Why the Pats, Colts, Chargers Got Burned for Undervaluing the Preseason

The pre-season of the NFL won a large victory yesterday. The month-long dog-and-pony show that fans, players and coaches alike screamed to have abolished stepped up and punched them right in the throat. Clearly there is only so much it was willing to take and it should be commended for teaching the league a lesson: use me wisely, or else...

Week 1 of the NFL showed us a few interesting things about older, more experienced teams which championed the insignificance of the pre-season. Several notable clubs who openly mocked the significance of the preseason correspondingly got stood up when they arrived to the dance. Peyton and the Colts were terrible at home. The Patriots scraped by, while the Chargers manufactured defeat from certain victory. The Browns are due slightly different criticism, but are included for reasons outlined below.

Manning's bum-knee kept him out of the pre-season and the Colts offense what victimized resultantly. They looked although the plays were brand new to them and had a porous line that left the pre-seasonless Peyton drifting the in back field. Tony Dungy runs the pre-season like a corporate team-building retreat instead of a boot camp and they were on the wrong end of a 13-29 thumping from a Bears team who was unquestionably better prepared to win.

The team that still hasn't lost a regular season game since 2006, the New England Patriots also unimpressively squeaked by. Notwithstanding the devastation that followed the season-ending injury to Tom Brady, I can't be the only one who felt they should still have put the hammer down a little more against a K.C. squad who also lost their starting quarterback? The Pats had four 3-and-outs and managed to look ordinary, admittedly due to a combination of pre-season malaise and Brady-related shock.

How about the Chargers and Browns? Not really fair to burn the Chargers for losing to a buzzer-beating TD, but they they deserved to lose after surrendering 388-yards (including 68y with 2:27 remaining) and converting but 4-of-12 third downs. They were sound on the offensive side of the ball with Rivers and LT managing performances akin to the AFC championship standards, which I acknowledge begrudgingly.

The over-hyped Browns were in tough against the Dallas Cowboys, but did nothing to make this game competitive. Derek Anderson was brutal, fumbling twice while completing less than half of his throws (QB rating: 74). Early drops and subsequent disappearance of Braylon Edwards set the stage for their unimpressive 10pt performance. With a few more repetitions under their belt Edwards might have run away with that sure-TD he dropped and changed the course of the game.

The reason for their respective struggles is naturally open for debate. If you're thinking like me, then you feel these teams were overwhelmed mentally and insufficiently prepared physically. We hear endlessly about their being no substitution for the speed and intensity of a regular season game, a soundbite that seems to stress the importance of that experience in games that don't matter. So when Manning, LT and Rivers, Brady, Edwards and half of their respective teammates watch -- rather than play -- the tune-up games designed to get them into the proper rhythm, is it any surprise they bonk out of the gate?

Consider the contrast between younger teams who worked their asses off and turned themselves into winners on week one. Rather than a collection of individuals grinding in an unfamiliar groove and at varying speeds, clubs like Atlanta, Buffalo, Chicago and Baltimore hit the ground running -- most importantly, as a group travelling at the same speed in the same lane. Synchronously and as a unit these 4 teams blasted out of the gate and surprised the entire league.

Atlanta was led by Matt Ryan and Mike Turner -- both new to the organization and with something to prove. These kinds of expectations are exactly that which ensures meticulous planning and familiarization with the on-field tenancies of one another. Likewise, after re-claiming the starting role for this season, Trent Edwards and the Bills looked polished. Defense and special teams were outstanding (two special teams touchdowns vs. Seattle) and the results speak for themselves. Baltimore, another team with low-expectations and a young quarterback proved in much the same way the Bills did that using the pre-season as a spring board for excellence rather than a walk-thru or warm-up pays off immeasurably.

In a week featuring the above contrasts to approach-and-outcome the value of the pre-season has never been more controversial. The err of veteran teams who piously demanded the abolishment of the pre-season is in their complacency. They sacrifice fluency and rhythm for the good of their health, which in a game as violent and brutal as the NFL, is a trade-off that needs to be delicately balanced. Let these examples serve as a reminder that in the game of inches, nothing can be overlooked regardless of it's perceived insignificance.

