One hundred and ten percent

Mmm, Yummy Crow

2011-06-16T23:11:00.001-05:00

I guess after being nigh on suicidal after game 1 and incredulous after game 2, I should write about the Mavericks unbelievable championship. It shocked the basketball world. In fact, I think it shocked the Mavs. It seemed at the end of the game that as time was ticking down they just looked at each other as if they were saying, did that just happen? Am I dreaming? The Heat were stunned, too. After one of the Heat's final baskets, when they had to foul to try to prolong the game, they let Jason Terry dribble around like it was a shoot around. They seemed to mail the last 5 minutes of the game in, which was a common theme in the finals.

I listened to a podcast of Miami sports writer Dan Lebatard with Bill Simmons recapping the finals. I didn't count, but he probably said 10 times that the Heat were close to winning all the games and if Lebron James had played to his averages then they would have won. I obviously can't dispute any of that, but the question has to be asked why did those things happen? Why did Lebron struggle so much in the series and the fourth quarters in particular? Why did the Mavs own the last few minutes of the games they won? How were they able to take apart the Heat defense late in games? These are legitimate questions because that is what happened on a consistent basis throughout the series.

After the historic comeback in game 2, the assumption (at least on my part) was that the Mavs it was a blip on the radar. They made a few shots and surprised the Heat, but it wouldn't happen again and game 3 seemed to prove that out. But in game 4, Mavs outscored the Heat by 7 in the 4th and won by 3. In game 5, the Heat were up again by 4 with four mins to go, but lost by 9! In game 6, the Mavs led most of the game, but after the Heat got to within four early in the fourth, the Mavs answered quickly and the Heat never got closer than seven after that.

The thing is in just about every playoff game or series, one can always point to a couple of plays here and there that won or lost the game. Rare is the game, especially late in the playoffs when a team gets so outclassed that they can't play the "what if" game. What if that borderline call went our way? What if the shot had fallen in instead of out (or vice versa)? What if that guy didn't get hurt? In the 2006 Finals, Mavs fan were asking what if the Mavericks had been able to pull out game 3 when they had a big lead and looked poised to go up 3-0? What if the refs hadn't given game 5 to the Heat? Here in 2011, what happened in the fourth quarters goes beyond what if. If it happens once, ok, those things happen. Four times? Whatever happened (and I'm still not quite sure how it happened) was real. The Mavs, shockingly enough, were better than the Heat. The Heat clearly had the talent advantage, but this is a case where the Mavericks' whole was great than the sum of it's parts.

For me, I didn't truly believe until the end. I expected them to collapse or the refs to make sure there was a game 7. At last, the Mavs were stronger than whatever forces were arrayed against them. It was a ton of fun.

The Worst Sports Week of My Life, Part 2

2011-05-31T22:37:00.002-05:00

The NBA finals. I could not possibly be less excited about it. Of all the teams to face, it had to be the Heat. Unbelievable. This sucks.

The problem is I'm experiencing flash backs of the worst sports week of my life- the 2006 NBA finals. I've been trying to think of worse sports weeks. I'm sure there have been days that have been worse: just about every Cowboys experience since 1996, watching Jo Jo Jones run around Hardin Simmons my senior year, and various and a sundry Rangers ridiculousness over the years.

What this feels like is Yankees/ Rangers in the late 90s. We know what's going to happen and there is nothing anyone can do about it. You know it and I know it.

Oh, how I wish I was wrong. I wish Dirk had someone who we could trust next to him. This is Dirk and the 2003 All Star Team. I'd love to see what Caron Butler would do for this team.

Of all the teams to play...

They may win one or two, but I doubt it. My prediction (made after game 1) is Heat 4-1. Prove me wrong, Mavs. Please, prove me wrong.

Message from Chuck Greenberg

2010-11-01T14:25:00.009-05:00

The following was written by Chuck Greenberg, Rangers co-owner, originally posted here. He may be from Pittsburgh but he speaks like a Ranger lifer here. Let's go Ranger fans, it's our time now.

Rangers CEO Chuck Greenberg posted the following message on his Facebook page.

This season has transcended expectations and transformed the psyche and hearts of legions of Rangers fans across Texas and throughout our country and beyond. At the core of the remarkable journey we have shared together is a ballclub and a community who collectively have consigned the conventional wisdom of the past to the dust bins of history, busting myths and charting a new course previously thought to be unattainable.

Can't pitch successfully in Rangers Ballpark. Wrong.

Can't compete successfully late in the season because the heat will break you down. Wrong.

Fans will lose interest when training camp opens. Wrong.

Fans won't come to Rangers Ballpark after the All Star break because it's too hot. Wrong.

Rangers can't win a playoff series. Wrong.

Rangers can't win a playoff game at home. Wrong.

Rangers can't beat the Yankees in the playoffs. Wrong.

Rangers can't get to the World Series. Wrong.

Rangers can't captivate the hearts and emotions of fans new and old deep into the fall. Wrong.

And on and on and on....

I can't even begin to count the memorable moments we have shared this year thanks to a very special group of players with hearts and smiles as big as Texas, who always pull together, stand up for one another, and who have changed the sports landscape here in the Metroplex forever.

But here is a simple reality. Monday will be the last game played in Rangers Ballpark this year. We all owe it to ourselves, our players and each other, to celebrate with passion, enthusiasm and indefatigable belief from lineup cards to the final out, loud and proud.

The defining team of my young life was the 1979, "We are Family" Pittsburgh Pirates. I have often remarked how much this Rangers club reminds me of that team, with a confident but friendly swagger and an abundance of character and personality.

Now these two teams have something else in common. Both fell behind 3-1 in the World Series. Kent Tekulve, the great closer from the '79 Pirates, texted me after tonight's game to pass along this story. Before Game 5, Willie Stargell told his teammates:

"We are playing in front of the whole world. We may not win this thing, but before we go, let's show the world how the Pirates really play baseball."

The Pirates, playing against a team whose colors were black and orange, won Game 5. Then they returned to Baltimore and won Game 6. Then they won Game 7.

I know our players will show everyone how the Rangers play baseball tomorrow. As fans, let's do the same. We have one final opportunity this season to show the world what we have accomplished together and the passion we all hold for our players and our shared dreams.

The World Series is going back to San Francisco. And then there will be one final piece of conventional wisdom to prove wrong....

Believe.

Chuck

A kid's dream

2010-10-26T21:47:00.002-05:00

So this is what it takes to get me writing again.

You know, it's been pretty tough on Dallas sports fans for a few years now. The Stars haven't been truly competitive for a decade and it's been four years since the Mavs choked in the Finals, beginning their slide to mediocrity. We thought the Cowboys were on the way to playing in the Super Bowl in their own stadium, before we were reminded they are still owned by Jerry and coached (for now) by Wade.

But the Rangers.

For my entire life, the Rangers have been more or less irrelevant in baseball. Sure, they'd score lots of runs, but with no pitching to speak of and the August swoon as a built-in excuse, they never really got your hopes too high. And with Tom Hicks slashing payroll the last few years--why does a top five market have a bottom five payroll?--the Rangers should have been trending down.

But things started changing five years ago, without anyone really noticing what was going on. First Jon Daniels was named GM. If you've been reading here for a while, you know I've been none too complimentary of JD in the past. Don't worry--a proper apology is coming later. After a year, he named Ron Washington manager, and two years after that Nolan Ryan joined the team as president. Along the way, Daniels made several significant trades that stocked the farm system. This year, it all came together, and combined with the eventual purchase of the team by the Greenberg-Ryan group, the Rangers were poised for great things.

And if that's all there was, it would be great. But there is so much more to this team. Simply put, they have "it"--that something that you can't quite put a finger on, but it's there nonetheless. The Red Sox as the self-proclaimed Idiots had it in 2004. The Patriots had it 2001 on their way to their first Super Bowl, just like the Rams two years earlier with the Greatest Show on Turf. It is evidenced by the Claw and the Antler, which some around baseball have mocked. That's fine--we're having fun anyway. But mock at your own peril, because you are mocking It. Maybe you call it chemistry, fate, destiny, desire, want-to. Whatever. Just know that the Rangers have It.

And only those of us who have been through the long, lean years can really appreciate how special that is. I grew up in Dallas as a fan of all three (pre-Stars) major sports teams, but the Rangers were my favorite, for a few reasons. I played little league baseball, so I readily identified with the game. Baseball was on TV more, just by the nature of the long season. But mostly, it was because those were the games I went to. Sure, we went to a Mavs game or two each year, and I went to my one-and-only Cowboys game when I was 21. But I grew up in the 70's as a Junior Ranger. I was at old Arlington Stadium when that logo you see above wasn't retro. I remember powder blues. I had fan giveaways: hats and plastic helmets and shirts and backpacks and pennants. And greatest of all, a red Rangers Louisville Slugger. I went to the top of the bleachers and peeked over the edge at the parking lot. I went to summer clinics where I got to walk out on the field and listen to real pro ballplayers talk about what they did and how they did it. Night of high school graduation? I went to Arlington with some friends to watch the great Nolan Ryan pitch. In high school and college, we'd go to games late, because after the fourth inning they'd let you in for free. I was there on April 19, 1996, when the Rangers batted around three times in an hour long bottom of the eighth and put up 18 on the Orioles, beating them 26-7. My first date with my wife? Dinner at TGI Friday's Front Row Grill and two seats in the Home Run Porch. One of the the last things I did before leaving Dallas? Take pictures out at the Ballpark. This team was a huge part of my life, from childhood into adulthood.

I've been away from Dallas for eight years. I go to Orioles Sunday home games all season at beautiful Camden Yards. I enjoy the games there. They're having a rough time on the field, but it's a great organization that takes care of its fans. Still, I miss the Rangers, and nothing can replace that. I've got too much history in Arlington.

I've waited nearly 37 years for this magical run at the World Series, and I've never enjoyed sports success so much. Not the Cowboys' Super Bowls or the Stars' Stanley Cups. Not even the Longhorns' National Championship. The plus side of all those Rangers lean years? The last few weeks have been a string of Firsts. First playoff series win. First home playoff win. First American League Pennant.

Up next: First World Series Appearance by the Texas Rangers. It's been a long time coming, and it's all the sweeter for it.

It's time.

Return to blogging: MLB predictions and Ranger questions

2010-04-04T12:33:00.003-05:00

I haven't posted in a long time. Having a toddler, a full time job, and being in school part time will do that. Does this mean I'm back posting a lot? Probably not, but I had some Ranger opinions and MLB predictions I wanted to throw out there before the season started.

First, my Ranger concerns.
I am a Ranger homer if there ever was one. I always have hope that this year will be different and we will relive the glory days of the late 90s when the Rangers won a playoff game. Ahh, memories. In fact, even on this blog, I have spouted unvarnished optimism that only a true rose colored glasses wearing homer could say. Finally, it seems this may be the year. Listening to podcasts and reading some of the national writers, many believe Texas could actually breakthrough and make it back to the playoffs. So why am I worried? I'll give you a list.
1. The rotation is deep, but full of question marks. Scott Feldman- can he do it again? He will probably regress a little, but how much? Rich Harden has looked terrible in spring training. CJ Wilson hasn't started since 2005 and he was terrible then. Can be a true #2 like he is listed in Ranger rotation? Colby Lewis was terrible the last time he was starter, too. He was great in Japan, but can be good here? Spring training stories like Matt Harrison (best shape of his life, added velocity, etc) are a dime a dozen. Does it mean anything? Is Tommy Hunter anything more than a #4 starter? Is Brandon McCarthy ever going to make us stop throwing up whenever John Danks does something? When is Derek Holland going to be ready?
2. The lineup has question marks: Chris Davis was terrible last year, so can he better? Will Ian Kinsler be able to stay healthy (not so far this year)? Will Elvis Andrus progress offensively? Will Michael Young regress? Can Hamilton stay healthy? Will Borbon's poor walk rate kill the Ranger offense? Will either catcher be any good?
3. The bullpen without Wilson is a concern. I wonder if the Rangers gain enough in moving CJ Wilson to the rotation to make up for what they lost in the bullpen? Darren Oliver is their only lefty right now. Who will close if (when) Frankie Francisco gets hurt?
4. Is Ron Washington's cocaine use last year really no big deal?

I still have hope, but for some reason, my blind optimism just isn't there.

Here are my picks
AL East: Yankees (FAIL! FAIL! FAIL!)
AL Central: Twins
AL East: Rangers (disregard everything I just wrote)
Wild Card: Rays (I just can't in good conscious pick the Yankees and the Red Sox)
AL Champion: Yankees (suck)

NL East: Phillies
NL Central: Astros (Just kidding... I'm picking the Cardinals. The Astros will probably loss 100 games)
NL West: Rockies
Wild Card: Braves
NL Champion: Braves (A wild card team goes to the World Series all the time. Why can't I pick one as well.)
World Champion: Yankees (I'm picking them to win because my predictions are never right. Even in the 2nd chance bracket for the NCAA tournament, I got exactly ZERO in the Final Four. I'm trying to reverse jinx the Yankees)

AL Cy Young: Jon Lester
AL MVP: Joe Mauer
NL Cy Young: Roy Halladay
NL MVP: Ryan Howard

110 Percent Madness 2010

2010-03-15T18:28:00.003-05:00

The bracket is set and 110 Percent invites you to pick against our 'pros' in our third annual Pick 'em challenge. Click on 110 Percent Madness Tournament Challenge to play.

Here are the details:
Group name: 110 Percent
Group ID# 78381
Password: teameffort

This is hosted by Yahoo!, so you will need a Yahoo! ID to play.

We have a tweak to the scoring this year. In addition to the standard scoring (1 point for first round, 2 for second, 4 for third, 8-fourth, 16-fifth, 32-championship), there are also bonus points up for grabs. All you have to do is pick the upsets. For a correct upset pick, you will get bonus points equal to the difference in the seeds. For example, if you correctly pick a 10 seed over a 7 in the first round, you will get one point for the win and three bonus points for the upset (10-7).

Also, we'll do some crazy brackets like last year--coin flip, free throw percentage, that sort of thing. If you have an idea you'd like to try for a crazy bracket and have an extra email account, go ahead and give it a shot, naming the bracket appropriately (ex: Coin Flip) so we all know what brainless method is schooling us. Please, though, only one serious bracket per person--any extras will be deleted.

Good luck and let the madness begin.

110 Percent Pick'em Contest 2009 (and more!)

2009-09-08T20:22:00.006-05:00

If anyone is still reading around these parts, for the third year, we have posted an NFL Pick'em contest.

To join, go to Yahoo! Fantasy Sports Pro Football Pick'em. Here is the important information:

League name: 110 Percent

Group ID#: 34198

Password: allonthefield

New for this year is confidence points. We have had some tight races in the past, so maybe adding confidence values will help in that regard.

Also, we will have a Survival Football game this year. All you have to do is pick one winner each week. Sounds easy, right? Give it a try and see...

League name: 110 Percent

Group ID#: 12914

Password: allonthefield

Be sure to join up before the early games on Thursday, and good luck!

Pittsburgh and Detroit - Stanley Cup Rematch

2009-05-30T10:48:00.002-05:00

So, this doesn't happen too often. The last time was 1984. A rematch in the Stanley Cup finals. The best team for over a decade vs. the young upstarts who have two of the best players in the game today. I'm so excited for this series, I can't even describe it. I love the way both teams play (as much as I hate Detroit, they are very talented), I love the skill level, I love the toughness involved. This is going to be great. Here are three keys to the series:
1. Marc-Andre Fleury. Probably the most important part of this years' playoff success for Pittsburgh has been the play of Fleury. He has had some softies, but always has rebounded with a mental toughness he didn't seem to possess last year. He will have to fight through Detroit's screens, and they are good at them, in order to survive.
2. Detroit's health. Datsyuk, Lidstrom, Ericsson have missed time, and while Lidstrom is going to be back (Ericsson too?), Datsyuk is a game time decision. The Red Wings were able to get past the Blackhawks without those players, but the Penguins are in a different class. They are much deeper and talented than anyone the Red Wings have played so far.
3. Coaching. Specifically Bylsma. He is a rookie coach, but brought this team out of a mid-season slump which had them out of the playoffs to the Conference Finals. He's the real deal, but Babcock and his team won the year before. Should be interesting.

Honorable Mentions: Detroit's "Going to the net", Pittsburgh's added toughness, Malkin's presence, Hossa's defection.

Before these playoffs, I wasn't that impressed with Crosby. I preferred the flash of Ovechkin and Sid the kid seemed almost dull in comparison. I know why now. I never watched him that closely. His drive and determination are so impressive. He and Malkin are the real deal. I've been won over. I'm officially a fan. Despite the fact that Detroit is a powerhouse, and most peoples' pick, I'm picking Pittsburgh in 7. I hope that they can rub it in Marian Hossa's face for picking the wrong team. I hope that the league's new superstars can hoist the Cup. Most of all, I'm hoping for a great series, and I doubt I'll be disappointed.

Thoughts on the Rangers

2009-05-29T18:40:00.003-05:00

I know it's been a long time since I posted, but between a baby, school, a new job, and the goal of running a freakin half marathon, I haven't had time. Instead of 110%, I've got about 2%. It'll just have to do right now.

For the last two years, I've given ridiculously optimistic outlooks for the upcoming Ranger season and then watch them come out and play like crap. So this year I don't have the time to really write anything and they come out of the gate playing pretty well. At this point, they are 8 games over .500 and 3 games ahead of the Angels in the AL West (after winning the first game of the double header with the As they are now 9 games over. Good times.) A pretty heady place for this team to be at this point in the season. Unfortunately, the point is still May. It's a long way from October and the dog days of July and August that have killed so many good Ranger teams are still a month away.

It's probably good that I didn't write this review last week right after they swept the Angels and Mariners at home. After getting swept by the Tigers in Detroit and losing 2 of 3 to the Yankees (surrounded by a sweep of the Astros which is really no great shakes), I'm not real giddy about the Rangers right now. In fact, I'm not real sure how to feel about the Rangers right now. I should be feeling good, but I think I've been burned more than a couple of times. Perhaps I'm waiting for the other shoe to drop. Anyway, here are some things I like and dislike about this team as it is presently constructed.

1. Elvis Andrus and the defense. The clearest improvement of the Rangers is the defense. Andrus over Young is an upgrade at short. Young over Blalock/ Davis/ Metcalf/ Vazquez is an upgrade at third. Davis over Blalock/ Shelton/ Catalanotto/ Broussard is an upgrade at first. Kinsler and Saltalamacchia have both improved in their defense. We know the pitching needs an upgrade, but a good way to help a pitching staff is the shore up the defense. How many plays has Andrus made that Young couldn't have caught with a net? Those are outs that the team didn't make last year. And Elvis has been much better than expected. Everyone thought he'd be able to flash the leather, but he has more than held his own at bat, being the rookie leader in on base percentage, slugging and batting average among qualifiers. Remember he's 20. He'd be the 3rd youngest player in AAA. Wow.

2. The arrival of Derek Holland, the Rangers #2 prospect according to Baseball America. In past years, top Rangers prospects (especially pitchers) could be sorta like being called the prettiest ugly girl at the dance. Not anymore. Holland is for real. It feels so good to hear about a top pitching prospect, see him come up (after not being traded), and have him not puke all over himself. His first two starts have been pretty good against the Astros and just ok against the Yankees. But he is apparently for real. It's not too crazy to think that he'll be the #2 starter next year. I mean a real live #2, building up to #1 soon. Not a #4 thrust into a #2 role because they don't have anybody else.

3. The pitching in general has been better, especially the starters going deeper into games. The deeper a starter goes in a game, the less the soft underbelly of the bullpen is exposed. Make no mistake, the worst pitchers on a team are in middle relief. The less they pitch the better. Last year, the main Ranger middle relievers, Josh Rupe and Jamey Wright, pitched so often that their arms almost fell off. Hopefully the trend of working deep into games can continue.

What I don't like.
1. Strikeouts. I am concerned about the Rangers offense. Whenever people talk about the Rangers, it's always, "Oh, you know they'll hit, but what about their pitching?" Well, the Rangers offense has been less than stellar. Ian Kinsler, Josh Hamilton, Hank Blalock, and Chris Davis have each performed under expectations with Davis striking out at a record pace. Over the last couple of weeks or so he has been the consummate all or nothing (mostly nothing), home runs and strikeouts. And the team in general just does not work counts or walk that much. The more you work the count the quicker you get into the sorry parts of the bullpen. I wonder if the Rangers need to look for another hitter who can work counts. Maybe they miss Milton Bradley more than they might have imagined. Don't get me wrong. The Rangers still have a strong offense and they can really beat the living daylights out of bad pitching. But they sure made Dontrelle Willis look like he was back.

2. The Bullpen. I bet every time Jon Daniels hears the song Upgrade U by Beyonce, he thinks, "I really need to upgrade my bullpen." Frankie Francisco has been awesome, but C.J. Wilson is the reincarnation of Mitch Williams, Darren O'Day was a waiver claim this year, Jason Jennings hasn't been good in like 5 years, Eddie Guardado is now a member of the Doug Jones Hall of Fame (Dan Rosendahl knows what I'm talking about- an 80 mph fastball), and if Kris Benson pitches again for the Rangers then someone needs a CAT scan. If the Rangers could add just one thing for the stretch run, I think it should be a real live 8th inning guy. How about Huston Street or Chad Qualls? Just throwing a couple of names out there. Perhaps the solution resides within the organization right now. Maybe Neftali Feliz can be the 09 Rangers version of Francisco Rodriguez.

So, there you go. My expectation is that the Rangers stay in the race the rest of the year. They have a chance to make the playoffs for the first time in 10 years, but they may also collapse in August as happened last year and 2005.

NHL Playoffs - 2nd Round

2009-04-30T12:36:00.002-05:00

So, I did pretty good last round in that I picked the winners in 6 of the 8 match-ups. And if you factor in that I mentioned that the two match-ups I missed were the ones I thought could go the other way, I feel pretty good about that. Especially since the Devils were 1:28 from moving on... Jeez.

So, I'll make this quick.

Boston (1) vs Carolina (6) - Boston in 6. Carolina got lucky in getting by the Devils. Boston is better.

Washington (2) vs Pittsburgh (4) - Washington in 7. This should be a great match-up. I am extremely interested in this series. In the end, I think Ovechkin will win.

Detroit (2) vs Anaheim (8) - Detroit in 7. I think Anaheim is confident enough to take Detroit to the limit, but Detroit is more talented and playoff-tested.

Vancouver (3) vs Chicago (4) - Vancouver in 6. Luongo has taken it to another level. Chicago is playing well, and Khabibulin is as well, but Vancouver is stronger than Calgary and Goaltending will be the difference.

PJ

NHL Playoffs - 2009 Edition

2009-04-15T11:31:00.003-05:00

So, it's that time of year again. For me, a little bitter-sweet. I love NHL playoffs, but it's very odd not to see the Stars in the postseason. I'm hoping that this year was an aberration, but that is another column. Today, I'll be going through the 8 different match-ups for the first round, and giving a couple thoughts as to who will win and why. Let's start with the East.

Boston (1) vs. Montreal (8). The classic rivalry is ignited again. The Bruins have been a consistent force all year, but the Canadiens have faltered down the stretch and limped into the playoffs. Boston has been getting great goaltending all season, the defense, which lacks star-power other than Chara, has been great, and the forwards have been great. Kessel and the return of Bergeron have been huge for this team. Montreal's goaltending can be spectacular, but Price can also be ordinary. The defense is injured and as such not as effective. The forwards can be fantastic, but if they cannot keep the puck out of their own net, then it won't matter. Boston in 6

Washington (2) vs NY Rangers (7). This is a case of opposites. Defense and Goaltending vs. Scoring. One of the best talents in the game, Ovechkin makes those around him better. Washington's Achilles will be Theodore, but if he can regain his form, not even NY's Lundqvist will be able to stop them. Washington in 5

New Jersey (3) vs Carolina (6). These two teams are more even than the records indicate. Cam Ward has been playing out of his mind and Brodeur has been shaky since becoming the all-time wins leader. The speed of Carolina will be a problem, but the defense and timely scoring of New Jersey will be enough. Brodeur will be back to form. NJ in 7

Pittsburgh (4) vs Philadelphia (5). This will be a fantastic battle. These two teams are so evenly matched, and they really don't like each other. Every category is a push except in forward talent which is why I'm going with Pittsburgh in 7.

West
San Jose (1) vs Anaheim (8). I hate the Sharks, and I'm not a big fan of Anaheim, but this should be a very good series. Selanne doesn't have to be the top guy since the emergence of Ryan and Getzlaf. Anaheim is also starting an untested Hiller against a fiercely talented offense including a rejuvenated Marleau. Sharks in 5

Detroit (2) vs Columbus (7). Hitchcock is a great equalizer and will get the most out of this Blue Jackets team. But, this is Detroit and Columbus won't stay with them long. Detroit in 5

Vancouver (3) vs St. Louis (6). St. Louis has been on a roll going into the playoffs and while Vancouver hasn't been as strong to the finish, they have all the pieces necessary to move on. Vancouver in 7

Chicago (4) vs Calgary (5). These teams are also incredibly matched up. Dynamic scoring (with an edge to the Hawks, solid defense (with an edge to Calgary), and great goaltending. But, Khabibulin, who has the best name in hockey since Nikolai Borschevsky, will be the difference maker. Chicago in 6.

So... I picked all favorites... I don't think I like that, but it's what makes the most sense. The two series where I could be way wrong. Carolina and NJ, and Sharks and Ducks. But, I'm sticking with my picks.

The Dallas Stars are done.

2009-03-24T14:29:00.003-05:00

So, as I write, the Dallas Stars are 3 points out of a playoff spot with 10 games left to play. A year ago, the Stars were limping into the playoffs where they put on an incredible run, but that will not happen this year. They are toast and here is why. Let's start with the obvious.
1. Injuries. This team has been decimated with injuries this year, and while some people may say that isn't an excuse, I doubt any of them follow a team that has lost it's best puck-moving defensemen/power play quarterback (Sergei Zubov), It's best forward/Captain (Brenden Morrow), and for the last couple months, one of it's top two remaining forwards (Brad Richards). Those losses for extended amount of time, plus lengthy absences from others (Jere Lehtinen and Steve Ott), have contributed to the Stars let down.

2. Lost Personnel - In the off season, the Stars lost players such as Antti Miettinen Stu Barnes and Mattias Norstrom. Miettinen wasn't a huge loss, but combined with Stu's retirement, left them without a checking center they could rely on for a lot of the season. Norstrom's absence means that forwards aren't as wary of going into the crease as they would have been.

3. Turco's play. To say it has been unsteady would be an understatement. Unfortunately, the coach couldn't even put in a backup for any amount of time to give Turco a few games to re-focus because this team has no battle-tested goaltender in it's system. Any game I saw another goalie in net, I penciled in as a loss.

So, the bright side.
1. The off-season will be good for the Stars. Since they will not make the playoffs, there will be plenty of time to heal and for key personnel to decide their futures. This could be the year that both Mike Modano and Sergei Zubov decide to retire. Each could be effective for another year, but it depends a lot on health. My bet would be that Zubov retires for health reasons, and Modano plays his final year. Either way, the health of Morrow, Lehtinen, and Richards for a whole season would do wonders.

2. Next, there is the emergence of both Loui Eriksson and James Neal. These are young players who should only get better with another year. Add in that Ribiero, Richards, and Morrow are all still very young, and you've got a great nucleus to build around.

3. Finally, Turco should rebound from a very odd year. This reminds me of when Modano had an off year a few years back and came back very focused and looking like the Modano of old. I anticipate a return to form for Marty.

So, I hope that is the case because after a disappointing year, it's never too early to get excited about the next one.

110 Percent Madness 2009

2009-03-15T21:36:00.003-05:00

The bracket is set and 110 Percent invites you to pick against our 'pros' in our third annual Pick 'em challenge. Click on 110 Percent Madness Tournament Challenge to play.

Here are the details:
Group name: 110 Percent
Group ID# 73102
Password: teameffort

This is hosted by Yahoo!, so you will need a Yahoo! ID to play.

