 53 guys can't play in one game. Maybe Mike Brown doesn't know this. Either way, this is a brilliant idea and it doesn't sound at all like Bill is throwing as many clever ideas at the wall in the hopes one sticks.

Now Bill answers the email of a guy who is complaining about his fantasy team.

SG: I enjoyed that email even if we had to edit 33 percent of it for some line-crossing. 

Who the hell is "we" in this situation? Does Bill of a sudden have an editor? Is Bill's use of "we" now extending to what he writes in his columns?

But that trade saved my West Coast season. Now it's do-or-die for me in my West Coast league — me against the random guy who runs Jon Hamm's team because Jon Hamm is too famous and busy to run his own fantasy team. If I win, I'm in the playoffs. If I lose, I'm probably out. According to the CBS Sports fantasy guru, I'm a 2-point underdog right now.

This is Bill's way of saying that he is in a CBS Sports fantasy league where Jon Hamm has a team. More than hearing compliments about himself, Bill loves to name-drop the people he knows that are famous. Jon Hamm is famous and now Bill has found a way to mention it in a mailbag. Big win for Bill.

Hamm's Team (-2) over Simmons's Team

Billy Zima needed to get involved. Take us home, Billy Z.

Has Bill mentioned yet he plays Jon Hamm's team in fantasy football? 

SG: If I had my own talk show called SIMMONS that erratically appeared in 19 different time slots on ESPN2 and ESPN News every night, "Penalty and/or Fine?" would definitely be one of my running segments.

Two things:

1. If you think this isn't Bill's way of trying to passive-aggressively get himself a television show on ESPN at some point or plant the idea in the head of an ESPN executive then I would submit you are wrong. If Bill got his own television show then this means he could stop writing columns permanently and would finally become fully entrenched as a sports personality at ESPN who doesn't have to write columns every week.

2. I doubt the NFL would allow ESPN to have a show where the host of the show would call attention to the inconsistency of the officiating in the NFL. ESPN would probably give Bill a kindly worded but firm memo asking him to drop this segment.

That's also one of the biggest reasons I like the Saints in Seattle on Monday night — they're gonna be able to throw the ball, their defense is just good enough to avoid getting blown out, and if that's not enough, you're not allowed to hit Brees unless it's somewhere between his nipples and his hips. (And even that might not be legal.) You shouldn't take an underdog in a big game if it's getting more than four points unless you think it can win … and I think the Saints can win or come damned close.

Sad face for Bill being wrong.

Q: It's not quite on the Jailblazers level of specific sport team nicknames, but is there a better current insult/joke than the Seadderall Seahawks?

Now this is a clever joke. I like this.

This team has been caught breaking the substance abuse policy more times than Lamar Odom.
—Marty Ward, Australia


And now the joke has gotten ruined because the writer wanted to be just like Bill Simmons and drop a pop culture reference into his question.

Q: First there was TAINT (Touchdown After INT). Then there was FART (Fumble And Return Touchdown). And now, I present to you, PUBES:  PUnt Blocked, Eventually Scored (or Punt Undertaking Blocked, Eventually Scored, but I'm partial to the first one)
.
—Grant, Columbus


SG: Wait, we're already in range? 


This whole column has been that range, but some of the Simmonsites are more covert about it in how they phrase their questions than others.

Q: So a friend of mine and I are getting ready to go over to our buddy's house to watch a game and we hear that his wife just got a boob job. What do you do when you get to buddys house?



Watch the game and don't email Bill Simmons to ask for answers to questions like this as if you need some sort of validation from him that you can't get by having this question answered by anyone else. That's what you do.

A — Congratulate buddy on wife's new boobs

B — Congratulate wife on her new boobs

C — Play dumb and ask buddy if his wife changed her haircut or something

D — Ignore the boobs completely

E — Other

—Jason, San Antonio, TX

SG: Yup, these are my readers.

Yes, there are Bill's readers. They require his validation to confirm they are as clever as they believe themselves to be.

Look for another mailbag in the next couple of weeks from Bill. He's fresh out of column ideas and I didn't see any ideas in this mailbag he could stretch into an entire column.


Thursday, July 11, 2013

6 comments Bill Madden Hates Free Baseball, Likes Steroids, and Just Kicked a Baby Panda in the Teeth

Bill Madden is frustrated with these low-scoring baseball games and he misses the days when baseball players used amphetamines and the game action was more exciting. This is the big secret among sportswriters, that many of them take every chance they can get to crucify PED users and rail angrily about any PED user being in the Hall of Fame, but yet these sportswriters are bored by baseball games that don't feature guys slugging the ball out of the park at an alarming rate. One minute these sportswriters are writing 1000 words about how A-Rod/Bonds/Sosa should not make it into the Hall of Fame, the next minute they are writing 500 words about how low-scoring and boring the game has become. Bill Madden specifically longs for the days of amphetamines (even if jokingly, I don't believe he is completely joking) and hates all of this good baseball that leads to extra inning games. This is typical modern sportswriting. One minute the sportswriter is eviscerating cheaters who ruin the purity of the game of baseball and the next minute the sportswriter is complaining the game of baseball is too low-scoring.

