Mount Athos

2008-07-12T16:36:00.001-05:00

Shockingly, the Jeromy Burnitz impression is not really overdone

and if you're wondering: yes, the guy is doing every team

2008-06-08T14:00:00.003-05:00

No explanation...

2008-05-28T21:46:00.001-05:00

Two posts in two days, I must have something important to say ... and I do, tooting my horn thusly:

The Simpsons Softball Quiz

Score: 100% (9 out of 9)

2008-05-27T20:10:00.003-05:00

I've been roused from my lengthy slumber to send this important message: If the words "Oregon Trail" immediately conjure up childhood memories of boldly fording rivers, buying 999 boxes of bullets at Matt's General Store, and watching your family members succumb to snakebite one by one, you need to go to virutualapple.org and re-live the experience right now. And if you die prematurely (you will), there are 1200+ other Apple II games on the site ready to kill your valuable time. Just go already, Woz wants you to.

2008-03-19T17:10:00.002-05:00

Ok, so I'll admit that I dropped the ball on "The Hattys" this year, but this is mainly due to me also forgetting about the oh-so-forgettable Oscars. That, and me not really watching any new movies this past year. However, I can recall going to the theater just once, to see Ratatouille, and it was enough for me to crown the champion right then and there, as a chef's toque serves as a critical element in the main plot point of the film. So, congratulations to Ratatouille, the first animated film to garner the prestigious honor of Most Hat-Centric Movie of the Year.

Now, you may notice that this years rundown is a bit shorter than normal, and that's due to me devoting my time to creating something that will benefit all of humanity. We're talking, of course, about the internet's only Hat Identification Chart. You may recall me complaining about the non-existence of this item last year, and a few weeks ago I finally decided to do something about it. I also put a handy-dandy link to it on the sidebar, just for easy access.

Enjoy.

2008-02-03T13:46:00.000-06:00

After some thought, I've decided to pass on watching the super bowl this year. And believe it or not, it has almost nothing to do with the Packers' recent elimination - now I'll admit if the Pack was in it I'd be watching, but if they had finished their expected 6-10 this year I'm pretty sure I'd be passing in that case, too. I arrived at my choice after making the following considerations:

Fox is mixing political coverage into this year's pregame. I'm confident it will be fair and balanced.
Fox will also have a red carpet this year, which is nice because I always feel like football broadcasts don't spend enough time focusing on which celebrities are in attendance, and what, or should is say, "who", they are wearing.
Every moment listening to Joe Buck is a moment of agony.
Ditto for Terry Bradshaw.
5 hours of Patriot (and Giant) butt kissing.
6 hours of promos for horrific new shows that will be gone by April.
There are several decent male-focused viewing alternatives this year, like the Mythbusters marathon.
The Puppy Bowl is always gold, too.
It's unlikely that more than five commercials will actually be funny.
In the age of the internet, I can always view any good commercials the following day, in 1/20th of the time.
My disdain for the league itself has grown a great deal over the past few years, most notably for the NFL Network's cash-grabbing tactics at the expense of their fans, but also for their idiotic handling of tape-gate - why on earth would you destroy the tapes?
I just plain don't like the Patriots.

So, anyway, I guess I'll pick the Giants just for the hell of it. Have fun if you're going to watch, I won't begrudge you. That's the last you'll hear from me on the matter, thank you for your time.

2008-01-26T10:24:00.000-06:00

Can somebody explain to me why The Weather Channel is publishing a video report from a meterologist entitled Proof that there is life on Mars?

(Apologies for the horrifically poor video player and embedding tool weather.com uses. I had no choice, I swear!)

I think right now is a wonderful time to think about where you get your weather information from. You may want to consider sites that tend to focus on actually providing weather information.

