All articles originally appeared on the main page. They appear here in the same inverse order as the main page.
Friday, February 24, 2017
NFL suggestions from ESPN's Bill Barnwell
Some NFL teams have a lot to do before the new league year begins March 9, while others won't have to make critical calls until the first day of the NFL draft on April 27. Click on the links below to read about the first five things that should be on the minds of each team's brass as they prepare for the offseason.
FROM ACT II: Note that there are actually 8 spoke articles, not 32, as each is divided up into divisions rather than teams. It's far too early for us to start making our predictions for the 2017 season to come - we're still salivating over the footy season that's about to start!
Arizona Cardinals: Should Arizona put the franchise tag on star pass-rusher Chandler Jones or let him hit the open market? Five moves for the Cardinals.
Atlanta Falcons: What are the Falcons' options with RB Devonta Freeman, who's nearing the end of his cheap rookie contract? Five moves for the Falcons.
Baltimore Ravens: Brandon Williams has established himself as one of the NFL's best nose tackles. Baltimore has to decide: Pay him or let him walk. Five moves for the Ravens.
Buffalo Bills: Should the Bills stick with quarterback Tyrod Taylor or start over with someone fresh in the draft or free agency? Five moves for the Bills.
Carolina Panthers: The Panthers have a clear need for a deep threat at wide receiver. Who makes the most sense for Carolina to target in free agency? Five moves for the Panthers.
Chicago Bears: Chicago has the option of putting the franchise tag on WR Alshon Jeffery. But is he worth $17.5 million for 2017? Five moves for the Bears.
Cincinnati Bengals: Tyler Eifert is entering the final season of his rookie contract. Should the Bengals extend him now or wait to see if he can stay healthy? Five moves for the Bengals.
Cleveland Browns: Which makes more sense for Cleveland: draft a quarterback in the first round or target one in free agency? Five moves for the Browns.
Dallas Cowboys: What kind of value should the Cowboys be looking for when fielding trade offers for quarterback Tony Romo? Five moves for the Cowboys.
Denver Broncos: The Broncos have two young quarterbacks on the roster, but should they go all-in for Romo? Five moves for the Broncos.
Detroit Lions: Ezekiel Ansah had only two sacks in 2016. Is now really the time for the Lions to sign the pass-rusher to an extension? Five moves for the Lions.
Green Bay Packers: What should the Packers do about their gaping hole at running back? Do any big names make sense? Five moves for the Packers.
Houston Texans: The Texans need a quarterback and Jimmy Garoppolo could be an option. What would they have to give up to get him? Five moves for the Texans.
Indianapolis Colts: How should the Colts address their massive void at pass-rusher with the free-agent market looking as if it will be thin at the position? Five moves for the Colts.
Jacksonville Jaguars: The Jaguars have the money to give Allen Robinson an extension. What can they expect to pay for the WR? Five moves for the Jaguars.
Kansas City Chiefs: Both Eric Berry and Dontari Poe are set to hit the free-agent market. Is it possible for K.C. to keep both of them? Five moves for the Chiefs.
Los Angeles Chargers: Should the Chargers sign pass-rusher Melvin Ingram to a long-term deal or let him play with the franchise tag? Five moves for the Chargers.
Los Angeles Rams: The Rams let CB Janoris Jenkins walk in free agency last year. Can they really afford to let Trumaine Johnson leave too? Five moves for the Rams.
Miami Dolphins: Free-agent-to-be Kenny Stills had nine TDs in 2016. Is that reason enough for the Dolphins to re-sign him? Five moves for the Dolphins.
Minnesota Vikings: How should the Vikings handle Adrian Peterson's $18 million cap hit, the highest (by far) for a running back? Five moves for the Vikings.
New England Patriots: How much leverage do the Patriots have in Jimmy Garoppolo trade negotiations, and should they move the QB? Five moves for the Patriots.
New Orleans Saints: How can New Orleans fill its void at pass-rusher without breaking the bank in free agency? Five moves for the Saints.
New York Giants: The Giants have two key defensive linemen getting ready to hit free agency. Should they retain both Jason Pierre-Paul and Johnathan Hankins? Five moves for the Giants.
New York Jets: The Jets (again) have a hole at quarterback with no heir apparent on the roster. What are they to do now? Five moves for the Jets.
Oakland Raiders: Quarterback Derek Carr has only one season left on his team-friendly rookie contract. How much should the Raiders expect to pay? Five moves for the Raiders.
Philadelphia Eagles: Does a reunion with former Eagles WR DeSean Jackson (now a free agent) make sense for Philly? Five moves for the Eagles.
Pittsburgh Steelers: Both Le'Veon Bell and Antonio Brown are set to receive big raises. How can the Steelers make both work? Five moves for the Steelers.
San Francisco 49ers: What should the 49ers do with the No. 2 overall pick -- draft a QB, trade it for a QB or take the best player available? Five moves for the 49ers.
Seattle Seahawks: Jimmy Graham has only one year and $10 million left on his contract. Does it make sense to give the TE an extension? Five moves for the Seahawks.
Tampa Bay Buccaneers: RB Doug Martin had a disappointing season after getting a hefty contract. Should the Bucs keep him around? Five moves for the Buccaneers.
Tennessee Titans: The Titans are fond of running two-TE sets. Which free agent makes the most sense for them to target? Five moves for the Titans.
Washington: For the second season in a row, Washington has a decision to make on QB Kirk Cousins. Is a long-term deal in the team's future? Five moves for Washington.
Some NFL teams have a lot to do before the new league year begins March 9, while others won't have to make critical calls until the first day of the NFL draft on April 27. Click on the links below to read about the first five things that should be on the minds of each team's brass as they prepare for the offseason.
FROM ACT II: Note that there are actually 8 spoke articles, not 32, as each is divided up into divisions rather than teams. It's far too early for us to start making our predictions for the 2017 season to come - we're still salivating over the footy season that's about to start!
