I'm pretty far in the hole. Only picking 8 games.
Kansas +5.5 Southern Miss (loss)
Miami OH -7.5 Colorado St. (win)
Missouri -14 SD St. (loss)
Navy -3 LA Tech (win)
Oklahoma St. v. Tulsa Under 69 (loss)
Wake +17 Stanford (loss)
VA Tech v. ECarolina Under 60 (loss)
W Mich -3 Toledo (loss)
Wow, I'm off to a brutally bad start.
5-16-2
The 100 Greatest Players in Professional Football History 80-71
Part 2 of my list is here.
NFL Network is revealing Part 3 of its list tonight, so I'll get the jump this morning. I'll edit in their choices after I see the show.
80.Bobby Layne QB 48-62 Lions/Steelers
-Beats out Boomer and Bradshaw, his top comps. I'm guessing Bradshaw makes the NFL list and Layne doesn't. (They picked Aikman here)
79.Gene Hickerson OL 58-73 Browns
-The Browns could run the football. With Jim Brown – after Jim Brown – the Browns could run the football. Hickerson gets the credit here. (Emlen Tunnell, not on my list)
78.Chuck Howley LB 58-73 Cowboys
(They picked Bruce Matthews, who is on this list, but not yet.)
77.Michael Irvin WR 88-99 Cowboys
-Top comp is Reggie Wayne; it’s all about the U. I’ve grown to really enjoy Irvin as a TV personality; it’s less that I find myself agreeing with him and more just that he’s very likeable. Funny how things work out. (NFL picked Dorsett; apparently they knew it was Cowboy time.)
76.Ed Jones DL 74-89 Cowboys
-Top comp is Lyle Alzado, and he’s underrated – his notoriety diminishing his accomplishment. You think I'm done with the Cowboy run? (Art Shell, who didn't make my list)
75.Roger Staubach QB 69-79 Cowboys
- 4 straight Cowboys! Staubach was great; I’m a Cowboy hater, but he was great – a short career is why he’s low, and if anything I’m ranking him high given the short career, but he was considerably Bradshaw’s superior, for example. If you're looking for Aikman on the list, you'll be unhappy. (Darrell Green - who is still to come on my list.)
74.Willie Wood DB 60-71 Packers
-Most similar players – Herb Adderly, Mike Haynes, both still to come, Ronde Barber didn’t make it. (Marion Motley - not on my list).
73.Will Shields OL 93-06 Chiefs
-The best in the Mack/Wisniewski/Allen line of interior linemen. Bruce Armstrong/Lomas Brown have similarly good cases. (Ozzie Newsome; my second TE is still to come, and he's in the top 50)
72.Carl Eller DL 64-79 Vikings
-The best, I’d argue, in the Youngblood/Strahan/Robustelli line of ends – if you tell me he and Doleman should flip, I wouldn’t be adverse. (Jonathan Ogden - entirely fair, didn't make my list - but entirely fair - that run of recent vintage tackles - Ogden, Jones, Roaf - they didn't make my list but they'd all be in the next 50).
71.Ladainian Tomlinson RB 01- Chargers
-88+ yards rushing per game; just a tremendous run of production by the guy who earned his nickname LT2 in contrast to the way that Andy Roddick never should have been called A-Rod. (Paul Warfield)
30 down, 70 to go. I'll update the NFL picks after the show airs, and then 70-61 on my list will be posted just before their next show.
I Pick Every NFL Game in 2010 - Week 2 (Plus my Bonus Big Brother Pick)
Wednesday, September 15, 2010
Week 1 record ATS: 9-4-3 SU: 11-5
Atlanta -6.5 Arizona (win/win)
Balt -1.5 Cinc (loss/loss)
Chiefs +1.5 Browns (win/win)
Dallas -8.5 Bears (loss/loss)
Eagles -4.5 Lions (loss/win)
Bills +13.5 Packers (GB wins game) (my suicide pick) (win/win)
Steelers +5.5 Titans (win/win)
Miami +5.5 Vikes (Vikes win game) (win/loss)
Panthers -2.5 Bucs (loss/loss)
Seattle +3.5 Denver (loss/loss)
Rams +3.5 Raiders (Oak wins game) (win/win)
Pats -2 Jets (loss/loss)
SD -7.5 Jags (win/win)
Hou -3 Wash (push/win)
NYG +5.5 Colts (Indy wins game) (loss/win)
NO -4.5 Niners (loss/win)
ATS 7-8-1, 16-12-4
SU 10-6, 21-11
Hayden wins Big Brother tonight. Lane finishes second.