2008-01-19T11:04:00.000-06:00

Unsurprisingly, I'm still riding a high from last week's remarkable Packers-Seahawks game. I'll be seeing replays from that game, on TV and mentally, until the day I die. In fact, I would go as far as saying the game deserves its own "bowl" name from here on out, for easy reference. "The Ryan Grant Bowl" is probably my leading candidate right now - narratives where you lose 2 fumbles in your first 3 plays leading to a 14 point deficit, yet end up with 200+ yards and 3 TD's in a visually stunning, snowy blowout just don't come along very often.

Combined with the quickly-becoming-an-annual-tradition Cowboys choke job, it was a near perfect weekend in the NFC. If I wanted to be bold, I'd say the dream matchup I talked about earlier this year, with the still-undefeated Patriots facing the Packers in the Super Bowl, appears close to inevitable at this point.

However I don't want to jinx anything, so I'm not going to say that thing I just said. NE and GB.

2008-01-10T17:29:00.000-06:00

Ah yes, divisional week in the NFL playoffs, also known as the week where you'd have to be insane to pick any upsets. GB, NE, IND, DAL.

2008-01-05T11:25:00.000-06:00

Playoff picks are just below, but first a response to the question of how I feel about Eric Gagne's name appearing in the Mitchell Report: Basically, I'd still rather see the Brewers with Gagne than without him, assuming 1) he stopped using once MLB put HGH on its banned substances list (I believe everything about Gagne in the report is 2004 or earlier) and 2) When he comes out and talks about it, he fesses up (to date, I don't think he's said anything publicly). We already have one wild and unreliable closer that used steroids before MLB started its current policy and has since fully apologized, so it's not like some significant change of course for the Brewers. The only thing that would truly turn me against Gagne would be if he pulled a Clemens and started issuing denials, excuses, and threats rather than accepting any kind of responsibility. And speaking of Gagne, a question for you, Chris: I never watched him on the Sox last year (I can't watch baseball games involving the Yankees or Red Sox) - what the hell happened there? Was his stuff no good, did he lose control on his pitches, did he become mentally unhinged, or was it the case of some bad breaks snowballing? When Doug Melvin signed the guy he said that Theo Epstein had nothing but good things to say about Gagne - was Theo just being a snot or is he actually salvageable? I don't want your opinion as a Sox fan, I want your opinion as a scout...

WAS at SEA: Ok, I went back and looked at Seattle's schedule again, and they did beat one team with a winning record, but it's Tampa, so that totally doesn't count. 0-2 otherwise. Upset special. WAS.

JAX at PIT: Everyone on earth is picking the Jags here, and for good reason. JAX.

NYG at TB: I truly cannot stand this pick, but picking Eli Manning to lead the Giants to victory in a road playoff game is insanity. And I don't want to hear any "they hung with the Patriots" arguments, the Patriots have been playing like a very lucky .500 team for the last 5 weeks or so, and beating the Patriots would have been NY's Super Bowl. TB.

TEN at SD: I still have no idea how the Titans are in the playoffs, when the Browns were a significantly better team all year. Makes you yearn for a BCS-type system, right? SD.

2007-12-29T18:06:00.000-06:00

I cannot remember a week 17 with so many playoff positions already locked up, making for an interesting week of picks.

NO at CHI: Note to Saints: If you can't get it done at home against a team with nothing to play for, you're not going to be able to get it done on the road either. CHI

CAR at TB: Carolina, I'm punishing you for not beating a shorthanded Dallas team last week. TB

BUF at PHI: It's a classic overachiever vs. underachiever matchup, but unfortunately those tendencies leave the teams evenly matched, so I'll just go with homefield. PHI

CIN at MIA: If last week was Miami's superbowl, then this would be their first week of the offseason. CIN

JAX at HOU: Houston would like to go out with a win, and I don't think the Jags have anything to play for. Upset special. HOU

DET at GB: There's only one word for how the Packers played last week: yucky. GB

SF at CLE: Cleveland, I'm sorry, but you blew your chance last week. Winning here isn't going to get it done. CLE

SEA at ATL: Ever wonder what the Patriots would look like if someone sucked half the talent out of each of their players? Just watch a Seattle game. SEA