Arizona Cardinals: Should Arizona put the franchise tag on star pass-rusher Chandler Jones or let him hit the open market? Five moves for the Cardinals.
Atlanta Falcons: What are the Falcons' options with RB Devonta Freeman, who's nearing the end of his cheap rookie contract? Five moves for the Falcons.
Baltimore Ravens: Brandon Williams has established himself as one of the NFL's best nose tackles. Baltimore has to decide: Pay him or let him walk. Five moves for the Ravens.
Buffalo Bills: Should the Bills stick with quarterback Tyrod Taylor or start over with someone fresh in the draft or free agency? Five moves for the Bills.
Carolina Panthers: The Panthers have a clear need for a deep threat at wide receiver. Who makes the most sense for Carolina to target in free agency? Five moves for the Panthers.
Chicago Bears: Chicago has the option of putting the franchise tag on WR Alshon Jeffery. But is he worth $17.5 million for 2017? Five moves for the Bears.
Cincinnati Bengals: Tyler Eifert is entering the final season of his rookie contract. Should the Bengals extend him now or wait to see if he can stay healthy? Five moves for the Bengals.
Cleveland Browns: Which makes more sense for Cleveland: draft a quarterback in the first round or target one in free agency? Five moves for the Browns.
Dallas Cowboys: What kind of value should the Cowboys be looking for when fielding trade offers for quarterback Tony Romo? Five moves for the Cowboys.
Denver Broncos: The Broncos have two young quarterbacks on the roster, but should they go all-in for Romo? Five moves for the Broncos.
Detroit Lions: Ezekiel Ansah had only two sacks in 2016. Is now really the time for the Lions to sign the pass-rusher to an extension? Five moves for the Lions.
Green Bay Packers: What should the Packers do about their gaping hole at running back? Do any big names make sense? Five moves for the Packers.
Houston Texans: The Texans need a quarterback and Jimmy Garoppolo could be an option. What would they have to give up to get him? Five moves for the Texans.
Indianapolis Colts: How should the Colts address their massive void at pass-rusher with the free-agent market looking as if it will be thin at the position? Five moves for the Colts.
Jacksonville Jaguars: The Jaguars have the money to give Allen Robinson an extension. What can they expect to pay for the WR? Five moves for the Jaguars.
Kansas City Chiefs: Both Eric Berry and Dontari Poe are set to hit the free-agent market. Is it possible for K.C. to keep both of them? Five moves for the Chiefs.
Los Angeles Chargers: Should the Chargers sign pass-rusher Melvin Ingram to a long-term deal or let him play with the franchise tag? Five moves for the Chargers.
Los Angeles Rams: The Rams let CB Janoris Jenkins walk in free agency last year. Can they really afford to let Trumaine Johnson leave too? Five moves for the Rams.
Miami Dolphins: Free-agent-to-be Kenny Stills had nine TDs in 2016. Is that reason enough for the Dolphins to re-sign him? Five moves for the Dolphins.
Minnesota Vikings: How should the Vikings handle Adrian Peterson's $18 million cap hit, the highest (by far) for a running back? Five moves for the Vikings.
New England Patriots: How much leverage do the Patriots have in Jimmy Garoppolo trade negotiations, and should they move the QB? Five moves for the Patriots.
New Orleans Saints: How can New Orleans fill its void at pass-rusher without breaking the bank in free agency? Five moves for the Saints.
New York Giants: The Giants have two key defensive linemen getting ready to hit free agency. Should they retain both Jason Pierre-Paul and Johnathan Hankins? Five moves for the Giants.
New York Jets: The Jets (again) have a hole at quarterback with no heir apparent on the roster. What are they to do now? Five moves for the Jets.
Oakland Raiders: Quarterback Derek Carr has only one season left on his team-friendly rookie contract. How much should the Raiders expect to pay? Five moves for the Raiders.
Philadelphia Eagles: Does a reunion with former Eagles WR DeSean Jackson (now a free agent) make sense for Philly? Five moves for the Eagles.
Pittsburgh Steelers: Both Le'Veon Bell and Antonio Brown are set to receive big raises. How can the Steelers make both work? Five moves for the Steelers.
San Francisco 49ers: What should the 49ers do with the No. 2 overall pick -- draft a QB, trade it for a QB or take the best player available? Five moves for the 49ers.
Seattle Seahawks: Jimmy Graham has only one year and $10 million left on his contract. Does it make sense to give the TE an extension? Five moves for the Seahawks.
Tampa Bay Buccaneers: RB Doug Martin had a disappointing season after getting a hefty contract. Should the Bucs keep him around? Five moves for the Buccaneers.
Tennessee Titans: The Titans are fond of running two-TE sets. Which free agent makes the most sense for them to target? Five moves for the Titans.
Washington: For the second season in a row, Washington has a decision to make on QB Kirk Cousins. Is a long-term deal in the team's future? Five moves for Washington.
FROM ACT II: Note that there are actually 8 spoke articles, not 32, as each is divided up into divisions rather than teams. It's far too early for us to start making our predictions for the 2017 season to come - we're still salivating over the footy season that's about to start!