Possible outcomes of leg 3 of HOH
-Hayden beats Lane
If Hayden beats Lane, he takes Lane. I don't know if there is a legit final two deal between any of the final 3; but were Hayden to win another competition, a Hayden/Lane matchup is a wipeout, with only Britney as a likely Lane vote. Regardless of jurors using a "better game play" or a "who I like the most" model of voting strategy, Hayden wins. Throw in the feeling that Lane doesn't need the money, and I cannot see any possible scenario that Hayden does not beat Lane.
Hayden is unlikely to take Enzo, both because of the previous paragraph and because he and Lane seem more likely to have a post-BB relationship. In the unlikely event he does, it opens up the "Enzo is mastermind" argument which might sway Ragan/Matt/Brendon/Rachel as likely "better game play voters" Britney/Kathy still vote Hayden. Lane may vote Enzo in this scenario, assuming he believes he has a deal with Hayden
-Lane beats Hayden
If Lane beats Hayden, there's not a good path for him to win the game. His matchup with Hayden becomes more favorable, as Hayden's competition record is then minimized by Lane's having won the final HOH. Lane has Britney, let's give him Enzo in this scenario just to do. He then just needs to split the "better game play votes" to win. I don't think he does - I think they all go for Hayden, but their decisions are all more difficult in this scenario. I think Lane is likely to take Hayden if he wins.
If Lane takes Enzo I think Enzo beats him, and maybe by the margin that Hayden were to beat him in the very first scenario. Britney votes for him, Hayden might, although he might feel jilted, but Lane's competition record, even with a final HOH win, won't be seen as the equivalent of Hayden's, and while Lane is liked, he isn't liked in the way that Hayden is - and really not liked in the way that Enzo is - giving Enzo's mastermind argument a better chance to take hold in the minds of the gameplay voters.
So:
If H d. L and H takes L - Hayden wins and it's not close.
If H d. L and H takes E - Hayden wins I think but it's really close.
If L d. H and L takes H - Hayden wins, but it should be closer than scenario 1
If L d. H and L takes E - Enzo wins and I don't think it's close.
Atlanta -6.5 Arizona (win/win)
Balt -1.5 Cinc (loss/loss)
Chiefs +1.5 Browns (win/win)
Dallas -8.5 Bears (loss/loss)
Eagles -4.5 Lions (loss/win)
Bills +13.5 Packers (GB wins game) (my suicide pick) (win/win)
Steelers +5.5 Titans (win/win)
Miami +5.5 Vikes (Vikes win game) (win/loss)
Panthers -2.5 Bucs (loss/loss)
Seattle +3.5 Denver (loss/loss)
Rams +3.5 Raiders (Oak wins game) (win/win)
Pats -2 Jets (loss/loss)
SD -7.5 Jags (win/win)
Hou -3 Wash (push/win)
NYG +5.5 Colts (Indy wins game) (loss/win)
NO -4.5 Niners (loss/win)
ATS 7-8-1, 16-12-4
SU 10-6, 21-11
Hayden wins Big Brother tonight. Lane finishes second.
Possible outcomes of leg 3 of HOH
-Hayden beats Lane
If Hayden beats Lane, he takes Lane. I don't know if there is a legit final two deal between any of the final 3; but were Hayden to win another competition, a Hayden/Lane matchup is a wipeout, with only Britney as a likely Lane vote. Regardless of jurors using a "better game play" or a "who I like the most" model of voting strategy, Hayden wins. Throw in the feeling that Lane doesn't need the money, and I cannot see any possible scenario that Hayden does not beat Lane.