Sports-Celebnalism: Morphing from ESPN to TMZ.

Fans are thrilled by walk-off jacks, pick-6's in OT and end-to-end game-winning ginos. It's only understandable that they become intrigued by the people who are responsible for eliciting these powerful emotions. However, dramatic changes in our relationship with athletes has altered the way we interact, and fulfill our desire to be associated with greatness. Physical restrictions fostered through the growth of populations, personalties, and pocket-books has created unconventional demands on increasingly-brazen media outlets.

When I recently touched on athletes in new media I facetiously argued that TMZ-Style Sports Blogs are Journalism. I was inspired then -- as I am now -- by the commentary from an MSM source. Here the South Florida Sun-Sentinel's Ethan Skolnick talks with Brooks from SbB about the direction of sports journalism. When pressed for specific changes that could incite celeb-like coverage of athletes Brooks offered:

“If sports journalists at major newspapers and magazines feel compelled to change their standards, because of the proliferation of gossip and pressure from superiors, and start reporting more off-the-field gossip.”

We are clearly witnessing this already: the value in providing consumable goods for the bottom-feeding illiterates who browse celeb rags, and the success of numerous publications who frequently post 'edgier' content has been observed and noted well. The steady increase in the E!-ish coverage of athletes is an unavoidable consequence of the demand for celebrity personalities. While relatively new to some, this phenomena is many generations in the making.

The ravenous commercialism of sport has irreparably skewed a variety of guidelines. While writers and athletes respectively wrote about and enjoyed the marked divergence in their annual income, communications evolved from radio to moving pictures to 1080p with surround. Meanwhile, assorted press outlets have exploded unto multiple platforms and information vehicles to meet the demands of the growing population.

We've come a long way from the days of getting pissed and playing bridge with Babe Ruth on the now-ancient North-East commuter trains. Extinct are the days of equal privileges for athletes and the masses, a factor paramount to our shifting media ideals and creation of the profitable genre of sport-celebnalism.

The impressive sums paid to todays athletes are increasingly jeopardizing the status of the formerly ubiquitous 'humble athlete'. Wealth and entitlement has spawned a new attitude towards the media responsible for their stardom. Slowly players' behaviour has morphed from amicable to dubious -- hows that for a cause-effect relationship? Partially shunned and wholly prideful, the delectatio morosa from certain media members is a palpable by-product of the maltreatment received from players and their organizations. Bitterness and envy surely play their role alongside the boyish motivations of those fortunate enough to make a living from kids games, but the debate rages on whether this is sufficient justification to publish scandalous off-field material.

Athletes and reporters aside, what about the impact of a third party? Ultimately the consumers decide what is to be published in both the MSM and blogosphere since their patronage guides the direction of the platform. This can be described as the inmates running the asylum, but I prefer to liken the consumer-producer relationship in the media to digging up a corpse: the purpose is to uncover the truth behind the human condition, but the outcome is generally deleterious.

Every skeleton raises the expectations for the next, leaving the limits up to the imagination of those in the business of raw and controversial. This new content is packaged to sell and there is an overwhelming amount of momentum behind it, so whatever the cause we know the effect: sport-celebnalism is here for good, and has room to grow.

Thanks for stopping in. If you enjoyed the content, click here to subscribe and come back soon. Also, Check out the radio show tonight 6-9pm by clicking here. Cheers, Derek.

Best-Ever Tennis, Russian Cheerleaders and Brett Favre v. Mats Sundin

Sometimes its the little things in life that matter. Russian cheerleaders for example will bring a smile to your face. And when they happen to be brought to your attention on the same day as the greatest tennis match of all time, everything is coming up Milhouse.