We have a tweak to the scoring this year. In addition to the standard scoring (1 point for first round, 2 for second, 4 for third, 8-fourth, 16-fifth, 32-championship), there are also bonus points up for grabs. All you have to do is pick the upsets. For a correct upset pick, you will get bonus points equal to the difference in the seeds. For example, if you correctly pick a 10 seed over a 7 in the first round, you will get one point for the win and three bonus points for the upset (10-7).

Also, we'll do some crazy brackets like last year--coin flip, free throw percentage, that sort of thing. If you have an idea you'd like to try for a crazy bracket and have an extra email account, go ahead and give it a shot, naming the bracket appropriately (ex: Coin Flip) so we all know what brainless method is schooling us. Please, though, only one serious bracket per person--any extras will be deleted.

Good luck and let the madness begin.

Don't let the door hit ya

2009-03-06T14:22:00.004-06:00

In PJ’s last post, he did something quite amazing. He made many accurate observations regarding Dallas and Terrell Owens, and still arrived at the wrong conclusion. Allow me to explain.

In theory, I agree with each of his observations. A head coach and an offensive coordinator should be able to control a player. And T.O.’s disruptions should be easily shrugged off by the rest of the team. However, this is not the reality of the Dallas Cowboys. We do have a puppet head coach who is unwilling and/or unable to assert his authority. And clearly, T.O. was a disruption. What should have happened last season is irrelevant. Roy Williams may or may not be the new number one, but that is also irrelevant when discussing if the Cowboys should keep T.O.

Besides all that, T.O. can’t produce like he once did. I completely agree that Jason Garrett needs to do a better job as offensive coordinator—I’m no fan of his work—but it’s not entirely his fault. T.O. simply can’t do the things he once did. PJ acknowledges this, but attributes it all to the failure of Garrett. The fact is that T.O. has lost a step, and has developed a reluctance to sacrifice his body to make a catch. And despite his reputation, T.O. did take plays off on occasion last year. This drop in production alone justifies his release.

However, that, of course, is not the only reason to let him go. We may not have the specifics in this “he said, he said” drama, but there can be no doubt that T.O. divided the locker room. Patrick Crayton followed T.O. like a puppy dog, and Roy Williams was starting to do the same. Releasing Owens sends the message to the impressionable players that there is a limit. Hopefully, this will serve as a signal to them to cut the foolishness—Orlando Scandrick has already gotten the message.

PJ also points out that most wide receivers always think they are open. True enough. If T.O. only said he was open, there would be no problem. His act went well beyond that this year, however, and that is what makes it unacceptable. PJ also points out that T.O. was never in trouble off the field. Also true, but to be honest, if I have to choose between a good teammate who has legal issues and a locker room cancer who keeps his nose clean, well, give me Michael Irvin every time.

Having said all that, T.O. is the symptom, not the problem. As I said before, a coach should be able to control his team, and one player’s antics shouldn’t derail a team. But that’s not how things work in Dallas, and that isn’t T.O.’s fault. It has been common to say in years past that Jerry the Owner should fire Jerry the GM, meaning that Jerry is a good owner but a poor talent evaluator. I don’t believe that is true anymore. Jerry the Owner is causing these problems. He has repeatedly emasculated his head coach, most recently with the gag order he implemented at Valley Ranch. Until Jerry the Owner changes the culture at Valley Ranch, these problems will continue.

T.O. is gone, and that is a good thing. By no means, however, is it the last change that needs to happen with the Cowboys.

T-Oh no...

2009-03-05T12:22:00.004-06:00

So, I haven't written in a LONG time as I am prone to do which is odd cause I really don't have as much on my plate as normal. But, something happened last night that I really feel the need to discuss at least a little bit. The Dallas Cowboys released Terrell Owens. First, I want to look at just numbers involving this deal and then I'll go into my opinion.

Over the past three seasons, TO had more TD receptions than anyone in the NFL. Last season he led the team with yardage (1052) and TDs (10). He is due to give the Cowboys a $9 Million hit against the cap this year instead of $8 Million this and some amount next year. With TO, the Cowboys finished the last three years ranked 5th, 3rd, and 13th in total offense. And 4th, 2nd, and 18th in points. They have also won 0 playoff games.

The laundry list of why he was let go includes the following:
1. He had too much power. The offensive coordinator, QB, and even head coach had to run a certain number of plays through him or he would get frustrated.
2. He's not as good as he used to be. He's 35 and WR's after that age tend to lose a step.
3. They've got the incumbent WR waiting in Roy Williams.
4. His antics are a constant distraction in and out of the lockerroom.

So, now for my opinion: I don't like this move. Not yet anyway. Here's why.
1. So he had too much power... he is still a player right? He's not the coach, not in charge of personnel? Doesn't call plays? So what if he pouts if he isn't getting the ball. Shouldn't that be up to the coaches to handle? I don't have the numbers in front of me exactly, but how many games did they win when he wasn't prominently involved? I would wager it is small. If the Cowboys had something other than a puppet for a head coach, he could have handled that.
2. He's declining. Yea, WR's tend to do so. But, other coordinators tend to find ways to make those wideouts more effective. I'm still not sure that Jason Garrett knows that he needs to get TO in motion or some other method so that he can escape the jamming at the line that tended to make him less effective.
3. Roy Williams? Really? With the Cowboys last year and the other teams' best cover team on TO, he had 19 receptions for 1 TD in ten games. I'm not that impressed so far.
4. His antics are a disruption. His celebrations did give the Cowboys 15 yard penalties after he scored, but he didn't take plays off. He ran solid routes, and other than his drop-happy first year in which he still managed to lead the team in TD's, he caught the ball when it was thrown to him.
Off the field he was always getting in trouble and alienating teammates... oh wait... he wasn't ever in trouble. You don't hear about him off the field unless some reporter is shoving a mic in his face and asking if the Cowboys used him enough. He would say no, as would EVERY OTHER WR IN THE LEAGUE! No receiver ever thinks he gets the ball enough. There were rumors of lockerroom issues, but nothing really solid.

Now, TO has had issues in the past that continue to haunt him. But, since he's been with the Boys, did he throw his QB under the bus? No. Did he work every game? Yes. Did he divide the lockerroom as it was said in the past? That's unclear, but apparently enough for Jerry.

Based on what I know so far, here are my predictions for next season:
1. I think that unless the Cowboys can get a top-flight receiver to replace Owens, which I don't believe they have in Roy Williams, there will be another season of missing the playoffs.
2. A NFC East opponent will pick up TO (Don't count out the Giants or Redskins) and he will kill the Cowboys every time they play.
3. Fans will continue to hate Jerry Jones the GM and wish he would be a quiet owner.

In the end, this was not a good move for the Cowboys. I hope I'm wrong.

Schadenfreude

2009-01-18T22:15:00.003-06:00

The last couple of days, I've been under the weather. Sore throat, runny nose, congestion, mild fever. You know, the regular stuff. I posted my status on facebook as "Russell is still sick." Today, I thought about posting, "I am feeling schadenfreude." But I was afraid someone would reply, "Is it contagious?"

No, schadenfreude is a German word which basically means having a feeling of joy at someone else misfortune. It's not generally a positive feeling to have. I mean, what kind of jerk enjoys it when bad things happens to others? However, tonight, I am feeling a great deal of joy at the misfortune of Philadelphia Eagles' fans. They lost their forth NFC championship game in their last five tries.

Admittedly, the Eagles have an enviable record. In the last ten years since the arrival of Donovan McNabb and Andy Reid, the Eagles have made the playoffs seven times, the NFC championship five times (three of which they played at home), and the Super Bowl once (which they lost to the Patriots). But it must really suck to get to the NFC championship, be favored, and just know in your heart of hearts that your team is not going to have whatever it takes to cross that threshold.

Now, honestly, I would gladly trade the Cowboys' recent history for the Eagles. These two teams played a winner take all game just three weeks ago and the Cowboys didn't even bother to show up. But at the end of the day, let's take a quick look at the trophy case: Five to nothing. So, Eagles fans: HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA.

If I were in Jerry Jones' shoes...

2009-01-10T20:15:00.005-06:00

One talk radio guy I listen to alot is a money guy named Dave Ramsey. People call in with their money problems and he tells them what they need to do. It usually has something to do with selling stuff and getting out debt. He often prefaces his advice with "If I were in your shoes, I would..."

As I've been thinking about the Cowboys and what they need to do, I've usually been at a loss past firing Wade Phillips. But after I thought about it from the perspective of what I would do if I were in Jerry's shoes, some ideas come to mind. (Since I'm in Jerry's shoes, I'll use the first person.) I'm going resist Jerry Jones' skin jokes, though.

***IMPORTANT NOTE*** I don't expect ANY of these things to actually happen, but here are my ideas.

1. I'm going to call a press conference (I expect Jerry to do this any time now, but he surely won't say this) and say that my biggest mistake was firing Jimmy Johnson and my second biggest mistake was hiring Barry Switzer. Just about every mistake I have made since that second Super Bowl win (atrocious drafts from 94-02, hiring Chan Gailey, Dave Campo, and Wade Phillips; signing Deion Sanders, not drafting Randy Moss, trading for Joey Galloway, signing Terrell Owens and Adam Jones, etc.) has come in reaction to those two mistakes. (Yes, I'm saying Deion Sanders was a mistake despite the fact that it helped bring us a fifth Super Bowl title. It along with Switzer coming was the beginning of undisciplined play and attitude that has plagued this team since 1994 and still plagues it today.) I personally apologize to Jimmy Johnson, in fact, he's here at the press conference.

2. In that same press conference, I fire Jerry Jones, the GM. Just looking over my years as GM since the last Super Bowl in 95-96 season, the Cowboys have won exactly 1 playoff game in only six appearances. My record of player acquisition has gone back and forth between awful and dumbfounding with small bits of greatness here and there. Let's look at the draft since 1994 when Jimmy Johnson left. Out of 122 players drafted, I drafted 4 All Pros (Larry Allen, Roy Williams, Jason Witten, and DeMarcus Ware) and 7 Pro Bowlers (Coakley, Adams, Ellis, Gurode, Newman, Barber, and Folk). Think of some of the trades I've made: Two #1s for Joey Galloway and #1 for Roy Williams. I could go on about dumb picks and terrible free agent signings, but it can get laborious. I have a record only the Detroit Lions and Texas Rangers could admire.

3. So, who should I hire as GM? How about Jimmy Johnson? Or throw all my money at Bill Cowher and give him controll. Or how about Scott Pioli or Bill Polian? I find the best football man who will work for me, give him control, and get out of the way. I want him to hire the coach and I promise that I won't go over his head. What kind of coach? I don't know, but no retreads. I had that not too long ago, but I decided I'd rather have Terrell Owens than Bill Parcells. I know Parcells wasn't perfect. His draft record had some issues as well, specifically on the offensive line, but he was building something that going in the right direction when he decided that he was too old for this stuff. And that leads me to my next moves.

4. The biggest problem I see with the team is a complete lack of discipline, which can be seen in the dumb penalties and the continual December collapses. I start right away by meeting with the team and telling them the days of "Camp Cupcake" are no more. I want a change in the culture up there. Some guys are going to get cut, and since the real Jerry has saved me the trouble of cutting Adam Jones, I don't have to worry about that. In fact, remember that press conference? One of the things I say is that I am really sorry about getting Jones to begin with. He was terrible on the field and a disaster off it. This is the last time I sign a guy like Jones. That reminds me. Tank Johnson? Gone. I going to hit guys where they feel it: in the wallet and in playing time. If a guy isn't ready for training camp, he can be suspended a game. If a player continues to make the same mistakes on the field (Flozell Adams and false starts for example), they can sit on the bench for a series. Even if it means losing a game, we have to change the culture of this team. I assume (talking as Russell, not as Jerry) that Terrell Owens is a cancer in the locker room. If that is true, then Owens needs to be looking for another team, salary cap be damned. Of course, if he isn't a problem, then he still has a place here. But this year, there were clearly problems in the locker room. Whoever was behind the problems, needs to either get their stuff together or hit the road. Again, I know there is a salary cap, but I think the problems we see every year are indicative of a systemic problem that requires a radical change.

5. Another change I want to see is in the offense. I look at this team and see a group tailor made for a power running game. I see a huge offensive line and three really good backs, as well as a quarterback with a troubling interception problem. (Speaking of which. If Romo continues to throw ridiculous passes and interceptions, he can sit. That means I want a back up who can actually play. No more Brad Johnson and Brooks Bollinger.) I also see an NFL in which most of the playoff teams are running teams. I mean why in the world does 3rd and 2 require a shotgun? We should be able to run the ball down people's throats. That's the offense I want to see.

So that's my prescription. What do you think?

110 Percent Hall of Fame 2008: Barry Sanders

2008-12-31T16:16:00.002-06:00

As a Cowboys fan, I always sided with Emmitt Smith in the "Who's the greatest running back?" debate. And Emmitt provided plenty of support for my case: Super Bowl rings, MVPs, rushing titles, TD records: Emmitt had them all.

But Barry was no slouch, either. He was a Pro Bowler in each of his ten NFL seasons, and was first team All Pro six times. When he retired at thirty, he declined the opportunity to break the career rushing record that season. Emmitt set the record four years later, but Barry could have shattered it with only a few more seasons in his prime. Look at that picture again--look at those hips, that ankle. Bodies are simply not supposed to move that way. Most pictures of Barry look like bad Photoshop jobs--if it wasn't Sanders, we wouldn't believe it was real.

And let's not forget that while the NFL instituted the "Emmitt rule" to keep players from taking off their helmets on the field, Sanders quietly handed the ball to the ref after yet another score--classy.

Bottom line: Emmitt won because he had help, starting with an awesome offensive line and fellow stars at quarterback and wide receiver, not to mention a killer defense. Barry had none of these things. Any success the Lions had, including the win over Emmitt and the Cowboys in the 1991 playoffs, was due almost entirely to Barry.

In fact, that's what led to Barry's early retirement. Ten years of not getting a commitment to win from the Lions was enough--Barry walked away from it all. I was so convinced he would come back during the season, either with the Lions or another team, that I used a late round pick in my fantasy draft on him. Unfortunately for me and other NFL fans, I was wrong on that pick--Sanders never even looked back.

With Emmitt joining Sanders in retirement in 2004, the distance of time has finally allowed me to make a confession. Taking nothing away from Emmitt Smith: Barry was better.

Cowboy Fan? Yea, I still am. Despite you Mr. Jones

2008-12-30T15:37:00.003-06:00

So, you may be wondering who this is as the last time I contributed a post was... well.. I'd rather not say. But, after watching (most) of the debacle on Sunday and having a day or two to digest it, I felt the need to address a few things. I agree with Rus' comments about the team having no heart. To point it out that much more, a fan actually picketed the Cowboys facility yesterday and was accosted by Bradie James. Normally, I'd make a funny joke about how James should have had more heart on Sunday than he did against this fan. But, I don't think James is to blame for the loss on Sunday. No, it has to go to the top, and like it always does, will go no where from there.

For the past couple days, I've been thinking that the Cowboys should fire the coach, but that's not the place to start. The GM is the one who really needs to be fired. Giving a large contract to Romo before he had a full couple of seasons as a starter was either shrewd, or foolish and right now, it's looking like the latter. Trading draft picks for Roy Williams who has done nothing since (or before) was foolish (I'm censoring myself in wording). Siding with Terrell Owens rather than a multiple Super Bowl winning coach was foolish. Bringing in character guys like Pacman and giving him opportunity without having good reason on or off the field was foolish. All of these things would have led any other GM in the league to be tossed to the curb. The problem of course being that the GM and Owner share the same skin (No Jimmy Johnson "Michael Jackson" jokes please).

After the GM goes, the coach needs to go next. He's stated that he plans on changing his approach a little next season, but to me those sounded like the words he was given to say by the GM who loves having a puppet for a coach. I understand the players have to execute a plan, but three things were curious to me during the game. 1. The team did not look ready to play, as they haven't most of the year. They have started slow especially lately. That is completely inexcusable in the type of game they were in on Sunday. 2. The defense seemed completely confused whenever Westbrook would slide down to a receiver position (something the Eagles do quite frequently). I'm not saying that the coach isn't putting time in watching film. I'm not naive enough to really think that, but that should be a formation that is heavily practiced against. 3. The team has completely taken on the form of its coach with the "whatever happens, happens". While that's a nice attitude to having in life, the absolute last thing I want to hear from my quarterback after that game is: "well, if this is the worst thing to ever happen to me, I've got a pretty good life going on." But, I'll get to Tony Romo in a minute.

Offensive Coordinator... I really don't know. For the brilliance he has shown, Jason Garrett has also shown some curious decisions. Throw out the games Tony was out, because I think Jessica Simpson would be a better option than Brad Johnson at QB. Not getting Felix Jones involved more before he was hurt was a curious choice. There is some confusion whether it is Tony or Jason trying to be forced to involve certain receivers, but either way, why are big physical receivers not being used like they were last season early on? The offense has seemed awful, and a lot of that has to go to Garrett. I think he's gone if the Lions want him. I wouldn't want to be associated with this mess at this point. I don't think it's a good thing for Dallas to lose him however. Yes, he had a bad season, but there seems to be a lot of whispers that was more to do with no support from the owner or coach.

Defensive Coordinator.. Remember when the Cowboys improved their defense after Wade threw his coordinator under the bus because they had a couple really good defensive games right when everyone got healthy? How did that work out when they played the last two teams of the season?

Players. You can't fire all your players and I don't think they should. There are some very talented people on the team, but they all need to keep their mouths shut. Romo - act like you care more. Nothing inspires confidence in your on-field leader like hearing the quote from above. Also, see how Peyton Manning has extra practices with his receivers to work on timing? Maybe try that or something. Witten - Change NOTHING. There is not a coach in the league who wouldn't want Witten as their tight end. (Or maybe even QB after last week). Owens - Pipe Down. When you were holding your peace during the games Romo was out, it was refreshing. Insinuating that the world is against you just makes you look like the primadonna everyone already thinks you are. Roy Williams - Actually, I like to pretend that neither one still plays for the Cowboys. Pacman - Make a play. Any play..

So, where does that leave me. My favorite team is awful and I don't think they'll turn around anytime soon. My second favorite team finished 11-5 and is not in the playoffs while Arizona (9-7) and San Diego (8-8) are hosting first round games. I lost the two rounds of playoffs in Fantasy Football, and saw my lead disappear and then finished fourth in Pick 'em. I think I'm glad football season is over.

Now to get to work on that Larry Bird column. Sorry Chris...

No Heart

2008-12-28T16:53:00.001-06:00

I’m writing this at half time and there is no freakin way this is turning around. If it happens, I’ll gladly eat all the crow in the world, but I just don’t believe it can happen.

I have always been a Cowboys fan. I take pride in the fact that I was a Cowboys fan when 3-13 and 1-15 was the results and Steve Peuller and Paul Palmer wore the silver and blue. In fact, I go further than that. I vaguely remember The Catch and No, Danny No!

But I’m just completely dismayed by the performance in this team this year in general and this game in particular. In just the first half, I saw all this aspects of the 12 Days of Christmas I wrote about, except 12 men on the field. Missed tackles, terrible blocking, horrendous play calling, stupid interceptions, dropped passes, dumb penalties, bad play by their best players (Terrence Newman, Tony Romo, Terrell Owens, DeMarcus Ware, Flozell Adams, Roy Williams- In fact, I’m trying to think of someone who played well so far and I can’t do it.)

The facts are the facts. This team has no heart. There are, as is said in Texas, all hat and no cattle. This team is a collection of ill fitting parts that apparently can’t play together to save their lives. With everything to play for, the Cowboys are playing like it’s a preseason game.

I can’t tell you that I’m turning in my Cowboys fan badge, but this team is just asking for the fan base to turn on them.

Added midway through the 3rd (34-3): Back in 60s before they won their first Super Bowl that they couldn't win the big one. At least those teams lost big ones in the playoffs. (Now it's 41-3)

The Airing of Grieviences

2008-12-23T10:00:00.003-06:00

Today is Festivus and with it comes the airing of grievances, because as the Festivus patriarch Frank Costanza said, "I've got a lot of problems with you people!" Because this is a sports blog (such that it is) it will only have my sports grievances. They are in no particular order, just as they come to me.

1. I'm looking at you, Dallas Cowboys, first, because you are foremost in my mind right now. Every one of you should be ashamed of yourselves for way you've performed this year. I look back on the season and see 1, maybe 2, well played games. But I swear, you have got to be the worst coached, most undisciplined, stupidest team in the history of professional sports! How can you continue to get ridiculous penalties at the worst times? Without fail, every game, there will be at least one snap that comes at the wrong count, 5 false start or offsides calls, several absolutely awful throws by Tony Romo, 2 dumb personal fouls, atrocious special teams play, a crying wide receiver, and 6 dumb looks from Wade Phillips. Has there are ever been a higher profile, less accomplished team than this one? Norm Hitzges call you the Dallas Resumes and that is exactly what you are. A bunch of resumes that have done absolutely nothing. It makes me sick watching it. This last game against the Ravens is just a case in point. Every single part of the team had a hand in that debacle. Romo throwing two of the worst thrown pics I have ever seen, just throwing it up for grabs, and would it kill the receivers to play a little defense on those plays? Two Ravens scoring drives made up mostly by Cowboys penalties. Every offensive play, there was someone coming free, and no adjustment? I know the Ravens are good on defense, but no one should get free runs at your QB every single play! I don't even want to think about those last two runs by the Ravens where there was almost no resistance, a couple of arm tackles and then nothing but space. And the special teams are a laughing stock. And somehow, through no doing of your own, you are on the precipice of the playoffs with a win in Philly on Sunday. Is there any one who has confidence in the your mental make up to win this game? I don't. Forget the mental make up. Does anyone think this coaching staff can come up with a game plan that might make a lick of sense? I don't. The blame for all this lies at the feet of Jerry Jones. This off season, Jerry, cut Terrell Owens, fire Wade Phillips and Jason Garrett and every one else on the staff, and take a dump truck full of your money and drop it in Bill Cowher's lap and give him control of the team. I know you won't do it. Your ego is too big.

2. Ok, Mavs. How stupid do you look for the most recent dumb Jason Kidd trade? Way to go Mavs! Most teams only get a chance to blow the trade of a player once. You did it twice. And what do you have for your trouble? A 35 year old point guard and a ninth place team. Awesome! You aren't even in the same zip code as the Lakers or the Spurs or the Hornets. Good bye challenging for NBA titles, hello mediocrity where you're just quite good enough to get run out of the playoffs in the first round, which is exactly what happened the last two years.

3. Stars. Are y'all even playing? I have no feelings one way or the other.

4. If I had written this a couple of weeks ago, I'd would have ranted for pages at the injustice of college football. Quite frankly, I'm ranted out on that. The bottom line is how the hell does the Oklahoma Sooners get away with losing to Texas on a neutral field and making the national championship game? Remember a few years ago when OU got plastered in the Big 12 Championship game and still made the national championship game (only to get predictably run off the field in that game)? Does OU have pictures of someone? There is something screwed up about the system and it's not gonna change because people are stupid. At the same time, Texas, you should have just stopped Tech. You had the game won and gave it away.

5. Finally, the Rangers. Why does anyone remain a fan of a team determined to hold the payroll below that of the Kansas City Royals? As Tom Hicks smugly says, "I'll be glad to expand the payroll when attendance rises." What happened in the last 10 years to make people think that anything is going to change? At least they didn't finish in last place in the division. They finished 2nd! Wow! A full 21 games out of first place! That's progress. Oh, we may sign Ben Sheets, but we're gonna have to trade Hank Blalock and his 6 million dollar salary. We could get Randy Johnson, but we are going to have to trade Vincente Padilla. Your payroll isn't going over $70 million dollars while legendary spenders like the Royals and the Pirates laugh at that total. Now I am not one of those people that think spending hundreds of millions of dollars is the way to the promised land, but Tom Hicks, you are deliberately ham stringing this team. If you can't belly up to the bar, sell the team. Hey, I think the Rangers are going in the right direction. The Rangers are generally considered to have, if not the best, then a top 2 or 3 farm systems in baseball. But no one cares about the minors. We want results in Arlington. It better happen soon or you'll really see what an empty ballpark looks like.

So, those are my sports grievances. I feel a little better. I think.

VY vs. Collins

2008-12-21T22:55:00.003-06:00

Chris wants me to give a home town view of Vince Young vs. Kerry Collins. Before today's games, some people from outside of Nashville seemed to think that the Titans need to go ahead and bench Collins for Young. I'll tell you right now: There is no way in hell Jeff Fisher will bench Collins unless he's hurt. He could have come out today and throw 5 pics today and they wouldn't pull Collins. Well, he might have pulled him for today, but next Sunday against the Colts and in three weeks in the playoffs it's going to be Collins, no question. Fisher just doesn't work like that. In fact, I think they should have run some plays of Vince. I mean everyone else is running the Wildcat formation. Why can't the Titans? It's because Fisher doesn't work that way. The only way Vince sees the field is injury or blowout.

I think the issues falls to two things. First, I doubt that Vince is really Fisher's kind of quarterback. I think he definitely prefers the "caretaker" QB, and that's exactly what Collins is. If anyone says that the Titans are where they are simply because of Collins is blind. They are here because of the running game, especially rookie Chris Johnson with complements from LenDale White, so-called Slash and Dash, a powerful defense, and a good kicking game. Collins has been good and for the most part has avoided throwing stupid interceptions unlike some quarterbacks I know, but he's not anything special.

The other issue is what happened during week 1. Apparently Vince quit on the team right before he hurt his knee. They had to talk him into going back out there after an interception. Do the other players want him to play? Has he used to time to get better at the things that he was struggling with, such as reading defenses and making good decisions? Of course, at the games, every idiot with a pair of binoculars watches Vince on the sideline waiting for him to yawn or look away so they can call in the talk shows and tell everybody about it.

The question is what to do with Collins and Young down the road. I'm pretty sure Collins is a free agent and will want a multiyear deal as well as a starting job. Will he be worth it? Sure, as long as you know what you're getting. He's a bus driver. He will do well for a good team, but he won't be able to take a mediocre team anywhere. About Young, the owner Bud Adams has said that the Vince is still the QB of the future. That may be Adam's thought, but is it's Fisher's? He's already won one power struggle with the Titans when he ran off former GM Floyd Reese to gain control of the team. If Fisher doesn't want Vince, I'd have to imagine he wouldn't have to take him.

College football: What could have been

2008-12-09T09:36:00.004-06:00

Last year I presented my plan for a sixteen team playoff. (Last year's final bracket is here, including links to each week's brackets.) To summarize the sixteen teams will consist of the eleven conference champions, plus five at large teams. They will be seeded by their BCS ranking. Here's what this year's playoff would have looked like:

1) Oklahoma (Big XII)
16) Troy (Sun Belt)

8) Penn State (Big Ten)
9) Boise State (WAC)

4) Alabama (At large)
13) Virginia Tech (ACC)

5) USC (Pac-10)
12) Cincinnati (Big East)

3) Texas (At large)
14) East Carolina (Conference USA)

6) Utah (Mountain West)
11) TCU (At large)

7) Texas Tech (At large)
10) Ohio State (At large)

2) Florida (SEC)
15) Buffalo (MAC)

Missed the cut (BCS rank):
Oklahoma State (13)
Georgia Tech (14)
Georgia (15)
BYU (16)
Oregon (17)

I addressed issues such as season length, game sites and the fate of the lesser bowls in the initial post last year, so let's look at the benefits for this season. Like last year, this one has shaped up to be a prime candidate for a playoff. There were eight one-loss teams, plus undefeated Utah and Boise State. How can we distinguish among these teams other than a playoff? Anything less than that is a mockery of the game, full stop.

Opponents to a playoff still bring up the tired argument that it would dilute the regular season. As I said last year and as this bracket demonstrates, that is simply not true. Look at those who missed the cut. Oklahoma State is the thirteenth best team in the nation according to the BCS, but they did not make the playoff. Georgia, a near unanimous pre-season favorite, did not make the bracket. Would they say their regular season didn't matter. In fact, it is the current BCS format that de-emphasizes the regular season. Texas beat Oklahoma, but what good did it do them in December? Eight teams did as well or better than OU and Florida, but are ignored. Is this what they call "meaningful"? I respectfully disagree.

