Friday Football and Other Things

by Ryan

Just a reminder that we will be live blogging the two games on Sunday. Why? Well, we are watching anyway, so why not talk about it? If you want to stop by, or even just pick games in the comments, you're more than welcome. Here are some football links to get you ready for the weekend, as well as a few other things.

- This post on Kissing Suzy Kolber is absolutely terrifying, and also pretty fantastic. They've forever changed the way I look at quarterbacks.

- Question: Where is the "it's tough to beat a team three times" theory coming from? John Clayton wrote about it this week and says this:

This is the fifth time a team will face a divisional rival in the championship round after beating it twice in the regular season. The 2-0 team got the sweep in three of the four previous instances. The 1982 Miami Dolphins won their third matchup against the New York Jets. The 1986 New York Giants swept the Washington Redskins. The 1999 Tennessee Titans went to Jacksonville and got their third win over the Jaguars.

The only team that didn't complete the sweep was the 1983 Seahawks, who lost to the Raiders. In that case, the Seahawks pulled off the upsets during the regular season, but the Raiders were a superior team.

So... the team going for the third win is 75% successfully? Am I missing something here?

- It's good to see Tim Graham is still doing work for ESPN despite the fact that the AFC East died this year.

- Sidney Crosby is out tonight, and holy crap Scott Burnside's giant head. Sometimes I think ESPN is taking their video player a bit too far.

- Getting Caught From Behind has the new Bisons uniforms up. I'm not a huge fan of the "B" but it's better than the first logo on the cap. Everything looks so... busy.

- Use the force, Luke.

- Here, of course, is Simmons' NFL picks column. He has done terrible this postseason, but I'd read it if only to confirm that the only hockey game he's ever watched was during the 1980 Olympics.

- Bolden is likely to play for Arizona on Sunday, which hopefully means Fitzgerald gets free. I'm not exactly rooting for the Buzzsaw that is, I just really enjoy watching him play.

- Just for the record... the Baltimore-Pittsburgh game will wind up like 13-12, right? Last week we thought the final in Tennessee would total under 20 points. We got close. I'd take the under on this one, too.

- With Gruden getting the axe, how many coaches were fired this year that were better than Dick Jauron? Three? Five? All of them? Ugh.

Easy Answer

by Ryan

No matter what you write or how well you write it, there are always people who get the wrong message out of it all. It's no one's fault, really, there are just so many elements of human communication that sometimes a signal gets crossed and the wrong impression is left. For example, here is what Bill Simmons had to say about the Cardinals/Panthers game that took place tonight:

Something wacky is happening with these Saturday night playoff games. The NFL didn't start having them until January 2002, the month when the Raiders traveled to New England for the "Snow Game" (what Pats fans call it) or "Tuck Rule Game" (what Oakland fans call it). Either way, it was one of the 10 most memorable playoff games ever played and the most famous "push" of the Double-Ohs. We've seen at least one memorable Saturday nighter every January since; the underdogs covered the past five in a row; and 10 of those 17 Saturday nighters were memorable in some way. Here's the complete list:

2002, Round 2 (N.E. by 3 at home): Pats 16, Raiders 13. The Snow Game. (Hah!)

2003, Round 1 (G.B. by 6.5 at home): Falcons 27, Packers 7. Vick rolls through Lambeau and murders everyone's two-team Packers-Jets tease; everyone finally sees through the "Favre is a big-game QB" myth.

2004, Round 2 (N.E. by 6 at home): Pats 17, Titans 14. Two degrees, minus-11 wind chill. Brrrrrrr. Adam Vinatieri somehow kicks a rock of a football 46 yards for the winning points (his greatest non-"Snow Game" kick).

2005, Round 1 (S.D. by 6 at home): Jets 20, Bolts 17 A classic Schottenheimer playoff collapse. Just classic. Can't somebody hire him again? Please?