Arizona Cardinals: Should Arizona put the franchise tag on star pass-rusher Chandler Jones or let him hit the open market? Five moves for the Cardinals.Atlanta Falcons: What are the Falcons' options with RB Devonta Freeman, who's nearing the end of his cheap rookie contract? Five moves for the Falcons.Baltimore Ravens: Brandon Williams has established himself as one of the NFL's best nose tackles. Baltimore has to decide: Pay him or let him walk. Five moves for the Ravens.Buffalo Bills: Should the Bills stick with quarterback Tyrod Taylor or start over with someone fresh in the draft or free agency? Five moves for the Bills.Carolina Panthers: The Panthers have a clear need for a deep threat at wide receiver. Who makes the most sense for Carolina to target in free agency? Five moves for the Panthers.Chicago Bears: Chicago has the option of putting the franchise tag on WR Alshon Jeffery. But is he worth $17.5 million for 2017? Five moves for the Bears.Cincinnati Bengals: Tyler Eifert is entering the final season of his rookie contract. Should the Bengals extend him now or wait to see if he can stay healthy? Five moves for the Bengals.Cleveland Browns: Which makes more sense for Cleveland: draft a quarterback in the first round or target one in free agency? Five moves for the Browns.Dallas Cowboys: What kind of value should the Cowboys be looking for when fielding trade offers for quarterback Tony Romo? Five moves for the Cowboys.Denver Broncos: The Broncos have two young quarterbacks on the roster, but should they go all-in for Romo? Five moves for the Broncos.Detroit Lions: Ezekiel Ansah had only two sacks in 2016. Is now really the time for the Lions to sign the pass-rusher to an extension? Five moves for the Lions.Green Bay Packers: What should the Packers do about their gaping hole at running back? Do any big names make sense? Five moves for the Packers.Houston Texans: The Texans need a quarterback and Jimmy Garoppolo could be an option. What would they have to give up to get him? Five moves for the Texans.Indianapolis Colts: How should the Colts address their massive void at pass-rusher with the free-agent market looking as if it will be thin at the position? Five moves for the Colts.Jacksonville Jaguars: The Jaguars have the money to give Allen Robinson an extension. What can they expect to pay for the WR? Five moves for the Jaguars.Kansas City Chiefs: Both Eric Berry and Dontari Poe are set to hit the free-agent market. Is it possible for K.C. to keep both of them? Five moves for the Chiefs.Los Angeles Chargers: Should the Chargers sign pass-rusher Melvin Ingram to a long-term deal or let him play with the franchise tag? Five moves for the Chargers.Los Angeles Rams: The Rams let CB Janoris Jenkins walk in free agency last year. Can they really afford to let Trumaine Johnson leave too? Five moves for the Rams.Miami Dolphins: Free-agent-to-be Kenny Stills had nine TDs in 2016. Is that reason enough for the Dolphins to re-sign him? Five moves for the Dolphins.Minnesota Vikings: How should the Vikings handle Adrian Peterson's $18 million cap hit, the highest (by far) for a running back? Five moves for the Vikings.New England Patriots: How much leverage do the Patriots have in Jimmy Garoppolo trade negotiations, and should they move the QB? Five moves for the Patriots.New Orleans Saints: How can New Orleans fill its void at pass-rusher without breaking the bank in free agency? Five moves for the Saints.New York Giants: The Giants have two key defensive linemen getting ready to hit free agency. Should they retain both Jason Pierre-Paul and Johnathan Hankins? Five moves for the Giants.New York Jets: The Jets (again) have a hole at quarterback with no heir apparent on the roster. What are they to do now? Five moves for the Jets.Oakland Raiders: Quarterback Derek Carr has only one season left on his team-friendly rookie contract. How much should the Raiders expect to pay? Five moves for the Raiders.Philadelphia Eagles: Does a reunion with former Eagles WR DeSean Jackson (now a free agent) make sense for Philly? Five moves for the Eagles.Pittsburgh Steelers: Both Le'Veon Bell and Antonio Brown are set to receive big raises. How can the Steelers make both work? Five moves for the Steelers.San Francisco 49ers: What should the 49ers do with the No. 2 overall pick -- draft a QB, trade it for a QB or take the best player available? Five moves for the 49ers.Seattle Seahawks: Jimmy Graham has only one year and $10 million left on his contract. Does it make sense to give the TE an extension? Five moves for the Seahawks.Tampa Bay Buccaneers: RB Doug Martin had a disappointing season after getting a hefty contract. Should the Bucs keep him around? Five moves for the Buccaneers.Tennessee Titans: The Titans are fond of running two-TE sets. Which free agent makes the most sense for them to target? Five moves for the Titans.Washington: For the second season in a row, Washington has a decision to make on QB Kirk Cousins. Is a long-term deal in the team's future? Five moves for Washington.Monday, February 6, 2017
Recap
"I expect a high-scoring game, and I expect Brady to Edelman to be the last and winning score of the game. New England will win its fifth title in the Brady/Belechick era by less than the final touchdown - less than seven points."
The good news for me as a prognosticator is that a Brady pass was the last and winning score of the game, New England did win its fifth title in the Brady/Belechick era by less than - well, less than seven, anyway - and it was a high scoring game (62 points beat the over/under line of 57, already one of the highest in history).
The bad news for me was that I didn't plan on them having to come back from 25 points behind in the third quarter to do it! Not exactly Balaam, am I?
Pleasantly, it was much more a case of Patriot prowess than Falcon folding: as with all human activities, they made some physical errors, along with one or two mental ones, but nothing worse than their opponents did in the first half (the pick-six was a gift).As someone who was rooting for a goodgame, rather than a particular team, I found myself on the Atlanta side until that pick-six in the second quarter made it 21-3 Falcons. at which point I switched to hoping Brady and crew could make a game of it. When they did nothing with the opening possession of the second half, and then Atlanta went down and scored yet again to make it 28-3, I told my son we'd go shopping for his present for the next day's birthday party for his friend during the fourth quarter if it stayed like that.
The comeback has been well-documented elsewhere, but I'll just say that we didn't go shopping until AFTER the overtime Patriot victory, as it became clear that the excitement was NOT in fact, over.
I wondered aloud if being a Falcons fan felt like being a Hillary supporter on Election Night. Sure of the victory, until...until... you're not anymore.