Hayden is unlikely to take Enzo, both because of the previous paragraph and because he and Lane seem more likely to have a post-BB relationship. In the unlikely event he does, it opens up the "Enzo is mastermind" argument which might sway Ragan/Matt/Brendon/Rachel as likely "better game play voters" Britney/Kathy still vote Hayden. Lane may vote Enzo in this scenario, assuming he believes he has a deal with Hayden
-Lane beats Hayden
If Lane beats Hayden, there's not a good path for him to win the game. His matchup with Hayden becomes more favorable, as Hayden's competition record is then minimized by Lane's having won the final HOH. Lane has Britney, let's give him Enzo in this scenario just to do. He then just needs to split the "better game play votes" to win. I don't think he does - I think they all go for Hayden, but their decisions are all more difficult in this scenario. I think Lane is likely to take Hayden if he wins.
If Lane takes Enzo I think Enzo beats him, and maybe by the margin that Hayden were to beat him in the very first scenario. Britney votes for him, Hayden might, although he might feel jilted, but Lane's competition record, even with a final HOH win, won't be seen as the equivalent of Hayden's, and while Lane is liked, he isn't liked in the way that Hayden is - and really not liked in the way that Enzo is - giving Enzo's mastermind argument a better chance to take hold in the minds of the gameplay voters.
So:
If H d. L and H takes L - Hayden wins and it's not close.
If H d. L and H takes E - Hayden wins I think but it's really close.
If L d. H and L takes H - Hayden wins, but it should be closer than scenario 1
If L d. H and L takes E - Enzo wins and I don't think it's close.
1st and Five - The Weekly Tendown Special Halfdown Edition Sept 5-11 2010
Sunday, September 12, 2010
Dear Internet:
1 back. 19 left. Lincecum goes today.
As I write this, my magical telephone which texts me when the world changes (last week, true story, I received a text that Keira Knightley was changing her official country of residence to the United States. Suck on that England! U-S-A! U-S-A!) just vibrated the following:
Giants CF Andres Torres had his appendix removed. Out 10 days to 2 weeks.
Appendicitis? Really? With 19 games left and the San Francisco Giants a game out of first place - arguably our best player over the course of the season just had his appendix taken out. That's one for the books. That's one for the Bobby Richardson playing out of position, Game 3 earthquake, 103 wins and no postseason, 5 run lead with 8 outs to go, Jose Cruz's kid dropping the fly ball - books.
Appendix? Really? With 19 games left in the season? Andres Torres is 32 years old. What is the historical precedent for a 32 year old starting center fielder to have appendicitis at the end of a pennant race? What's next - Brian Wilson has his tonsils out? Aubrey Huff gets chicken pox?
Giants baseball. It's torture.
Here's Tendown 43.
First: Reggie Bush
This week came word that the Heisman Trophy Trust would be stripping Reggie Bush of his 2005 Heisman; this now seems in doubt; Christine Brennan argued this week that the Trophy should not only be stripped but awarded to Vince Young, the runner-up.
She is wrong - the argument that Bush should be stripped rests on the notion that had the money given by a street agent to Bush and his family while he was at USC been known by the NCAA at the time, then it would have ruled Bush ineligible. My thoughts about this are threefold:
1. Its a helluva erosion of due process - if today, the NCAA were to find that a current superstar player, a potential top 5 overall NFL draft choice headed for a bounty of endorsement opportunities once his college career was concluded was ineligible, the amount of potential financial harm were he unable to play football would absolutely require a judicial hearing before he was taken off the field. Maybe that results in Bush being made ineligible (although what would the precedent be - has there ever been a player of Bush's 2005 profile who the NCAA said could not play for a full season? Do ticket sales fall, are ratings harmed, what about all those USC #5 jerseys that aren't sold, or DVDs, video games, and other ancillary memorabilia that directly traded off of Bush's game and fame - let's put aside whether it's "right" to punish an athlete for accepting money given the billions made in big time college sports off of the labor of those athletes - does it make sense that perhaps the NCAA doesn't want Bush to be made ineligible in 2005?) maybe it doesn't, but there would have been a court fight had it attempted to take him off the field. Its convenient, 5 years later to say, "in lieu of that fight - let's just pretend that Bush was found ineligible and therefore could not have won the Heisman."