DAL at WAS: I'm very much rooting for the Viking-killing Redskins in this one. Can anyone think of a less intimidating team to face in the playoffs than the Redskins? I used Todd Collins as a punchline earlier this year, assuming he had retired five years ago. WAS

PIT at BAL: I'm telling you, Baltimore will not recover from the NE game for years. PIT

KC at NYJ: Oh baby, Herm Edwards returning to New York! What a story! Almost as exciting as watching one of those early-December bowl games! NYJ

SD at OAK: San Diego runs away with the AFC West, disparagingly known as "The NFC West of the AFC". SD

MIN at DEN: Yet another embarrassing loss for the overrated "mastermind" everyone forgot about, Mike Shanahan. MIN

STL at AZ: I could see this GIDCAOTW a mile away.... AZ

TEN at IND: Exact same scenario as the DAL-WAS game, exact same result. TEN

2007-12-28T19:30:00.000-06:00

I was meaning to get back to Chris's Mitchell Report Challenge a bit earlier, but was distracted by a Christmas bonanza of video game goodness. I've torn myself away from the joystick for a bit, so lets move on to some topics:

On whether it was right for Mitchell to lead the investigation: In a word, No. And it's not because I have even the faintest belief that any unscrupulous behavior is going on. It just seems like a very poor choice to pick a man who undoubtedly qualifies as an MLB "insider" as the lead investigator in a case that's as much about baseball being an impenetrable ol' boys' club as it is about the drugs themselves. The whole reason this report exists, as far as I can tell, is because no one else had any luck breaking through the stonewall put in place by the player's union. With the government behind them, the baseball community, of all sports, should have understood the value of picking a true arbitrator for this kind of matter. Instead, they provided every Roger Clemens fan a significant piece of ammo to use in whatever conspiracy theory they happen to be cooking up in their tinfoil hat.

On what to do about the records/statistics from convicted users: First of all, I tend to be of the opinion that once a player retires, most of his records, statistics, awards, etc, have no real meaning. His stats are just numbers in a book, completely incapable of influencing the present or predicting the future - they're just a log of what happened, why would anyone care to erase them? As for awards, if Raphael Palmeiro somehow made it into the Hall of Fame, I would probably be upset for about a minute, and then forget about it for the rest of my life. However, this is a game we're talking about, not accounting, and I'm willing to admit there may be a few numbers or achievements that have some kind of "sentimental" value, for lack of a better term. For me, there are really only two numbers, 61 and 755, that are important enough to care about and have been irrevocably linked with the whole steroid issue. And for those two numbers, the steroid "crackdown" came a year too late for the latter, and almost a decade too late for the former. So where does that leave me standing on this issue? Well, let me put it this way: A record can't be un-set once it's set, and baseball will just have to deal with Bonds' 73 and 762 as an embarassing part of its past.

The MLB recordbook is like a program's log file: its creator shouldn't be going back and editing it, even if it contains some nasty stuff...

Oh, and NE for tomorrow...

2007-12-22T16:53:00.000-06:00

Chris's last post brought up the topic of having another point-counterpoint on the Mitchell report. It sounds like a good idea to me, so check back here in a few days and I should have a "formalized" argument started. But today, I'm just doing cleanup picks....

NYG at BUF: Given that this is the NFC vs. the AFC, and that the Giants are in the middle of their yearly late-season collapse, I'm not sure this even qualifies as a real upset. BUF.

GB at CHI: Over the last two years, a well-defined, larger-than-expected segment of the Bears fan base has been clamoring for Lovie Smith to give Kyle Orton a shot at QB (I am not making this up). He was the kind of guy the Bears offense needed: a good game manager, relatively smart, supposedly a good teammate. Last week they got their wish, and hopefully figured out what the rest of us already knew: that Orton, despite his positive traits, was missing one important quarterbacking ability - being able to throw a football. GB.