Lady Gaga was remarkable! The stage dive from the top of the stadium gets credit for guts alone, and it was executed well, as well. And to finish the show, one more dive OFF the stage at the end to bring the show fully around to the top - brilliant. As much as some feared a political statement in the performance, given her predilection for the Democratic candidate last November, I never saw one, although there were probably five different companies whose advertisements reminded us that we are better when we are a nation of immigrants, never specifically calling the POTUS out on the topic. Those I found appropriate. The only one that aimed directly at Mr. Trump, even HE probably found funny - a hair company predicted four years of bad hair ahead of us, so buy their product to prevent that.
Speaking of adverts, my personal favorites (and you can easily find these on line if you spend fifteen seconds looking) included the ghost of Spuds McKensie going all "It's a Wonderful Life" on the poor schlub who doesn't go drinking beer with his buddies anymore; Honda's inspirational ad with thecelebrities speaking from their high school yearbook photos; the Mercedes "Easy Rider" homage that ended with Peter Fonda himself in a Mercedes topless; poor John Malkovich trying to obtain the domain "johnmalkovich.com"; Melissa McCarthy as an environmental activist with a penchant for disaster, Tom Brady in 360 for Intel; and even the Geico spots with Terry Bradshaw and Jimmy Johnson before the start of the game itself. I'm also curious about The Cure For Wellness and the Scarlett Johannson vehicle Ghost In The Shell, even though I'm not a movie aficionado.
But my favorite (and I'd never thought I'd say this) was the T-Mobile ad with Justin Bieber. I won't spoil it for you; it's a ton of fun, and good for him for letting his guard down some to make this spot.
How many were "ART", as we discussed before? Several. You decide which ones, friends.
"I expect a high-scoring game, and I expect Brady to Edelman to be the last and winning score of the game. New England will win its fifth title in the Brady/Belechick era by less than the final touchdown - less than seven points."
The good news for me as a prognosticator is that a Brady pass was the last and winning score of the game, New England did win its fifth title in the Brady/Belechick era by less than - well, less than seven, anyway - and it was a high scoring game (62 points beat the over/under line of 57, already one of the highest in history).
The bad news for me was that I didn't plan on them having to come back from 25 points behind in the third quarter to do it! Not exactly Balaam, am I?
Pleasantly, it was much more a case of Patriot prowess than Falcon folding: as with all human activities, they made some physical errors, along with one or two mental ones, but nothing worse than their opponents did in the first half (the pick-six was a gift).As someone who was rooting for a goodgame, rather than a particular team, I found myself on the Atlanta side until that pick-six in the second quarter made it 21-3 Falcons. at which point I switched to hoping Brady and crew could make a game of it. When they did nothing with the opening possession of the second half, and then Atlanta went down and scored yet again to make it 28-3, I told my son we'd go shopping for his present for the next day's birthday party for his friend during the fourth quarter if it stayed like that.
The comeback has been well-documented elsewhere, but I'll just say that we didn't go shopping until AFTER the overtime Patriot victory, as it became clear that the excitement was NOT in fact, over.
I wondered aloud if being a Falcons fan felt like being a Hillary supporter on Election Night. Sure of the victory, until...until... you're not anymore.
Lady Gaga was remarkable! The stage dive from the top of the stadium gets credit for guts alone, and it was executed well, as well. And to finish the show, one more dive OFF the stage at the end to bring the show fully around to the top - brilliant. As much as some feared a political statement in the performance, given her predilection for the Democratic candidate last November, I never saw one, although there were probably five different companies whose advertisements reminded us that we are better when we are a nation of immigrants, never specifically calling the POTUS out on the topic. Those I found appropriate. The only one that aimed directly at Mr. Trump, even HE probably found funny - a hair company predicted four years of bad hair ahead of us, so buy their product to prevent that.
Speaking of adverts, my personal favorites (and you can easily find these on line if you spend fifteen seconds looking) included the ghost of Spuds McKensie going all "It's a Wonderful Life" on the poor schlub who doesn't go drinking beer with his buddies anymore; Honda's inspirational ad with thecelebrities speaking from their high school yearbook photos; the Mercedes "Easy Rider" homage that ended with Peter Fonda himself in a Mercedes topless; poor John Malkovich trying to obtain the domain "johnmalkovich.com"; Melissa McCarthy as an environmental activist with a penchant for disaster, Tom Brady in 360 for Intel; and even the Geico spots with Terry Bradshaw and Jimmy Johnson before the start of the game itself. I'm also curious about The Cure For Wellness and the Scarlett Johannson vehicle Ghost In The Shell, even though I'm not a movie aficionado.
But my favorite (and I'd never thought I'd say this) was the T-Mobile ad with Justin Bieber. I won't spoil it for you; it's a ton of fun, and good for him for letting his guard down some to make this spot.
How many were "ART", as we discussed before? Several. You decide which ones, friends.
The good news for me as a prognosticator is that a Brady pass was the last and winning score of the game, New England did win its fifth title in the Brady/Belechick era by less than - well, less than seven, anyway - and it was a high scoring game (62 points beat the over/under line of 57, already one of the highest in history).
The bad news for me was that I didn't plan on them having to come back from 25 points behind in the third quarter to do it! Not exactly Balaam, am I?
Pleasantly, it was much more a case of Patriot prowess than Falcon folding: as with all human activities, they made some physical errors, along with one or two mental ones, but nothing worse than their opponents did in the first half (the pick-six was a gift).As someone who was rooting for a goodgame, rather than a particular team, I found myself on the Atlanta side until that pick-six in the second quarter made it 21-3 Falcons. at which point I switched to hoping Brady and crew could make a game of it. When they did nothing with the opening possession of the second half, and then Atlanta went down and scored yet again to make it 28-3, I told my son we'd go shopping for his present for the next day's birthday party for his friend during the fourth quarter if it stayed like that.
The comeback has been well-documented elsewhere, but I'll just say that we didn't go shopping until AFTER the overtime Patriot victory, as it became clear that the excitement was NOT in fact, over.