2006, Round 2 (Denver by 3 at home): Broncos 27, Pats 13. An atypical Brady stinker combined with Champ Bailey's bizarre 99-yard interception TD in which Ben Watson stripped him at the goal line but the refs ruled it a score. I'm still bitter.

2007, Round 1 (Seattle by 2 at home): Seahawks 21, Cowboys 20. The Romo Game (if you're from Dallas) and the Babineaux Game (if you're from Seattle). Regardless, this was a Pancreas Punch Game for Cowboys fans.

2007, Round 2 (N.O. by 5 at home): Saints 27, Eagles 24. A rollicking semi-shootout with a fantastic post-Katrina Superdome crowd.

2008, Round 1 (Jax by 2.5 on road): Jaguars 31, Steelers 29. The game that earned David Garrard $60 million.

2008, Round 2 (N.E. by 13.5 at home): Pats 31, Jaguars 20. 19-0 was in secret jeopardy for a while. Surprisingly tense.

2009, Round 1 (Indy by 1.5 on road): Chargers 23, Colts 17. The Mike Scifres Clinic, as well as the game that probably will get the OT rules (thankfully) overturned in some way.

So that's 10 memorable Saturday night playoff games. What's the reason? I couldn't possibly tell you. You got me. I'm stumped. Now throw this in …

Thanks to a tip from Mike Wilkening (an editor at Pro Football Weekly), we're also working on a streak in which three straight double-digit Round 2 favorites failed to cover: the '05 Colts (gave 10 to Pittsburgh, lost by three); '07 Colts (gave 10.5 to San Diego, lost by four) and '07 Patriots (gave 13.5 to Jacksonville, won by 11). Since 1990, double-digit favorites in Round 2 are 9-7-1 against the spread and 12-5 straight up. Of those nine covers, the favorite won by 17-plus in every game. Of the six favorites favored by between 10 and 11 points since 1990, four of them ('95 Niners, '95 Chiefs, '05 Colts, '07 Colts) lost outright; the other two ('91 Bills, '01 Rams) won by a combined 62 points.

Here's why I'm telling you all of this: If you like the Panthers, you'd better really like them.

Before I read this I believed tonight's game would be competitive. The deep threat of Fitzgerald and Bolden was for real, and at the very least this game could develop into a bit of a shootout if things go right. After having all that laid out for me, I only believed this more. I suppose that's my initial feelings being positively reinforced, who knows.

Either way, after all that reasoning and hard work he goes and picks the Panthers.

Well, I really like them. The weekend couldn't have worked out better, actually: A limited Arizona team broke two big plays, got a fluke fumble-return TD and took advantage of a deafening home crowd to overachieve against a young team that never caught a break. Now the Cardinals are on the road -- where they went 3-5 this season and got blown out by the Jets, Pats and Eagles by the combined score of 151-62 -- and playing 2008's best home team (8-0), a well-balanced, well-coached team that will run it down their throats. What am I missing?

A lot, I guess. This is in no way a "I'm smarter than Bill Simmons" post, in fact it's quite the opposite. I just think it's interesting that the exact same information laid out and interpreted by two different people could come to two completely different conclusions. Based on our preconceived notions I suppose this shouldn't be shocking, but I find it really interesting that he did all that and still couldn't convince himself to change his pick.

Did he really "miss" something, or is there something more to it? Is the NFL at a point where anyone can beat anyone anywhere, or is there something about a time slot that changes how games are played? All I thought was that the game would be entertainingly close, and I was dead wrong. There was never any doubt, but for the other team. Everyone loves to say they are right, but can anyone really say they expected "Arizona 33, Panthers 13"?

If not, then I think there's plenty to talk about here. Does anyone have any ideas about... any of that before I start talking about hockey again? Just with expectations and playoff football, I suppose. Feel free, that's all I'm watching all day.