CLE at CIN: A few weeks ago I was convinced that Cincy would win some meaningless games at the end of the year, but they appear to be in even worse shape than I thought, and Cleveland is so close they can taste it. CLE.

KC at DET: Detroit was mathematically eliminated with the Vikings win last monday, so here's the meaningless victory that would have gone to the Bengals. DET.

HOU at IND: I'm surprised, it actually feels like Indy only played Houston twice this year. IND.

PHI at NO: New Orleans is mathematically alive, Philly isn't. Seems reasonable. NO.

OAK at JAX: I may be getting suckered in here, but the Jags are again approaching AFC 1st-tier status. 1.5-th tier at worst. JAX.

ATL at AZ: Poor, poor, pitiful Falcons. Actually, that's not true, they're mostly a bunch of punks and don't deserve much pity. I doubt "due process" was a term considered by Roddy White while coming up with his subversive T-shirt designs. AZ.

TB at SF: And the ~~rich~~ lower-middle class gets richer. TB.

NYJ at TEN: The Jets shockingly are still playing games. GIDCAOTW. TEN.

MIA at NE: Thanks, Miami, for ruining the fun of 0-14 vs 14-0. NE.

BAL at SEA: Ok, here's the deal: until Seattle beats a .500-or-better team, I will refuse to talk about anything else when picking their games. SEA.

WAS at MIN: If you watched any of last week's Monday night game, it should be painfully clear that the Vikings are overrated. However, the Skins are far too Bear-like to inspire any confidence. MIN.

DEN at SD: A late-season throttling of the Broncos would be the perfect cap on Shannahan's comeuppance year. SD.

2007-12-20T16:31:00.001-06:00

PIT at STL: I saw the Rams last week, and they're certainly talented enough to be a .500 team if healthy, but the Steelers really need this game. PIT

DAL at CAR: Once again, I can't tell if this is a head or heart pick, but what the heck. Upset Special. CAR.

2007-12-15T22:22:00.000-06:00

Let's hurry up and get to the playoffs already....

BUF at CLE: I'm still trying to figure out how Buffalo is still in the hunt, what with them not having anyone good on their team and all...CLE

TEN at KC: Even at 4-9, on a 6 game losing streak, I'd say KC has overachieved this year. TEN

GB at STL: Favre has never played well in the TWA (or whatever it's called nowadays) dome, so I'm more nervous about this game than you might think. GB

BAL at MIA: Just like Chris, I've been forced into picking the dolphins every week until they win. MIA

NYJ at NE: Yay! what a wonderful opportunity for GIDCAOTW. NE

AZ at NO: Sorry kids, you're done...you should both go home now. AZ

JAX at PIT: I proclaimed the Jags as a second-tier team last week, and this is a game that second-tier teams lose. PIT

ATL at TB: Well, this would have been a good GIDCAOTW too, but now that I've already used it, I'm forced to say something relevant. Ummmmm.....do you think Earnest Graham was named after that Jim Varney character? I don't. TB

SEA at CAR: I've already made my thoughts on the Seahawks clear. Repeatedly. SEA

IND at OAK: Personally, I don't think the Frozen Tundra gives the Packers nearly the advantage most claim it does, but last week, the Raiders genuinely looked like a team that just wanted to find a heated area about five minutes after kickoff. IND

PHI at DAL: Upset special: Dallas is due. Actually they're one week past due, but the Lions managed to do what they do best. PHI

DET at SD: Like I was just saying. SD

WAS at NYG: NFC east games always have a strong "meh" element to them, no matter what the records or talent levels are. NYG

CHI at MIN: It would be nice to see the Bears damage the Vikings' playoff hopes here, but bad teams usually can't get it done in the metrodome. MIN

2007-12-12T21:47:00.001-06:00

We're now in the stretch of the season where the NFL starts evenly distributing their games across the week in an effort to inconvenience as many teams, fans, and pick-makers as possible, so from here on out I'll likely just be picking winnners for the odd days and giving full descriptions for the rest: HOU, CIN