With a playoff, the best of the mid-majors gets the chance to prove they are worthy. All season, playoff opponents complain that teams like Utah and Boise State play inferior competition, and in most cases, they are right. However, this doesn't mean they aren't good teams, so give them a chance to put up or shut up on the field. You think Penn State would be happy about playing Boise State in the first round? Or Texas wouldn't be a little nervous about a second round game against Utah or TCU?

Finally, opponents of a playoff often cite the need to protect the tradition of the bowls. Tradition? Did you know that 34 bowl games will be played this year? Did you know that the traditional Peach Bowl has morphed from the Chick-fil-A Peach Bowl to simply the Chick-fil-A Bowl? Did you know that the San Diego County Credit Union Poinsettia Bowl, Papajohns.com Bowl, Brut Sun Bowl, and magicJack St. Petersburg Bowl will all be played this season? And people dare to cite tradition in reference to the bowls?

It is time for common sense to prevail. Do not confuse controversial for interesting. Just because people are arguing over the BCS does not make it legitimate--that's what they are arguing over. Please, give us a college football playoff, where the winner has to prove it on the field.

The State of the Dallas Sports Scene

2008-12-07T13:29:00.002-06:00

It's been a while for me, so I'll jump back in by evaluating the state of Dallas sports. Putting it briefly: it isn't pretty. A year and a half ago we were looking at a series of near misses. Who knew those were the good old days?

Dallas Cowboys: Dallas has underachieved this year, but the problem is not Pac-Man Jones, Jerry, Wade, or any of the other "distractions" that get all the talk. The real problem is that this team has had to deal with something this year that they have avoided for a few years now: injuries. Since they have gotten most of their players back, they have been 3-0, although against weaker competition, bringing their season record to 8-4. The real test will be the last quarter of the season against playoff-caliber opponents. As tough as that will be, it has been made even tougher with the injury to MB3, especially with Felix Jones already out. Going at least 3-1 will be tough enough against these opponents, and having to do it for at least one game with a third string running back makes it even tougher. But if the Cowboys can do that, they should make the playoffs. They have left themselves no wiggle room, but if the Cowboys can't go 3-1, they aren't good enough anyway. For Dallas, the playoffs begin today.

Dallas Mavericks: I'm getting tired of reading articles or hearing radio personalities say that nobody could have seen the Mavs falling like they have. According to this, this, this, this, this, this and this, here at 110 Percent, we are nobodies. The Mavs are as soft as ever, but at least before they were young and soft, leaving hope that they would become grizzled veterans. Now they are just getting old and soft. They talk the same game of stepping up their defense and taking the ball to the basket, but as always, it's just talk. It stings even more seeing Devin Harris blossom into the Tony Parker starter kit that we were always told he would be. As for Josh Howard, not only is he an immature nutcase who can't play four quarters, but now he is also injured. Meanwhile, Ron Artest, who the Mavs could have aquired by dropping Howard, is a strong contributor down in Houston. Sure, the Mavs are on a 9-1 run, but like the Cowboys' last few opponents, it's been done against weak competition: eight of the ten teams have records worse than Dallas. Bad sign: the Mavs only have three players averaging double digit points. Worse sign: JJ Barea, Devean George, Antoine Wright, Shawne Williams and DaSagana Diop all get significant minutes with this club, and the Mavs are trying to convince us that this is OK. I am reminded of the mid-90's when Popeye Jones, Fat Lever, Loren Meyer and Sean Rooks were all supposed to be viable players. Hello, mediocrity!

Dallas Stars: Such high hopes. The Stars ended last season in the Western Conference Finals, but they haven't been able to carry that over to this season, instead fighting to stay out of the bottom spot for the entire league. Things went from bad to worse with the Sean Avery Incident, who likely has played his last game in Dallas. Tom Hicks has always been kinder to his hockey team than his baseball club, but I don't think he's going to enjoy buying out Avery's four year contract. Oh, well, at least everyone in the lockerroom will like each other as they miss the playoffs this year.

Texas Rangers: The Rangers have so far been inactive in the trade and free agent market, and I'm OK with that. Wheeling and dealing has not been this team's strongsuit. Imagine if the Braintrust had left well enough alone: we could have Edinson Volquez, John Danks and Chris Young at the top of the rotation. Hopefully, the Rangers will stick to their new plan of drafting smart, developing their own and making smart decisions. Who knows, in a couple years, the Rangers may be the most competitive team in Dallas.

Listening the World Series with a heavy heart

2008-10-29T20:49:00.003-05:00

So I'm sitting here listening to the Philadelphia broadcast of the continuation of game 5 of the World Series. As I type this Brad Lidge is trying to close down the game and series for the Phillies and he'll probably be done by the time I finish this post. (1 out)

I'm conflicted as I listen to Lidge. Just three years ago, he was a pitch away from sending the Astros into the 2005 World Series and he hung a slider to Albert Pujols that he hit so hard that it took about six days for it to land. (He just gave up a single). I firmly believe that if Lidge had been able to close the door on that game 5, the Astros would have won the World Series. I could be wrong. I mean, they didn't just lose, they got swept by the White Sox. (stolen base, man on 2nd, one out)

After that pitch, he wasn't the same. In the World Series, he gave up (2 outs) a walk off home run in game 2 to Scott Podsednick and the winning run in game 4. Then the next two years, he was a shell of himself (0-2 count), giving a bunch of hits, unable to strike guys out like before, and his ERA went up 3 runs from the previous year. (That's the ball game on a strike out. Fitting. Congrats Bill) He was a classic "needed a change of scenery" guys. So he moves on to Philadelphia and becomes what he used to be in Houston before Pujols crushed him and the hearts of Astros fans. Automatic and now a World Series Champion.

I'm happy for Brad Lidge. He was awesome for the Astros for three years and was a huge part of two Astro playoff teams, but I can't help but be a little sad at what I missed.

How I'm Feeling (with 2 buts)

2008-10-27T08:49:00.003-05:00

After the St. Louis game, my facebook status said, "Russell is wondering what in the hell is wrong with the Cowboys." Two of my friends posted asking me to say how I really feel. Well, today I'm feeling much better, and winning a game, no matter how ugly, will do that for you. It was good to see some great effort from the Cowboys as opposed to the way they played against the Rams where they got down and couldn't get back up to save it's life. The defense looked better despite losing another cornerback and having to trot out 2 rookies (Mike Jenkins and Orlando Scandrick) and guy who's been active a grand total of 3 times over the last two years (Alan Ball). I think the biggest change was in the attitude, especially on defense and Marc Columbo. So things are looking much better than they did a week ago.

BUT......
I think they get slaughtered next week against the Giants. I watched a bit of the Giants/ Steelers game yesterday and I fear for the life of Brad Johnson. I think we see Brooks Bollinger next week and we may never see Johnson again because he will be in a body bag. The Giants sacked Ben Roethlisberger 4 times yesterday. How many does that add up to for the Cowboys next week? About 10? They need to run the ball early, often, and well to give them a chance to keep the game close, especially if Jason Witten is out. Also, with a decimated secondary, unless they can really pressure Eli Manning, he and Plaxico Burress and the rest of the Giants wide receiver corp will run wild against the Cowboys' defense. Next weeks game could be one of those 35-10 games.

BUT.....
I think there is a light at the end of the tunnel. After the Giants game, they have a bye. Then they'll hopefully welcome back Tony Romo, Felix Jones, Terrence Newman, Anthony Spencer, a fully integrated Roy Williams, Jason Witten, Bradie James, Anthony Henry(assuming the last three are out this week),and Kyle Kosier. If they add these guys back, they'll be set for a strong effort down the stretch, which is something they haven't had since..... I don't know when. This team isn't dead yet. The Bucs game may be a turning point.

No Longer a Kneejerk

2008-10-20T10:05:00.002-05:00

Sometimes it sucks being right. It's taken me four days to try to come to grips with the latest Cowboys debacle. There is no other way to spin what happened this past Sunday. The Cowboys were laughed at by the Rams. Every team has games when they aren't at their best, but the problem I saw Sunday was a whole bunch of guys who looked like they didn't care about getting their butts handed to them by the Rams. Only DeMarcus Ware acted liked he game a rip about playing football for Dallas. This season could go down the drain in a hurry if something doesn't change. The problem is I don't know what they could possibly change to turn around the season. They are officially on the fast track to missing the playoffs.

Losing Tony Romo is not helping matters, but he wasn't playing that great anyway when he got hurt. Brad Johnson is definitely not the answer, but who's really excited to see what Brooks Bollinger has to offer? I've seen what he's got when I was in New York, and I'll tell you it's not alot.

Even when Tony Romo comes riding in on the white horse, either this week or after the bye week, it's not gonna matter unless the offensive line continues to stink. They are providing about as much protection as a circa 1967 beaded door. I think Marian Barber is tiptoeing and may be proving that he is not a feature back, but if he has to make moves in the backfield, then that's on the offensive line.

And it's not like the defense has done anything worth remembering. Their two best cornerbacks are out, Terrence Newman with injury and Adam Jones with suspension, so rookies get to take two of the top spots and the other is a guy they wanted to move to safety.

The coaching has to put under the microscope as well. Can a head coach like Wade Phillips really inspire confidence in having a real plan going forward? Do we really think that is going to turn over a table? Would that even work? The one major change that comes out of the Rams game is that Wade is going to take up calling the defensive plays. Oh boy, just what we need.

The season is not over. They still have time to turn it around and become the team that everyone expected them to be at the beginning of the year. But they are expected to lose this weekend against the Bucs. Can they muster a decent effort against the Giants? If not, it may be a blood letting. This could be a long season.

The continuing destruction of the 2008 Cowboys

2008-10-10T10:06:00.007-05:00

The Cowboys are 4-1 and tied for 2nd in the NFC East. Sure, they struggled the last couple of games, losing one to the Redskins and having to scratch and claw to keep their head above water against the Bengals. But that's ok, because the Bengals took the Giants to overtime a few weeks ago in New York. Tough game coming up with the Cardinals, but the Cowboys will be focused on the game and should take care of business.

Now, excuse me while I take my rose colored glasses off and start knee jerking.

The Cowboys are on a road for this year that I don't like. I'll start with the least concerning and go up.
1. I'm concerned about Tony Romo. He has not looked sharp since Green Bay. There were a few throws against the Bengals that looked short. He continues to throw stupid interceptions like the one in the end zone last week- Jason Witten was tripled covered. How many games will he lose this year because of dumb mistakes.

2. The defense still doesn't look good. There was absolutely no pressure on Carson Palmer until the final series. There were wide receivers running free in the secondary again, just like in the Redskins game. They were getting gashed on the ground. Terrence Newman is hurt and who knows when he will returns. That leaves a still rusty Adam Jones (more on PacMan later) and two rookies, Mike Jenkins and Orlando Scandrick. By the way, I know Jones missed all of last year, but how long does it take to shake off whatever "rust" he has? He has looked all kinds of mediocre. I watched just about every game with him in Tennessee and he looked really good, but Dallas is still waiting for him to start playing.

3. Everyone keeps talking about the reason that Terrell Owens is not getting the ball as much is that he is being double teamed with a corner and a safety. I wonder if his problem is that he is either 1) loosing a step or 2) Tony Romo is sucking. I'm skeptical of the whole double team thing. How in the world do the Redskins stack the box against the run (obviously the problem because the Cowboys completely abandoned the run) and take TO out of the game with a double team. You gotta be able to do one or the other if you're a good team.

4. Penalties and just all around undisciplined play kills this team. A critical stop against the Redskins is negated because of 12 men on the field. They come back from a time out after a punt and get a delay of game penalty. A drive is stalled because an offensive line decides to pile on after a play is over drawing a personal foul. Those are signs of an undisciplined team and a lack of discipline will cost this team.

5. Finally, I beginning to think that the problem with the Cowboys is Jerry Jones and the way he runs things. On the surface, things are better for the Cowboys than they were after Jimmy Johnson. The drafts are better and the free agency moves aren't so haphazard, but he continues to close his eyes to the problems on the team. He refuses to take character into account when taking people onto the team and places too much faith in the program that Calvin Hill is running for the Cowboys. He brings in Terrell Owens, who isn't a bad guy. He's never been busted for drugs or abusing his wife or girlfriend, but he is a jerk. He's your typical arrogant, self absorbed wide receiver. Jones also brings in Adam Jones, who can't or won't get away from being "PacMan." He's a good, not great, player who hasn't been near worth the trouble so far. On top of all that, and I'm including Tank Johnson and Keith Davis in "all that," he hires who can only be described as a cross between a village idiot and Sargent Schultz from Hogan's Heroes. I don't really think that Wade Phillips is complete idiot who spends most the time asleep at the wheel, but do you really think that he is holding the whip over this team? Again, the Cowboys aren't full of bad guys, in fact, I think there are lots of really good character guys, but they're human, and minds wander and when the going gets tough, are they going to be able to keep excellence in the big games. They've fallen apart down the stretch and in the playoffs the last several of years. So, at the end of the year, when they fade again down the stretch and miss the playoffs or flame out once again and those of us who live and die with the Cowboys are angry once again, Jerry Jones can look in the mirror and realize that it's his fault. And nothing could make me happier than being wrong.

110 Percent Hall of Fame 2008: Emmitt Smith

2008-09-26T14:28:00.005-05:00

The Year: 1990. The Scene: New York, NY. The Event: The NFL draft. The previous year the Cowboys had gone 1-15, easily the worst record in the league. They would have had the #1 draft pick, but they had used a supplemental pick on Miami QB Steve Walsh. But the Vikings had traded a slew of draft picks for Herschel Walker the previous year and the Cowboys were ready to reap that harvest. They had a player targeted, but weren't sure if he would drop to them. After some maneuvering, they got as high as they could: #17. Unfortunately, the guy they wanted, Baylor LB James Francis, went #12 to the Cincinnati Bengals, who had a decent 10 year career. So they settled on the 2nd RB taken in the draft, Emmitt Smith, a guy who was very productive in college at Florida, but considered too small and too slow to make it in the NFL. Sometimes it better to be lucky than good.

For the 90's Cowboys that won three Super Bowls in four years and was arguably the greatest team in NFL history, QB Troy Aikman was the brain of the team, WR Michael Irvin was the heart, but Emmitt Smith was the engine that team ran on. In the fourth quarter of many games, Emmitt would grind it out behind that awesome offensive line and just punish a team into submission. His statistics and awards speak for themselves: career rushing leader, career rushing TD leader, 1990 rookie of the year, 1993 MVP, 1993 Super Bowl MVP, and 3 Super Bowl rings.

His signature game was on January 4, 1994 against the Giants in New York. They were tied with the Giants for 1st in the NFC East. This game would be the difference between a bye and home field advantage and going on the road for the playoffs. Late in the 2nd quarter, Emmitt separated his shoulder. But going into overtime, tied 13-13, the Cowboys rode Emmitt to the tune of 50 yards on 8 carries to a game winning field goal. He was the warrior that won that game. For the whole game he rushed for 163 yards on 32 carries and totaled 229 yards of all purpose yardage.

The Cowboys have had a history of great running backs: Tony Dorsett, Calvin Hill, Duane Thomas, and Herschel Walker, but Emmitt stands at the top of that list.

Did we watch the same game?

2008-09-17T12:32:00.002-05:00

I really shouldn't make a big deal about this. I really shouldn't be drawn offsides by the national media, but I just can't help it. One of the upsides to the Cowboys winning on Monday night was that I could listen to sports talk radio and read the blogs and sports writing and be happy. After a Cowboys loss (say after the Giants playoff game last year), I will not read the newspapers or blogs, listen to the sports talk show idiots, or anything else. But I was sure after Monday night's game I would enjoy a little ESPN radio praising the greatness of the previous night's game and the strength on the Cowboys and just laugh while reading Peter King and others venerate the Cowboys. But instead of praising the Cowboys, the Colin Cowherd of ESPN and Peter King of SI evidently quit watching the game after halftime when the Eagles were ahead 30-24 and assumed that it was misprint that the Cowboys outscored the Eagles 17-7 in the 2nd half. They worshiped at the shrine of Donovan McNabb who was great until about 10 mins to go in the game when he evidently got tired and quit being able to complete passes longer than 10 yards. In fact, the longest play for the Eagles late in the game was a ten yard pass to a TE on a 2nd and 18 (the series ended in a punt). The fumble was clearly Donovan's fault as he was seemingly unable to decide if he was going to give it to Westbrook or to the receiver on the reverse. It was that choke job that turned the tide towards the Cowboys. Cowherd trumpeted over and over how the Eagles were able to get yards when they needed them. However, he failed to mention that the Eagles got inside the Cowboys 25 five times and had to settle for field goals in three of them. Two of the Eagles TD were a direct result of Cowboy turnovers, both of them really unforced, but rather bad plays by Tony Romo. So the absolutely awesome Eagle offense scored 23 points. Hardly the stuff of domination. Also, they talked about the return of Donovan McNabb, but they evidently missed the stats about his performance in Sept. the last few years. He's been dominant. There is a good questions whether he'll be able to keep it up. The Eagles better hope so.

Another group that got a ton of praise from the national media was the vaunted Eagle defense. But Tony Romo emerged from the game almost completely untouched (except, of course for the unforced errors of the fumble and the pic). The Cowboys showed their offensive strength by being able to almost completely stay away from TO and still move the ball at will against the Eagles. It opened up Marion Barber to get 51 yards on 11 carries in the 2nd half after just 12 on 7 carries in the first. Jason Witten made their line backers and safeties look silly and the Cowboys lower rung guys like Martellus Bennett, Patrick Crayton, Miles Austin, and Tony Curtis made plays as the Eagles payed their attention to TO.

I could go on. It's still early. The last several years the Cowboys have been great until the calendar turns into December. And all this won't matter if they fall apart down the stretch and there are things that concern me. Tony Romo being the crazy gunslinger is one and the penalties (which make me think of their lack of disciple) is another. But I want the national media to realize that the Eagles are good and maybe the 3 best teams in the NFL are in NFC East, but the Cowboys were clearly the best team on Monday.

Cowboys Eagles knee jerk reactions and live blogging.

2008-09-15T11:41:00.005-05:00

I'm writing this during the game and will continue to write this during the game. There will probably be a whole lot of knee jerking, but here goes. And I'm going to type "us" alot because I'm watching the game.
1. This is already one of the craziest games I've EVER seen.
2. I'm starting to question the Romo gospel. It seems that just about every big game he gets jittery. I think every team needs to look at what the Eagles do. He is all kinds of rattled. He still makes some good throws, especially on that last drive, but I'm not sure we can trust him to lead us to the Super Bowl.
3. How in the world does this defense continue to be just shredded by good teams. How many big free agents and top round picks are on the defense? And the coach was supposed come in with his big scheme and make the defense better. Is the defense better?????? I don't know. As I'm typing this, they stop them on a three and out. I'll take the jinx on that and I may try it again later in the game.
4. Penalties are killing us. Two penalties led directly to touchdowns and another penalty wiped out a big gain to TO. On the other hand, I don't know what game these refs are watching. The PI on Anthony Henry was HORRIBLE!!!!! How do they miss that??? It was in the endzone so it practically gift wrapped the Eagles a TD. And on the TD run after that PI, I saw at least two holds that didn't get called.
5. Speaking of penalties, I've counted at least twice when the Eagles hold up a receiver so someone else can lay in a kill shot. That's dirty football. It's not gonna get called because the Cowboys is still churning for yardage, but it looks bad to me.
6. In the first half, it looked like Marion Barber was tiptoeing. He's running much better in the 2nd half.
7. It's a little surreal watching the game while my daughter sleeps upstairs. The monitor is on down here and every time she makes any noise, I'm afraid she's going to start crying and I'm going to have to go get her.
8. As I type this, it's 31-30 Cowboys. 5 mins to go in the third. How much crazier can it get?
9. Whoever has the ball last wins or after Romo throws another pic. (Typed after the Eagles score to go ahead 37-31.
10. I hate Bryant Westbrook. I wish he played for my team.
11. I like Felix Jones. Think he could become Bryant Westbrook? He's not there yet, but he can clearly play.
12. Early 4th: are they planning on throwing to TO again? How long has it been? Did he get a pass thrown his way in the 3rd? I mean, I love Jason Witten, but TO is your homerun hitter.
13. Again, after this drive that ends in a field goal and makes it 37-34 Eagles, where in the world is Terrell Owens?????
14. The defense gets the stop when they need it the most. The fans are the 12th man tonight. I've never heard a Texas Stadium crowd as loud as it is tonight. I think Dallas has a rep for being quiet fans, but not tonight.
15. The questions of the night: 3mins to go and I just put Erica down to sleep in her crib. Will she stay asleep for the final 3 mins?
16. 2nd guess time. Why can't you run the ball and force the Eagles to use their last time out? As Darrell Royal said, three things can happen when you throw the ball and two of them bad. Can the defense do it one more time?
17. MORE PENALTIES???!!!???
18. GREG ELLIS!!!!!! He's been one of favorite Cowboys since he came so many years ago. He's going to fall by the wayside of all the great Cowboys in their history, but he is a darn good one.
19. I've been complaining about the Cowboys all game, but I don't understand that last call by the Eagles. Weird play.
20. So we won. I can't believe it. To quote Tommy Boy: "I've seen alot of crazy stuff in my days, but that.....was.....awesome!" and yes Erica stayed asleep throughout the whole end of the game.

The end of Vince Young? and After Week 1 Predictions

2008-09-09T11:44:00.007-05:00

Vince Young is my favorite non- Dallas Cowboy football player. In fact, since I don't have any real fandom connection to any of the current Cowboys, he might be my favorite football player. Don't get me wrong, I love the Cowboys, but I'm really more of a 90s Cowboys fan that really just rooting for the laundry. I think it's similar to what those who were fans of the Cowboys during the glory years of the 70s thought about the 90s Cowboys. They like Staubach, Dorsett, and Pearson better than Aikman, Smith, and Irvin. I like the latter better than Romo, Barber, and Owens. It's ok. I just matter of when the Cowboys were great and entered your brain.

But Vince Young entered demigod status with myself and every other Texas Longhorns fan with what he did in 2005. He almost singlehandedly beat who everyone on the whole wide world thought was the best college team of all time. He made everyone realize who should have won the Heisman trophy that year. Very rarely in football does one player raise a team to the level of national champion, but that is exactly what Vince Young did. He made Mack Brown look like a pretty good coach. And on a personal note, he also provided light in a very dark time for me, and when we moved to Nashville in 2006, I was so excited that Vince was coming to the Tennessee Titans. Chances are I would have liked the Titans anyway and since they're in a different conference I feel like I can get away with rooting for both the Titans and the Cowboys like I do the Rangers and Astros, but Vince's arrival in Nashville cemented that. And 2006 Vince was everything we all hoped he would be, leading the team to an 8-8 season after starting 0-5. He slowed flashes of the transcendent quarterback I thought he could be. Especially the Giants game when the Titans scored 24 points in the last 10 minutes including escaping the grasp of a Giants linebacker and running for a key 1st down. Barely missing the playoffs.

He seemed to take a step back in 2007. He didn't run as much and threw 19 pics and only 7 TDs. He did lead the Titans to the playoffs, a loss to the Chargers. But he started to show some immature behavior- getting benched in the preseason for violation of team rules, seeming to sulk after bad plays, and stuff like that. The team seemed to move better when back up Kerry Collins played. But when Offensive Coordinator, Norm Chow was fired it was generally assumed it was because of Vince, though whether he asked for it or it was just assumed that would be best for everyone. They brought in a new OC and everthing was better, or was it?

Now in 2008, he's looks barely passable during the preseason, scoring exactly no touchdowns. In fact, when the Raiders came, LaMarcus Russell looked much better throwing the ball. Then after throwing 2 pics, the last of which was of no fault of Vince but a great play by the defensive end, Jeff Fisher had to force him back out on the field then Vince seemed relieved when he hurt his knee. Now, out for 2-4 weeks, at least, there is some questions as to whether or not he even wants to play in the NFL. He can't take the sniping from the press and a few boos from the fans! I mean, come on! It's a good thing he wasn't drafted by New York or Philadelphia! Is this the end of Vince Young? It appears after all this that he is a mental midget who can't take it when there's the slightest bit of pressure. If that's the case, then he needs to go back to Houston and dig himself a hole and crawl in it. I hope he comes back and leaves this behind as an odd, but no-big-deal memory. But now, the Titans are getting Chris Simms. I know Chris Taylor is excited about it. I'm sure he'll be tivoing Titans games now.

Here are my picks. These are given after week 1, so Brady is gone and knee jerking is going on all around. Remember hate and love plays a big part in my pics.
AFC East: Bills- I hate the Pats and the Jets. Actually when I lived in NY, I prefered the Jets, but Brett Favre can't fall off the face of the earth for all I care. I'm stuck with the Bills.
AFC North: What a bunch of spare teams! Browns- underwhelming; Bengals- criminals, Ravens- rookie QB. Steelers it is.
AFC South: If the Jags had played any offense this last week against the Titans, I'd go with them. But since the Titans play better with Kerry Collins and have an awesome defense. I'm going with the Titans.
AFC West: I'm going with the Broncos, because I don't trust Norv Turner with the Chargers and the Titans wished they'd drafted home town kid, Jay Cutler.
WildCards: Colts and Chargers
NFC East: Cowboys. Like the Mavs after 2006, regular season doesn't matter. Only the playoffs matter.
NFC North: Packers. If nothing else to make Brett Favre look bad.
NFC South: Panthers. Can't come up with any snarky comments here.
NFC West: No champion. This division is so bad, the NFC should just let everyone from the NFC East in and leave out the NFC West. OK, I have to pick someone, so I'll go with the Cardinals.
Wildcards: Giants and the Eagles
Super Bowl: Cowboys over Steelers.

2008 NFL predictions

2008-09-07T06:58:00.005-05:00

I'm just getting my picks in under the wire (What? What Thursday night game?), so there's not too much time for analysis. Doesn't make me wrong, though.

NFC West: The Seattle Seahawks should win this division, but I don't think they'll be bragging too much about it.

NFC South: This is a tough one for me. New Orleans has the team to return to their 2006 form, but Tampa Bay could also challenge for the division title. I'm flipping a coin and saying the New Orleans Saints will win the South in a close one.

NFC North: If Brett Favre had gone to the Vikings, I might have picked them as Super Bowl contenders. With Jackson behind center, the Minnesota Vikings should still win a weak division, but I don't see them making too much noise in the playoffs.

NFC East: This is the toughest division in the NFL, and I see both wildcards coming from here, just like last year. The Dallas Cowboys, though, will be the division champs.

Wildcards: The Philadelphia Eagles and the New York Giants will make the playoffs out of the East, leaving the Washington Redskins as a good team sitting at home in January.

AFC West: The San Diego Chargers should have no trouble winning the West. Their biggest concern should be not getting too rusty heading into the playoffs.

AFC South: Jacksonville should give Manning and Co. a run, but in the end, the Indianapolis Colts are the best in the South.

AFC North: Cincinnati and Cleveland get a lot of attention, but the Pittsburgh Steelers will quietly win the North. Cincy still has too many headaches that will likely cost Marvin Lewis his job this year. As for Cleveland: have you seen their schedule?

AFC East: You heard it here first: the Buffalo Bills will win the East over the Pats, whose age, especially on defense, will catch them in the end.

Wildcards: Jacksonville Jaguars and New England Patriots. Two solid runners-up who might take their divisions. Either way, these are the six teams you will see in the AFC side of the playoffs.

Super Bowl: The Cowboys should emerge from the NFC playoffs, but the AFC is harder to pick. The playoff teams there are so balanced that it is hard to differentiate them. I think the Chargers will be rusty going in, so they're out. Pittsburgh is a good team but a little short on talent. Buffalo is too young and New England is too old. Jacksonville is still a year away. So that means the Dallas Cowboys will earn their sixth Super Bowl trophy over the Indianapolis Colts in what should be a great game. Book it.