Except if you're Brett Favre, who is more than obnoxious with his persistent desire to be important. We all may make decisions in life we regret, it is unfortunate in this instance that the very conundrum facing Favre is most frequently one which ends disastrously. Few things are as sure-to-disappoint as Pacman Jones or a new Will Ferrell movie, but a pro athlete set to come out of retirement rivals our most of epic letdowns. The numbers are not in Favres' favour if the Vikings think he'll be their saviour, and I think we'd all prefer if kept his musings to a simmer and made decisions behind closed doors like a grown up.

I am confident my neighbors in the US would rather watch the clinical removal of a hangnail than another sports-news clip featuring Brett Favre rumours. As a small consolation you can take solace knowing we have endured parallel suffrage in Toronto and -- although to a slightly lesser degree -- Canada. Mats Sundin is as enigmatic and annoying as the Old Boy Favre, but notably every bit as talented and potentially valuable. He's got offers from nearly a third of the league to join their club, with the Vancouver Canucks deeming a debatable top-15 player worthy of the largest contract in the league. He's not worth all that bread, but at the risk of wasting one of the best goalies in recent memory Vancouver is desperate to put a winning club in front of Roberto Luongo.

On a rather gossipy note, Kevin Lowe dropped a bomb on Brian Burke recently and I am thrilled. The saga is well documented. Who isn't interesting isn't piqued by the successive manifestations of two executives clashing through public channels? It is truly better than fiction. In The Ego and the Id (1923), Freud said, "...the ego uses borrowed forces" which fittingly meanders us to the root cause of this quarrel: Lowe broke the a gentleman's agreement in the NHL (by soliciting a restricted free agent on Burkes' team to a very generous offer sheet) effectively nailing the stones of the Ducks GM to the wall. Slighted and betrayed, Burke pushed back and the carousel thankfully continues. Sadly, their interpersonal spat doesn't go near the real problem: salary inflation in the NHL will eventually force the league into contraction (a tactic I've long been in support.) Much of what Burke preaches has merit, but the message is often muddled by his palpable infatuation with his own grandeur. This tabloid-like feud has guised the legitimate problems like salary inflation and the nature of RFA offer sheets (which do skew the market undesirably for the league and owners). Look forwards to more on this later, as it deserves it own piece.

Thanks for reading and support the site. Check out the Cloud9 Radio show tomorrow (Tues. Listen Live here) 6-9pm and subscribe to show some love. Cheers, Derek.

Crime & Punishment: Marion Jones/IOC vs. NE Patriots/NFL

All those with aversion to parallels between sports and life need not continue reading, this one is just too rich for your blood. The turmoil surrounding the cheater, liar and fraud Marion Jones draws attention to the issues of performance enhancing drugs, human ethics, discrimination and justice.

Such weighty topics drench our moral conscience as the peoples of society and fans of athletics, and grip our emotionally-driven rationality. This scenario in particular epitomizes the phenomenal power of public outrage flipped on its backside: what happens when no one cares?

Marion Jones' story is simple. Essentially she cheated, got caught and forced the IOC to rule that she and her relay teammates will be stripped of their medals. Sad, yes. Unjust?

If we based the relative injustice on the public reaction (see: inaction), then we are to conclude that the seven non-doping members of Marion Jones' 2000 Sydney Olympic relay teams were indeed guilty by association. That no one cares is not surprising, but consider the follow:

What if, in a retroactive ruling courtesy of NFL commissioner Roger Goodell, the New England Patriots were deemed void of their 2004 Super Bowl Championship because Rodney Harrison was burned for HGH in 2007?

Too dissimilar to be relevant? Both are team sports heavily reliant on contributions from each and every individual (Harrison was All-Pro in 2004 and the anchor of NE's defense). Both rulings came long after the victorious were crowned. Both featured lengthy paper trails and longstanding associations with PED providers (see Balco & Jones, Wade Wilson and Harrison). Jones and her teammates were disgraced publicly and then shamefully stripped of their medals compounding their distress while Rodney Harrison received only a four game suspension.