2007-12-08T19:44:00.000-06:00

MIA at BUF: Gosh darn it, I just can't pick against Miami at this point, because I know it will guarantee a Dolphins victory. MIA

STL at CIN: Somebody named "Brock Berlin" will start for the Rams. There's no way that's his real name. CIN

DAL at DET: This would be a classic letdown game for the Cowboys, but don't count on it against the god-forsaken Lions. DAL

OAK at GB: You better win this, Packers.... GB

SD at TEN: Like I've said previously, the Chargers simply don't have the mental fortitude to win on the road against a tough defense. TEN

NYG at PHI: Did you really think Mr. Feely was the answer? PHI

CAR at JAX: Sorry Jags, you're officially second tier. JAX

TB at HOU: Tampa Bay is almost as bad as Seattle (believe me, that IS an insult), but Houston already has their annual five wins. TB

MIN at SF: I really would like to pick San Fran here, but if it's late in the game and you have the lead, you shouldn't start heaving the ball down field, if you know what I mean... MIN

AZ at SEA: Believe it or not, Seattle hasn't beaten anyone with a winning record this year. In fact, they haven't even beaten anyone with a .500 record. I'm calling upset special all over this. Oh and in case your wondering, the Seahawks schedule down the stretch: CAR, BAL, ATL. I'm going to throw up now. ARI

KC at DEN: Wasn't Jay Cutler supposed to "break out" this season? Unless he's come down with a nasty rash, I don't think it's happened. DEN

PIT at NE: Ok, the last two weeks I've come to the brink of picking against the Pats, and the last two weeks the Pats have come to the brink of losing. So, let's go with the Steelers here and see what happens. PIT

CLE at NYJ: Cleveland is inching up near the top of the list of teams I wouldn't want to face in the playoffs. CLE

IND at BAL: The Ravens just lost the kind of game it could take 5 years to recover from. IND

NO at ATL: Reggie Bush must regret having stayed healthy long enough for people to realize he's not a #1 back. NO

2007-12-05T19:39:00.000-06:00

CHI at WAS: Someone's going to come out of this with their playoff hopes officially ended....WAS.

2007-12-01T17:21:00.000-06:00

Lisa and I were luckily invited to a satellite-enabled household to watch the Packers, so I'm still recovering. I'm not angry or concerned as much as I am confused about how to feel. The Cowboys were the better team than the injury-ravaged Packers and deserved to win, but the game still could have gone to the Packers except for a bunch of very iffy calls all going the Cowboys' way. Because I'm still quite incoherent, I going with 4-word picks.

SF at CAR: San Fran can't tank. SF.

BUF at WAS: Dan Snyder's a jerk. WAS.

HOU at TEN: See ya, Mike Sherman. TEN.

ATL at STL: Race for pick 2. STL.

SEA at PHI: Seattle is NOT good. PHI.

DET at MIN: The Lions collapse continues. MIN.

JAX at IND: Gettin' over the hump. JAX.

SD at KC: Rivers complains too much. SD.

NYJ at MIA: This is the week. MIA.

DEN at OAK: Here's your upset special. OAK.

CLE at ARI: Cleveland is "for real". CLE.

TB at NO: The Bucs still suck. NO.

NYG at CHI: Bears have false hope. NYG.

CIN at PIT: No one's watching Pittsburgh. PIT.

NE at BAL: Almost called upset again. NE.

2007-11-28T21:52:00.000-06:00

There are many words to describe what Lance Thomas is doing to Brian Butch in this photo, but I don't think "defends" is one of them. Dick Vitale must have consulted on the captions.

Anyway, I'm picking Green Bay tomorrow, if you haven't guessed....

2007-11-23T15:57:00.000-06:00

We'll move on to the rest of this week's picks shortly, but first, a rebuttal of Chris's last rebuttal (a re-rebuttal?), specifically concerning the sub-topic of wide receiver contact rules.