Championship!

2008-08-21T09:45:00.005-05:00

I said in my last post that this season has failed written all over it. But now I've seen the light. I believe in the Mavs. Now they have what it takes to go all the way. Finally, the free agent signing that's going to put us over the top! The too-awesome-for-words Deavan George!! We bow down Mark Cuban, Donnie Nelson, and Rick Carlisle. They are surely leading us to the promised land!

Sleight of hand

2008-08-16T09:07:00.007-05:00

There's a lot of complaining going on about the Beijing Olympics. Since the Opening Ceremony, many have been outraged to learn that some of the fireworks in the television presentation were computer generated. Even more are up in arms over a nine-year-old lip-syncing to the voice of a seven-year-old.

A question for those who are angered by these events: Exactly how big is that rock that you've been under the last twenty years?

Computer generated images and lip-syncing have become staples of big-stage presentations. In the internet age where everyone is a critic, event organizers can't take chances on firework duds or child performers. Instead, they have to play it safe with computers and pre-recorded soundtracks, the smoke and mirrors of our modern world. Any talk of the "fake" Opening Ceremony being non-compliant with the Olympic Spirit is nonsense. The only mistake the Chinese officials made here was admitting that the real singer was replaced because she wasn't cute enough. (Who is their PR man, anyway? Why didn't they just say she was shy about performing in front of such a large audience?)

While most of the world is upset about the treatment of a future hopeful for Chinese Idol, we are missing the real issues at the Beijing Games:

Hundreds of thousands of Beijing residents have lost their homes over the past five years to make room for Olympic venues. (The Guardian, New York Times)
Peaceful protests have been suppressed. Three protest zones were set up by the government, but no one has actually been allowed to make use of them. Questions regarding this situation by foreign reporters have been ignored. (The Guardian)
Despite assurances of media freedom, foreign journalists have been harassed by the police. At least one was arrested while attempting to cover a Free Tibet protest. (The Guardian) When questioned on these tactics, Chinese and IOC officials avoided giving a straight answer, later canceling daily press conferences to avoid the questions altogether. (Sydney Morning Herald) All media personnel were also inexplicably photographed by the Chinese officials after the press conference confrontation.

Thus far, these serious concerns are getting very little attention from Olympic viewers around the world. I'm not opposed to China hosting the Olympics, but I am opposed to human rights violations and government disinformation. I enjoyed the Opening Ceremony, with its portrayal of Chinese history and culture. I enjoyed seeing athletes from around the world enter the stadium, walking proud and tall. But the greater issues over the past few days have taken the thrill out of these Games for me, and I find it even more disturbing that it appears most people aren't even paying attention to it. As with any good movie, the majority of the general public is more concerned with the special effects in Beijing than looking for what is real.

Scattershooting Opinions

2008-08-10T15:21:00.006-05:00

I haven't written in a while (but neither has anyone else, so I don't feel bad), mainly because I haven't had a whole lot to say. It seems a waste of time to post a couple of sentences and be done with it, but if you put them all together you can become Blackie Sharrod or some other guy with opinions.

1. So the last four games have put a damper on the Rangers and they have continued to fall out of playoff contention. As I write this, they are winning the last game in the series against the Orioles, but are 7.5 games out of the wild card and fourth behind the Red Sox, White Sox, and Yankees. They were never really serious playoff threats, but those first two games against the Yankees were fun. The problem with the Rangers is, stop me if you heard this before, pitching. Their team ERA is 5.31, a full run more than next closest team. Because of injuries and ineffectiveness, they've ran a bunch of rookies and young guys (Hurley, Harrison, Hunter, Mathis, Madrigal, Mendoza, Feldman, etc). Theoretically, they are going to get better, but raise your hand if you're confident in that. I have hope, but a wise man once said hope is not a strategy.

2. About the Cowboys preseason gamethe Chargers scrubs beat the Cowboys scrubs. Big deal. My only concern is this: the Cowboys played undisciplined: lots of penalties and lots of bad special teams play. Maybe it was just the spares, but still, Wade Phillips is not running a tight camp. There's no denying that the Cowboys have awesome talent, maybe the most in the league, but if they lead the league in sloppy play (penalties, special team problems, turnovers, etc.), they'll win a bunch of games, but start to lose them down the stretch when the games get tight. Sound familiar?
a. I know Hard Knocks is just a show and they can show whatever they want, but Wade Phillips sounds like he's just glad to be there. He doesn't inspire much confidence.
b. I'm not real worried about the cornerback formerly known as Pacman. It's been a year since he played, of course he's gonna be rusty.
c. The Cowboys need a real live backup QB. I have a stronger arm than Brad Johnson. I heard Moose Johnston say on the broadcast that he was comfortable with Johnson as the back up. Maybe Brad Johnson, circa 2000, but this is 2008. He can't be counted on to play meaningful time. As a Texas, I hesitate to long for Chris Simms, but the Cowboys desperately someone they can rely on behind Romo.
d. Felix Jones looked really good. Again, mostly against scrubs, but he looked really good. Their 2nd rd draft choice, not so much. But you can tell from Hard Knocks that they love Martellus Bennett, because the TE coach was on his butt the whole time.

3. The Mavericks summer just keeps getting worse and worse. Josh Howard continues to go off the deep end. I mean, granted, if they traded him now they'd be selling low, but at least they'd trade him before he got suspended or killed for drag racing. Then they get nothing.
a. I was skeptical of getting Ron Artest, until he went to Houston. The Mavs just keep falling further and further from their Western Conference rivals.
b. Jason Kidd is in the olympics, playing behind Chris Paul and Deron Williams. Oh, Kidd starts, but played fewer minutes than the other two. In the first game, in 13 minutes this Kidd's line: 0 Points, 0 Assists, 3 Turnovers, 2 Rebounds. Makes you proud to be an Ameican!
c. Then, their only draft choice, Shan Foster, is going overseas. Another in a long line of the Mavs "draft and stash" strategy that has worked so well over the last several years.
This season has FAILED written all over it. Anyone get the feeling that Mark Cuban is interested in buying the Cubs, because he sees the writing on the wall about the inevitable decline of the Mavs?

4. Every couple of years, the Olympics roll around and I think that this year, I'm not going to care. Then I get sucked into it and watch as much as I can. The 4x100 relay last night was awesome! I hate the human interest stories and I can't hardly watch gymnastics, but everything else is great.

Finally, I don't want to turn this into a political post, but is anyone else wondering why George Bush just seems to be hanging out at the Olympics when stuff is going on all over the world. I know in these days of instant access and internet and global cell phones, but it's just a little disconcerting to hear about the Georgia/ Russia crisis, which I think will probably end up being more important in the global situation than the war in Iraq, and he's playing grab ass with the beach volleyball players, waving a flag at Michael Phelps, and leading the basketball team in a "1-2-3 hustle" chant? Is he just mailing it in?

Even more on Josh Hamilton

2008-07-16T10:10:00.004-05:00

We here at 110 percent are about to turn in our Hall of Fame nominees and judging by the amount of time I spend writing about Roy Hobbs, I mean, Josh Hamilton, it's pretty clear that he should be one of my nominees. It's hard to place his name in contention because he's been a Ranger for only a half a season and he could just as easily fail after this (in more ways then one). However this is at least my third post focused mainly on Hamilton in the brief time he's been a Ranger. The thing is he's been on my fandom radar since 2001. I've been a fan of his longer than I've known my wife, and honestly, even if he had done all this with the Yankees I would still be a fan of his. Well, maybe not the Yankees, but you get the idea. Anyway, he is the man. He is on the road to being my favorite Ranger of all time. Which leads me to my post.

After the impressive display off raw power the other night, which, BTW I jinxed quite effectively (I missed the first round for a breast feeding class and as soon as I was able to turn it on, he basically quit being able to his home runs), the national media started drooling all over Hamilton, which normally would have caused me to hate him, but I didn't mind it so much. I mean, he is Ranger. Anyway, I was reading a baseball chat and someone asked should the Rangers consider trading Hamilton for a pitcher like Tim Lincecum. If you don't know who Tim Lincecum is that's ok. He's a 24 year old ace, who this year in his second full year in the majors has an ERA under 3, a WHIP of about 1.2, and more than a strikeout per inning. He is a legitimate ace on a bad Giants team and exactly what the Rangers for lacked for most of their history. Hamilton for Lincecum wasn't an actual rumor, but a hypothetical to gauge the value of Hamilton, as in what kid of pitcher could be bring. So the question is would ya? Hypothetically, would you trade Hamilton for Lincecum? When I first read it, I was tantalized. I mean, the Rangers have all of a sudden come up with a strong outfield, even if you take Hamilton out of the equation, both offensively and defensively, with several legitimate outfielders on the way in the minors. On top of that, with Hamilton's background you have to be concerned about injuries or, God forbid, a relapse. This could be the ultimate "sell high." Also, the Rangers have a alot of pitchers in the minors, many of whom are close. But the close ones are not #1s, but rather mid rotation guys- Hurley, Harrison, etc. The big time guys with #1 potential are all in the lower minors. So a guy like Lincecum would step right in as the true ace of the staff, instead of that impostor, Millwood. (I am beginning to have lots of bitterness towards Millwood, but that is a topic for another day.)

Those would all be really good reasons to trade Hamilton for Lincecum. But after thinking about it for a while, I decided that I would be opposed to that trade. Over the history of the Rangers they've really lacked a true national superstar, both in terms of production and "face". Nolan Ryan was past his prime when he came the Rangers, and while he brought legitimacy to a moribund franchise and his production was pretty good (at times awesome), it wasn't enough to really take the team over the top. Alex Rodriguez never wanted anything more than his money and while I don't think that he's the only blame for the divorce from the Rangers, the fan base never truly embraced him. Pudge Rodriguez, after Ryan, was the closest to reach that level, and again, blame the Rangers for letting him go. I'm still trying to figure out who he learned how to handle a pitching staff as soon as he left the Rangers. I blame John Hart. He's a convenient scapegoat for the problems of the early aughts. Hamilton is a guy who can spend the prime of his career as the Rangers are in ascendancy and lead the team to heights that they've never reached before. Yes, I'm talking pennants and World Series. Scouts drool over his stools and his production has already starting to match it. The Rangers have always been a second rate franchise, even in their own town. Hamilton can bring legitimacy to the Rangers and be the national bell cow that takes the Rangers off the last 15 mins of Sports Center and onto the front pages. I think the Dallas/ Fort Worth fan base is dying to love the Rangers. With his history and the demons which he has defeated, he can be the face of the franchise as it moves into the upper eschelon of baseball.

It's for nights like this that I am a fan.

2008-07-09T22:38:00.004-05:00

First of all, I'd like to thank the miracle of the internet for allowing me to being able to take part in tonight's game. If it weren't for you, I'd be watching 45 minutes of ESPN before I'd have any clue what in the world happened in lowly Texas. I'd have to watch idiodicy like Titletown. Man, ESPN sucks.

But I'm not here to talk about ESPN. I'm here to celebrate the greatness of Josh Hamilton and the Texas Rangers. On a night in which the Rangers, dealing with so many injuries in the starting rotation, they started Warner Madrigal, a rookie who hadn't pitched about A ball until this year and is considered a reliever down the road, hoping he'd go three innings. The Rangers were praying just stay in the game and not have to burn through their whole bullpen, and miracle or miracles, they were in the game, down 4-2 into the bottom of the ninth, with the top of the order up.

A couple of base hits and couple of outs later, it's 4-3 with a man on and 2 outs and Hamilton at the plate. They don't call him Hobbs for nothing, and fittingly, as he rounded the bases, they played the tune from the Natural. (It doesn't matter that they play it after every Ranger's homer).

With my wife trying to sleep in the next room, I jumped and danced and celebrated and screamed as quietly as I could. It's these kinds of a games that makes it fun to be fan. That somehow or another, almost 700 miles away, I could join Josh Hamilton, the rest of the Ranger players, and all the Ranger's fans in celebrating a truly memorable moments for the Texas Rangers. I'll leave commentary about what this may mean for this year's edition of the Rangers for a later time. I'm too busy celebrating.

The Rangers at the Half Way Point and Going Forward

2008-06-29T13:27:00.004-05:00

After 82 games, the Rangers are 41-41, a .500 team. A wise man once said you are what you are, and the Rangers are a .500 team with a really good (and could be great) offense and a mediocre to bad pitching staff. Sounds like the last nine years or so. But while the Rangers are what they are, they aren't what they were. Which is a mediocre team without much real hope for the future. I've said a couple of times before that the Rangers actually have a bright future. And it's not just Rangers fan and apologists who think so. I could list the names, but if you follow the Ranger's minor leagues you know who the are and if you don't, then I could just list any names and it wouldn't make a difference, but that sweet swing you see to your left belongs to Chris Davis, who was in the process of hitting his 2nd home run of the Red Hawks/ Nashville Sounds game a went too last week. The Rangers have some real talent on the way and some of it is really close.

So while they will probably spend the rest of this year around the .500 mark, they are looking better and better. So this begs the question on every Ranger fan's mind. Do the Rangers buy or sell? Is there enough here to try to make a run for it? Or do we trade everyone over the age of 26? On one hand, you never know when you're going to have a chance to make a run for the playoffs and for a fan base who is discontent to say the least, why would they really throw it all to wind and try to get CC Sabathia or Roy Oswalt and relief pitcher or two? On the other hand, how close are they really? They're 7 1/2 games back, and while they're by no means out of the race, they don't appear to be a team that's going to run off a big winning streak or even a 9 of 10 or anything like that. While a pick up of Sabathia would definitely help, I'm not sure it would enough and is it worth trading away the best of their farm system? Back in the 80s, the Rangers had a good team, but were several games behind the leading team. But they had a frustrated fan base and decided to go for it and trade Wilson Alvarez and Sammy Sosa for Harold Baines. No one wants that again. The Rangers have some tradable commodities: Kevin Millwood, Vincente Padilla, Milton Bradley, etc.

For a while this year I was an advocate of the first thought. But I'm not real big on trading everyone. I would rather the Rangers do what I call strategic trading with an eye not on 2008, but 2009 and further. They need to be ready to trade Millwood or Padilla (I don't think I'm big on trading both. That would leave them with an all- inexperienced rotation. Millwood and Padilla haven't been great, but even on days when they suck, like Thursday for Millwood, he at least pitched 5 innings. Not great, but he saved the bullpen.), but there's no reason to give them away. Don't trade for a pending free agent, like Sabathia. Trade for guys who are going to be here and help the next two years. At this point, my fear of the Rangers getting fleeced out of their young guys on a misguided attempt to hang around for a pennant when they are clearly the third best team in the division, a la John Danks for Brandon McCarthy or Chris Young and Adrian Gonzalez for Adam Eaton. I don't mind trading young guys, but I want something that helps soon. The Volquez- Hamilton deal was a tough deal, but both teams can be happy about that trade. Don't screw up like they did with the Harold Baines deal.

The NBA treadmill

2008-06-27T08:20:00.009-05:00

I'm back.

Ever play tennis? Baseline or net? Maybe you like staying on the baseline, where you have more time and can place your shots strategically. Or maybe you're aggressive and charge the net, hoping to force your opponent's hand. Either way is fine, but you don't want to get caught in no-man's land.

Stop me if you've heard this one before: the Mavs have acquired a shooter and. . . what, already?

Yes, that's right. With the 51st overall pick in the 2008 NBA Draft, the Dallas Mavericks selected Shan Foster, 6-5 shooting guard out of Vanderbilt. Word is he's a phenomenal shooter, 42% in his college career, 47% as a senior. Great. Another jumpshooter.

I realize there are few options when you are picking at 51. But does the Mavs braintrust (and I'm starting to use that term very loosely) realize that the last thing they need is another shooter? According to the Dallas Morning News, he "needs to work on his strength and defensive ability." Which, of course, is the punchline of another tired Mavs joke.

And I don't know what the Mavericks have done with the Morning News's Eddie Sefko, but the police might want to investigate. His article is ridiculous in it's praise of a very average draft selection. At one point he says that because the Mavs need more shooters "to help open up the floor for Jason Kidd, Dirk Nowitzki and Josh Howard, Foster seems to be a wonderful fit." Funny, I thought they needed strength in the front court and slashers to take pressure off the shooters. And wasn't the trade for Kidd supposed to open up the floor?

And after telling us about his shooting, Sefko spends a fair amount of the article on Foster's second best skill: the piano. That's right, the piano. No other commentary necessary here.

I've seen it coming since their '07 playoff loss to Golden State, and particularly since the Kidd trade, but this team has been caught in no-man's land. If this season had been five games longer, they wouldn't have made the playoffs this year, and they won't make it next year. Mavs fans, get ready for a string of near misses to get in the playoffs and the mid-first round picks that go with them--just good enough to keep you from the bottom of the standings, but not good enough to make some noise in the conference. This team is now running in place on a treadmill: they aren't going anywhere, and they can't get off, either. And they're staying there until the "braintrust" realizes that this team as currently constructed can't compete.

Source: Dallas Mavericks stay put at 51, pick shooting guard, Dallas Morning News

Blow. It. Up.

2008-06-26T22:43:00.003-05:00

There is nothing left to do than to blow up the Mavericks. Trade Dirk and Kidd and Josh and cut anyone else who isn't nailed down. Only an idiot looks at this team and says they are legitimate championship contender. Unfortunately, it seems idiots are running the Mavs. They are not in the same zip code as LA Lakers, New Orleans, or San Antonio. They are about to get passed (if they aren't already) by Portland and Golden State. The Mavs are about to be the Kevin Garnett led Minnesota Timberwolves, a mediocre team that gets kicked out of the playoffs in the 1st or 2nd round every year. A wise man once said "You are what you are." In 2007, the Mavs lost to the team that lost to the team that lost to the team that won the championship. In 2008, they stumbled into the playoffs then lost to the team that lost to the team that lost to the team that lost the championship. In terms of tradable parts they have Dirk, Josh, Brandon Bass, and, and, and.... what else? Maybe Kidd? The Kidd trade last year just looks worse and worse. Stackhouse is nothing. Terry is nothing. George is nothing. Jones is nothing. Damp is nothing. This team is done. I'm listening to the draft and Norm and Ben and Skin are talking about the 51st pick in the draft (Shan Foster from Vanderbilt) getting time on this team! Avery was a problem, but he was not THE problem. Changing the coach is rearranging deck chairs on the Titanic and this team is on it's way to the bottom of the ocean.

Why I Do Root For Tiger

2008-06-24T11:38:00.002-05:00

I've read the post a few times, and I've started to write a response, but now, I think I'm ready. I understand the idea of rooting against teams you hate. Heck, in my bio on the left side I talk about rooting for anyone who plays the Yankees cause I don't like them. But I guess what I don't get is why you would think Tiger is almost everything wrong with sports.

I read the bit about his work ethic and determination and I agree. That is also one of the things that make him so compelling to watch. But I'll get into that in a minute. First a response to the things you see wrong with Tiger.
1. The media. The media does beat Tiger into the ground and into our heads and that is extremely annoying. But, there is a reason they do that. He is a great story on so many levels. Dominant player, Multi-Cultural icon, once-in-a-lifetime run at history, and now that he is a husband and father, he has seemed to open up a little more. I understand getting tired of seeing too much of him commercially, but I don't think he's approached Peyton Manning stages yet.. I don't think we'll see him on SNL any time soon. When a player like him is so dominant for such a long time, he is naturally going to be the top person covered. He is the golfer known by people who hate golf or don't know anything about golf. Not to cover him would be a more odd choice even when they do seem to go overboard.

2. This I just disagree with. I think it's extremely interesting to watch dominant sports figures. It's fun to watch them get pushed by someone who normally wouldn't be in the same class. It's fun to watch Tiger eat Phil's lunch over and over. I've seen some iconic figures play live and it is always amazing to watch them and the little things they do that the camera does not pick up. Wayne Gretzky, Michael Jordan, Emmitt Smith, Nolan Ryan, and Tiger Woods. I've had the pleasure of watching them all live and each time, they have not disappointed as they just looked better than the other players. Tiger's chase of the major wins is very fun for me to watch and I hope he gets it very soon (although this has been put on hold with the injury).

3. This I think was more the Tiger of the past. When he sunk the put to go to a playoff, the look of excitement was very apparent. The look of joy when he picked up his daughter was unmistakable. I think as he's mellowed a little, he does enjoy his winning more, and does it because he can feel that he's closer to what he's been working for so long.

I don't watch golf unless Tiger is playing. Which likely means I'm out for the rest of the year, but I'm not alone. I forget the player who said it, but someone said that if they won the British Open, they would need an asterisk stating that Tiger wasn't playing. He was only partly kidding and that speaks to why Tiger is worth watching and rooting for.

The Sports of Hate or Why I don't root for Tiger Woods

2008-06-17T10:17:00.002-05:00

As I've said before on this blog, for me sports is almost as much about who I hate as to who I love. In fact, my love for my teams causes me to hate with a passion teams that drive me crazy. Because I love the Cowboys, I hate the Giants, Eagles, Redskins, 49ers, etc. I am much more of a fan of my teams than I am a lover of sports. This brings me to Tiger Woods.

I am not a big golf fan. I have a set of golf clubs and I fool around with some friends every once in a while, though I haven't played this summer. For many of my friends and lots of people on sports talk radio, the golf majors are appointment television. Actually, it would be more correct to say that the majors are appointment television if Tiger is in contention on the last day. For me, golf is switch off no matter what the situation. I listen to coverage, though hardly ever watch it on TV hoping that Tiger is loosing or struggling.

As the US Open played out yesterday, I heard several sports talk radio guys say something along the lines of, "If you're a sports fan, you have to root for Tiger" or "How can anyone root against Tiger?" And I thought, it's pretty easy. For me, Tiger represents almost everything that is wrong with sports. I say almost everything because there is one thing that he is an example of everything good about sports. For an immensely talented individual, he is very much a grinder. For most pro athletes if they don't have it, they'll say, it's not my day, go through the motions, and be satisfied with that. Tiger works his butt off on the course and it's not satisfied with anything less that being champion. That's the epitome of what it means to compete.

Now, the wrong things about Tiger and how it relates to my hatred of other things in sports:

1) The media beats everyone upside the head with Tiger. The only way they'll pay attention to golf is if he plays. He is ubiquitous on commercials- the Gatorade commercial of him on the moon drives me crazy for some reason. He almost as bad as Jordon in that they won't turn down an opportunity to sell himself for a few bucks. I can't listen to sports talk radio after a major because they bow down at the altar of Tiger. In other sports, the media takes a team or player and just beats them to death as if the only teams that matter exist in the Northeast or on the West coast. In baseball, it's minutia of the Yankees and the Red Sox and if the Cubs are even in the zip code of contention then we are inundated with articles of what those teams need to do in order to win the whole thing and what kind of problems they have and what their blowhard owners have to say about anything. I can't watch ESPN baseball tonight because the biggest question is always what is happening with those teams. If Joba Chamberlain was a Colorado Rockie (is this right? Should it Rocky?), we would have no idea who he was and not have five million article written as to whether or not he should start or relieve. Of course as teams fall out of contention, the question becomes can any of their players help the Red Sox or Yankees or Cubs or Dodgers achieve the greatness that is preordained for them? The only media darling I like the Cowboys. If I wasn't from Dallas and therefore a licenced Cowboy fan, they would be as bad or worse than the Yankees. I accept this level of hypocrisy.

2. I'm sorry, it's not fun to watch the same guy win all the time. It's really boring. The question yesterday was not if Tiger was going to win, but how. And sure enough, he choked away a three shot lead, fell behind, made a birdie put to tie, and won on the sudden death playoff hole. Technically exciting, but it's like we all knew the ending we just wanted to see how he was going to pull it off. It's Revenge of the Sith all over again. We know Anakin becomes Darth Vader we just didn't know how and hopefully they'll give us a little drama for good measure. When the Lakers and the Celtics made the finals this year, it wasn't fun, it was expected. And of course the media just drooled all over themselves as two marquee teams were in the playoffs. Too bad the NBA sucks. The NBA where boring happenings.

3. Can anybody win alot and appear to enjoy it less? Maybe Bill Belicick. Sure he cusses and throws his clubs when he messes up and pumps his fist when he wins, so obviously he cares, but he's basically one of the guys down at the municipal course who is better than everybody else but doesn't have fun doing it.

At the end of the day, I don't care about golf, but when I pay attention, I hope Tiger loses. But if Tiger's not there, I care about it even less! So maybe their diabolical plan has succeeded. Imagine what happens to golf if this knee injury is really bad and he doesn't play in the next two majors? If a golf tournament happens and Tiger isn't there to play it, does it really happen?

NHL Fall Out / Watching the NBA again?

2008-06-13T14:36:00.005-05:00

So I broke a rule when I made my pick for the winner of the Cup this year. I picked against a better team cause I happen to hate them. I can't stand Detroit and I probably will never come around on them. I had thought that the cracks shown in the Dallas series would be enough for Pittsburgh to attack them and be successful. I also bet against a hot goalie. Osgood played out of his mind. Finally, Malkin, who I thought would be the biggest player for Pittsburgh wilted in the playoffs. He was all but invisible against the Red Wings and that pretty much summed up why they won.

I hate Detroit, I hate that they won the cup, and I hate that they continue to build impressively talented teams in spite of being in a salary cap era. Shouldn't this have caught up to them already?

So, with the NHL officially closed for the season, I've been watching the NBA, which really is ironic considering the news regarding officiating that has come out lately. I'm obviously rooting for the Celtics to win this series and before it started, I didn't actually think they would win. Now, LA is going to have to do something amazing (which they could still do) in order to win it. Being raised in the Northeast, I was pretty much slated to root for the Celtics, Bruins, Red Sox, and Patriots (I'll have to talk about them later...) But there is something I really don't like about LA. It goes back to Magic, Worthy, Kareem (especially Kareem), and has continued with Kobe. I liked Shaq when he was there, but that's because he is Shaq. Kobe is a phenominal player, but from everything I've seen, he's a pretty sorry person. Right or Wrong, that is the impression that he gives.

This group of Celtics is another story. KG, for all the criticism that has been poured on him lately, is fun to watch. Ray Allen, Paul Pierce, Rondo, etc... they are fun to watch because it feels like a team and not just like a bunch of guys playing one-on-one games against each other. I am rooting for the Celtics to win the title, and while I'd rather it be at home, I'm OK with doing it the next game, just to make sure it happens. This may not get me watching the NBA on a regular basis, but it was a start to getting me back as a casual fan.

I have a great idea for speeding baseball games up

2008-05-28T15:23:00.002-05:00

Tampa Bay - Bottom of 5th SCORE
TEX TAM
S Riggans singled to left. 2 1
B Zobrist WALKED, S Riggans to second. 2 1
A Iwamura singled to right, S Riggans scored, B Zobrist to third, A Iwamura to second advancing on throw. 2 1
C Crawford grounded out to first. 2 2
B Upton intentionally WALKED. 2 2
C Pena WALKED, B Zobrist scored, A Iwamura to third, B Upton to second. 2 2
E Longoria hit sacrifice fly to right, A Iwamura scored, B Upton to third. 2 3
J Bartlett WALKED, C Pena to second. 2 4
C Floyd WALKED, B Upton scored, C Pena to third, J Bartlett to second. 2 4
S Riggans struck out looking. 2 5
4 Runs, 2 Hits, 0 Errors

THROW STRIKES FOR CRYING OUT LOUD!!!!!!

NHL Stanley Cup Finals 2008

2008-05-24T13:16:00.004-05:00

So, I don't have much time to write, but I wanted to be on record before the first game is played. I'm picking Pittsburgh to win. This goes beyond my hatred for the Red Wings. I simply believe that the Penguins are on an incredible roll and I don't see that stopping soon. I really wish that the finals would have started a day or two ago, but since it's now, that's what we have.

Breaking it down:
Forwards: I give the edge to Pittsburgh. I just think that Crosby, Malkin, Hossa, and Staal are a better group than what Detroit can roll out. Even if the edge is ever so slight.