2. Are we really saying that, in the history of the Heisman, the only winner who took money while he was playing was Reggie Bush? It has to be yes, right - Christine Brennan has to be saying that, and the Heisman Trust, were they to pull Bush's trophy - has to be saying that, and if they are saying that, that's a level of embarrassing that a sports analyst should not want to reach. John Salley has a podcast - his answer when asked how many big time college athletes take money while they're in school was "all of them." Tim Brown went on television and said Bush should give the trophy back - my thought was exactly as is it whenever a former baseball player says that those suspected of PED use should not be eligible for the Hall of Fame or otherwise lose their records - what did you take? What did your teammates take? Tell me of all the money/drugs that you are aware of. If I'm Reggie Bush - I want every living Heisman winner deposed. Further, there are lots of behaviors that could make one ineligible. Vince Young, recall, scored a six on the Wonderlic test at the NFL draft combine - let's walk our way through all of his coursework while at Texas. In the same way that the "give Jose Canseco's MVP Award to Mike Greenwell" fails the slippery slope test, how deeply are we willing to probe the academic careers of the runners-up to the Heisman to begin the process of finding the "true" winner? If Christine Brennan wants to argue that big time college sports are dirty, completely removed from the amateur ideal - that's fine. If she wants to argue that it's just Reggie Bush, she should lose her press credential.
3. This is really the same line of "what happened on the field is illegitimate and you should pretend it didn't happen" thought that has permeated the steroid discussion. At this year's baseball Hall of Fame ceremony, Hank Aaron was announced as the "home run king."
He is not.
Barry Bonds hit those home runs. They happened. So did Cy Young's 511 wins, and Hack Wilson's 191 rbis, and Ty Cobb's career batting average of .367. We can view them in context - like we can view Aaron's playing in small ballparks, or Roger Maris hitting 61 against expansion pitching, or Babe Ruth never hitting a ball thrown by anyone other than a white American dude probably born east of the Mississippi, or every baseball clubhouse for decades having jars of amphetamines that the players could pop to give them a little lift for those day games after night games.
Reggie Bush won the Heisman trophy. He did it on the field. Barry Bonds owns both the single season and the career record for home runs. He did it on the field. Andres Torres is not on the field. He's in the hospital getting circumcised or something.
Appendicitis? With 19 games left in the season? Argh. Argh. Argh. Argh.
We're never going to win.
After the jump - the rest of Tendown 43.
1 back. 19 left. Lincecum goes today.
As I write this, my magical telephone which texts me when the world changes (last week, true story, I received a text that Keira Knightley was changing her official country of residence to the United States. Suck on that England! U-S-A! U-S-A!) just vibrated the following:
Giants CF Andres Torres had his appendix removed. Out 10 days to 2 weeks.
Appendicitis? Really? With 19 games left and the San Francisco Giants a game out of first place - arguably our best player over the course of the season just had his appendix taken out. That's one for the books. That's one for the Bobby Richardson playing out of position, Game 3 earthquake, 103 wins and no postseason, 5 run lead with 8 outs to go, Jose Cruz's kid dropping the fly ball - books.
Appendix? Really? With 19 games left in the season? Andres Torres is 32 years old. What is the historical precedent for a 32 year old starting center fielder to have appendicitis at the end of a pennant race? What's next - Brian Wilson has his tonsils out? Aubrey Huff gets chicken pox?
Giants baseball. It's torture.
Here's Tendown 43.
First: Reggie Bush
This week came word that the Heisman Trophy Trust would be stripping Reggie Bush of his 2005 Heisman; this now seems in doubt; Christine Brennan argued this week that the Trophy should not only be stripped but awarded to Vince Young, the runner-up.