I originally said:
There are plenty of other high-class organizations out there, so it's a poor argument by TMQ. However, Chris, I don't believe you can honestly tell me that bringing up an argument to the rules committee in the offseason about them enforcing an already-existing rule is at the same level of "poor sportsmanship" as willfully breaking a rule to gain a competitive advantage (no matter how small that advantage might actually have been).

And then Chris said:
First of all, it was not an already-existing rule. The rules for wide receiver contact were changed after those meetings to the current system where no contact with wide receivers is allowed beyond 5 yards. Before that, contact was allowed so long as the ball was not in the air.

Before you go making such an authoritative statement on this matter, Chris, I'd like to see some reasonable source (even a obscure internet source) indicating that the rules were in fact changed, as opposed to enforced, because I really don't think they were. It may shock you, but even outside the New England universe, many fans have been affected by the interpretation of the rules governing cornerback play, and have been forced to keep close tabs on the situation. To the best of my understanding, the narrative actually went something like the following:

For many years before the incident in question, the rules for contact before the ball was thrown were basically the same as they are now. You were allowed to shove any offensive player around as much you wanted within five yards, and after five yards, you were still allowed to make contact as long as you didn't impede the progress of the receiver.
By the early 2000's, many teams (not just the Pats, but the Packers as well, who have long been one of the biggest bump and run teams in the league) were taking advantage of the fact that the officials tended to be pretty lax on the five-yard rule, and generally let DB's redirect WR's as long as the ball wasn't in the air, in which case the regular pass interference rules would go into effect.
After the Patriots used a game plan that prominently featured downfield shoves (which were technically illegal at the time), the Colts complained to the league
The following year, the league announced it would more precisely enforce it's existing rules. In reality, the only thing that was now being enforced more than before was the "5 yard" part, which is why it my have looked to the casual observer like a new rule.

It's hard to find any real evidence online because search results get obscured behind the most recent Colts-Pats interference controversies, but in a few minutes of googling I was able to find this article which seems to agree with my points.

Does this version of the events paint new New England in a poor light? Not at all. Does it make the Colts look like crybabies and sore losers? Yes. But the Colts' point was technically correct (the best kind of correct) and there's no rule about not complaining about rules enforcement, so I don't think you can compare it to a situation where someone's trying to force a rule change. Even if that was the case, I think the argument stills boils down to: which is worse, cheating or complaining? And at least for me, cheating is the winner there. To bring back your basketball analogy, if I played pickup against a bunch of guys who complained every time they lost, it would be annoying, but I'd love coming back the next week to try to beat them again, especially if they managed to get the rules slightly tweaked. If I played against guys who willfully cheated, I just wouldn't show up the next week.

OAK at KC. I've heard that this is a big rivalry game. Yeah, and so is The University of Vermont vs The University New Hampshire... KC.

SEA at STL. We'll start hearing about how Seattle is "legit" after they win here, which, of course, is beyond laughable. SEA.

TEN at CIN. Tennessee's record is starting to catch up with their talent level, and Cincy seems like a team that will win a few because they're basically out of the race (Marvis Lewis thrives under non-pressure). CIN.

HOU at CLE. I haven't seen a single minute of the Browns this year, so I feel completely unqualified to dismiss or extol them. If only the folks at ESPN had the same scruples. CLE.

MIN at NYG. Did anyone notice Chester Taylor's performance last week? Maybe AP isn't twice as talented as everyone else in the league... NYG.

WAS at TB. I can't believe this horrible matchup actually has significant playoff implications. TB.

NO at CAR. Fun fact: David Carr was healthy enough to start last week, but Vinny was still given the nod. David, welcome to Tim Couch territory. I hope your long, luxurious hair will help console you. NO.

BUF at JAX. This is EXACTLY EXACTLY EXACTLY the kind of game the Jags normally blow, but I've done well fighting the urge to go against them for an upset special this year, so I'll let things slide. JAX.

BAL at SD. Best comeuppance story of the year: Brian Billick in Baltimore. SD.

SF at ARI. GIDCAOTW. ARI.