Jock Washing and the Anti-Buffalo Bias

by Ryan

Being a Buffalo sports blog, we are pretty big homers when it comes to all things Buffalo. However, even we're not sure what this is all about. Media Matters took offense to a Bill Simmons line from a mailbag a few weeks back. Here's the entry:

There is one silver lining to Buffalo's Cinderella season slowly falling apart to the point that the Bills now might miss the playoffs. I am not allowed to mention it, but if you rack your brains, you will figure it out. Think about the insufferable way that Oprah attached herself to Obama, and you will be getting warm.

Anyone want to fill me in on this one? What media figure has been propping up the Bills this year? Chris Berman has certainly said nice things, and he even donned a Buffalo hat at one point. But Obama won, and Oprah was happy, whereas the Bills are losing ...

I'll assume for now that this is a dig at Simmons' ESPN colleague, Berman, which is only further proof of anti-Bills bias at that network. It has hired two former members of the 1990s Dallas Cowboys, Michael Irvin and Emmitt Smith, both of which openly root for their old team on the air; Smith even served as spokesperson for his old team when a (very) critical book was written. Such criticism is especially ironic coming from Simmons, one of the biggest jock-washers for the New England Patriots in the mainstream sports media. But profess fanship for the Bills? Tsk tsk, how insufferable...

First of all I'm not so sure the assumption is correct. Many people took that as a dig at ESPN for nixing his Obama podcast a few months back, as well as his picks column the week before. He's the first person I've seen to directly claim it a crack at Berman, but if that's the case I suppose I'm wrong.

Here's the thing about Berman: even if he is a Bills fan he's really annoying. The nicknames, the tired routine; it was cute when I was seven, but now I'd like to hear something... different. Even so, a personal opinion about Berman doesn't imply an "anti-Bills bias" at ESPN. In fact, I think that's the furthest thing from the truth.

What ESPN has when it comes to the Bills is not a bias, but rather sheer indifference. When you think about it, what reason does ESPN have to rally against the Bills? The fact of the matter is that a small-market football team doesn't make the headlines the "majority" of America wants to see. Only WNY and some expatriates want to know about the Bills, unlike the huge followings of Dallas, Washington, and New England.

Also, what have the Bills done in the past ten years to warrant any special coverage? A long playoff drought, shortage of superstars, and a whole mess of other reasons have conspired to push the Bills off the front page in the sporting world, not some hyper-conspiracy against them. Norby doesn't hate the Bills, he just doesn't give a crap about them. Simple as that.

The interesting thing about these claims of bias is his mention of Michael Irvin and Emmitt Smith, two former Cowboys who currently have jobs with The Four Letter. He must have short-term memory because it wasn't long ago ESPN had both Jim Kelly and Marv Levy under its collective wing. Times change, and so does the overload of players from a specific team.

He did get one thing right, though: Simmons can be a huge jock-washer at times. Still, call me when he get three rings things right...

My Turn

by Ryan



"They always said Red Sox fans would care a little less after we climbed the mountain once or twice, that it wouldn't mean as much, that it couldn't possibly mean as much. That's not true. It will never be true. You either love sports or you don't." - Bill Simmons

Surprisingly Good

by Ryan

It's very hard to write about someone else's writing, especially when you agree with what they say. That's pretty much the definition of redundancy. That being said, I think you should give the newest Bill Simmons E-Ticket piece a shot. If you are a Simmons fan or just a baseball fan, you should definitely check it out.

It's not perfect and really, really long, but I agree with a lot of what he says, and for the first time in years he seems to write with genuine passion for "The Game", so to speak. To be honest, it's just nice to see he's still human, even if he acts like a douche whenever he talks about Buffalo.

On Pink Hats and the Bandwagon

by Ryan


So I've been staring at this quote for the past hour.

Sid the Kid, the return of Don Cherry, the old Flyers uniforms, Montreal self-combusting, the four-OT game, Bucci and Barry, Chris Osgood clipping the dude with the butt of his stick, HD telecasts, a Wings-Pens Finals ... I have to admit, I'm enjoying the NHL playoffs. No, really. I even figured out how to find the games on my cable system and everything.