Honey, are you still awake?”

“Of course, I am. It’s only the 14th inning!”

Extra inning games are SO boring aren't they? Who likes the idea of free baseball? Not Bill Madden, that's for sure.

So are you loving all this or not? All this extra-inning baseball we’re being treated to this season? Eighteen bonus frames alone by the Mets and Marlins (Ugggh!).

It's one game between two not very good teams that went into extra innings. It's free baseball, how can you hate free baseball? 

The Yankees had to play a whole ’nother nine innings on getaway day in Oakland before losing, 3-2, to the A’s Thursday, and from the looks of their pathetic offense (0-for-28 with 12 strikeouts from their 4-7 hitters, Mark Teixeira, Travis Hafner, Vernon Wells and Kevin Youkilis), they could’ve easily gone another nine without scoring a run.

Two teams from New York played extra inning games that weren't very exciting, so all extra inning games are now seen as boring by Bill Madden. He misses those days when baseball players used PED's and then he could write about how exciting the games were AND later write about how these PED-using players should never make it into the Hall of Fame. And yes, Madden has a history of moral grandstanding when it comes to steroids and a history of criticizing MLB players who have been caught using PED's. It's all about the story to Bill Madden. He wants more offense in the game of baseball, but also wants to remove steroids from the game entirely. I don't think it would be a lie if I said he probably misses the Steroid Era in some ways.

While you were sleeping, there had been 110 extra-inning games played this season through Thursday which, according to the Elias Sports Bureau, puts baseball on pace for a total of 272, which would shatter the previous record of 237 in 2011.

Oh sure, NOW Bill Madden embraces statistics when they help him prove a point, but when anyone else uses statistics Madden gets his panties in a wad.

Now it would be one thing if these games were replete with suspense, dramatic home runs and occasional great plays, like in, say, Mets-Astros, 16 innings, Game 6 of the 1986 NLCS, or Yankees-Red Sox, 11 innings, Game 7 of the 2003 ALCS.

Basically if it were an exciting extra innings game that involved a New York team then Bill Madden would have no problems, but since these were boring extra inning games that involved a New York team then this must mean all extra inning games are boring. 

Also, to compare a regular season extra inning game to three of the most exciting extra inning games in MLB history is a bit unfair. This is like saying if every regular season game can't be as exciting as Game 7 of the 1991 World Series, Game 7 of the 2001 World Series or contain as much excitement as the 1951 National League pennant race then what's the point in playing these regular season games? It's not fair to expect every extra innings game to be among the most exciting extra inning games in the history of baseball. 

But for the most part, this year’s version of Extra Innings Theatre has been an exercise in futility, boredom and, in the case of Mets-Marlins, been downright unwatchable.

ONE EXTRA INNINGS GAME WAS BORING, SO ALL EXTRA INNINGS GAMES MUST BE BORING!

So why is this? Why have extra innings, which used to be looked upon with great anticipation, instead been replaced by a sense of dread?

Perhaps because you are using the example of two games to serve as an example for all extra inning games. This sense of dread could very easily be your conscience telling you that your moral grandstanding and super-secret love for players who used PED's has led to games that features less offense and you feeling like the non-Steroid Era has become offensive to your delicate senses. 

According to scouts and baseball execs I talked to, it starts with the gradual decrease of runs and homers since baseball instituted its ban of amphetamines in 2006.

I'm not entirely sure this is an accurate statement, but when have baseball execs and scouts ever been wrong? NEVER. That's the answer. Baseball execs and scouts are never wrong.

This is a lesson in being careful what you wish for. In Bill Madden's mind fewer PED's mean fewer runs, so if Bill wants to criticize PED users that is perfectly fine, but he needs to reduce his whining about lower scoring games in that case. He can't necessarily have it both ways.

“There’s less power in the game,” said one exec, “less examples of one swing of the bat ending the game.”

When compared to the Steroid Era, this probably makes sense. Again, this is what happens when MLB has a steroid policy. In fact, this is the entire point of a steroid policy. The point is to make sure players aren't using artificial means to power their swing. 

The Elias Bureau reports there are 2.01 homers per game this season and 15.15 strikeouts per game. In 2006, there were 2.22 homers and only 13.03 strikeouts per game.

That means every fifth game teams hit a home run in 2006 they won't hit in 2013. Over an entire season that is 34 additional home runs (162 games times 0.21) that are hit in a certain team's slate of 162 games. I don't feel like doing regression analysis and I'm sure 34 fewer home runs in a team's season is a statistically significant number, but it doesn't seem like the fact teams hit one fewer home run every fifth game in 2013 could be attributed to the boringness of the next inning games being played. This seems like a simplistic kind of answer. As far as the strikeouts go, each team is striking out one more time in 2013 as they were in 2006. I can't see how this can be the reason there are more extra innings games. But don't worry, Bill Madden has anecdotal evidence of his being correct that he will share with us in a moment.