I wondered aloud if being a Falcons fan felt like being a Hillary supporter on Election Night. Sure of the victory, until...until... you're not anymore.
Lady Gaga was remarkable! The stage dive from the top of the stadium gets credit for guts alone, and it was executed well, as well. And to finish the show, one more dive OFF the stage at the end to bring the show fully around to the top - brilliant. As much as some feared a political statement in the performance, given her predilection for the Democratic candidate last November, I never saw one, although there were probably five different companies whose advertisements reminded us that we are better when we are a nation of immigrants, never specifically calling the POTUS out on the topic. Those I found appropriate. The only one that aimed directly at Mr. Trump, even HE probably found funny - a hair company predicted four years of bad hair ahead of us, so buy their product to prevent that.
Speaking of adverts, my personal favorites (and you can easily find these on line if you spend fifteen seconds looking) included the ghost of Spuds McKensie going all "It's a Wonderful Life" on the poor schlub who doesn't go drinking beer with his buddies anymore; Honda's inspirational ad with thecelebrities speaking from their high school yearbook photos; the Mercedes "Easy Rider" homage that ended with Peter Fonda himself in a Mercedes topless; poor John Malkovich trying to obtain the domain "johnmalkovich.com"; Melissa McCarthy as an environmental activist with a penchant for disaster, Tom Brady in 360 for Intel; and even the Geico spots with Terry Bradshaw and Jimmy Johnson before the start of the game itself. I'm also curious about The Cure For Wellness and the Scarlett Johannson vehicle Ghost In The Shell, even though I'm not a movie aficionado.
But my favorite (and I'd never thought I'd say this) was the T-Mobile ad with Justin Bieber. I won't spoil it for you; it's a ton of fun, and good for him for letting his guard down some to make this spot.
How many were "ART", as we discussed before? Several. You decide which ones, friends.
Saturday, February 4, 2017
Super Bowl 51, and Art
The Super Bowl is the most watched television show of the year in America every single year. It doesn't matter if it's Patriots/Falcons, or it was Jaguars/Buccaneers - the nation stops to watch the Super Bowl.
Notice I didn't say stops to watch "the game", because that's not the major attraction for a large portion of society.
For football fans, even casual ones, we watch the game as the culmination of the NFL season, although it takes the edge off the game to me having the extra week in between the conference title games and the Big One. (I understand why you want to have the week in between; just whining about it from a fan's perspective.) To put the delay in perspective, the last meaningful game the NFL played was two days after the Inauguration - we had barely been introduced to the phrase "alternative facts" yet!
And when you have a polarizing or popular team in the game - and the Patriots are both - that's going to increase the fans' interest. Will Tom Brady become the only five-time champion QB? Will Belechick win another one? Will Roger Goodell have to present the MVP trophy to Deflategate-boy?When you add the excitement of a high-powered offense like Atlanta has, and the possible ascension of Matty Ice to the quarterback Parthenon with a title, then the hype for the game itself is palpable.
But for a large portion of the nation (and very slightly beyond - the NFL is truly 'national', still, unlike the other three major sports leagues which have teams in at least Toronto, Canada), the EVENT is more important than the GAME.
Luke Bryan singing the anthem (the over/under is two minutes fifteen seconds, if you're a betting person). Lady Gaga's halftime show (sometimes the halftime is bigger news than the game. We blame you, Janet.), all the amazing new camera tricks and gadgets the network of the year pulls out of its bag for its showcase (and with an indoor game, and being on Fox, expect more than normal on this front), and of course, don't forget that the POTUS always makes an interviewed appearance in the pre-game somewhere (somehow, I've a hunch that will be more newsmaking than normal).
And, of course, the commercials.
There was a study this year that suggests that 80% of Super Bowl advertisements fail to increase sales for the advertising company. Compared to the conference title games, for example, there's a 12% increase in viewership for a 20% markup in price (on average during the last decade or so - wish I'd cited my source when I read this!). That doesn't sound cost-effective, and some companies have come to that conclusion over the years themselves.
But others always seem to take their place - there's never a lack of advertisers for the game, even at five mil a slot. If you watch television, this is the ONLY time all year you're going to specifically watch for the advertisements, barring a special "stay tuned for a sneak preview of Disney's upcoming movie, Aladdin and Jasmine Are Arrested Flying Their Carpet Over Mr. Trump's Wall". If you want to make your mark in the culture today with an ad, this is where you have to do it, ever since Apple's 1984 Macintosh ad.
And every year, there are two or three that stick with us, at least for a while. Many more try and fail to capture the public's imagination, and that's as it should be. Art is always a risk - if it isn't, then it's not really art. And, believe it or don't, commercials like many of the SB ads are most definitely art. They make a statement (beyond 'buy our product'), they appeal to the senses, they are designed to challenge the viewer. Those are three of the most critical elements to determining what ART IS, and what IS ART.
Art should say something. You may not always like the message, or occasionally even get the message. But if it's really art, then it has to make you think at some level. Along with that is the idea that art should challenge the observer as well. It's one thing to say something benign, like "Chocolate is good," or "I like trains". Art should make you think about the message being given, and leave some of the work to you. It's the exact opposite of what a good journalist would do: if you're reading a news article, you want ALL the facts (and opinions, if appropriate) laid out in easily digestible form for the reader. That's the appeal of the USA Today/ Mashable school of layout - the easy on the eyes, straight forward modality that draws in those who find the New York Times a tough read. But art? Art as a rule leaves out key elements of the puzzle, forcing the observer to solve it (which they need to be able to do, or the artwork is a failure) and thereby become part of the artistic process themselves. If your observer never invests himself into your art, you've failed as an artist.
Critically, the difference between art and any other statement-making form is that art should be aesthetically stimulating. Notice I didn't say pleasing, although that's by far the norm. But cacophony has its place. Tension has its place. Jarring the sensibilities of the observer has its place. If it turns the observer off to your work, you've overdone it, but unlike every other method of communication, art must have an affect, not just an effect.