DEN at CHI. I'm just praying that free-agent-to-be Rex Grossman does well enough the rest of this year to convince the Bears management that he is the solution, not the problem. CHI.

PHI at NE. Really came close to going upset special here, but I couldn't tell if it was coming from my mind or my gut. NE.

MIA at PIT. Not this week, Miami. PIT.

2007-11-21T12:32:00.000-06:00

The thanksgiving slate this year is pretty boring, so I'll make the obvious picks and save the good stuff for the weekend. GB, DAL, IND.

2007-11-17T19:13:00.001-06:00

As I mentioned here last week, I was lucky enough to go to the Packers-Vikings game last week. While the players were warming up, I decided to run a bit of an experiment, by pointing my camera at Adrian Peterson and taking a picture. Based on what I've been hearing, I was worried that my poor little image sensor stood no chance of capturing the glorious light reflected from his heroic figure. Expecting the camera to explode in my hands, I took the shot. Shockingly enough, he showed up on the preview screen a second later, just like all the other players.

I should have known right then that this would turn out to be the best game ever. I honestly think this was better than our last Super Bowl win. Just consider the factors:

The score itself - not just a blowout, but a shutout, the first ever vs. the Vikings
The victory against the Packers' most hated rival
The perfect fall weather
Being part of a regular-season Lambeau attendance record
Being able to watch the opposing team's ridiculously overhyped star player get totally shut down
Being able to watch one of my most-frequently-mentioned football pick predictions come true as, surprise surprise, Adrian Peterson had to leave with an injury.*
Being able to watch Vikings fans, who probably accounted for 20% of the stadium attendance, quietly cover their jerseys and sulk away, because of factors 5 and 6.
Witnessing an "everything's going right" crazy touchdown in garbage time (where two Vikings collided with each other going for a sure interception, followed by the ball bouncing directly into the hands of a waiting receiver)
Witnessing an ex-player who's well known for talking %@#! about his former team getting regularly embarrassed (and being one of the colliding Vikings I just mentioned) - Darren Sharper
Witnessing a fantasy breakout performance by a deep keeper candidate I picked off waivers - Ryan Grant

Outside of the Packers beating the Pats as a 3-TD underdog in the superbowl, I can't think of a much better scenario. See below for pics, including some of the somewhat-destructible Peterson.

Packers-Vikings

I'll respond to Chris's latest volley in our Pats discussion some other time, so let's get on to picks:

TB at ATL: Wow, what a bad way to start off. I'm all for parity, but this is it's ugly side. TB

AZ at CIN: And the yuck continues. Neither of these teams seems remotely capable of winning this game. AZ

NYG at DET: Evidently Kevin Jones' foot is acting up again, which will give Mike Martz all the justification he'll need to implement an all-pass gameplan. NYG

CAR at GB: If I said that I actually remember the first time Favre and Testaverde matched up, would that make me old? GB

KC at IND: Indy's in big trouble, but they get a break against the least talented offense in the AFC. IND

OAK at MIN: Based on what I saw at last week's game, approximately 80% of Minnesotans have bought at least one Adrian Peterson jersey in the last 2 weeks. Way to express your individuality, guys. MIN.

MIA at PHI: I don't get the impression that the Fins are destined for 0-16, but they're not going to do it in Philly. PHI

SD at JAX: The Chargers have played like crap every time they've faced a strong, physical defense on the road, and there's no reason to expect things will change here. JAX

CLE at BAL: Despite recent circumstances, and despite what Vegas says, I'm still not sure Baltimore at home over Cleveland can ever be classified as an upset special, Chris. At least not in this decade. CLE.