Bill Simmons, 5/22/08

So... what does that even mean? I get it, the postseason has been interesting thus far, it always is; but to see that from a guy who disowned hockey a decade ago and only to brings it out to make fun of... what gives? When did hockey become watchable from the Sports Guy Mansion with J-Bug and Hench on the wings?

I've been working on a few theories over here. The first one is that he's being genuine. Perhaps he is giving hockey a solid look for the first time because of that whole "Hey! The Bruins matter again!" thing and likes what he sees. Sure, the hockey hasn't been fantastic, but when you train yourself to cast it aside as garbage how could he possibly expect better? Perhaps he is finally understanding that the NHL can't live off the NBA model of strong personalities and that good, consistent teams with a likeable core are more important and fun to watch.

So yeah... there's that.

Another possibility is that he's full of crap and ESPN is forcing his hand. He has had some conflicts with The Four Letter recently, enough so that he has his own blogspot operational. Maybe mentioning the Don Cherry on Sportscenter gimmick is a way to mend fences. Heck, throw Bucci and Melrose in there, too!

We all know that this sudden hockey push is a test balloon for ESPN and the possibility of hockey returning, perhaps Simmons decided to help them out by throwing a major voice behind the game at juuuust the right time.

One other option, the one I've been weighing the longest, is that Simmons is simply an elitist. Bill started as just a sports fan, but moving out to LA and watching his hometown become the "City of Champions" has taken a toll on his everyman status. Suddenly he can pick and choose what he watches, he has a power over his audience to tell them what is watchable or like able.

He recommends books and people read them, tells them to follow a "Vengeance Scale" and people ask where their team's performance ranks. Simmons has a strong voice and a strong following, and let's face it, he's a damn good writer. I know I'm not the only one that started in the Internet sports scene reading every word he wrote, even if it was about things I didn't care about. Simmons can write a 30,000 word diatribe about the NBA and people that don't know who CP3 is will read it. That's the kind of power he has.

Because of this reach, he gets to pick and choose what he likes, even if it means throwing a team he loved as a child under the bus. For years all you would hear out of Simmons about hockey was how crappy the Bruins owner was, or that Joe Thornton is amazing and they got hosed in that trade. True as it was, it got old and he clearly didn't know what was going on by his own doing. Once ESPN dropped hockey, it was open season to mock the game.

So my question remains, why the change? Maybe he's for real, or maybe he just sees hockey moving towards relevance again and wants to be ahead of the curve. Regardless of the reason, it is good for the game that he is paying attention. Disgusting, filthy bandwagoner that he may be, for far too long hockey has gone without fringe fans. If it takes Simmons leading the charge of people who don't know what a Blackhawk is, so be it.

Hey, at least he watches the draft.

Broken Hub

by Ryan



Montreal closes the door on the Bruins at home, letting Bill Simmons get on board juuuust long enough to get punched in the stomach. I didn't know about this until the game was over, but thank God Boston lost. Let him go through purgatory with a hockey team before the spoils of war come. Bandwagoner.

(On that note, Happy Patriots Day everyone!)



Carey Price was indeed the difference in this series, making me right about at least one thing in the first round.

Speaking of predictions, the scoring for our first round picks will go as follows: 2 points for picking the team correctly, and a bonus point for picking the right number of games. Once tomorrow's games are over I'll post the results along with picks for the second round. If you didn't get a chance to pick for the first round, feel free to pick the rest of the way, we didn't give much notice for the first round.

If you will, read the Simmons column and tell me if I'm being too hard on the guy. I am glad he is getting back into hockey because it is good to have a national voice interested in the game, but doesn't it feel like a bit of a cop out? If you care that much about a team, can you ever just leave it for dead like that?

Insomniac ESPN Moments

by Ryan

I know the moment Sean Taylor died I thought to myself, "What's his cap hit?"

Good freaking God, what is wrong with Len Pasquarelli? I mean, how do you do the research for that column and not get that icky feeling in your stomach? I feel sick just reading it.