(I'm pretty sure all my math is right. I would love to do a regression analysis, but I'm very lazy.) 

My point, and I do have one, is that while Bill Madden, scouts and baseball execs are talking about the reduction in home runs (which there does seem to be one) as the reason for more extra inning games, I'm not entirely persuaded. It's very possible the reduction in runs can be attributed to the amount of extra inning games, but teams can score runs by other means than hitting a home run. Plus, Bill Madden needs to decide if he likes baseball with less offense or baseball players using PED's. 

“But that hasn’t stopped guys from swinging from their heels,” the same exec said. “The problem is, you get into extra innings, and guys who can’t hit home runs are swinging from their heels anyway and striking out.

Gosh, this doesn't read like anecdotal evidence at all. Players try to hit home runs in extra innings and are striking out all over the place. It seems like an epidemic doesn't it?

At the same time you get into the sixth or seventh inning of a tie game, with runners at first and second and nobody out, and nobody seems to bunt anymore.

NOBODY bunts anymore. Again, more anecdotal evidence. Why wouldn't you bunt in a situation where you have gotten two runners on base and nobody out? Clearly the pitcher isn't (a) tiring or (b) struggling to get batters out, so the best move is to give the other team a free out. There is a time and a place for bunting and if it is a tie game in the sixth or seventh inning with runners on first and second, I'm not sure this is the time or place. It depends on the status of the pitcher and other factors, but simply saying "nobody" bunts in this situation is just dumb. Not to mention, were teams bunting a lot in this situation during the Steroid Era or something? Or could teams in 2006 just hit that extra home run every fifth game that is the reason so few games went to extra innings in 2006?

It’s like managers are being disrespectful to the batters to ask them to bunt.”

Or managers are realizing that asking a player to bunt in a situation where there are no outs means that manager is giving up an out in an inning where the opposing pitcher seems to be struggling. 

“There’s far less power and far more hard-throwing relievers,” said one scout.

The relief pitchers are becoming more talented? Whatever can be done about the increased skill level of relief pitchers? Maybe the hitters should be allowed to use PED's, just to keep up with the hard-throwing relievers. 

“You get in these low-scoring games, and now it seems almost every team in baseball has two-three relief pitchers who can come into a game and throw 100 mph gas for an inning and it’s a mismatch. Then, by the time you get into extra innings, look at these guys the way they’re dragging!”

So are the relief pitchers dragging or are the batters dragging? There's a disconnect here. Bill Madden has stated that these extra inning games are boring, so does he want a reduction in the pitching talent in baseball or what exactly is his solution for these boring extra inning games? What's the complaint, that pitchers are pitching too well and this is making baseball boring? Isn't the exclusion of PED's from the game of baseball and the increased skill set of pitchers a good thing?

Any way you look at it, the common denominator in most of these extra-inning games is a dearth of runs —

This makes sense considering when a game goes to extra innings if one team scores more runs than another team then the game is over. So games that last for 14 innings tend to have fewer runs scored after the ninth inning is over, because if a lot of runs were scored then the game would be over when one team outscored the other in a certain inning.

I would also enjoy seeing the data that makes Bill Madden believe the dearth of runs is the reason for most of these extra inning games. I'm not sure he has supporting data and is probably basing this conclusion on the viewing of two extra inning games during the 2013 season.

which suggests that maybe baseball needs to do something drastic to rouse its fans and players out of their slumber.

Bill Madden thinks extra inning games are boring. He has anecdotal evidence of why baseball games are boring and that's because the hitters are not hitting as many home runs as they did during the Steroid Era. Plus, it doesn't help the pitchers are so talented they can overmatch the hitters. So in summary, Bill doesn't like competitive baseball games that go to extra innings, he thinks there is too much talent among MLB pitchers, and he wishes there was a way to make a drastic change to improve the hitting. So what's his solution? 

Yo, Bud — call off your amphetamines police!

There we go. The solution is to call off the amphetamines police. This is Bill Madden's solution even though he has repeatedly written about PED users (like A-Rod) and how he wouldn't vote a player like A-Rod into the Hall of Fame because he doesn't have the integrity required to be there. It seems Bill Madden wants every MLB player to lack integrity and use PED's to make the game more exciting. Even if this is a joke, it's a bad one. 

This is typical modern sportswriting though. Just typical. Madden rails on and on about PED's and the lack of integrity among PED users, but then when baseball takes a harsh stance against PED's he complains the game of baseball isn't exciting enough. All those extra inning games cut into his sleep time and all of these talented relievers make the game boring for him. Some people just feel the need to complain about baseball  no matter what.