NO at HOU: Any game involving Houston gets a big leg up in the race for GIDCAOTW. NO

PIT at NYJ: Jets games aren't as fun to comment on as they used to, because I don't have Pennington to pick on anymore. PIT

WAS at DAL: I know everyone looks at this game and sees one of the NFL's greatest rivalries, but all I see is a matchup between the NFL's jerkiest owners. DAL

STL at SF: I have never seen a worse MNF performance than the one the Niners put up last week. Never. If you can't beat a bad St. Louis team after being nationally embarrassed, you're beyond hope. SF

CHI at SEA: Speaking of which, every time I get a chance to watch a Seahawks game, the only part that usually interests me is watching Mike Holmgren's facial expressions, because he usually looks like he's attempting to digest a live weasel. SEA

NE at BUF: The official downer game of the week, as the feel-good Bills get mercilessly mowed down. NE

TEN at DEN: Mike Shananan, I hope you're getting well acquainted with this thing called "comeuppance" - it will continue to follow you until you get fired 3 years from now. TEN

* Easy there, fellas, I didn't say I was happy that Peterson got hurt, so you can keep your "schadenfreude!" comments to yourself. Boy, those Germans have a word for everything...

2007-11-10T23:18:00.000-06:00

Sorry, but I'll be going to the abbreviated format again this week, as Lisa and I were fortunate enough to be given some Packers tickets for this week's game against the Vikings, and I've run out of time before we have to head off. I should be extra grateful to be able to go to this game in particular, because (according to the national media) watching Adrian Peterson in person will be analogous to experiencing a purple-tinted version of the Second Coming.

MIN at GB: GB
JAX at TEN: TEN
DEN at KC: KC
BUF at MIA: BUF
STL at NO: NO
CLE at PIT: PIT
PHI at WAS: WAS
ATL at CAR: CAR
CIN at BAL: BAL
CHI at OAK: OAK
DAL at NYG: DAL
DET at AZ: AZ. Upset special
IND at SD: IND
SF at SEA: SEA

2007-11-03T18:36:00.000-05:00

I know this is a serious run of nothing-but-football posts, but I've run into a couple Tecmo Bowl items too good to pass up. SI had a link to the following Tecmo-ized version of the Packer's overtime victory a few days ago and I had to share it:

And, because we're on the topic, here's an clip from a few years ago, when a last-second touchdown by a horrible Cardinals team knocked the Vikings out of the playoffs and the Packers in - this audio is from Vikings radio, if you haven't guessed...

So, on to picks...

SF at ATL: Everyone's been disappointed that Alex Smith and Vernon Davis haven't turned into a spectacular duo this year. However, they have the excuse of being injured, which means that we'll have to wait at least another year or so before people realize they just plain suck. However, SF.

CIN at BUF: Wow, before the season began, who would have thought that Buffalo would actually go into this game as a mild favorite? BUF.

DEN at DET: The full list of teams the Lions have beat to this point: Chicago, Minnesota, Tampa, Oakland. Will people please stop paying attention to these dopes? DEN.

CAR at TEN: I have to give it to The Onion for having, far and away, the best Vinny Testaverde joke I've seen this year. TEN.

GB at KC: No comments necessary. GB.

SD at MIN: Adrian Peterson's combined stats over the last two games: 32 carries, 133 yards, 1 TD, 1 catch for 12 yards. And this is before he gets hurt. Obviously the next NFL superstar. SD.

JAX at NO: Get onboard the spectacular Quinn Gray train now, because you haven't seen anything yet - one of these games he's going to attempt upwards of TWENTY passes! JAX.

WAS at NYJ: At least Kellen Clemens has two working arms. However, WAS.

AZ at TB: I could have sworn that Arizona was 1-6 at this point. Upset Special, I guess... AZ.

SEA at CLE: This game will be a great statement as to just how pathetic the NFC west is. How else can you explain a fourth-tier AFC team beating a team that basically is being handed a division title? CLE.

NE at IND: ... NE

HOU at OAK: Totally GIDCAOTW. OAK.

DAL at PHI: Teams the Cowboys have beaten: Giants, Dolphins, Bears, Rams, Bills, Vikings. Upset Special II. PHI.

BAL at PIT: Hmmm.... I'm having a great deal of trouble caring about this pivotal AFC north matchup.... PIT