Defense: Lidstrom is the man, Stuart and Rafalski are excellent, and I didn't see anything against the Stars that would keep me from thinking they wouldn't continue to be great. For Pittsburgh, they have regularly sat Darryl Sydor as a healthy scratch and he has won 2 Stanley Cups. Still, the edge goes to Detroit.

Goaltending: I can't help but think that Osgood is playing with the dealer's money as it were. I keep waiting for the other shoe to drop and so far it hasn't. Fleury has played remarkably and I just feel more comfortable with him. So I say this goes to Pittsburgh.

That's what leads me to pick Pittsburgh in hopefully a long, exciting series (Pens in 7)

Seriously, how much longer can this go on?

2008-05-10T23:45:00.002-05:00

On April 10, the Rangers swept a double header from the Baltimore Orioles to go to 5-4 and put them over .500 for the very first time in Ron Washington's tenure as manager. Over the next 18 games, they lost 14 in absolutely awful ways: blown saves, blowouts, errors, and a lack of clutch hitting. Their record went as far down as 9-18 and it looked like another editions of the sorry, last place Texas Rangers. More of the same.

Then something happened. I'm not sure what. I'm reading all the blogs I usually read and no one seems to know what happened, but it's like a light has gone on. They've won 9 of 11 and are two games from .500 and only 4 games out of first place.

If you had said that early in May your rotation would be Millwood, Padilla, Sidney Ponson, Scott Feldman, and AJ Murray, you would have been very worried about your chances. They are basically working with their 7th, 8th, and 9th starters and each one of them have thrown at least one quality start in this little streak. The offense has been good, but not great. This streak is a product of excellent pitching. And like I said, I have no idea why. I also have no idea how long it can keep going.

It looks like smoke and mirrors to me. You can't really count on Ponson pitching like he did in 2003, the last time his ERA was below 5. Feldman is a converted sidearm throwing bullpen guy, and Murray's topside is #5 or a long man out of the bullpen. They can just as easily go on a streak of losing 8 of 10, and will Millwood going out of tonight's game with a sore hamstring, who know who will actually pitch this week.

So, enjoy it while you can, Ranger's fans. We have an interesting little team here.

What has gotten into the Rangers?

2008-05-09T21:41:00.003-05:00

31 consecutive shutout innings??? They've won 10 of 14 and 4 in a row. Talk about smoke and mirrors.

I'm waiting for the other shoe to drop. Maybe.... 3 games giving up 10+ runs or 3 games in which the starter doesn't get out of the 3rd or 3 games with blown saves in the 9th. Actually probably a combination of all three.

About Richie Sexson, I heard someone say, "I guess he threw the helmet because he didn't have his purse."

SI BS

2008-05-07T13:56:00.005-05:00

Every few months or so Sports Illustrated or ESPN or FOX Sports or some other national sports network comes out with bogus lists that are designed to do nothing more than fill space. Things like the best ballparks in baseball, the best sports towns in America, the greatest living left handed pinch hitters, greatest rivalry between directional schools in college football 1-AA, and so on and so forth. I usually don't get bogged down in those things because they are usually worth little more than the time it takes to read them. They put them out there so idiots like me will gripe and complain that their pet team, player, era, sport, city, or whatever isn't number 1. Of course there's bias, of course current and recent players often win out over older players, of course the east coast always wins out over the rest of the nation. And of course they throw garbage out there to get people all up in arms.

Case in point, Sports Illustrated has come out with their Best Baseball Players by Number. A great big time waste until you get to #42. Who is considered the greatest #42 by this group of drooling morons? Oh, Jackie Robinson, right? The man for whom the number was retired by all baseball. Who broke the color barrier. Who played two years of negro league ball before even an opportunity to play minor league baseball. Of course not! It's Mariano freakin' Rivera! A closer! A man who usually plays in about a third of the games his team plays. And of those games he plays 1/9 of the innings actually played. He can throw everything he has for 1 inning and goes out there usually with a lead. There's no doubt that Rivera is a great pitcher (although I'd like to see what he can do two times through a lineup) and he has a great postseason track record. But I'm naturally skeptical of closers. I agree that the 27th out is the hardest to get, but most closers these days throw as hard as they can for 4-5 batters, usually with a lead. They have to have strong personality no doubt, but you only need one out pitch, and for Rivera, it's a cut fastball that rides in on players, resulting in a lot of broken bats. It's a great pitch that has lasted him for almost 15 years.

But any discussion about the who is #42 in baseball history begins and ends with Jackie Robinson, perhaps the most important player in baseball history. The only one that might have something to say about that is Babe Ruth who almost single handedly rescued baseball after the Black Sox scandal.

So I've fallen into SI's trap. I talked about their stupid list. Idiots.

Update: I'm an idiot. It turns out only one moron at SI thought Mariano Rivera was a better representative for #42. Bryan Graham who I've never heard of but needs to just stop writing right away. His argument is that because Robinson's stats aren't as great as other players of the era, but did any other player of the era have to put up with the stress of what he had to deal with as the first African-American major league baseball player? Because of society's ignorance and baseball unwritten rules, Robinson didn't get to his start in MLB when he was 28! Those were leading into his prime years.

The bigger question I have is this: are closers in the era overrated? As I said earlier, they pitch in about 1/3 of the teams games, of those games they usually pitch only one inning, and they usually have the lead when they come in. In the 1998 season, the Yankees best team record wise with 114-48 and a World Series win, his numbers were 3-0 and 36 saves in 54 appearances. He had a direct hand is 34% of the teams wins and APPEARED in exactly 1/3 of the teams games anyway!

So what do you think? Closers overrated?

NHL Conference Finals

2008-05-07T09:03:00.002-05:00

So, I was 3 for 4 last round, but I was way off in the games it would take for Detroit to eliminate Colorado. Can't believe they swept them.

Eastern Conference:
Pittsburgh (2) vs Philadelphia (6) - A nice intra-state rivalry that means very little travel and a lot of bad blood (apparently - I keep reading about this, but I've never seen these two teams really get into it). I just don't see how Pittsburgh loses this series. They are just too talented and are clicking really well right now. Pens in 6

Western Conference:
Detroit (1) vs Dallas (5) - I won't lie. I really wanted Colorado to beat Detroit or at least take them to seven and maybe beat up on them a little. A sweep was pretty much the antithesis of that so we move forward. Detroit is very talented and Osgood has been playing very well. But, Dallas has Marty Turco and even though he has had difficulty against Detroit in the past, before last year, he had trouble with the playoffs, so I think it's time for him to escape that problem also. I know I'm a homer and I know I'm a little crazy, but this just feels like a team of destiny (that can change really quick). Stars in 7 (I really am a homer)

I'm... So... Tired...

2008-05-05T09:41:00.000-05:00

There is nothing like playoff hockey. Nothing that is.. except a 4 OT game that ends with your team knocking home the winning goal. The only bad thing about it is... I'm pretty sure my work is going to suffer today. And I really wish I didn't have two meeting back to back after lunch. There's a pretty good chance I need to load up on sugar and caffeine before then...

I'll put up my next round predictions after my head clears (ie.. not today..)

Go Stars!!

The future of the Mavericks

2008-05-01T04:15:00.008-05:00

Well, that's that.

And that's OK. Avery is a good coach who will no doubt quickly be hired by another team. But his demanding style had run its course in Dallas. He got more out of this team than Nellie ever did, but it took only three and a half years for burnout to set in. A change in scenery will benefit him more than Dallas.

It is interesting seeing all the talk in the media about the Mavericks, though. Lots of revisionist history going on. A lot of people were all for the Kidd trade back in February--now they are saying that it didn't work, but the Mavericks had to do the deal because they weren't going to win as is. They are only partially right.

Avery certainly has his faults, but he is not responsible for the Mavericks current situation. This team's problems are a result of poor trades and out of control spending, and that falls at the feet of Mark Cuban. After Don Carter and Ross Perot Jr, it's been nice having an owner who will spend money to improve the team. But the Mavs and their fans are about to learn a painful lesson: it's not enough to spend money. You have to spend it wisely.

How do you rebuild a team? Free agency? The Mavericks have the league's highest payroll this year and are millions over the cap. How about a trade? There are no significant tradeable parts. How about the old-fashioned way--the draft? The Mavericks traded their first round pick this year and in 2010 in the Kidd deal. And that 2010 pick is going to be a good one because this team is going on a long playoff drought starting next season--you're welcome, New Jersey. Remember how bad the Mavs were back in the 90s? Those days have now returned, and with no quick way to fix this mess, they will be here for a while.

So all those trade revisionists were right about this season--the Mavericks were not going to win this season with or without Kidd. But before the trade they had flexibility and the potential for improvement, most of which was traded away for Kidd (while the rest was lost when Josh Howard opened his mouth). In a Western Conference full of young, quick point guards, the Mavs traded one of their own away for an aging has-been. Kidd has been one of the most dominant point guards of his era, but those days are long gone.

All right, so the Mavs are going to stink. But they still need someone to lead them through this playoff drought. Who's it going to be? Cuban has never actually hired his own coach so no one is really sure which direction he will go. Usually it is a safe bet that a team will go with a coach who is the polar opposite of the former coach, particularly when they are replacing someone like Avery. But I don't think that necessarily applies in this case. Cuban doesn't care if the next Mavs coach is a high-octane offensive mind or a hard-nosed defensive specialist. He's going to be looking for someone who won't rock the boat.

Maybe Wade Phillips is looking for something to do in the Cowboys offseason.

Cuban can beat his head against the wall, hire a marshmallow of a coach and keep trying to spend and trade the Mavericks out of this hole. Or he can take a step back, make a smart basketball hire and be patient.

This isn't going to be easy.

Picture from dallasnews.com

NHL Playoff Predictions - Round two

2008-04-24T11:06:00.002-05:00

So, I don't know the East (50%) as well as the West (100%). That's ok, not too bad for a first round. Let's get right to the second round picks. (Anyone else find it interesting that it's 1v6 and 2v5 in both conferences?)

Eastern Conference:
Montreal (1) vs Philadelphia (6) - Philly's "Upset" of Washington isn't surprising. What will be surprising is if Stellar goaltending is the mark of this series. Price has been a little rollercoastery (is that a word?) and Biron is solid, but not spectacular. I think the scoring of Montreal holds up and Price's resiliance takes them to the next round. Habs in 6.

Pittsburgh (2) vs NY Rangers (5) - Interesting match-up. The Pen's are so completely different than NJ, the Rangers may take a period or two to adjust. While their strength is defense, I don't see them holding up against the young Penguin forwards. Especially now that Crosby is back and getting healthier. Pens in 6.

Western Conference
Detroit (1) vs Colorado (6) - An old rivalry rekindled. Osgood is even back in net for Detroit. While the Colorado scorers are still good, I just don't see them beating the more talented Detroit team in a game 7 in Detroit. Wings in 7.

San Jose (2) vs Dallas (5) - If the regular season finale is any indication, this is going to be another hard-hitting series for the Stars. Marleau is starting to come around for San Jose, and these two teams seem very similar. (Great goaltending, solid defense, three solid centers) I think Marty is better in net and in the end, I think that makes the difference. Stars in 7.

So there you go.

Pacman is now a Cowboy

2008-04-23T20:05:00.003-05:00

Well, now they've done it. After the newest Adam Jones related news came out about the hush money, I was sure that if the Cowboys wanted Jones they could get him for the proverbial bag of balls and a fungo bat to borrow a baseball cliche, not a 4th round pick and future considerations.

I like Chris's comment about circumventing the salary cap by bringing in guys with a bad rep, but Jones is BAD GUY. He has no regard for anyone other than himself. Is he contrite about his actions? He doesn't appear to be. It's just another case of a supremely talented athlete getting a second chance or, more correctly, a tenth chance, at least.

I'm not surprised that Jerry Jones felt that he could get Adam Jones under control. He believes in the program that he and Calvin Hill have put together and you can't discount that in this situation. But I wonder what the leaders ad high character guys on this team, like DeMarcus Ware, Terrence Newman, and Bradie James feel about this. Oh, I know what they'll say to the media. They're excited to have him and he's such a great talent, and so on and so forth. But what are they saying amongst themselves? Chemistry may be overrated, but when things get tough in December like they always do, are they gonna be able to count on Adam Jones or is he going to be a grenade that blows up in their faces? We'll have to wait and see.

From bad boys to good deals

2008-04-18T04:46:00.007-05:00

Two years ago, the Cowboys signed Terrell Owens, a bad guy. T.O. was bad because he had been blamed for poisoning locker rooms in San Francisco and Philadelphia and making enemies in Baltimore after refusing a trade to the Ravens. Owens has never been in trouble off the field and no one would question his work ethic. But he has clashed with teammates and coaches when things haven't gone to his liking.

And then there is Adam 'Pacman' Jones, also a bad guy, but a different kind of bad than T.O. Jones had no problems fitting into the Titans locker room, but off the field he has been almost nothing but trouble, eventually receiving a minimum one year suspension from the NFL.

So which type of bad is worse?

The answer is most likely whichever one you are dealing with at any particular moment. It also depends on exactly what you are talking about. If you are talking about a good teammate, then T.O. is potentially the greater problem. If you are talking about marketing or public perception, Pacman is probably a bigger headache. But either one is more than capable of tearing a team apart.

Which leads us to the Dallas Cowboys. Jerry Jones has apparently discovered a new favorite way to legally circumvent the salary cap: acquiring 'bad guys' cheaply on the rebound. T.O. was a a cheap acquisition two years ago, Tank Johnson became a Cowboy at little cost during last season, and now Pacman is in a holding pattern. Each player is a star on the field, but because of their 'bad boy' history, they have a contract that puts little to no financial risk on the team should any further problems occur.

And as a Cowboy fan, I think this is brilliant.

These players are poison for their old teams so the Cowboys have all the leverage in negotiations. The Boys end up with first round talent for late round picks, Pro Bowlers for backup dollars. Each of these players is likely on their last chance in the NFL with the Cowboys and have so far been on their best behavior. And if a problem should occur all Dallas has to do is release them because of the structure of the contract.

Of course, while the contract structure provides a safety net, these players are acquired with the hopes that that won't have to happen. So far, the Cowboys have been able to create an environment that keeps these players productive and out of trouble. Maybe they have just been lucky. Maybe they really know what they are doing. Either way, the results have been positive so far in Dallas.

Who knows, a few more of these 'bad boy' deals and they might even win a playoff game.

This team is done!

2008-04-14T21:27:00.004-05:00

So my wife comes down stairs from her nap this afternoon and I'm clearly upset about something. "Are you depressed?" she asked me. "Of course I'm depressed, I'm listen to the Rangers."

Just when things can't seem to get any worse, they do. Over the last three days in Boston it's been different culprits: bad starting pitching on Friday night, inability to get runners homes on Saturday, and bad relief pitching on Sunday. It's obvious God hates the Rangers and loves the Red Sox.

You know, every year spring is the same. I have optimism about about the coming Ranger season. I hope that the Rangers are finally going to come together and stay in contention. The long time players (Michael Young, Hank Blalock, Ian Kinsler) etc are finally going be the players we all expected them to be. The off season moves (Jason Jennings, Eddie Guardado, Milton Bradley) are going to work out. The young players (Jason Botts, David Murphy, Josh Hamilton) are going to step up. The pitching is going to be good enough. On and on and on and it never happens. Two weeks into the season and where are we, last place in the west. What are we looking forward to the rest of the year? Last place!

The defense is horendous! Isn't Ron Washington supposed to be the guy who molded Eric Chavez into a Gold Glover? Where is that wizardry with Blalock or Kinsler? It's obvious that Young is a terrible defensive shortstop, but at least Blalock and Kinsler should be able to catch and throw. Any why does he keep trotting out Frank Catalonatto into left field? He couldn't play left for my softball team! And his former bat has completely left him. he's now a singles hitting corner outfielder: exactly what we need.

Talking about Washington, is there a worse in-game manager? How in the world does he in a one run game in which they had the lead, go with Benoit one inning, Wilson one inning, and then pin all your hopes on Franklyn German and Dustin Nippert? Of course, German gives up the lead and then Nippert allows the run that ends the game.

Except for Beniot and Wilson, they have no one worth a crap in the bullpen. They hope that Dustin Nippert can do something, but what has he done so far besides stink up the place? Nothing! And who is surprised that Eddie Guardado and Kaz Fukimori have thrown up all over themselves this year? When was their last decent year? 2001?

Any Astros fan want to testify about Jason Jennings? I will. He sucks. To quote Homer Simpson, "I've seen guys suck before, but he's the suckiest bunch of sucks that every sucked." When will JD put Rangers fans out of their misery and DFA that loser?

I don't even have a plan to move the team forward. Mainly because I'm positive that any plan they implement is almost sure to fail miserably. All I have is this: over the summer the Rangers considered getting into the Johann Santana sweepstakes. They had the prospects the Twins wanted, but the question was would Santana sign the long term deal to make the expenditure in prospects worth the Rangers while. When it was pitched to Santana talked to North Texas native Torri Hunter about Texas and then refused to even consider Texas. Why? Because the culture is poisonous. The Rangers now are the Mavs of the 90s and the Cowboys of the late 80s and the Rangers for their whole damn franchise history except for the late 90s. The Cowboys had a seismic shift when Jerry Jones bought the team in 89. The Mavs had the same thing in 2000 when Cuban bought the team. Would Tom Hicks selling the team be the change needed to change the Ranger's fortunes? Probably not.

Grand Slam: On the record

2008-04-11T07:20:00.005-05:00

I've said this for years, but it isn't documented anywhere, so I need to get it in now.

Tiger Woods will win the Grand Slam.

It might not be this year (although I'm certainly not ruling it out), but it will happen. I have been convinced of this ever since he got the Tiger Slam in 2000-01. I know it's never been done before, but this is Tiger. I've said before that we are too quick to label athletes or events as the Greatest Of All Time, but not in this case.

Why might it be this year? Because the major venues are favorable for it. Tiger has a history of performing well at each, which include Augusta National, Torrey Pines, Royal Birkdale and Oakland Hills. And Tiger has won three of his four events this year against good fields. He has crafted his swing to near perfection and is incredibly focused, even by his standards. A few years ago, it appeared that the other top players had caught up, but over the past year, Tiger has made the gap wider than ever.

Why might it not be this year? Well, it's kind of hard to do. One bad round--heck, one bad shot--and it's over until next year. And while Tiger has certainly distanced himself from the pack, there are more guys than ever vying for the title of Best Golfer Not Named Tiger.

But even if it doesn't happen this year (and again, I'm not ruling it out), Tiger is just now entering his prime. That thought is enough to give Mickelson, Singh, Garcia and the rest nightmares. And enough to make Sabbatini say something stupid again.

Get ready for history, golf fans. And take time to appreciate what we are witnessing.

NHL Playoff Pre(ish)view - Round 1

2008-04-10T13:49:00.003-05:00

So, I meant to post this yesterday, and some would call me weak for posting a preview one day into the playoffs, but this isn't a one loss and you're out thing, so I'm hoping for a little latitude. Let's start with the fact that even as a hockey fan, I feel like the season is too long. But, that's probably an arguement for a later date. It's Playoffs!!

Eastern Conference:
Montreal (1) vs. Boston (8) - Two things stand out in this series which is a great original six rivalry that we haven't seen in a long time. 1. No one expected either team to finish in these spots. Charbonneau has Montreal playing like the Montreal of old and Price is making Gainey look like a genius. The loss of Bergeron should have been more devistating to the Bruins. 2. Only 10 points seperate these two teams. Should be a fun series and I see this going to the wire. Habs in 7 (That's Montreal for non-hockey fans).

Pittsburgh (2) vs Ottawa (7) - Even if the first game wouldn't have been played last night, I would have picked Pittsburgh in 5. I don't think Ottawa has it this year with the loss of Alfredsson and others, and with Crosby coming back, the Penguins will only get stronger. Pens in 5.

Washington (3) vs Philadelphia (6) - Gotta love when a team that gets fewer points gets the higher seed. I think Ovechkin is great, maybe one of the best in the league and I think Washington wins because of this. There has been talk of Hatcher coming back for Philly, but he couldn't keep up with number 8 so I don't see that being a factor. Plus the retro looking Caps jerseys are awesome. Capitals in 6

New Jersey (4) vs. NY Rangers (5) - I honestly don't remember the score of last nights' game, but when Brodeur is involved, I expect him to win against a team that doesn't score that many goals. New Jersey in 6. (uh-oh.. NYR won 4-1. )

Western Conference:
Detroit (1) vs. Nashville (8) - I love the Predators' jerseys, but people who wear the red ones just have more talent. Red Wings in 5.

San Jose (2) vs. Calgary (7) - I'm gonna go with what I would have originally wrote rather than what I'm feeling today. I think San Jose is much more talented and Nabakov is better in net. Sharks in 5. (I'm thinking today - Calgary in 6, but I'm still on the books for SJ).

Minnesota (3) vs Colorado (6) - Minnesota bores me and I don't see them being able to keep up with the Avalanche who have been in playoff more for a month or so. In round 1, that advantage goes to Colorado. Avalanche in 6.

Anaheim (4) vs Dallas (5) - I think these two teams are very evenly matched. But I am a homer and I'm going to pick Dallas even without Zubov (If he came back that would be worth at least a game in favor of Dallas). Stars in 7.

Russell’s Rangers Preview

2008-03-30T14:56:00.004-05:00

Last year, I wrote a preview that basically said that the Rangers will do well if...

If McCarthy and Tejeda can solidify the third and forth spots in the rotation.
 If Gagne is healthy and the bullpen falls into place.
 If the Blalock can break out of his malaise. 
If Cruz and Kinsler are as good as advertised.
 If the offense can get it done. If Sosa doesn't become too big of a distraction.

Well, Gagne was good and got traded and Kinsler was pretty good, but everything else didn’t happen. In fact, almost the opposite happened. Not only did McCarthy and Tejeda not solidify the rotation, but Millwood and Padilla were terrible. Blalock looked really good, then got hurt. Cruz went the way of Tejeda and now both are all but gone. Sosa was ok, but not that great. All the worst case scenarios happened to the highest degrees. Well again, hope springs eternal and new year starts tomorrow. Will anything change? It’s frustrating year after year to lose and lose and this year looks to be no different. The question is are they making progress in the building of the team? Is there a light at the end of the tunnel? Are we really going to be able to tell? Here’s my rundown of the Rangers with keys to look for to see progress.

Rotation:
1 Kevin Millwood
2 Vincente Padilla
3 Jason Jennings
4 Kason Gabbard
5 Luis Mendoza
Injured: Brandon McCarthy
Next in Line: Eric Hurley, A.J. Murray, Sidney Ponson, John Patterson, Matt Harrison
This years Gagne: Padilla, Jennings

The rotation does not look pretty. The top three are great big IFs (can be really good, can be pretty bad, probably will be mediocre), Gabbard has been terrible during the spring and has a limited upside anyway, and Mendoza was given away by Boston a year ago. So it’s just a lot of “ifs” there. We will be able to see progress if Hurley gets to Arlington in August and performs well and McCarthy gets past his injury issues. These guys should be rotation mainstays for years, but as we all know injuries and control issues usually kill the Ranger pitching prospect. They brought in two guy recently who have been considered good, but have struggled with injuries and ineffectivness- John Patterson and Dustin Nippert. Are they going to be anything? Probably not. But progress could mean one of these two become something like everyone thought they could be. I expect the rotation to be better, and possibly see Padilla and Jennings traded with Hurley and Patterson or Nippert taking their places.

Infield
C Gerald Laird
1B Ben Broussard
2B Ian Kinsler
SS Michael Young
3B Hank Blalock
Util Ramon Vasquez
DH Frank Catalanotto and Jason Botts
Next in line: C Jarrod Saltalamacchia, 1B Chris Davis, 2B/SS/3B German Duran
This year’s Teixeira: Broussard, Laird, Catalanotto, Blalock

Trading Teixeira for Broussard is HUGE step down. The hope is that Blalock will be healthy and Kinsler will continue to improve. Overall, I expect the offensive output to be similar to last year. We’ll see progress if Salty solidifies his catching defense in Oklahoma and Davis comes up in September to get his feet wet.

Outfield
LF Marlon Byrd
CF Josh Hamilton
RF Milton Bradley
4OF David Murphy
Next in line: Kevin Mench, Brandon Boggs
This year’s Lofton: Bradley, Mench Byrd

When you have bad pitching, you need really good defense, in the Ballpark especially. Last year, they had one center fielder, Kenny Lofton. Now, they have three with another on the bench. Add the power of Hamilton and Bradley and this outfield is going to be A LOT better, on offense and defense. The future here is further down on the farm. Hopefully, Hamilton will prove that he can stay healthy and play at least 130 games.

Bullpen
CL C.J. Wilson
RP Joaquin Benoit
RP Kaz Fukumori
RP Eddie Guardado
RP Josh Rupe
RP Franklyn German
RP Jamey Wright
Next in Line: Frank Francisco, Wes Littleton, Kameron Loe, Kea Kometani
This years Gagne: Guardado, Wright

I’m a little worried about the bullpen. Wilson, Benoit, and Guardado have been injured or sick during spring training. The bullpen was a strength last year, but I’m afraid that this will be the weak point of this team. The guys who need to step up are Wilson, Rupe, Francisco, and Littleton.

Overall, we want to see progress in the Rangers. I think .500 is the high end of the Ranger year. Around 80 wins would be a pretty good year, but we want to see guys like Kinsler, Hamilton, Murphy, Saltalamacchia, and Botts on the offensive side and Hurley, Wilson, Nippert and Gabbard on the pitching side to lead the way for the Rangers. If it’s Padilla, Jennings, Broussard, and Catalanotto, then progress isn’t being made.

I realize we keep pushing this back, but 2010 is realistically when the Rangers can think about seriously contending for the World Series, but let me give a hypothetical. The Angels are relying on an old outfield and injuries have thinned out their pitching staff. The Mariners are Bedard, Ichiro, and ..... The As are rebuilding just like the Rangers. Can the Rangers contend? Is it at all possible that August roles around and they are within a five of games of first? Could they make a big trade to bring in top pitcher (a bullpen guy) and roll into the playoffs? Or just ride good young players like the Rockies? Maybe, stranger things have happened. I’m not holding my breath though.

Here are my picks for this year.
AL East: Boston Red Sox
AL Central: Cleveland Indians
AL West: LA Angels
AL Wild Card: Detroit Tigers
AL Champion: Indians
NL East: NY Mets
NL Central: Milwaukee Brewers
NL West: Arizona Diamondbacks
NL Wild Card: San Diego Padres
NL Champion: Diamondbacks
World Series: Indians

110 Percent looking for new talent, Mavs reporter

2008-03-28T23:11:00.007-05:00

You may have heard about the flap this month about bloggers and Dallas Mavericks. If not, here's the short version: Tim MacMahon, Mavs blogger with the Dallas Morning News, was ejected from the Mavs locker room by Cuban, and a policy banning all bloggers, regardless of affiliation, was implemented a few days later. According to this Friday article in the Dallas Morning News, the NBA has told the Mavs they must allow fully-credentialed full-time bloggers proper access. But the next part shows why it is important to read past the headlines.

Cuban has implemented a new policy that does not discriminate between professional bloggers and, well, us. So any blogger, and he even mentions Blogspot by name, can apply for a press credential and get in there. This is where you come in.

Since two of the three of us currently here aren't in Dallas, and the third isn't really an NBA guy, I want you to join our team. If you live in Dallas and have always wanted to interview the players, now is your chance. Send me an email and I'll get you hooked up with us, then you can apply for your credential. Act fast, though, because there are only four home games left:

Wed, Apr 2, Golden State
Tue, Apr 8, Seattle
Thu, Apr 10, Utah
Wed, Apr 16, New Orleans

I don't expect this policy to carry over to next year, and playoffs in Dallas are looking unlikely, so let's get in on this now. I look forward to your contributions to our team.

Random thoughts on the tourney

2008-03-27T06:35:00.002-05:00

After two rounds, our tournament challenge picks up right where it left off last year, with Sam's Amateur Psychic bracket at the top of the leaderboard. But Rus is tied with him, trying to salvage the integrity of the 110 Percent pros. And we aren't worried here--Sam has Memphis winning it all, when everyone knows they won't get past Texas.