The contrasting severity smacks of judicial bias and discrimination, but must be considered with the acknowledgment of the equally-contrasting tolerance of PED users within their respective organizations. NFL players are every bit the walking chemistry experiment personified by Marion Jones, Tim Montgomery, Ben Johnson and others, who have tarnished the reputation of their sport, a fact that NFL fans don't care to notice.

However, these two scenarios highlight the respective philosophies towards cheaters and their perceived wrong doing. The NFL fears the wrath of the public, the negative media frenzy that might be associated with such harsh condemnation. Instead, they hope their wrist-slapping is echoed among the masses – which culminates in the form of moans and groans, but little else.

While noble and praiseworthy, the IOC is determined -- at the expense of their own bottle line -- to ruin the careers and livelihood of those who deviate from their accepted policies. It does little to promote future Olympic athletes, but unquestionably fosters a trusting and integral competitive environment.

It may be the insignificance of the Olympics or womans athletics that has allowed this story to fly under the radar. Assuredly, if the hypothetical ruling from Commissioner Goodell came down tomorrow, the shit would hit the fan in Boston and everyone would get hit with a piece. The public outrage would make the intensity of the L.A.-Rodney King riots look like an equestrian competition. Fortunately for the otherwise peaceful Massachusetts residents, the NFL doesn't care about cheaters, and it would never make a decision at the risk of jeopardizing their bottom line.

Does this have a reflection upon our collective moral consciousness in society? Should we alleviate the impetus to cheat by allowing PED's in sport? These issues and a host more like them will remain indefinitely unresolved, perhaps another article for another day. Thoughts?

NFL: Is Tom Bradys' Boot Bill Belichicks' Brilliance?

In a league where coaches work 18h days, it's no surprise that gameplanning and probability are so vital in the NFL. It is equally intuitive that Coaches will go to extreme lengths to gain an edge. By displaying their star player with a potential flaw, the NE Patriots have indeed set up their opponents for an unforgettable thrashing at the hands of the most potent offense in NFL history. This is how the best coach in football turns his oppositions' greatest strength into its mortal flaw.

By now most NFL fans have seen this photograph of Tom Brady wearing a protective boot on his right foot one day after defeating the San Diego Chargers in the AFC championship game. Most casual observers might take this at face value, but in our world where we know less about the internal workings of the New England Patriots than the CIA, I am not one such casual observer.

If you thought it was uncharacteristic of a Superbowl quarterback showing up on the streets of NYC with a walking cast 13 days before the Championship game, you are not alone. Is this anomaly not more intriguing given that we're dealing with the best coach-QB tandem since Bill Walsh and Joe Montana? Indeed it is worthwhile to consider the possibility that Coach Belichick and Tom Brady colluded with one another to ultimately influence the outcome of the Superbowl. It's not outside of Belichick to do whatever it takes to win, but this? Really?

Yes. If Brady were legitimately injured to a point where it may jeopardize his performance in the Superbowl, in no uncertain terms would he be advertising it on a day trip Giselle Bunchens' house – a trip routinely featuring Brady and an army of celebrity press looking to gleam a prized photograph for the hot sheets and celeb rags. Both Brady and Belichick knew of the injury following the game Sunday, regardless of the extent of said injury, and both knew that any public appearance would be photographed and documented. Never one to dismiss an opportunity to exploit his opponents, perhaps Belichick proposed a visible walking cast, in favor of a slightly less significant limp or hobble about, knowing full well the potential impact of the whole affair on the Giants' preparation. Skeptical? Read on...

Consider the possibility of this unorthodox gamesmanship in concert with the defensive game plan to beat New England: rush Brady with everything you've got, take Randy Moss out of the game, and hope the secondary can hold tight coverage on the remainder of the Patriots receivers. These highly predictable strategic initiatives are imperative for the success of Tom Coughlin and the Giants, since allowing a breakdown in any one of these three vital areas will undoubtedly result in to defeat.