Do Super Bowl commercials accomplish these three tasks? Are they "art"? Well, to be fair, many if not most of them don't strive for that particular goal. They're paid in the end to sell a product; if they can do so by other means, more power to them. But if you're ever going to see the artistic side of the advertising business, Sunday's the day you'll see it. There are awards shows for commercial makers, but we might well consider the Super Bowl after-analysis to be the "people's choice" of commercial awards: which ads will have you talking around the water cooler the next day?
Of my children, four of them will be home with me watching the Super Bowl on and off. (The two oldest will be off making and selling food for the other viewers at their diverse food establishments.) My youngest son, the twelve-year old, will watch for the football game for the most part; the fifteen year old son will be interested in the musical performances, but he and his sisters will be the ones running into the room when commercials come on, rather than the usual tide going the opposite direction for most shows.
As for the game itself, FOLLOWING FOOTBALL gives the Patriots a two point edge (Vegas has been hovering around three all week). I personally think Atlanta's the best option to face New England this year, as Dallas was a year or two away despite their record this year, and Green Bay had too many injuries to hold up against the Pats. Belechick's M.O. is to take away your best weapon on offense (to me, that's Julio Jones), but Atlanta has too many to take just one away and be completely effective on defense. On the other hand, the Falcons' defense (though improved throughout the season) can definitely be exploited by a smart offense and a good QB, and New England has both.
I expect a high-scoring game, and I expect Brady to Edelman to be the last and winning score of the game. New England will win its fifth title in the Brady/Belechick era by less than the final touchdown - less than seven points.
Notice I didn't say stops to watch "the game", because that's not the major attraction for a large portion of society.
For football fans, even casual ones, we watch the game as the culmination of the NFL season, although it takes the edge off the game to me having the extra week in between the conference title games and the Big One. (I understand why you want to have the week in between; just whining about it from a fan's perspective.) To put the delay in perspective, the last meaningful game the NFL played was two days after the Inauguration - we had barely been introduced to the phrase "alternative facts" yet!
And when you have a polarizing or popular team in the game - and the Patriots are both - that's going to increase the fans' interest. Will Tom Brady become the only five-time champion QB? Will Belechick win another one? Will Roger Goodell have to present the MVP trophy to Deflategate-boy?When you add the excitement of a high-powered offense like Atlanta has, and the possible ascension of Matty Ice to the quarterback Parthenon with a title, then the hype for the game itself is palpable.
But for a large portion of the nation (and very slightly beyond - the NFL is truly 'national', still, unlike the other three major sports leagues which have teams in at least Toronto, Canada), the EVENT is more important than the GAME.
Luke Bryan singing the anthem (the over/under is two minutes fifteen seconds, if you're a betting person). Lady Gaga's halftime show (sometimes the halftime is bigger news than the game. We blame you, Janet.), all the amazing new camera tricks and gadgets the network of the year pulls out of its bag for its showcase (and with an indoor game, and being on Fox, expect more than normal on this front), and of course, don't forget that the POTUS always makes an interviewed appearance in the pre-game somewhere (somehow, I've a hunch that will be more newsmaking than normal).
And, of course, the commercials.
There was a study this year that suggests that 80% of Super Bowl advertisements fail to increase sales for the advertising company. Compared to the conference title games, for example, there's a 12% increase in viewership for a 20% markup in price (on average during the last decade or so - wish I'd cited my source when I read this!). That doesn't sound cost-effective, and some companies have come to that conclusion over the years themselves.
But others always seem to take their place - there's never a lack of advertisers for the game, even at five mil a slot. If you watch television, this is the ONLY time all year you're going to specifically watch for the advertisements, barring a special "stay tuned for a sneak preview of Disney's upcoming movie, Aladdin and Jasmine Are Arrested Flying Their Carpet Over Mr. Trump's Wall". If you want to make your mark in the culture today with an ad, this is where you have to do it, ever since Apple's 1984 Macintosh ad.
And every year, there are two or three that stick with us, at least for a while. Many more try and fail to capture the public's imagination, and that's as it should be. Art is always a risk - if it isn't, then it's not really art. And, believe it or don't, commercials like many of the SB ads are most definitely art. They make a statement (beyond 'buy our product'), they appeal to the senses, they are designed to challenge the viewer. Those are three of the most critical elements to determining what ART IS, and what IS ART.
Art should say something. You may not always like the message, or occasionally even get the message. But if it's really art, then it has to make you think at some level. Along with that is the idea that art should challenge the observer as well. It's one thing to say something benign, like "Chocolate is good," or "I like trains". Art should make you think about the message being given, and leave some of the work to you. It's the exact opposite of what a good journalist would do: if you're reading a news article, you want ALL the facts (and opinions, if appropriate) laid out in easily digestible form for the reader. That's the appeal of the USA Today/ Mashable school of layout - the easy on the eyes, straight forward modality that draws in those who find the New York Times a tough read. But art? Art as a rule leaves out key elements of the puzzle, forcing the observer to solve it (which they need to be able to do, or the artwork is a failure) and thereby become part of the artistic process themselves. If your observer never invests himself into your art, you've failed as an artist.
Critically, the difference between art and any other statement-making form is that art should be aesthetically stimulating. Notice I didn't say pleasing, although that's by far the norm. But cacophony has its place. Tension has its place. Jarring the sensibilities of the observer has its place. If it turns the observer off to your work, you've overdone it, but unlike every other method of communication, art must have an affect, not just an effect.
Do Super Bowl commercials accomplish these three tasks? Are they "art"? Well, to be fair, many if not most of them don't strive for that particular goal. They're paid in the end to sell a product; if they can do so by other means, more power to them. But if you're ever going to see the artistic side of the advertising business, Sunday's the day you'll see it. There are awards shows for commercial makers, but we might well consider the Super Bowl after-analysis to be the "people's choice" of commercial awards: which ads will have you talking around the water cooler the next day?