If you thought you could take on three pros no problem, you might be interested to know that there is a fourth on the leaderboard. Currently in fourth place is Kevin Hayward from All on the Field. He's running a MLB preview right now; be sure to head over there and check it out.

The reigning champ might be at the top, but there are eight other teams within four points, which is the value of each game in the next round. And by the time the regional finals are over, the standings could look quite different--particularly after Memphis gets KOed.

As for the actual tournament, I've got a few observations. I'll start with this year's phenom, Michael Beasley from K-State. In a word: unimpressed. I watched the first round game between USC and K-State (thanks, CBS Sportsline!), my first game of the year. (Before you get too smug, think about how many games you watched before March. Only need one hand? That's what I thought.) I've read a lot about Beasley, but if I was an NBA GM, I'd pass. I freely admit that I can't quantify why; it's just a feeling I have, and it's only based on the one game. I think it's his attitude--he seems too cocky. Confidence is good, but Beasley looks like he thinks he's a little better than all this. He foresee a journeyman's career. Now, OJ Mayo, USC's star, I'd take. He's gonna be good.

We've got two 12s and a 10 in the Sweet Sixteen, and yet none can really be considered a Cinderella. Parity really his college baskeball this season. All of the teams seeded four to twelve would be six to eight seeds historically. The fours aren't really that good and the twelves aren't really that bad. So when number 12 Villanova "upset" Vandy, you shouldn't have really been surprised. And, yeah, number 12 Western Kentucky beat Drake in the first round, but they only had to beat 13 seed San Diego to make the Sweet Sixteen, and that doesn't qualify them as a Cinderella yet. If they beat UCLA in their next game, then we can talk.

As for the Final Four, I'm still confident with North Carolina, UCLA and Texas. With Georgetown getting knocked off in the Midwest, however, it looks like Kansas is going to have a hard time choking their way out of this Final Four. I'll stick with UNC over UCLA in the Final, but you know I'll be pulling for Texas. I'd be more than happy to write another article about how I love being wrong.

Would the real Dallas Mavericks please step up?

2008-03-24T06:57:00.007-05:00

I have seen the light. I have come around on the Kidd trade.

All season, the Mavs have been enigmatic. They would play well against the best teams, even winning on occasion, then they would lose to a lottery team. There was no rhyme or reason to it. Since Kidd got to town, all has come into focus.

So in a word, here are your 2008 Dallas Mavericks: eh.

Since Kidd's arrival, they are 0-8 against the best of the NBA. And they just completed a nice run against teams with worse records. So there you go. The Mavs are average.

OK, not average; they are still a very good team. If they were in the East, they would be in the top three for sure. But in the Wild, Wild West, very good isn't good enough. Very good might even get you a ping pong ball in the lottery, especially when your star player goes down to injury for a few weeks.

The truth is, the Mavs are the same team they have been since 2000, despite Avery's coaching and numerous trades: soft inside, jump shooters on the outside and below average defense. Cuban showed up for Sunday's game with an "Avery's team" shirt as a public show of reconciliation, but the fact is he hasn't provided Avery with the personnel that fit his system. And I'm with Avery on this one. His style wins championships, not jump shooters who don't play defense. Avery has his faults, but this isn't one of them.

This is not to say that this is Kidd's fault, only that his arrival coincides with the clarity. And he is symbolic of the Mavs' problems going forward: this team got old this year. And with no first round draft picks for the next two years, it's going to be hard to get younger. Not to mention that those might be some pretty good picks.

Reality check: the Mavs might miss the playoffs, and Dirk's injury doesn't help. And even if they do stay ahead of Denver, they don't have a chance against any of the top seeds in the West. I'm talking sweep.

This team and front office needs a wake up call. Over the next month, they'll get it.

Bracket Key

2008-03-20T08:46:00.002-05:00

No time to waste, so here's the picks.

Midwest
Sweet Sixteen: (1) Kansas, (2) Georgetown, (3) Wisconsin, (4) Vanderbilt
First round upset: (12) Villanova over (5) Clemson

West
Sweet Sixteen: (1) UCLA, (2) Duke, (3) Xavier, (5) Drake
First round upset: (11) Baylor over (6) Purdue

East
Sweet Sixteen: (1) North Carolina, (3) Louisville, (4) Washington State, (7) Butler
First round upset: (9) Arkansas over (8) Indiana

South
Sweet Sixteen: (1) Memphis, (2) Texas, (3) Stanford, (4) Pittsburgh
First round upset: (10) Saint Mary's over (7) Miami

Final Four
North Carolina over Georgetown
UCLA over Texas

Final
North Carolina beats UCLA 76-71

Am I the only one who is baffled by the parity of the seedings? Look at a particular pod in the East: George Mason, Notre Dame, Washington State and Winthrop. Without looking, could you correctly identify who is the 4, 5, 12 and 13 seeds? Or would you really be stunned if (1) Memphis lost to either (8) Mississippi State or (9) Oregon in the second round? Me either.

Having said that, I have a very pedestrian bracket, with only two picks lower than a four seed in the Sweet Sixteen. And one of those is a very underrated Butler, who somehow got a seven seed despite being eleventh in the most recent AP polls. Last year was a tough one for picking against the favorites; this year, it is virtually impossible.

But what's the point in picking underdogs if you're wrong?

You still have a few hours to get your bracket in, so if you haven't done so already, head over to the 110 Percent Madness Challenge to take on the 110 Percent "Pros". And if you want to have a little fun with it, you can put together a wacky bracket (see below). A few wacky brackets are in, but we can always use more. If you ever wanted to know if you would be better off picking games by uniform color, this is your chance.

But if you want to win, use the Bracket Key posted above.

Wacky brackets

2008-03-17T07:01:00.004-05:00

Are you tired of the person in your office who doesn't know a thing about basketball winning the pool? You know, the guy (or gal) who fills out their bracket according to team colors or mascot? Well, it's time to beat them at their own game.

If you have multiple Yahoo accounts, please feel free to submit additional brackets to our 110 Percent Madness tournament, using your favorite wacky method of filling out a bracket. As the tournament proceeds, we will each be able to see how our "legit" brackets compare to the wacky brackets, and maybe even learn what's the best option for next year's pool.

To get us started, I've already done "Free throw percentage" and "Fans vs. Fans" (based on the feature of the same name in the Yahoo game) brackets. Other suggestions include:

RPI
Coin flip
Tuition
Uniforms
Academic ranking (or perhaps reverse?)

Or feel free to choose your own wacky method. Please title the bracket according to the method so everyone knows what you've done. Have fun with it and good luck.

110 Percent Madness 2008

2008-03-16T04:57:00.004-05:00

The bracket is set and 110 Percent invites you to pick against our 'pros'. If last year is any indicator, that shouldn't be too big of a challenge. The one you have to look out for is Sam, last year's winner.

Click on 110 Percent Madness Tournament Challenge to play.

Here are the details:
Group name: 110 Percent
Group ID# 69767
Password: teameffort

This is hosted by Yahoo!, so you will need a Yahoo! ID to play. Also, you can also make your bracket eligible for the Yahoo's bracket contest--first prize is ten thousand dollars, and a perfect bracket will net you five million.

Let the madness begin.

The role of the record book

2008-03-06T05:22:00.003-06:00

Prior to each of past three seasons, Brett Favre has contemplated retirement. Each time, he chose to come back, despite various difficulties in his private life and the Packers struggles on the field. So when the Favre and the Pack had a great season in 2007, and high expectations in 2008 for the first time in years, what does Favre do? He suddenly, and unexpectedly, retires.

Favre has had a fantastic career, and is without question one of the greatest quarterbacks of all time. As for the timing of the retirement, Favre has said that he didn't feel wanted by the Packers and that the only reason to come back would be to win a Super Bowl. But is that the whole story?

Allow me to play devil's advocate for a moment. Prior to 2007, Favre had 57,500 yards, 414 touchdowns, 5021 completions on 8223 attempts, and 147 wins. Oh, he also had 273 interceptions. After the 2007 season, Favre passed Marino's 61,361 yards for a career total of 61,655. His 442 TDs surpassed Marino's 420. He already had the completion record, but the extra season got him to 8758 attempts, bettering Marino's 8358. He easily surpassed Elway's 148 wins, setting the new mark at 160. For good measure, he even passed Blanda's interception total of 277, reaching 288. Might not have hurt to leave that one out, Brett.

I know he's a year older and that he wants to spend time with his family. But the Pack have as good a chance as anybody of reaching the Super Bowl next year. Could the fact that he has no more records to chase play a role in his decision? Better question: Is there anything wrong with that?

I don't mean to rip Avery, but...

2008-02-29T08:08:00.003-06:00

I really enjoy it when someone says "I don't mean to be ________, but..." because that's usually exactly what they mean to be. In fact, a Google search of "I don't mean to be" can be an amusing way to kill some time. Some examples:

I don't mean to be rude, but you're an idiot. This person is rude.

I don't mean to be a total dork, but I want to remind everyone that there is a total lunar eclipse tonight and, barring really horrible weather here, we should have a great view of it. This person is a total dork. He even goes on to say "Whoo hoo! I loves me some lunar eclipse."

See what I mean? Here's one more:

I don't mean to rip Avery, but...

Last night, the Mavericks lost a close one to the Spurs, 94-97. But coming out of a game that was full of playoff-like tension, everyone is talking about two guys who were on the bench: Avery Johnson and Jason Kidd.

Yes, that Jason Kidd.

For the final thirty-five seconds, spanning two Mavs possessions, Johnson had Kidd riding pine.

Didn't they trade for him to provide leadership? To get easier shots for Dirk, Josh and Co.? To finish games? Does Johnson expect Kidd to do all that from the sideline? Why did he push for the trade if he isn't going to play him in crunch time, especially against the Spurs?

We could all understand when Avery kept a tight grip on the reins when Devin Harris was playing the point. But if you are going to bring Kidd in here, you have got to let him do his thing and get out of the way. If this team is going to have any chance at success, Avery is going to have to get the ball in Kidd's hands when the game is on the line.

Avery has had a phenomenal start to his coaching career. But look at the team he was handed. They were supposed to be good. And let's be honest: he got coached out of the gym against Nelson and the Warriors last year. And last night, his need for control sabotaged the game. Avery's offense is stagnant and Kidd was brought in to be the cure. Instead, he's on the bench.

Avery came in as the anti-Nellie, but after only a few years, he is losing this team. They have already lost some of the defensive intensity he instilled in them. And while Kidd is toeing the company line, Dirk pointedly referred all questions about Kidd's benching to the coach. When you have a superstar with a fragile nature, this is not what you want.

For his part, Avery reasoned that he wanted to spread the floor with shooters so the Spurs wouldn't double team Dirk. This ignores the fact that they acquired Kidd because Nowitzki was having to work too hard for his shots. If Kidd was on the court, perhaps he makes Dirk's shot a bit easier. Avery's decisions have been questionable this year; last night's was madness. Dallas fans thought Avery was brilliant, but since last year's playoffs, he appears to be panicking, with last night's move being the latest and perhaps greatest.

Jerry Jones: Fantasy GM

2008-02-25T09:59:00.003-06:00

A couple of weeks ago, the Dolphins released former All Pro LB and tackling machine, Zach Thomas. It seemed like a sensible move for the 1-15 Fish who aren't going to be good next year and Thomas struggled with injuries most of the year. He's probably first in a line of veteran cuts by the struggling franchise. When I saw that Thomas had been released, I knew that the Cowboys would be first in line for him. Sure enough, they had him in and Jerry wouldn't let him leave without a contract, which he signed on Sunday.
I'm not necessarily opposed to this signing, though I do have a few questions. First of all, do we really need more linebackers? On the inside, we have Bradie James (4th round, just signed a big contract), Akin Ayodele (big free agent contract), Kevin Burnett (2nd round contract), and Bobby Carpenter (1st round draft pick). Not that they are the end all be all at linebacker, especially the very disappointing Carpenter and I think this spells the end of Ayodele's time with the Boys. But still, with the tightness with the cap, did we really need to spend $3 million on a linebacker? They desperately need a cornerback and, though the decided to franchise Ken Hamlin and are trying to sign him long term, I'm not sold on his work.
But look back over the free agent signings of the Jerry Jones and I think you'll see a pattern, even going all the way back to after Jimmy Johnson left. If the Cowboys have a need, then Jerry Jones tries to meet it through signing a name who is coming off injuries or problems and then watching them just suck. Let's see if you remember these gaggle of spares: Quinton Coryatt, Herschel Walker, Rocket Ismail, Alonzo Spellmen, Bryant Westbrook, Ryan Leaf, Eddie George, Anthony Miller, Randall Cunningham, Chad Hutchinson, and Drew Henson.
Jerry runs his team too often like a fantasy team, gathering as many names as he can, hoping to "catch lighting in a bottle." Unfortunately, that lighting usually ends up fizzling in the bottle.
Thomas missed 11 games last year, struggling with a concussion and subsequent migraine headaches. He's 34 years old and on the last legs of his career. He is really a starting linebacker for a Super Bowl team which is what this team is presumed to be?
Jerry runs his team too often like a fantasy team, gathering as many names as he can, hoping to "catch lighting in a bottle." Unfortunately, that lighting usually ends up fizzling in the bottle. Maybe Valley Ranch should put up a little Statue of Liberty with a sign that says "Give me your over-rated, your injury prone, your 'past his prime' looking for one more payday."

Finishing the deal

2008-02-21T06:55:00.002-06:00

I've come to grips with it: Jason Kidd has come home. I'm still not happy with the deal, but since he's here, we might as well see what he can do in Dallas his second time through. So what is Kidd expected to do that Devin Harris couldn't? Make assists, grab rebounds and provide leadership, right? No problem.

Oh, wait, there is a problem: who is going to finish all of those beautiful passes? The Mavericks are jump shooters. All this team does is hang around on the perimeter. I could run this offense--all you have to do is pass around the arc--and believe me, I'm not bragging about that. It would be great if the Mavs introduced a little speed and motion to the offense, but these players won't do it. Howard used to, but he forgot how over the off season.

So we need to make another trade and get a slasher in here. Someone who isn't afraid to take it to the rim and finish a Kidd assist. (Please note: I'm not even going to bother on name speculation. I'm just itemizing the needs.) This team is predictable and easy to defend when everyone is standing around watching Dirk or Josh run an iso. With a finisher, things should open up for the shooters. Without a finisher, Kidd's primary asset is wasted. Most definitely.

Next up is a new back up center. Look, I think Diop was severely overrated in Dallas. Where else does three points and five boards in seventeen minutes make you a fan favorite? Back up center is the new back up quarterback in Big D. But to make it through the West, the Mavs are going to need more than Dampier's six fouls against the likes of Shaq, Duncan and Bynum. I don't care if he is a stiff--a warm body will do.

While we are at it, let's go ahead and get a shiny new back up PG, too. Anyone else comfortable with JJ Barea filling in when Kidd takes a breather? In the playoffs? Me, either.

OK, that's three more acquisitions. Avery still needs to do some tinkering with the offense, and the defensive end could use a little work, too, but as far as personnel go, that about covers it. I'm not sure who they trade away to get them (but I do know who they probably should avoid working into a deal). So working a deal might require a little time.

Wait, the trade deadline is today?

OK, in the offseason, the Mavs need...

Devean and Stack attempt to save the Mavs from themselves

2008-02-15T06:21:00.009-06:00

This week I have discovered two new heroes: Devean George and Jerry Stackhouse.

The Kidd-to-Dallas rumors have been swirling for a few weeks now, but the deal was finally all but done on Wednesday. And I hate it.

I realize that I am very much in the minority on this. The Mavs and most Mavs fans love the idea. Kidd's gonna bring a title to Dallas! Really? How many rings does he have again? Since when did Kidd come with title guarantees? But everyone is ready to start planning the parade route again. Let's slow down, folks. If up 2-0 in the NBA Finals was too early to make those plans, shouldn't we at least wait until the players pass their physicals?

You know who else loves this deal? The Suns and Spurs. Oh, wait, that's probably a bad sign for Dallas, isn't it?

Kidd is not a better player than Harris right now. Harris gives San Antonio and Phoenix fits with his speed and Kidd can't do that. Kidd only edges him in two areas: assists and leadership, and Kidd's assists would go down in Dallas. His leadership would be beneficial to a soft team, but that's about it. I wouldn't trade Kidd for Harris straight up. Add to that first round picks this year and 2010? And no more bench? And Kidd's bloated salary as his ability declines in the next few years? Are you joking?

This is a desperate panic move on the part of Mark Cuban that will rank among the all-time great panic moves if it is completed. It'll be right up there with Randy Johnson to the Yankees, Joey Galloway to the Cowboys, and any trade by Isiah Thomas. Dare I? It will be the NBA equivalent of Herschel to the Vikings. Any Dallas fans want to be on the wrong side of that deal?

I'm not saying Dallas is going to win a title this year with Harris. I am saying they won't win a title this year with anybody. And the Kidd trade is a title-or-bust move. Harris has a long career ahead of him, and the rest of the Mavs core still have years left in their championship window. Kidd does not, and his salary hamstrings the Mavs for years, not to mention having to search for a new PG in a few years.

So I'm not too fond of the trade. But before I could begin hyperventilating, Devean George pulled the brake on the deal, thanks to a little-known NBA rule that protects his Early Bird status. George is being ripped in Dallas, but he's my new favorite Maverick. And let's be honest: he is only doing this to protect his own salary. Any readers willing to give up their chance to maximize their earnings? Me either. Unfortunately, George is shooting himself in the foot, because it's not likely a team is going to offer him much anyway since he apparently isn't a "team player".

And if George's personal objections weren't enough, here is the latest: Jerry Stackhouse got caught talking a bit too much. In an interview, he said that he'll have "30 days to rest then I’ll be right back. I ain’t going nowhere." Uh-oh. First Donaghy, and now pre-arranged deals bringing Stack back to Dallas? The NBA will examine the situation and consider banning Stack from returning to Dallas if traded, and perhaps even not accept him as a piece in the trade at all. This is ridiculous. Stack would have to sit out 30 days, and any team has the opportunity to sign him. He might have a deal to return to Dallas, but nothing is stopping another contender from stealing him away. Remember when Cleveland thought they had a deal with Boozer? How did that work out for them?

Either way, though, he's another Maverick hero.

I expect this deal to go through one way or the other—honestly, the Mavs almost have to do it now or they risk losing the confidence of the team. Even though Cuban has said he wouldn't do it, I'd look for Keith Van Horn to be included in the deal as a sign and trade. He could easily replace George's expiring contract and with a bump in salary on the "contract" could cover for the Stack omission as well. This would cost Cuban some extra cash under the luxury tax, but when has money ever really stopped him? He also told us a week ago that the Kidd deal would never happen because it would cost the Mavs half their roster, so his word isn't exactly good as gold.

But if Devean and Stack can somehow keep this deal from ruining the Mavericks, I think I've got my nominations ready for this year's 110 Percent Hall of Fame.

Another Hard Right Turn

2008-02-06T19:42:00.000-06:00

In the 35 illustrious years of the Rangers, they have a grand total of one Hall of Famer: Nolan Ryan. But even he spent the best years of his career in California and Houston. It was he, however, who brought legitimacy to the team playing in a glorified AAA ball field in Arlington. You could say that the Ballpark is the Ballpark Nolan Built, because it was his popularity that allowed that beautiful park to be built in the first place and he is rightfully honored with a statue in the centerfield concourse. Now, he returns to Arlington as president of the Texas Rangers. He is a strong change from the previous presidents who were business people who seemed not to care even a little bit about baseball.

Over the past several years, in fact since Tom Hicks bought the team, the biggest complaint I've had is that the can't seem to stick to a plan. They swing back and forth between throwing big money at free agents and building from within, usually mixing in the terrible trade, the terrible free agent signing, and the terrible draft. In fact, usually for their whole history, it's if something bad can happen it will. Perhaps Murphy's Law should be changed to Ranger's Law: if something bad can happen it probably will.

However, I think the franchise is now on more solid footing that it has been in a long time. But that footing is precarious. Because of shrewd trades and an almost universally lauded draft last year, the Rangers went from one of the worst farm systems to one of the best, with some top prospects on the cusp of helping the team this year. However, most the big time pitching prospects are below AA and anything can happen to them (considering Ranger's Law, probably bad things).

As you all know, I like what JD has done over the last year or so. He's not batting a 1.000, but he's doing pretty good. I'm nervous about Ryan coming in and changing things before we have a chance to know if JD's plan is going to work. Apparently, Ryan's going to have say over all baseball matters. I'm nervous.

I read now, that it means that Tom Hicks will step back from baseball matters. If that is the case and Ryan can do to Hicks what he did to Robin Ventura, then I'm all for it. Only thing though, how long do you think that'll last?

Which is worse?

2008-02-06T14:08:00.000-06:00

So, I can't remember if we've had this conversation before, but it's something I was thinking about as I was lamenting the loss of the Pats earlier this week. As a fan, is it better for your team to get to the Championship and lose, or for them not to get there at all?

I can only go with what I've experienced so that's how I'm going to approach this. Focusing on the local teams.

Case Study # 1 - The Dallas Stars from 1999-2000. The Stars had come off of winning the Stanley Cup the previous season and there were fall-off expectations that just didn't happen. After some hard-fought series, they made it back to the Cup finals to meet the Devils and a chance at back-to-back titles. They fell short and I remember thinking that it was the worst feeling being so close and yet so far. This was a little smoothed by the fact that they had won the season before, but I remember being bummed for a while. Fast forward to the present where the Stars haven't made it out of the first round for ever... and I get frustrated when they lose, but I almost expect it and it doesn't seem to hurt as much as a fan. So, Getting there and losing - 0, Not getting there at all - 1

Case Study # 2 - The Dallas Mavericks in 2006. I don't need to recap and won't cause Andy and Jenn still haven't visited our house since Andy and I played NBA on my PS3 the day of the finals and we lost to the Heat... I still haven't watched a full NBA game since and am not sure if I ever will... so, I'd say that was horrible. GTAL - 0, NGTAA - 2

Case Study # 3 - The Dallas Cowboys since 2000. I am more personally invested in this team than in the Mavericks, but again, my expectations have been set that if they make the playoffs, they will probably lose in the first round. At least that is how it had been until this year. I couldn't believe when they lost to the Giants when I felt like they were a shoe-in to make it at least to the NFC game. It was very disappointing and worse than the botched snap game. GTAL - 0, NGTAA - 3

Case Study # 4 - The Texas Rangers since team creation. They have never been there, and I haven't been convinced that they have an actual plan to get there so they never disappoint. GTAL vs. NGTAA - Push

So, based on my research, I'd rather not get that close and lose. I'm officially a sports snob who has to win the whole thing or I'm disappointed. Man, I used to hate people like me when I rooted for North Texas and the Patriots of the early 90's and winning more than they lost was a successful season.

So, how do you feel? Would you rather get to the dance? Or be left at home?

Sometimes I love being wrong

2008-02-04T17:45:00.000-06:00

Two days ago, I commented on Rus's article, saying that the Patriots were going to wipe out the Giants.

I have never been so happy to be wrong.

In his new post (see below), PJ gave me credit for predicting the Super Bowl loss, which I did do. But I bailed on that in the second round when both Indy and Dallas folded. I resigned myself to the inevitable. The Giants? Are you kidding?

But the football gods were merely aligning the pieces to make the Patsies fall that much sweeter.

Do I wish it was the Cowboys instead? Of course, but they had their chance and blew it. Back to the drawing board. And as a Cowboys fan, I take great pride in being a fan of America's Team. But today, that title belongs to the Giants. They truly represented all of the NFL and all of America when they defeated the Patsies.

I'm not one to take joy from the suffering of others, but watching them lose was truly sweet, the definition of poetic justice. This was retribution for Spygate and the ensuing arrogance, payback for running up scores.

And they can't even look forward to peace in the off season. The NFL tried to sweep it under the rug during the season, but with new video allegations, Belicheat is going to have to finally give some answers.

But that will be for another day. For now, the Pats have been relegated to trivia status. Years from now, someone Wanting to Become a Millionaire will do just that by answering the question: Which team went undefeated in the regular season only to fall short of perfection in the Super Bowl?

And I will still be smiling.

Dont' think, don't worry, everything's just fine...

2008-02-04T10:36:00.000-06:00

So, I feel numb. Sorry to borrow from the Edge, but that's how I feel today. Still. Since last night at around 9:15 or so, I really haven't been able to digest the fact that a) the Patriots blew a perfect season, b) they had no answer for the Giants' pass rush, and c) Eli Manning made the MVP trophy a family affair. As I watched Eli take control of the first series and I kept seeing the graphics (most third down completions on an opening drive, most plays on an opening drive...), and even when the Patriots held them to 3 points, I was nervous. They had eaten up how much time? Then Brady took over and they scored a touchdown and I calmed down a little.

But the Giants wouldn't go away and they were on the march again. Then Eli made his first big mistake and there was the pick. Only the Patriots couldn't do anything with it. Then a fumble, and the Patriots couldn't do anything with it. And they went into the locker room with a very misleading 7-3 lead.

I was also surprised by how inaccurate Brady was. That seemed to be the theme of the second half. Other than the Giants' front four doing whatever they felt like defensively, there were a lot of mistakes. I know the defensive pressure causes those mistakes, but that had been the calling card of this offense. The ability to handle a pass rush and make big plays out of it just never happened for this team, and was ultimately their downfall.

The curious decision to go for a 4th and 13(I think it was 13 - it was definitely double digits) instead of a long, but makeable field goal when you lose by 3 is another case of hindsight coaching, but was a weird decision even for Belichick. So, I'm crazy disappointed, but I will in no way discredit the Giants by saying that the Patriots lost the game rather than the Giants winning. The Giants definintely won the game. I will stop short of Mike and Mike's assertion this morning that the Patriots had the collective rears handed to them, but the Giants did win and congratulations to them for that.

The only positives that I can take from this game, are:
1. The team that took out the Cowboys won the Super Bowl (A very very very small moral victory)
2. Now, I don't have to hear anything about the Championship being "tainted".
3. Maybe now someone will finally stop leaking parade routes...

Whoop-de-freakin'-do

2008-02-03T22:54:00.000-06:00

Well, the Giants won. I guess I'm happy. I mean I was rooting for them half-heartedly. No, make that about a quarter-heartedly. I mean, it's sorta like asking would I rather drown or burn to death. Either way I loose.

The thing that really ticks me off is that it could have been the Cowboys. It's should have been the Cowboys. I mean, this was how I drew it up after New England beat the Cowboys earlier in the season. The Pats go undefeated until the Super Bowl and then they lose. Except that the Giants took the place of the Cowboys as the upset super bowl victor. It ought to leave a bad taste in every Cowboys fan.

The window for winning championships for most teams these days is small. That's why the Mavs should still feel sick about 2006. It was right there in their hands and they vomited all over themselves. Now the question is are they good enough to win this year? There's a long way to go, but it's not looking good.

But back the Cowboys: give credit to the GIants. They got hot and rode a really strong defense to the Super Bowl. (By the way, I can't believe Eli won the MVP. I mean, the defense held the Pats to 14 points!) It was the defense that beat the Cowboys. They wouldn't allow them to do anything in the second half when the Cowboy defense stiffened. The only touchdown the GIants scored in the second half was on a short field. But the difference was that when the Cowboys got into the red zone, they had to settle for field goal, while the GIants scored a touchdown.

There is reason to be optimistic about the Cowboys next year. But they had a chance this year and let it get away. But bottom line is this: I will not believe in the Cowboys until the playoffs. Because everything good that happens next year in the regular season won't mean jack squat. It is officially Super Bowl of bust.

Sometimes I hate being right

2008-02-02T19:13:00.000-06:00

Last April, when the NFL schedule was released, I predicted a 13-3 season for the Boys. OK, so I didn't specifically nail two of the losses--sue me. Thanks to the fact that most of our low traffic consists of Cowboys fans, that flew by largely uncontested. Not so on Armchair GM, where I was accused of making a meaningless prediction in April and smoking up with Michael Irvin. But I argued that the schedule was ridiculously easy and that they had every chance of losing their first playoff game anyway. So I was vindicated in the end.