She is wrong - the argument that Bush should be stripped rests on the notion that had the money given by a street agent to Bush and his family while he was at USC been known by the NCAA at the time, then it would have ruled Bush ineligible. My thoughts about this are threefold:
1. Its a helluva erosion of due process - if today, the NCAA were to find that a current superstar player, a potential top 5 overall NFL draft choice headed for a bounty of endorsement opportunities once his college career was concluded was ineligible, the amount of potential financial harm were he unable to play football would absolutely require a judicial hearing before he was taken off the field. Maybe that results in Bush being made ineligible (although what would the precedent be - has there ever been a player of Bush's 2005 profile who the NCAA said could not play for a full season? Do ticket sales fall, are ratings harmed, what about all those USC #5 jerseys that aren't sold, or DVDs, video games, and other ancillary memorabilia that directly traded off of Bush's game and fame - let's put aside whether it's "right" to punish an athlete for accepting money given the billions made in big time college sports off of the labor of those athletes - does it make sense that perhaps the NCAA doesn't want Bush to be made ineligible in 2005?) maybe it doesn't, but there would have been a court fight had it attempted to take him off the field. Its convenient, 5 years later to say, "in lieu of that fight - let's just pretend that Bush was found ineligible and therefore could not have won the Heisman."
2. Are we really saying that, in the history of the Heisman, the only winner who took money while he was playing was Reggie Bush? It has to be yes, right - Christine Brennan has to be saying that, and the Heisman Trust, were they to pull Bush's trophy - has to be saying that, and if they are saying that, that's a level of embarrassing that a sports analyst should not want to reach. John Salley has a podcast - his answer when asked how many big time college athletes take money while they're in school was "all of them." Tim Brown went on television and said Bush should give the trophy back - my thought was exactly as is it whenever a former baseball player says that those suspected of PED use should not be eligible for the Hall of Fame or otherwise lose their records - what did you take? What did your teammates take? Tell me of all the money/drugs that you are aware of. If I'm Reggie Bush - I want every living Heisman winner deposed. Further, there are lots of behaviors that could make one ineligible. Vince Young, recall, scored a six on the Wonderlic test at the NFL draft combine - let's walk our way through all of his coursework while at Texas. In the same way that the "give Jose Canseco's MVP Award to Mike Greenwell" fails the slippery slope test, how deeply are we willing to probe the academic careers of the runners-up to the Heisman to begin the process of finding the "true" winner? If Christine Brennan wants to argue that big time college sports are dirty, completely removed from the amateur ideal - that's fine. If she wants to argue that it's just Reggie Bush, she should lose her press credential.
3. This is really the same line of "what happened on the field is illegitimate and you should pretend it didn't happen" thought that has permeated the steroid discussion. At this year's baseball Hall of Fame ceremony, Hank Aaron was announced as the "home run king."
He is not.
Barry Bonds hit those home runs. They happened. So did Cy Young's 511 wins, and Hack Wilson's 191 rbis, and Ty Cobb's career batting average of .367. We can view them in context - like we can view Aaron's playing in small ballparks, or Roger Maris hitting 61 against expansion pitching, or Babe Ruth never hitting a ball thrown by anyone other than a white American dude probably born east of the Mississippi, or every baseball clubhouse for decades having jars of amphetamines that the players could pop to give them a little lift for those day games after night games.
Reggie Bush won the Heisman trophy. He did it on the field. Barry Bonds owns both the single season and the career record for home runs. He did it on the field. Andres Torres is not on the field. He's in the hospital getting circumcised or something.
Appendicitis? With 19 games left in the season? Argh. Argh. Argh. Argh.
After the jump - the rest of Tendown 43.
I Pick College Football Games - 2010-2011 Week 2
Thursday, September 9, 2010
I went 2-3 last week.
West Virginia -12.5 Marshall (loss)
Arkansas St. v. La/La Under 55 (push)
BCollege -17.5 Kent St.(loss)
Colorado St. +23.5 Nevada (loss)
Oklahoma St. v. Troy Under 63 (loss)
New Mex St. +13.5 SDiego St. (loss)
Texas -28 Wyoming (loss)
Buffalo +16 Baylor (loss)
NC St. +3 Central Florida (win)
Wake -6 Duke (push)
1-7-2
3-10-2
West Virginia -12.5 Marshall (loss)
Arkansas St. v. La/La Under 55 (push)
BCollege -17.5 Kent St.(loss)
Colorado St. +23.5 Nevada (loss)
Oklahoma St. v. Troy Under 63 (loss)
New Mex St. +13.5 SDiego St. (loss)
Texas -28 Wyoming (loss)
Buffalo +16 Baylor (loss)
NC St. +3 Central Florida (win)
Wake -6 Duke (push)
1-7-2
3-10-2
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)