Of my children, four of them will be home with me watching the Super Bowl on and off. (The two oldest will be off making and selling food for the other viewers at their diverse food establishments.) My youngest son, the twelve-year old, will watch for the football game for the most part; the fifteen year old son will be interested in the musical performances, but he and his sisters will be the ones running into the room when commercials come on, rather than the usual tide going the opposite direction for most shows.
As for the game itself, FOLLOWING FOOTBALL gives the Patriots a two point edge (Vegas has been hovering around three all week). I personally think Atlanta's the best option to face New England this year, as Dallas was a year or two away despite their record this year, and Green Bay had too many injuries to hold up against the Pats. Belechick's M.O. is to take away your best weapon on offense (to me, that's Julio Jones), but Atlanta has too many to take just one away and be completely effective on defense. On the other hand, the Falcons' defense (though improved throughout the season) can definitely be exploited by a smart offense and a good QB, and New England has both.
I expect a high-scoring game, and I expect Brady to Edelman to be the last and winning score of the game. New England will win its fifth title in the Brady/Belechick era by less than the final touchdown - less than seven points.
Wednesday, January 25, 2017
The last thing I'll probably ever say about the "Deflategate" case...
From Kevin van Valkenburg, ESPN the Magazine, in an article about Tom Brady... He makes a phenomenal point about the lead-up situation to "Deflategate":
"There is one important but mostly forgotten scene in the Deflategate mess. It came after the Patriots outfoxed the Ravens in the 2014 AFC divisional round, using only four offensive linemen and declaring one receiver ineligible to create confusion for the Ravens' defense. Brady threw for 367 yards and three touchdowns. Baltimore coach John Harbaugh was annoyed, feeling the Patriots had exploited a loophole in the rules. He predicted the league would make such tactics illegal in the offseason, and he was ultimately correct.
"When informed of Harbaugh's comments, Brady couldn't resist offering a cheeky dismissal and twisting the knife. A smile spread across his face as he spoke. "Maybe those guys gotta study the rulebook and figure it out," Brady said. Within a week, someone -- the Ravens deny it was them -- turned that statement around on Brady. The Colts insisted the league check the PSI level in Brady's footballs during the AFC championship game, and leaks, allegations, depositions, lawsuits and mayhem followed. It was a kangaroo court, in a way, with the outcome barely taking into account the evidence. If there's one statement Brady would take back, it might be that dig about the rulebook."
I thought the Belechick play design in the Ravens game was utterly brilliant at the time, and for some reason I was personally offended that they legislated such a clever tactic out of the playbook. But if IT led to the checking of the footballs? (Or, more precisely, the comments by Brady et al led to the PSI checks?) Ironic, at the least. Undoubtedly most of the league KNEW Brady played with the under-inflated footballs: the rule was instituted at his and Peyton Manning's request in the first place, and he was on record as saying how much he preferred the grip.
So the bending of the law was true, I have no doubt. But the rubbing in of the exploitation of the rulebook could very well have led to that being turned against them, to the detriment of both Brady and the NFL, in the long run.
(PS - it was a STUPID rule in the first place: why are you allowing two different kinds of football depending on who's on offense? You flip sides of the field, all that sort of thing to make the game as even, as fair as possible. Why the NFL gave in to the star power of Manning and Brady and gave them this is beyond me.)
Someone suggested that the NFL would go to significant lengths, if not to keep the Patriots from winning, at least from keeping Tom Brady from being the MVP, so Roger Goodell wouldn't have to present the trophy to him, this season in particular. While I don't base my North Star on the NFL's ethics and behavior, that seems far fetched to me. Unless we see a smoking gun during the game on Feb 5th, don't spend any time worrying about it. (But the very fact that I bring it up...)
It really is remarkable to see the longevity of the Pats' run at the top of the heap: Seven straight trips to the conference finals? Seven years in a row that they were one of the four best teams out of 32? In a league that prides itself on parity, that's an amazing feat, and one that had never been accomplished before, even "pre-parity" (which I date from Rozelle's leadership - it was his mantra, originally). The year before that streak? Brady's injury year, when they managed to go 11-5 with a back-up QB.
One of the most remarkable things about Bill Belechick's coaching is how he exploits every little detail, as witness that play against the Ravens. (Remember, they won that game b y two TDs - the two they got on running that play twice and scoring both times.) How often have you seen them pick up someone's dropped player off the waiver wire and make them a useful cog in their machine? He's probably the ultimate "Fantasy Football" player, in that he knows which positions on his team are important and must be paid and pampered (QB, TE, etc), and which positions can be filled with exchangeable parts (he's notorious for plugging any old RB in and getting him 100-yd games!). The cases where he's pushed the fringe of the rules - "spygate" comes to mind, of course, although I've never understood that rule, particularly. And regardless of what he said, do you believe that someone with the "I NEED to know everything that's going on!" mentality he has really had NO knowledge about the inflation of footballs? But y'know what? That's life in the NFL. You could take away those edgy issues and he'd still have the best team most years. You could take Brady away and they'd still go 11-5. You could injure half his team, and they'd still make the conference finals. I don't like the man's image - I certainly don't know the man - but I admire the heck out of him as a coach.
(a tiny football update)
We said we weren't going to do any more public NFL predictions until we could refine our model to make it at least the equal of the Vegas oddsmakers.
So, I want to report on our practice trial on this latest version.
In Week 17, which is notoriously radical regarding how teams play (some very good teams rest their starters for the playoffs; some medium level teams play their hearts out for a playoff berth, some lower teams play all rookies to see what they have for next year, some teams literally couldn't care less what happens that game), we disregarded two games (Pittsburgh/Cleveland and Dallas/Philly) because of the first category, and watched the other games carefully for signs of the other categories. In the end, keeping all fourteen others, our system went 6-8 against the spreads. Eh.