And vindication has never felt so empty.

Does this feel at all familiar to anyone else from Dallas? Let's see: high-profile team dominates the regular season, setting a franchise record, only to humbly bow out early in the playoffs. Where have I heard that before?

So where do we go from here? I don't mind telling you that I already predicted that, too. Statistically, the defense was improved, but they gave up big plays at all the wrong times. Hopefully, Dave Campo can get that secondary to finally clamp down and play like the Pro Bowlers that three(!) of them are. I'm glad Jerry talked Jason Garrett into hanging around, but he has got to do something about the running game. It was just like the defense: if you look at the stats, they were pretty good. But when it really needed to, this team could not run the ball. A high flying passing game will lead SportsCenter and attract bimbo girlfriends, but this team needs to be able to pound the ball when the game is on the line. Special teams continued to lose field position, too. With Campo already on board and Capers mulling an offer, maybe we could add one more former head coach to the staff: Jimmy Johnson. He always stressed the importance of special teams. Quick, someone go sink Three Rings and pass a rumor that Jerry sold the team.

Just like the Mavs, the Cowboys are going to have a long off season to think about the what-ifs. But it is no secret what they have to do: everyone knows that defense and a running game win championships. Get it done, Boys.

Over the last month and the greater good

2008-01-29T14:07:00.000-06:00

It's been a while since I've posted and alot of things have happened.

*The Mavs have been playing well. In fact, they've gone 13-4 since my last post. But Devin Harris just got hurt. I'm not to worried since he's only out for 2-3 weeks. I mean the Mavs almost won 70 last year with Jason Terry at the point, so I think they can survive for a couple of weeks. Unless someone else gets hurt. Then all bets are off. It does bring up the thought of righting at least one of the wrongs of the 90s Mavericks and trading for Jason Kidd. I'll just say this. I'd do it, but ain't holding my breath.

*The Stars have been struggling at 9-9. I don't follow them as closely, but I wonder what they're going to do with Marty Turco. I keep waiting for P.J. to post his thoughts. It seems to me that a Brian St. Louis would be a pretty good haul for Turco. But I know less about hockey than just about anything else.

*The Rangers fortified their starting rotation with the addition of Jason Jennings, who is probably going to fit in well with the Rangers rotation. As an Astros and Rangers fan, I am really really underwhelmed. Hopefully, he is over the health issues that plagued him in his only year as an Astros. But he sucked last year and it was especially bad in light of what the Astros gave up for him. Maybe he turns it around and pitches well this year. But the real problem is that he is another in a long line of pitchers signed to one year "make good" deals who end up sucking, like Pedro Astacio, Ismael Valdez, and Mark Clark. Plus the idea of bringing him and then, if he's any good, trading him ticks me off because I hold dreams (or hallucinations) of a competitive Ranger team that should not be trading off players at the end of the year. But in addition to Jennings, the Rangers also brought in pitchers Eddie Guardado and Kazuo Fukimori and toyed around with trading Marlon Byrd for Matt Murton (which I'd probably do). But overall, each of these moves are met with a collective *yawn*. I have written on my calender that pitchers and catchers report on Feb 14. Can't happen a moment too soon.

*In college sports, Texas won the Holiday Bowl. Which is fine, but really, I expect so much more from Texas. I like what Mack Brown has done so far: hiring Will Muschamp to coordinate the defense and bringing Major Applewhite home. Still don't think Colt McCoy is good enough to take this team to the national championship. Texas Tech won an exciting bowl game, and Texas A&M lost a bowl game. College basketball looks good for Texas, A&M, and Baylor. I don't pay attention to college basketball until March anyway.

*The Titans made the playoffs, but lost a tough first round game to the Chargers. Vince Young has a new offensive coordinator, but I think the real question is is he willing to do what it takes to be a great NFL quarterback. Merrill Hoge not withstanding, everyone thinks that he's got all the talent in the world and is going to be great, but he's gotta want it. Is he going to work on his passing game? Also, are the Titans going to surround him with the talent he needs at WR? In the two years that I've followed the Titans, it seems that Bud Adams, the owner, is cheap. They invested a #3 pick and millions of dollars on their quarterback, but last year completely failed to improve their receiving corp.

*Something else happened in Dallas sports over the last month, but I forgot what it was. I may be repressing memories.

*Anyway, about the greater good that I referenced in the title. With the Super Bowl coming up, the question for football fans everywhere is who to root for. Usually, if I don't have an interest, I root for the underdog. But this year, I hate almost equally both teams. I'm so beaten by the Pats and their "quest for perfection." You'd think after the whole spy thing, the arrogance, the jerkiness of Belichek, the football gods would wake up and kick them in the shorts. But the thing is the Giants aren't a love able team either. Michael Strahan just beats me. Every time I see him, I turn off the TV. In fact, to be honest, I've watched so little of ESPN and quit listening to sports talk radio over the last couple of weeks, they could have called the whole thing off and I may not have heard about it.
But beyond all this: the Super Bowl is further proof that the sports universe revolves around New York and Boston and as a New York and Boston sports hater, this is hell. But in the grand scheme of things, the Boston sports fan must be stopped! First, the Red Sox, now, the Patriots, and coming soon, the Celtics. Even the New England Revolution made the MLS championship! (Full disclosure: I had to look that up. I just guessed that the Rev (as I'm sure they're called) would have been any good this year.) I'm surprised the Bruins aren't kicking butt in the NHL. For the greater good of sports and the rest of the nation. Down with the Pats! Go Giants! (I think I'm gonna be sick).

Josh Hamilton: Texas Ranger

2007-12-21T17:43:00.000-06:00

Spring 2001. Dan Rosendahl and I travel during spring break to Florida for a week of baseball- seven games in five days and some great stories featuring George Brett and some old Red Sox fans. A-Rod's a Ranger and autographs from Ranger greats Rusty Greer and Rafael Palmiero as well as Jonathan Johnson and Ryan Glynn.
One of the games we went to was the Minnesota Twins against the Tampa Bay Devil Rays. In fact, it may have been our first game. This was where Dan played the little kid to the groundskeeper's Mean Jow Green, who tossed him a ball. I got one that was hit during batting practice by the immortal BJ Garbe, the Twins first round draft pick in 1999 who still can't get out AA ball.
With that ball, I was determined to get a good autograph. When I entered the stadium during batting practice, one guy stood out from the rest: the Devil Ray's number one draft pick in the entire draft, 19 year old Josh Hamilton. There were a few old guys standing around with notebooks full baseball cards and Hamilton was signing them. I thought this is a good guy who to sign my new ball. But it was taking too long with the other guys and he had to run and hit batting practice. He looked at me and told me that he would be right back. During batting practice he was showed light pole power, crushing pitches out of the park. To his credit, when he was done hitting, he came over and signed my ball. However, about that time, I looked around and realized that was I was a 27 year old guy and I was clamoring for the autograph of a 19 year old kid. The other guys who were standing around were old balding guys who, frankly, looked like complete loser. While the rest of the week, I still got lots of autographs and have paid for a few autographs, it was the beginning of the end of my careing about baseball players autographs. Now, if it's Nolan Ryan or Troy Aikman or someone of that ilk, then I'll act a complete loser to get that.
Anyway, after that year, he fell off the face of the earth, battling injuries and drug problems. In fact, he didn't play proball from 2002-2005. Then he came back last year with an OPS of .924 and with 19 hrs and covering centerfield. Now the Rangers take a risk on a guy who can be a All-Star or end up homeless. I think it's a good call. I'll talk more later.

Steroid hypocrisy

2007-12-19T09:24:00.000-06:00

Yesterday, I got in the car and turned on the radio and it was on ESPN radio. During the Sports Center Update, Fernando Vina was confessing his sins of using Performance Enhancing Drugs. This is by no means the only word about steroid or PEDs. Turn the dial down again and it's someone saying Roger Clemens won't make the Hall of Fame. Flip on the TV and someone is condemning the culture of drug use that has run rampant in baseball. Go to the blogs and someone else is calling the Yankee World Series victories into question.
Then wait a few minutes and there's a commercial depicting Shawne Merriman. In this commercial Merriman absolutely devastates several opposing offences in a row. This is the same Merriman who was suspended last year for PED. Of course, it's not surprising that he would be featured because despite the suspension, he was named to the Pro Bowl. As far as I know, he never has gone on TV or radio to try to justify his use of PED.
This isn't the only player who got busted for steroids, but not only got a pass, but was celebrated. Luis Castillo, a Charger defensive tackle, a confessed steroid user who used his enhanced performance to be able to wow the teams at the pre-draft combine, was drafted in the 1st round and then was the cover boy for the Madden 08 video game Spanish edition.
After baseball was called on the carpet before grandstanding congressional hearings, and was absolutely dragged through the mud, the NFL came and the congressmen just drooled all over them.
I could go on and on. For some reason, the fabric of society is threatened by the use of PEDs by baseball players. And of course, what about the children??? But football players get continue to get bigger, stronger, and faster, and more and more comes out about what is happening in football, but it's give a big, hearty "meh."
I'm not saying that PEDs are ok and that we shouldn't do anything and just let professional sports become like the Olympics and professional bike riding, but I just ask that we give a little bit of equity here.

Baby steps

2007-12-19T05:17:00.000-06:00

Last week the highly anticipated Mitchell report was released, including the names of 86 players, past and present, who allegedly used performance enhancing drugs. Like many sports fans, I was looking forward to what the report, two years in the making, would reveal.

But when it finally hit, I found myself extremely unimpressed. Many of the players named were no surprise, and even for those, the report doesn't include any evidence that would hold up in court. I found myself asking, so what do we do with this now?

I'm not here to criticize the report as I have heard others do. One common criticism is that players not on the list now have a free pass. I don't buy that at all--as far as I know, Senator Mitchell never intended this to be an exhaustive list. I just want to know what happens from here on out. I'm not interested in striking records from the books or asterisking them. What's done is done, and it wasn't against the rules of baseball at the time anyway. And even though it is against the rules now, we don't have a test for HGH, what any ballplayer with half a brain who is willing to cheat is using. Without a test for the substance, baseball's anti-doping policy is useless.

The commissioner needs to demand the development of a test. the owners need to demand a test. Most of all, the players' union needs to demand a test. Maybe I'm being naive, but if I was a clean player, I'd be pretty ticked about dirty players, regarding both competitive balance and job security.

Senator Mitchell is on the right track with his report, but what is really needed is for all of baseball to work together to clean up the game, and for science to at least keep up with the cheaters.

Out on a limb

2007-12-14T08:05:00.000-06:00

I'm setting myself up for heaps of ridicule, but I want to go on the record now that New England will not win the Super Bowl this year. This is something I have wanted to do all season but never got around to for one reason or another, and to be honest, some of my original reasons are losing steam. Nevertheless, I still think I am right on this and need to document it now if I want to brag about it in a couple of months.

First of all, if you give me the choice of one team or the field, I'll take the field every time. New England may have the best odds to win the Super Bowl, but they still have less of a chance than the rest of the league combined. If you were to press me on it, I'd say that Indianapolis and Dallas have the best chance to knock them off.

Next up is one of my apparently failed reasons: injuries. Earlier in the season, I really thought a major injury or two would wipe the team out. I just couldn't see them going all out the way they were and escaping the regular season healthy. Well, so far they have. That's OK, though, because I've got a few other reasons on which to hang my hat.

Another reason is karma. If there was ever a team that angered the football gods, it is New England. I'm not usually one to buy into this kind of stuff, but after Spygate and the way they have run up the score on everyone, the Patsies are going to get their due.

Which leads to my next reason: the Pats are not as dominant as their undefeated record implies. Let's not forget that Dallas has a single loss and Indy only two. Yes, both of these teams lost to the Pats, but a repeat win in the playoffs is by no means a lock for the Patriots. Forget for a moment what Brady has done this year, if ESPN and the mainstream media will let you. Everyone knows (but still manages to forget this time of year) that defense and a running game win championships. How does NE stack up? Defense is fourth (behind Indy at two, Dallas is eight), rushing is fourteenth (behind Indy at twelve and Dallas at nine). In fact, I think the Patriots and their pass-happy offense would have been better off if they had to go on the road to Indy in the AFC playoffs. New England's undefeated season is a sham anyway; remove Dallas and Indy, and the remaining Patriots opponents are 55-88.

My final reason is precedent, in the form of the 06-07 Mavericks, who went just about as close as you can get to undefeated in a 82 game NBA season. How did that work out for them again? The Mavs burned themselves out in the regular season, and Belichick is doing the same thing to the Pats in his chase for an undefeated season, or revenge for the slights his team received after Spygate, or whatever else is driving him. When the playoffs roll around and each opponent has a better record than sub-.400, the Pats will fold. I didn't think the Pats could go undefeated in the regular season, but I am now resigned to that. But I have come to embrace it; after all, it will be that much sweeter when they fall short of the championship.

Are the Pats good? Absolutely, but don't engrave the Lombardi yet.

Selling the Farm for Some Magic Beans

2007-12-12T15:49:00.000-06:00

I'm sure you've been checking the site for what the resident Astros' expert has to say about the Tejada trade. Well, I'll just say I like it alot better when I thought it was Luke Scott, Adam Everett, and one pitching prospect a week ago. Now I find out it's OF Luke Scott, P Troy Patton (#3 on the BA prospect list), P Matt Albers, P Dennis Sarfate, and 3B Mike Coustanzo (#6 on the BA list, I like it whole lot less. And if Tejada can demand a trade after 2008, as Richard Justice of the Chron is reporting, I like it even less. And now (one day later) that I know the Miguel Tejada is on the Mitchell report (big surprise, really), I like even less.

The main weakness of the Astros over the last several years was a weak lineup. Numbers 7-9 hitters were Everett, Brad Ausmus, and the pitcher, three almost automatic outs, add to that a declining Craig Biggio, an array of spares such as Jason Lane, Chris Burke, Eric Bruntlett, Willy Tavares, and Morgan Ensberg, and with the loss to free agency, injuries, and retirement to players such as Jeff Bagwell, Jeff Kent, and Carlos Beltran the Astros had basically become Lance Berkman and the Punchless Wonders. Last year, they started to add some offense, by overpaying for Carlos Lee and the emergence of Hunter Pence. J.R. Towles should outhit Ausmus and Michael Bourne as speed and defence to centerfeild. And while you could make the argument that Everett could bat ninth after the pitcher, he is an excellent defensive shortstop. When we went down last year with a broken leg, the Astros had to go with Bruntlett and Mark Loretta, slightly better hitters, but had no where near the glove. So it goes without saying that Tejada will improve the Astros offense. I mean, optimally, they'll have one of the strongest lineups in the National League so I guess that's a good thing.

Unfortunately, unless the Astros plan on Roy Oswalt being the #1, #2, #3 starter and the closer, they have no realistic shot at contending and have hamstrung themselves for the foreseeable future. The Astros had a weak farm system anyway and now they have traded away most of what they had left. They basically traded most of their tradable commodities for declineing, roided up guys who will need to be move to third base probably during the season. Could they not have thrown this together for a starting pitcher? Now they'll have to throw probably $25 mil after spares like Jason Jennings or John Leiber. They still don't have a closer as Chad Qualls inspires about as much confidence as the US Congress. Here is the rotation after Oswalt: Wandy Rodriguez, Woody Williams, Chris Sampson, and Brandon Backe. Inspired, yet? Maybe the Astros will be an offensive juggernaut. But they'll eaither be winning or losing games 10-9 all year long. I just don't understand the move.

The Allas Cowboys?

2007-12-10T15:12:00.000-06:00

Disclaimer: I didn't get to watch yesterday's game with the Lions. It was the first game I have missed this year. So this post is based on what I've read and what I heard from Brad and Babe on the radio.
Here is the premium money and draft picks that the Cowboys have spent on their defense:
DE: Marcus Spears- 2005 1st round draft pick, Chris Canty- 2005 4th, and Jason Hatcher- 2006 3rd
DT: Jason Fergeson- 2005 free agent
LB: Greg Ellis- 1998 1st, DeMarcus Ware- 2005 1st, Bradie James- 2003 4th, Akin Ayodele- 2006 free agent, Kevin Burnett- 2005 2nd, Anthony Spencer- 2007 1st, Bobby Carpenter- 2006 1st
CB- Terrence Newman- 2003 1st, Anthony Henry- 2005 free agent
S- Roy Williams- 2002 1st
Not mentioned failed high picks like Dewayne Goodrich, Ebenezer Ekuban, and Tony Dixon.
They even hired a defensive guru coach in Wade Phillips. In fact, the last three head coaches have been defensive guys.
But then against one of the worst running offenses in the league and after a week of whining about something a 2nd rate quarterback said a year ago (after he had torched a playoff bound team for 300 yards and 4 TD passes), the D was gashed for 400 yards of total offense. John Kitna was the most sacked QB in the NFL, but the Cowboys hardly touched him and caused 0 turnovers. Kevin Jones averaged 4 yards a rush and Kitna completed 35-44.

The Cowboys have a strong offense. So strong that it overcame a fumble on the 1 yard line down by a touchdown and still drove down and won the game in the end. And it looks like that offense is going to have to carry this team as far as it will go. I mean, do you feel good about this defense against the Vikings again, especially when they have Adrian Peterson and Tavaris Jackson seems to have found himself? What about the Giants or the Packers again? I'm not preaching doom and gloom yet. But this defense needs to step up if the Cowboys want to do what they said they want to do. Their goal isn't the NFC East title they clinched yesterday. It's the Super Bowl.
This win falls in the same line as the Buffalo game: A game they should have lost, but won anyway.
Glass half full? This team has guts and never says die.
Glass half empty? This defense is a sieve and will inevitably keep this team from it's goals.
Which one is it?

The Definition of Insanity, Part 2

2007-12-07T13:18:00.001-06:00

One definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result. Earlier I talked about this concerning the Dallas Mavericks. Now I'm saying this about myself and the Texas Rangers. I keep expecting that the Rangers are going to do something smart and then contend and it never happens. Stupid trades on top of stupid free agent signings on top of bad drafts on top of key injuries on top of under performing players on top of bad leadership from the top and so on and so on. I haven't looked at all the numbers, but I'm pretty confident in saying that the Rangers are probably fighting it out with the Rays and the Royals for the worst franchises in all of baseball.

This past year has been a bit of a step backwards for the franchise: trading their best player (Mark Teixeira) for Jarrod Saltalamacchia and a bunch of minor leaguers, big free agent signings of the past couple of years (Kevin Millwood and Vincente Padilla) struggling, a slow start from the FOTF (face of the franchise- Michael Young), injuries to key players (Brandon McCarthy and Hank Blalock), and another questionable trade (McCarthy for Danks). There are a couple of things you can look back on as good things: a couple of very good trades (Kenny Lofton and Eric Gagne for Max Ramirez, Kason Gabbard, Elvis Andrus and David Murphy), a good step forward by some younger players (Ian Kinsler, C.J. Wilson, Travis Metcalf, and Edinson Volquez), and what looks like and excellent draft. For the first time in LOOOONG time outside observers are calling the Ranger farm system one of the best in baseball with a whole lot of prime pitching talent, including some that may impact the big league team this year (Eric Hurley and Matt Harrison).

So the question is about this off-season, preparing for 2008. How aggressive should the Rangers be in free agency for areas of need? What about trading some of their prime minor league talent for established major leaguers like Johan Santana or Eric Bedard?

So far the Rangers have made only very minor moves: stealing an Angels' prospect on a paperwork snafu and trading a barely usable center fielder for a recently released first baseman. Hardly front page stuff. Their stated focus of the off season, Torri Hunter, signed with the Angels and as the top flight center fielders sign elsewhere the Rangers are forced to look at spares like Corey Patterson and Juan Pierre. This hasn't exactly been an off season to get excited about Rangers baseball. When the Royals are more appearing more apt to spend money than you, you know you have problems.

I suggest, however, that the Rangers are making the right moves at this time by not making any major, earth shattering moves. There are two main reasons that I think this:
1. For the first time in years, it appears the Rangers actually have a plan and are sticking to it. That plan is building the team from within, especially in the pitching department. In the top 20 prospect list I linked earlier, 6 are pitchers that were added this last year, either through trade or the draft. They have finally realized that if you want to hold down costs you can't build a rotation through free agency. Also, when pitchers get traded, it's for top notch minor league talent, like when the Marlins traded Josh Beckett for Hanley Ramirez and more. The thing about pitching prospects is the high attrition rate. TINSTAAPP (There is no such thing as a pitching prospect). Injuries happen, guys aren't effective, they go off the deep end mentally. Any number of things can happen. How do you keep that from killing your franchise? By stock pilling as many as possible.
2. They've realized you don't get better by throwing ridiculous amounts of money at mediocre players. For example, after Torri Hunter, Andruw Jones was the best center fielder on the market. According the reports, while he signed for 2/36 with the Dodgers he wanted a long term commitment to change leagues and sign with the Rangers. Now the best center fielder on the market, Aaron Rowand wants five years. If you're operating on a budget, you can't throw good money after bad players. I'm not even sure the Torii Hunter was worth the money the Rangers would have had to pay him to et him hear.

The off season is still going on. There are plenty of time for the Rangers to make moves and screw all this up. Hopefully, they will continue to follow the blue print that they have set out for themselves. They still need to improve the outfield which with Murphy, Byrd, and Catalanotto may be the worst outfield in baseball. I don't think they need a closer or a starter right now, although if you can get rid of Vicente Padilla you gotta do it. Their offense has a chance to be terrible. But 2008 is not what we are working for. We're looking at 2009, 2010, etc.

What to think of this NHL Season - Stars Edition

2007-12-04T21:23:00.000-06:00

So, I've been watching the NHL for a while. About 14 years pretty steady (you know, except for the years where they weren't playing). I feel like I understand and can generally pick how seasons are going to go for a franchise. In summary, I consider myself an NHL guy. So, what the heck do I make of this season? It's pretty wheels-off, that's what. Every time you think you know something, you find out you don't know it.

Let's start with the Stars. Actually, I'll just focus on them. The rest of the NHL will have to wait. Before the season, I pretty much guessed them to be a middle of the pack playoff team that was probably on it's way down. Then, when the season started and Modano looked like the pressure of the record was getting to him, I thought... uh oh, the Stars may not make the playoffs this year. Apparently Tom Hicks agreed and fired Doug Armstrong. And hired Brett Hull as interim co-general manager (seriously... what kind of title is that???) Then Mike breaks the record and realizes that he can score again and the Stars go on a winning streak. Except instead of being anchored by their franchise goalie, they are led by Mike Smith, a goalie who I thought was as generic as his name. I've been trying to figure out what to write about this team, but every time I started to write, the story changed. Now, the Stars are in first place in the Pacific Division (where I thought they might be third best), and near the top of most "Power Rankings". But will they stay there?

Um.. no, I don't think so. I hope they prove me wrong because I love this team and always want them to do well, but here are the issues:
1. Unsteady play from Turco. Turco has been the rock of this team for so long that not having him there has cause them to play over their heads for a while. I think this is a trend that won't continue.
2. Scoring. Or lack there of. They are getting more balanced scoring, but no one is charging ahead. This can be good or bad, but not knowing who to rely on scoring wise is different. (who knows, it worked for Buffalo last year).
3. Lehtinen's injury. Modano is awesome, and I really enjoy Morrow's game, but if I were going to be reincarnated as any hockey player in the world, it would be Jere Lehtinen. (No, I don't believe in reincarnation, but anyway...). His injury (a sports hernia) is not an easy one to recover from, and if I remember right, it's not his first. These things can linger, and for a player who is known for his tenacious defense and timely scoring, losing him is huge.
So, where will the Stars end up? Well, I'd love to see them end where they are now, but I think this is short-lived and would be surprised if a downturn doesn't happen.

Also, Brett... Where is the scoring? I figured the first thing Hull would do as GM-ish would be to bring some scoring in here. I'm surprised it hasn't happened yet.

Btw, don't think this isn't a intended reverse jinx thing happening.. :)

The Man in the Mirror

2007-12-04T13:05:00.000-06:00

Last night's game was really interesting. I've for years really disliked to Ravens. I don't have any real reason personally to dislike them, but I do. Perhaps it's the fact that I think Brian Billick is the most over rated coach in the NFL. He lucked into Randy Moss and Robert Smith when he was with the Vikings and became known as an offensive genius. Then he lucked into a dominant defense which carried the Genuis' pathetic offense into a Super Bowl ring. Add to that Ray Lewis getting away with murder, Jamal Lewis being busted as a drug dealer, that they were moved by a sorry owner from Cleveland and you have in my opinion a dislikeable franchise.
Last night, however, as the adversary of the Patriots on Monday Night Football, the Ravens because the carriers of all things good and righteous against the evil Hoodies. And for three and half quarters, they were what we all hoped for. And with Don Shula in the MNF broadcast booth, clearly rooting for them, I thought they had a chance. By now, you know what happened. Trailing 24-20 with 4 minutes left in the game, Tom Brady led the Patriots down the field to the winning touchdown and the Pats are now 4 games from 16-0. The Ravens would have you believe that their righteous victory was stolen from them by the evil refs in dark conspiracy perpetrated by the highest of puppet masters in the NFL offices in New York. Don't you believe it. Really, they should just look in the mirror, coaches and players. Here are a list of reasons the Ravens lost last night starting with the least egregious.

1. A still inept offense. Brian Billick has been at Baltimore for nine years and the Ravens have consistently been below average on offense. In the 4th quarter, Baltimore had three possessions while ahead and each time went three and out. Until the last desperation drive, Kyle Bolar was 2-5 for 10 yards and a pick. Willis McGahee ran 5 times for 5 yards. At the time when they needed to run the clock and pick up first downs (in that order), they completely failed.

2. Bad defensive coaching on the Patriots last drive. From what I hear the Ravens defensive coaching had as good a game plan for most of the game, bringing pressure from different places, well run disguised blitzed. Until the end that is. I wish I could go back and watch that last drive because it seemed every time Brady was able to get yardage passing was when the Ravens rushed only three. With the talented receivers that Brady has, you can't give him time to sit back there and wait for someone to come open and that's exactly what happened. Everyone wants to complain about the timeout, but the Ravens let Tom Brady run for twelve yards and a first down after the timeout. As expected the Ravens only rushed three and left the right side of the offense wide open. Brady's not Vince Young. Unless there's a wide open space, he's not gonna run. It was not a good defensive performance there.

3. Undisciplined players. The real problem with the Ravens were players who went off the deep end after the touchdown. I understand that it was an emotional game and there were a number of times when they thought they had to game won only to have that not be the case because of factors not always under their control. The fact of the matter is there has been infighting on this team for most of the year. Even as one who doesn't pay close attention living in another city, I can tell there are problems. It all culminated last night with the penalties after the touchdown and the comments after the game. When the Patriots scored the touch down there was 44 seconds left in the game. A long time? No. But there was a possibility of a long return on the kickoff or some other unforeseen circumstance. Instead, the Ravens lost 35 yards in penalties, mostly by Bart Scott's 2 unsportsmanlike conduct fouls. When the Ravens cry about loosing this game, they can only blame themselves. Not that I care about the direction of this team, but the Billick needs to go. He has presided over the deterioration of all discipline and ability to play like a team.

A real national champion: The Final Bracket

2007-12-03T04:34:00.000-06:00

Well, this is it. The regular season is over, and my final bracket is unveiled here. Without further ado:

1) Ohio State (Big Ten)
16) Central Michigan (MAC)

8) Kansas (At large)
9) West Virginia (Big East)

4) Oklahoma (Big XII)
13) BYU (Mountain West)

5) Georgia (At large)
12) Florida (At large)

3) Virginia Tech (ACC)
14) Central Florida (Conference USA)

6) Missouri (At large)
11) Arizona State (At large)

7) USC (Pac-10)
10) Hawaii (WAC)

2) LSU (SEC)
15) Troy (Sun Belt)

Missed the cut (BCS rank):
Illinois (13)
Boston College (14)
Clemson (15)
Tennessee (16)
Wisconsin (18)

For previous weeks, see Week Seven, Week Eight, Week Nine, Week Ten, Week Twelve and Week Thirteen.