Also, from Bill Simmons' marathon chat:

Tony (Toronto): Hey, Bill - just wondering if there was anything that could happen to the sport of hockey to get you interested again, or if you're totally and eternally done. Thoughts?

Bill Simmons: I would come back if they completely re-invented the league - 22 teams, 11 in Canada, 11 in USA.

Honestly, if that's what it takes to get you back, thanks but no thanks. Not only is that the worst realignment idea I've ever seen, I'm pretty sure executing that idea is impossible. It's a heck of a nice way of saying "never", though.

Morning Musings: Porn, Drugs and Portis

By Chris

Just some quick thoughts on a beautiful Wednesday morning:

-Steeler’s offensive line coach Larry Zierlein reportedly sent what the Steelers are calling an “inappropriate e-mail” from his Pittsburgh office to “unintended recipients” throughout the NFL last Friday. Zierlein, as Buffalo fans may recall, was an assistant line coach for the Bills last season. Mike Florio’s blog, ProFootballTalk.com broke the story and it was finally confirmed yesterday. Apparently, according to Sports Illustrated’s rumor site FanNation, the porn message made its way up the ranks from important Steelers officials all the way up to commissioner Roger Goodell himself. It’s nice to know that the players aren’t the only ones who don’t know how to handle themselves in the NFL.

-Jason Giambi failed a test for amphetamines within the last year, according to the New York Daily News. So I guess when he said he was wrong for doing “that stuff,” amphetamines weren’t included. There’s also a rumor that the Angels would like to trade for him. Owner Arte Moreno always likes to look for a big move and Giambi would be an upgrade offensively over any of the first baseman currently on the Halos roster. Unfortunately, with all of the trouble Giambi was now dug himself into, who knows if he’ll even be in the game much longer. With the positive amphetamine test, Giambi subjected himself to six additional tests for one year, making his statement to USA Today about being “tested more than anyone” all the more true. The Daily News couldn’t have picked a hotter time to leak those test results and they couldn’t have done it at a worse time for Giambi.

-The Ducks advanced to the Stanley Cup Finals with a win over Detroit last night. Now I can have a rooting interest and I may be able to stomach watching this series. Ottawa has the ability to adapt to Anaheim’s defensive style from the blue line out, but it will ultimately be the goaltending that will keep Canada from its first championship since 1993. It’s very hard to see Ray Emery outplaying former Conn Smythe winner J.S. Giguere on the biggest stage of all. I see the Ducks taking advantage of all those juicy rebounds Emery will leave on the doorstep and taking the Cup in five.

-Clinton Portis makes me laugh. From his goofy disguises in post game interviews to his recent comments about Mike Vick and dog fighting not being a problem, I just can’t wait to see what he does next. I love how he couldn't even keep a straight face during that dog fighting interview. A reality show is a no-brainer. Unfortunately, such a series might jeopardize Goodell’s efforts to keep the image of the league clean. And those efforts are working out reeeeeeeeally well right now.

-The Spurs are up 2-0 against the Jazz already? Really? Does anyone even expect Utah to win a game? And notice that since Bill Simmons’ ESPN the Magazine column was published last week, everyone is now praising Tim Duncan as “the greatest player in the past decade.” Coinicdence? And also, is there is a reason as to why there needs to be a four day lay-off between games in that series? I blame Tom Bergeron.

-The University at Buffalo finally finished their new 12,000 square foot training facility last month. The old weight room inside Alumni was a joke for a Division I program and hopefully the new facility will help sway athletic recruits to the Bulls program. The Morris Sports Performance Center will actually be able to house whole teams! And it’s good to hear they’re not settling with just this new facility, as Rodney McKissic writes in The Buffalo News today: “The Morris Center is a precursor to a projected 200,000-square-foot indoor multipurpose field house that will include a 120-yard football field and an estimated 20,000-square-foot weight room, which would be one of the biggest in college athletics. The field house, nevertheless, is in the embryonic stages of planning.”