In the three rounds of playoffs so far, we went 2-2 the first weekend (picked all winners correctly but lost thinking Detroit and Miami would stay closer than the spread), and 2-2 the second weekend - nailed the two NFC games, missed the AFC games by a couple of points the wrong way (NE favored by 16 - we said 14, won by 18....KC favored by 1, we said 2, lost by 2). Not terrible.
And yesterday, we happened to get both games right - our point spreads were bigger than the Vegas numbers, and both Atlanta and the Patriots won easily. So overall in the playoffs we're 6-4, guaranteeing an overall win for the FOLLOWING FOOTBALL odds system, for what it's worth since we didn't publicize our predictions in advance.
The upshot is that we think we have something in place for the fall of 2017, although we will keep tinkering between now and then. And of course, Australian Rules Football season starts next month, with the pre-season games for the men and the seven-round inaugural AFL-Women's season starting on February 3rd, and we'll be hip-deep in our force-feeding you info and our predictions for all things Aussie, which you have the complete right to ignore completely. (But...hope you don't!)
PS - We see New England by 2 in the title game on Feb 5th. The opening line in Las Vegas is three.
Thursday, December 15, 2016
December football prediction central!
New Orleans @ Arizona - we like the Cardinals to cover the 2.5 point spread easily.
SF @ Atlanta - the Falcons will cover almost any spread here.
Cleveland @ Buffalo - even with the tumult around Rex Ryan, never bet the Browns.
Pittsburgh @ Cincinnati - we see this as even; Vegas favors the Steelers.
Detroit @ NYG - we think the Lions AT LEAST cover, probably win.
Oakland @ San Diego - we like the Raiders, though the Chargers are favored.
Tennessee @ KC - the Chiefs cover easily.
Indy @ Minnesota - Vikings cover against a bad offense.
>The other games are pretty close on our FOLLOWING FOOTBALL sheets to the official odds. We went 50/50 last week...a TON better than the near-shutout the previous week!
Friday, October 14, 2016
FOLLOWING FOOTBALL predictions for the weekend of Oct 14-16
On to the NFL! We agree with the odds makers on every game (having been equally wrong about Denver/SD last night!), so it's all a matter of degree. We think the Giants are going to fare better at home versus Baltimore than +3...we see the poor 49ers losing by more than eight to Buffalo...Chicago may not be great at 1-4, but Jacksonville isn't up to the journey to Soldier Field yet... Green Bay over Dallas by four? Try nine...Indy is a three point underdog to Houston; we have it more like a ten point margin. (I disagree with one of my system's predictions: Cincinnati covering the nine-point spread against the Patriots. The problem is that my system didn't know Mr. Brady was gone for four games...I still like New England.)
Monday, October 10, 2016
A quick football forecasting report...
By the way, with tonight left to go, we're at 6-6 on the NFL games with the professional gamblers in Vegas. (We have Carolina as a 13 point favorite over Tampa, and the oddsmakers are more willing to take Cam's absence into account with a six-point spread.) We do NOT mess with the raw numbers - if Cam's out, so what? We've learned that we're better off not second-guessing the original FOLLOWING FOOTBALL computer system!
Tuesday, October 4, 2016
We look at professional football, too - both NFL and CFL!
We have rating systems for them, too - and yes, FOLLOWING FOOTBALL has three different rating systems for three different levels of football! In the NFL, we have a handicap system - subtract one from the other (giving three point benefits to the home team) and you've got a pretty good prediction of the game outcome between the two teams in question! (That's true of the Canadian teams too, but that one's more like an ELO system.)
Here's the current team handicaps for the 32 NFL teams:
AFC) Denver (4-0) - 9, Pittsburgh (3-1) - 12, Cincinnati (2-2) - 13, Buffalo (2-2) and New England (3-1) - 14, Kansas City (2-2) - 15, NY Jets (1-3) -16, Houston (3-1), Oakland (3-1), and San Diego (1-3) - 18, Baltimore (3-1) - 20, Miami (1-3) - 22, Indianapolis (1-3), Jacksonville (1-3), and Cleveland (0-4) - 25, Tennessee (1-3) - 26.
NFC) Seattle (3-1) and Minnesota (4-0) - 10, Green Bay (2-1) - 11, Arizona (1-3) - 12, Carolina (1-3) - 14, Atlanta (3-1) and Philadelphia (3-0) - 16,Detroit (1-3) - 18, Dallas (3-1) and Los Angeles (3-1) - 19, Washington (2-2) and New Orleans (1-3) - 21, Chicago (1-3) and San Francisco (1-3) - 22, NY Giants (2-2) - 23, Tampa Bay (1-3) - 25.
Here's the current team handicaps for the 32 NFL teams:
AFC) Denver (4-0) - 9, Pittsburgh (3-1) - 12, Cincinnati (2-2) - 13, Buffalo (2-2) and New England (3-1) - 14, Kansas City (2-2) - 15, NY Jets (1-3) -16, Houston (3-1), Oakland (3-1), and San Diego (1-3) - 18, Baltimore (3-1) - 20, Miami (1-3) - 22, Indianapolis (1-3), Jacksonville (1-3), and Cleveland (0-4) - 25, Tennessee (1-3) - 26.
NFC) Seattle (3-1) and Minnesota (4-0) - 10, Green Bay (2-1) - 11, Arizona (1-3) - 12, Carolina (1-3) - 14, Atlanta (3-1) and Philadelphia (3-0) - 16,Detroit (1-3) - 18, Dallas (3-1) and Los Angeles (3-1) - 19, Washington (2-2) and New Orleans (1-3) - 21, Chicago (1-3) and San Francisco (1-3) - 22, NY Giants (2-2) - 23, Tampa Bay (1-3) - 25.
No comments:
Post a Comment