Looking back at the initial bracket, only ten teams included then (in Week Seven, mind you, not the preseason) made it to the final bracket, and that includes two teams (Oklahoma and Arizona State) who spent one week each on the outside looking in.

I have already addressed issues such as season length, game sites and the fate of the lesser bowls in the initial post. Let's focus on the overwhelming benefits of this system here.

A common knock on a playoff is that it dilutes the regular season. Look at this bracket and ask: Does the regular season matter? Ask Boston College, who were a two seed before a couple losses knocked them out of the picture. Ask Tennessee, who was an SEC Championship win away from playing their way in. Ask South Florida and Connecticut, who were both riding high in the Big East before West Virginia reasserted their dominance. I'd say the regular season still matters.

In a sixteen team playoff, undefeated Hawaii gets a shot. They may very well get blown out by USC in the first round. But there is no way to rationalize a team going undefeated and not even getting a sniff at a championship. If you want to argue that they played a weak schedule, that's fine, but you better start by getting the big boys to stop ducking Hawaii and other dangerous mid-majors like them. I'm talking to you, Michigan.

As things currently stand, two-loss LSU gets a shot at one-loss Ohio State. But what about two-loss teams such as Virginia Tech, Oklahoma, Georgia, Missouri, USC, West Virginia, Arizona State, in addition to one-loss Kansas and previously mentioned undefeated Hawaii? Could they have solved their own problems during the season? Sure, but their warts are no worse than LSU's, or Ohio State's for that matter. That makes at least nine teams who have just as legitimate a claim to play for the title as LSU and OSU.

While the BCS shuts its eyes, covers its ears and screams "I can't hear you!" over and over, my playoff gives them the shot they rightfully deserve.

Notes from the Packers/Cowboys

2007-11-30T08:26:00.000-06:00

Last night's game between the Cowboys and the Packers was very much an emotional roller coaster. I'm came really close to calling my friend Steve during the second quarter and beginning the celebration. If I had, I'm sure the Packers would have completed their comeback. I did get to watch the game (thank you, Direct TV) and I also listened it on the Cowboys network broadcast over the internet (thank you, high speed internet). I came away with several thoughts.

1. The Cowboys had to win that game. Not in a if they didn't the season was a failure or a playoff game at Lambeau Field is certain death, but considering the circumstances, they had to win the game. The game was at home. The Packers were dealing with injuries even before Favre got hurt: with the injuries to Charles Woodson and Kabeer Gbaja-Biamila the Packers were hampered on the defensive end of the field. The Cowboys had to take advantage of the injuries. I think we'll see people who downplay the win because of the Packer injuries. Well, too bad. That's football. The Cowboys have been blessed with amazing health (knock on wood). I don't know if it's luck or conditioning (maybe both), but they have had an amazing run. The one major injury the Cowboys have had to face is Terry Glenn. Can you imagine what this offense would be like if Terry Glenn was playing? The sound you hear is defensive coordinators around the league shuddering.

2. If Brett Favre had played the whole, it may have been a complete blowout. I think after Favre went down, the Cowboys defense let up and let the Packers back in the game. Give the Packers credit. They didn't quit. Aaron Rogers played really well. They have some really good receivers and their running back, Ryan Grant looked really good. It proves my theory that you can find a running back just about anywhere and unless you have an Emmitt Smith, there's no reason to spend a high draft pick on a running back or sign a running back to big free agent contract. Ask the Chiefs. Are they happy about Larry Johnson and he 70 yards a game average? How about Seattle and Shaun Alexander not even getting that much?

3. Speaking of running backs, on the 4th and 2 in the third, I was all for going for it (shoot, I'm a fan. I always want to go for it). But why give the ball to Julius Jones when you have a battering ram in Marion Barber? Was there anyone who believed Jones would get those two yards? I didn't. I think Jones would have gotten those two yards and then ran over a DB picking up 4 more yards. I liked Jones when they first got him. He had burst and he made people miss, a true home run hitter. Now, he rarely gets in the open and, when he does, he can't make safeties miss him. That being said, I wouldn't be surprised if he's back here next year because I wonder if anyone else will pay him what he thinks he's worth. Barber is the horse the Cowboys ride to win. That last drive was like watching vintage Emmitt Smith. The Cowboys knew they were gonna run, the Packers knew they were gonna and, the Cowboys ran down the field for the game sealing field goal.

4. DeMarcus Ware is the man and he made the most important defensive play to this point in the season. It's 27-24 early in the 4th. The Packers had just picked off Tony Romo in the end zone on the drop by TO. The Packers had up to that point scored 14 unanswered points and had already moved the ball 20 yards to their own 40. Third down and 5 and Ware just abused Chad Clifton (the brother in law of one of my co-workers, fyi) and just swallowed Aaron Rogers. That's the kind of play that gets a guy defensive player of the year. For three years now we've been wondering about whether the Cowboys were right about Ware over Shawne Merriman. But that play and a later play when he dropped back into coverage and deflected a pass show that Ware is true all round line backer and one of the best in the NFL.

5. I don't know about that pass interference call on the Cowboys last touchdown. Looked like a tough call to me. If that had been called on the Cowboys, I would have been mad.

6. I don't know for sure that the Cowboys are a shoe-in for home field advantage. They don't have an easy schedule down the stretch. There'll be favored in every game, but maybe only one is without true concern:
A. At Detroit: They have lots of talented receivers and the Cowboys lost to them last year. One good thing: The Cowboys have 10 days off before then.
B. Philadelphia at home: Who will be QB for the Eagles? Was the game they played against the Patriots a mirage or is this team together? Will they have another game like it? The Boys blew them out the Philly and this is at home.
C. At Carolina: The Panthers will trot out either Vinny Testaverde, David Carr, or Matt Moore, whom the Cowboys cut in the preseason. As they say, 'Nuff said.
D. At Washington: It doesn't matter what is happening around the rest of the season, this game is almost always close. Hopefully the Cowboys won't need it for home field and can rest a few guys. I'm just saying don't hand the Cowboys home field before the playoffs start.

All in all, great win by the Cowboys. But as they've been saying the last several weeks: It's been nice to get these wins, but it's not the final goal. For the first time since maybe 1996 the Cowboys have a team that they can legitimately say are Super Bowl contenders. It's a great place to be.

A real national champion: Week Thirteen

2007-11-26T06:53:00.000-06:00

There was quite a shuffle in the seedings this week. After a week on the outside looking in, Oklahoma is back in. A loss this week in the Big XII championship game would again remove them from the tourney, so they are playing a must win game this week. Their opponent, Missouri, is not in must win mode, but a win would lock up their #1 seeding for the tournament, which is always desirable. Moving into the tourney field for the first time this year is USC, thanks to their win over Arizona State, who find themselves bounced after holding the four seed as recently as three weeks ago. USC and Oklahoma also combine for a very intriguing 8 v 9 first round matchup. Several other tourney tickets will be punched this weekend as the conference championships are decided. This season is begging for a playoff.

For previous weeks, see Week Seven, Week Eight, Week Nine, Week Ten and Week Twelve.

1) Missouri (Big 12)
16) Central Florida (Conference USA)

8) USC (Pac-10)
9) Oklahoma (At large)

4) Georgia (At large)
13) BYU (Mountain West)

5) Kansas (At large)
12) Hawaii (WAC)

3) Ohio State (Big Ten)
14) Troy (Sun Belt)

6) Virginia Tech (ACC)
11) Boston College (At large)

7) LSU (SEC)
10) Florida (At large)

2) West Virginia (Big East)
15) Central Michigan (MAC)

Missed the cut (BCS rank):
Arizona State (13)
Tennessee (14)
Illinois (15)
Clemson (16)
Oregon (17)

A real national champion: Week Twelve

2007-11-19T05:50:00.000-06:00

Sorry I missed last week--I was a little busy relaxing in Hawaii. The last two weeks have been interesting. We have seen Ohio State and then Oregon fall from the top spot, and Oklahoma's loss this week was very costly, knocking them out of the field. There have been a few substitutions of conference leaders, with Virginia taking over the ACC from BC, Central Florida taking the lead in C-USA from Houston and Arizona State benefiting from Oregon's loss. It's been wild, but it isn't over yet.

For previous weeks, see Week Seven, Week Eight, Week Nine and Week Ten.

1) LSU (SEC)
16) Central Florida (Conference USA)

8) Virginia Tech (At large)
9) Oregon (At large)

4) Missouri (At large)
13) BYU (Mountain West)

5) Ohio State (Big Ten)
12) Connecticut (Big East)

3) West Virginia (At large)
14) Troy (Sun Belt)

6) Arizona State (Pac-10)
11) Virginia (ACC)

7) Georgia (At large)
10) Hawaii (WAC)

2) Kansas (Big 12)
15) Central Michigan (MAC)

Missed the cut (BCS rank):
Oklahoma (10)
USC (11)
Florida (12)
Texas (13)
Boston College (14)

Credit, Where It is Due

2007-11-12T21:06:00.000-06:00

I was very unhappy with the Cowboys hire of Wade Phillips. Actually, I was cautiously optimistic until Chris dragged out my real feelings. I thought that he was a retread coach who had failed his previous two coaching chances with the Broncos and the Bills. I was annoyed by Jerry Jones hiring his offensive coordinator, Jason Garrett, before he even hired his head coach. I was was leery of Garrett anyway because he had one year of coaching experience, an decorated year as the QBs coach at Miami.
However, after an 8-1 start to the season in which the offense looks like a juggernaut and the defense is improving dramatically as it continues to return starters such as Greg Ellis, Terrence Newman, and Anthony Henry, I have to admit that, at this point, I was wrong. Wade Phillips has been exactly what this team needed after Bill Parcells. He has allowed the team to play looser and more confidently.
I give Jason Garrett a lot of credit for the development of Tony Romo. I love the aggressiveness that the offense shows every week. I think this team is going places.
Up until the last couple of weeks, the Cowboys had not played a tough schedule. Their biggest game was the Patriots game at home. As I look back on that game, I'm feeling better and better about their chances. They led late in the 3rd quarter and were ready to retake the lead when a penalty killed a drive and the next drive ended in a turnover. Now every single game turns on penalties and turnovers. It's often the difference between winning and losing. Case in point is last weeks Giant's game. As the Giants are ready to tie to ballgame, a holding call on Brandon Jacobs' touchdown run forces the Giants to settle for a field goal and the Cowboys never looked back. But in the Patriots game, they went toe to toe, but they lost. No one else except for the Colts have even given them a game.
The question for this team is will the avoid the late season meltdown that plagued them during the Bill Parcells years. Baring injuries, I expect the Cowboys to continue to win leading up to the big game against the Packers. That may be for home field advantage in the playoffs. Once you get to the playoffs anything can happen.

A real national champion: Week Ten

2007-11-06T03:21:00.000-06:00

No changes in the participants this week, but the Arizona State and Boston College losses did shuffle the seedings a bit. ASU dropped to nine and handed over the Pac-10 lead to Oregon. BC still leads the ACC, but has dropped to the eighth seed.

This could be an interesting weekend, because even though there aren't any big games between those currently seeded, there are quite a few rival games that could shake things up a bit. Find out next week.

For previous weeks, see Week Seven, Week Eight and Week Nine.

1) Ohio State (Big Ten)
16) Houston (Conference USA)

8) Boston College (ACC)
9) Arizona State (At large)

4) Kansas (Big 12)
13) BYU (Mountain West)

5) Oklahoma (At large)
12) Hawaii (WAC)

3) Oregon (Pac-10)
14) Troy (Sun Belt)

6) Missouri (At large)
11) Connecticut (Big East)

7) West Virginia (At large)
10) Georgia (At large)

2) LSU (SEC)
15) Central Michigan (MAC)

Missed the cut (BCS rank):
Virginia Tech (11)
Michigan (12)
Texas (14)
Florida (15)
USC (17)

Financial Craziness...

2007-11-02T15:44:00.000-05:00

So, building on Rus' (Chris - Is it Rus' or Rus's ?) posting about A-Rod, it has come out that he was seeking a contract from the Yankees worth approximately $350 Million. Those numbers are astounding. I can't really begin to think in terms like that, but more and more, large numbers (maybe not this large, but still) are becoming more accepted. For instance, Jason Spezza recently got a contract extension for 7 years $49 Million. If you are like 98% of the people reading this, you are wondering. Who the heck is Jason Spezza? He's a center for the Ottawa Senators. That's right. Professional hockey players are still getting contracts that get them in excess of $7 million per year. At first, I thought Ah, well the Sens have Spezza locked up until 2015. Great for them.

Then, the reality of that hit me. I see half empty buildings on game night every time I turn on a hockey game. If I can find it on TV at all. Where is this revenue coming from? Aren't the owners just going back to doing business the same way they were before the lockout?

Baseball, specifically the Yankees (yes I know.. and the Red Sox now..) can afford to do this, but for how long will it remain lucrative to sign free agents in this manner as salaries climb higher and higher? And without results (except for the Sox - go Red Sox).

I was glad to see Dallas not over-spend for a free agent who would likely under-deliver, but I wished they would have at least signed some scoring help. I wonder what the going rate is for a 30 goal scorer is anymore?

A real national champion: Week Nine

2007-10-31T07:41:00.000-05:00

Not too much changed this week; all projected conference champs are still in place. There was some maneuvering among the at large teams, as South Florida and Virginia Tech both dropped out of the tourney. Their spots were taken by Missouri and Georgia, who came out of nowhere with a win over Florida last week.
For previous weeks, see Week Seven and Week Eight.

1) Ohio State (Big Ten)
16) Houston (Conference USA)

8) Kansas (Big 12)
9) Missouri (At large)

4) Arizona State (Pac-10)
13) BYU (Mountain West)

5) Oregon (At large)
12) Hawaii (WAC)

3) LSU (SEC)
14) Troy (Sun Belt)

6) Oklahoma (At large)
11) Connecticut (Big East)

7) West Virginia (At large)
10) Georgia (At large)

2) Boston College (ACC)
15) Central Michigan (MAC)

Missed the cut (BCS rank):
Virginia Tech (11)
Michigan (12)
Texas (15)
Auburn (16)
Alabama (17)

More A-Rod Sorriness

2007-10-29T16:10:00.000-05:00

Alex Rodriguez is not a bad guy. He's never beaten his wife or got caught doing drugs. He's never been arrested for drunk driving or threatened to run over kids with his car. He's never been a clubhouse cancer on the level of TO in Philly. He's never sucker punched a manager or body slammed a teammate over music.

In fact, he takes great pains in being a good guy. In fact, some people will tell you that he is too scripted, too polished. It might be better for him if he would ever do those things. As it is, the worst things he's done off the field are be seen around town with a manly looking woman who was not his wife and play poker in one of the illegal underground poker games that are all over New York. Oh, and he's been completely unable to hit in the post season.

I want to hate A-Rod and blame him for the catastrophe that has been the Rangers since 2000 when they shocked the baseball world with giving A-Rod what is still the largest contract in sports history. He forced his way out, hoping to gravy train to a ring in New York. It never worked out that well in New York as he never accepted as a "real Yankee" (whatever that means). I've said over and over the people I blame for the Ranger debacle are the Rangers' management, Tom Hicks, John Hart, and Buck Showalter.

Despite all this A-Rod isn't a bad guy. But events yesterday prove that he is either really sorry or he listens to terrible advice. First of all, not showing up for a presentation of the Hank Aaron award was sorry. But that could happen anytime. But to follow it up with the announcement that he was going to opt out during what was probably going to be the last game of the World Series is the epitome of sorriness. He had ten days to make that announcement. I'm no fan of the Red Sox and I don't at all feel sorry for the Yankees. In fact, I'm glad he opted out because it saves the Rangers money over the next few years (don't even get me started on that). But did it have to be announced last night?
As I've said, I want to hate A-Rod but I can't do it. But he just comes across a total jerk way too often.

PS. Peter Gammons keeps saying that the Rangers are possible landing spot for the A-Rod. Now I thought there was a snowball's chance in hell of that happening in 2000 when they really did sign him. Now? There is no scenario I can see that actually happening. A-Rod has a better chance of signing with the Nippon Ham Fighters than of signing with the Rangers.
ADDED on October 31 at 1:24pm. Maybe I'm ahead of the curve on this A-Rod to Japan thing:
Celest (The desert): Nate nicely handicapped the A-Rod sweepstakes earlier today. Where do you see A-Rod ending up?

Jim Baker: I like the lonely-guy-by-the-fence thing I described earlier. How about Japan? Wouldn't that be a Criss Angel mindfreak?

A real national champion: Week Eight

2007-10-22T08:32:00.000-05:00

Well, Rutgers sure shook things up, didn't they? With their upset of South Florida, Connecticut takes over as the current leader of the Big East. Yes, Connecticut. Maybe a football tourney has ramifications that I hadn't considered: put together a college tourney and UConn thinks you are talking to them. South Florida has hung on to remain in the tournament, although it is much lower than last week's number two seed. It was a good week for the Pac-10 as both Arizona and Oregon both made big leaps in the seeding. The SEC took a beating, though, as South Carolina and Kentucky each fell out of the tournament with disappointing losses to conference opponents. In other news, Houston took over the C-USA lead with East Carolina losing on the weekend.

1) Ohio State (Big Ten)
16) Houston (Conference USA)

8) Virginia Tech (At large)
9) Kansas (Big 12)

4) Arizona State (Pac-10)
13) BYU (Mountain West)

5) Oregon (At large)
12) Connecticut (Big East)

3) LSU (SEC)
14) Troy (Sun Belt)

6) Oklahoma (At large)
11) Hawaii (WAC)

7) West Virginia (At large)
10) South Florida (At large)

2) Boston College (ACC)
15) Central Michigan (MAC)

Missed the cut (BCS rank):
Florida (11)
USC (12)
Missouri (13)
Kentucky (14)
Virginia (15)

A real national champion: Week Seven

2007-10-17T10:01:00.001-05:00

The first BCS poll was released earlier this week and Ohio State and South Florida currently hold the all-important top two spots. And while there is still a lot more football to be played, the current system is too restrictive, even allowing for the plus-one game.

That is why I am in favor of a sixteen team tournament, while most playoff proponents prefer four or eight. What makes my suggestion different from most others I have seen is that mine does not take the top sixteen ranked teams. I propose taking the eleven conference champions and five at large teams, which would be the five highest ranked teams in the BCS poll who did not win their conference. I freely admit this is a completely unoriginal idea; it is basically a scaled down version of the basketball tourney. But I have seen virtually no one else propose such a plan for football.

I believe that this plan answers most of the major concerns with a playoff. The most common complaint is that a playoff would de-emphasize the regular season. If you take the top sixteen, that would be a fair concern. But in my plan, a conference championship guarantees a playoff spot, putting more emphasis on the regular season, not less. And this week, the lowest BCS ranked team to get an at large bid was Oregon at #10. Virginia Tech, Cal, USC and Florida all would miss the cut at this point. Try telling them that the regular season doesn't matter.

The other major complaint is that the season would be too long. Beginning this season, a team playing a twelve game season, a conference championship, and BCS bowl game and a plus-one national championship would play fifteen games. I suggest going back to an eleven game regular season plus conference championships for those conferences with twelve teams. Only eight teams would play beyond the standard regular season and bowl game, and I don't think they would be complaining. And it doesn't need to extend too far into January. There is already a huge gap in between the end of the season and the BCS bowl games. This season, conference championship games will be on Saturday, December 1. The first round of the tourney could be Dec. 8, the second on Dec. 15 and the semifinals on Dec 22. That would allow the National Championship to be played on Tuesday, January 1, because as everyone knows, New Years Day is all about college football. Compare that to this season, when the National Championship is scheduled for January 7.

Yet another complaint about a playoff is that it would make all other bowl games meaningless. The way I see it, they are already meaningless. Under the current BCS system, only one game matters. All the others, even the other BCS games, are little more than exhibition games. With a playoff, fifteen games matter: win or go home. And besides, there is no reason not to play the lesser bowl games. If they can survive under the current system, they can still be played along side a playoff, NIT-style.

One of the greatest benefits of this playoff system is that it finally gives the small conference champ a shot. Boise State knocking off Oklahoma last year was nice, but in a tournament they would have had the opportunity to really prove how good they were. And imagine what a deep playoff run would have done for recruiting.

As for where the games would be played, I am open to suggestions. Personally I would like to see the first round hosted by the higher ranked team. This would further emphasize the regular season: if you finish in the top eight, you get a first round home game. From there, the four second round games could be played at the current BCS affiliates, and the semis and final could be played as repeats at three of those, just as this year's plus-one will be played in New Orleans a week after the Sugar Bowl. Another possibility is to open it up to bidding again, just as they did when the BCS first began. This time, seven bowls could bid for the second round on.

On to the seedings. Please understand that nothing is for certain yet, and the 'conference champions' listed below are based on current standings only. In the case of a tie, I have gone to overall record, then point differential. After conference champs were determined, at large teams were selected according to the top five non-conference winners in the BCS rankings. After the sixteen teams are selected, they are re-seeded according to their BCS rank. I have made my best guess to seed the teams not ranked in the BCS (East Carolina, Central Michigan, BYU and Troy in this week's poll).

I have tracked this playoff system the past three or four years, and there is quite a bit of movement at this point in the season: this week's 'conference champ' could easily be next week's 'missed the cut' and vice versa. I'll publish the newest version each week after the BCS rankings are released, so check back to see how our real national championship could have been.

1) Ohio State (Big Ten)
16) East Carolina (Conference USA)

8) Arizona State (Pac 10)
9) West Virginia (At large)

4) LSU (SEC)
13) BYU (Mountain West)

5) Oklahoma (At large)
12) Hawaii (WAC)

3) Boston College (ACC)
14) Troy (Sun Belt)

6) South Carolina (At large)
11) Kansas (Big 12)

7) Kentucky (At large)
10) Oregon (At large)

2) South Florida (Big East)
15) Central Michigan (MAC)

Missed the cut (BCS rank):
Virginia Tech (11)
California (12)
USC (14)
Florida (15)
Missouri (16)

So, what does all this mean...?

2007-10-16T13:19:00.000-05:00

So, when two undefeated teams meet and one demolishes the other, what exactly does that mean... especially to the person who considers them his two favorite teams? Here is what I got out of Cowboys-Patriots game on Sunday:

1. I don't care about the records of the teams they have played, the Patriots and the Colts are the best two teams in the league. (And once they play each other in a few weeks, we'll know who is the best - More in a minute). Of course this is only right now. If these two teams (Pats and Cowboys) were to meet in a game... I don't know.. sometime in late January, would the outcome be the same? Hard to say, but right now, there is not a team that is as solid as the Patriots.

2. The Cowboys, despite a couple shaky games, are still one of, if not the best team in the NFC. I'm not sure if that's the same as saying that someone has a really nice personality, but they are a good team if they are playing a team that is not so balanced in run/pass offense. And that is really the problem with them this year. The Bills ran effectly, and the passing game complemented that. The Patriots do both extremely well, and we saw that outcome. So, this Minnesota team (which can run like crazy, but doesn't pass well at all), should be an opportunity to rebound.

3. Patrick Crayton is a moron. Don't get me wrong, I think he is a very serviceable receiver, but when you just get whipped by 21 points (even if the last 7 were just rubbing it in), you cannot talk about how you are not impressed by the opposing defense. Yes, Crayton you did score a touchdown, and your 46 yards were very impressive, but when a team shuts down your top receivers (that would be Owens and Witten - just in case), you should really just be happy with your TD and shut your mouth.

4. Tony Romo had an off week against the Bills. Other than one really ill-advised throw which was picked by Seau, he responded pretty well, and even fought back to get the lead until New England steamrolled.

5. Where is the TO who would talk (and don't mistake it. Writing a note that ends with "Get your popcorn ready" is indeed talking) and then back it up? I'm still waiting for he and Romo to get on the same page and go crazy. And man... I miss having Terry Glenn on the other side. How would that have changed yesterday? SIDE NOTE: Can we stop referring to him as TO Owens? I've heard several people do this now, and it drives me up the wall. What do people think the O in TO if for?

6. I am dying for both the Colts and Patriots to be undefeated when they play each other November 4th. Undefeated teams playing each other is awesome. This was a great game until the fourth quarter implosion. This could easily happen with the major roadblock being the Jaguars to the Colts, and the trap game of Miami to the Pats.

So, what does this all mean to me? Well, I'm happy that the Patriots have proven themselves, and I'm happy that the Cowboys are experiencing these bumps now, rather than later this year. I still have high hopes of this team, and think they can make it far in the playoffs. I think they are still the best in the NFC, and would rather they lose this non-conference game than others in the future.

A comment on Chris's post that turned into a post

2007-10-11T14:37:00.000-05:00

I was going to post about the Bill's but I couldn't get it right and gave up so I decided to just comment on Chris' post. Then it got so long that I decided to make it into a post. So here it is.

While I agree by and large with you that there really no reason to get down about the game. (It happens, trap game, road out of conference game, bad team playing about their heads for about 3 quarters, etc). There are a couple areas of concern.

1. Did Tony Romo simply have a bad game that every player has every once in a while or is this sign of things to come? Did the Bills "figure out" Romo and give everyone else in the NFL the key to solving him?
2. While the defense did play really well, I don't think you can say that no one played poorly. Terrell Owens dropped a number of passes, including the 2 point conversion. He's been a model citizens so far this year. But I hope that him throwing Romo under the bus about that thrown isn't a harbinger of things to come. Also, the running game never got going. While the offensive line has done a great job of keeping people off Romo in the passing game, the running game has not been gang busters.
It is a tribute to the tenacity of the team for them to win that game that seemed to desperately want to give away, but there are plenty of things to be concerned about. I'm not just talking about the Patriots. Remember last year when the Colts came into Texas Stadium undefeated and left with their first loss as the Cowboys held them to 14 points. Even if they do lose, it's just their first loss and an out of division loss as well. It really won't be that big of a deal.
However, there are areas that need work for this team to really be what we all think it can be. The NFC East looks strong, with Jason Campbell looking strong for the Redskins, the Giants having recovered from their awful start, and the Eagles are always dangerous. In the past several years, the Cowboys have started strong and then tailed off at the end. They need to be consistent this year to reach the Super Bowl. I still consider them the best team in the NFC, but there is still a long way to go.

Easy there, Cowboy

2007-10-11T09:01:00.000-05:00

Last week I warned the Cowboy fans not to get too carried away and identified my concerns about the team. This week I feel it is my responsibility to keep you from getting too down, so I'm going to point out all the things that went right Monday night in Buffalo.

The defense played great. Despite defending a short field due to Romo's turnovers, the defense only gave up 257 yards and three points--Buffalo's TDs came off of two INTs and a kickoff return. Their offense went nowhere. The defense looked pretty bad in week 1 giving up 35 to the Giants, but they have gotten better each week since. As is, this is a Super Bowl caliber defense.

Romo's last two drives. He absolutely stunk for the majority of the game, but in the end, when the win was there to be taken, he led two scoring drives to get the job done. That answered a lot of my lingering questions about Romo. Most QBs would have folded sometime around half time, and most coaches would have pulled the plug much earlier. Kudos to both Romo and Wade Phillips for not giving up on the game.

Only one player had a bad game. Romo has gotten a lot of attention for a year now, but this game was a pleasant reminder that there is more to the Cowboys than a hot QB. The running backs can play, particularly as a tandem, if they get the carries. The receiving corps can play and the O-line is solid. They've got a kicker. And have I mentioned the defense? Romo's game was awful, but it was not typical of him, and the rest of the team was able to make up the difference.

Team attitude. When Romo was down in the second quarter, offensive players, defensive players and coaches took the time to rally him. Yes, even T.O. Do you think that would have happened last year? This is a team that believes in each other. Don't underestimate that.

Can they afford games like this out of Romo every week? Certainly not: Buffalo might be the only team in the league that might happen against. The fact that they were able to pull off that win against anybody says something. Romo won't be that bad again, and this game showed us what the rest of the team can do.