With a perceived decrease in Bradys' already limited mobility, one must deem it reasonable for Coach Coughlin to maneuver towards capitalizing on this considerable vulnerability. By designing more blitz packages and increasing the pressure on Brady by the Giants front seven, Coughlin is unknowingly playing right into the hands of New England. With more men devoted to the pass rush and consequently fewer men dropping back in coverage, it will create a predictable scheme for the Patriots to counter and exploit – something they have assuredly started planning for. As Coughlin plays catch-up on a moped, Belichick can grab a snack while the attendant fills up the Carrera GT.

However ludicrous and speculative you mind find this discourse on a seemingly minor detail, remind yourself what Bill Belichick will do to give his team an edge. (The answer is anything and everything). Lest we forget the scathing criticism of the Patriots manipulating their weekly injury reports, which throughout Belichicks' tenure has listed Tom Brady as “probable” with a right shoulder injury. But I guess he's just a slow healer?

It should be an easier pill to swallow when you also take into consideration what is at stake: an immortal 4^th ring for Brady and Belichick.

Look forward to much more to discussion on the Superbowl in coming days, stay tuned and enjoy the newest podcast in a few days time! Cheers, and thanks for reading; Derek.

NFL: What the World has Wrong about the Perfect Patriots.

The best team ever? Maybe not. The most potent offense of all-time? Debatable. Super Bowl XLII champions? Probably.

The fact sheet on the Patriots greatness has been written in the blood of the reports who've been slurping them all year long. The knocks, however scarce they may be, have leaked through to the back pages and focus on the perceived ineptitude of their rushing attack.

While the trend among several powerhouse NFL franchises (Dallas, Green Bay, New Orleans, Indianapolis, New England) has shifted in favor of passing to set up the run, a good tailback is still essential for anyone claiming to be a contender. Firstly, because it helps protect leads and shorten games, and secondarily because the cold playoff weather changes the scope and dynamics of your offensive game planning. The playoffs, which start in the dreaded winter season, cause havoc on the skill positions that are heavily relied upon to put points on the board. So when passing becomes more challenging due to the elements, you typically hand the ball off to your stalwart running back and hope your offensive line can manufacture some holes. It's this very factor that many mainstream talking heads have deemed New England's biggest liability and potential Achilles heel, as it is suggested that they've yet to demonstrate the ability to rush the ball with desirable proficiency.

Once again Bill Belichick has outsmarted the observers of the game; those whose job description includes accurate analysis of these critical parameters of victory (a group that also includes the 14 opposing coaching staffs his team has trampled this year). New England can run boys and girls, but heres the rub: Belichick just doesn't want them to, and for good reason.

Once the rosters are set, an NFL coaches ability to asses and exploit strategic advantages over their opponent is the primary determinate of their teams success. When two great field generals (in this case, the Coaches) face off in battle, they all plan based on the most likely course(s) of action of their opponents, it's game theory, and an extension of the Art of War. However, the best of the great generals forces their opponents into defending an attack that will never be launched through deception. The best generals attack formlessly, for the formless cannot be predicted, anticipated, nor defended, thus making it the clearest and most reliable path to victory. Only a fool fights battles he cannot win, and Belichick ensures through meticulous calculation that his team has the best chance to win every Sunday.

When breaking down the numbers, the strategy issued by Coach Belichick becomes increasingly well illustrated and transparent. Their current lead running back, Lawrence Maroney, was the secondary ball carrier last year, although he was impressive behind Corey Dillon who carried a mere 24 more times than Maroney in 2006. With Dillon out of the picture for the 2007 season, Maroney was promoted into the #1 tailback role. Enter Belichicks' genius.

It follows sound intuition that one might want to keep a pivotal piece of your championship puzzle rested and healthy, of course while brilliantly doing so not at the expense of Maroneys' learning and maturation processes. As the numbers show, Maroneys' mileage is nearly identical to his successful rookie campaign with total carries projected at only 4 greater (175 v. 179), while average yards/carry remains within 0.1(4.3 v. 4.2). Surprising are these figures given New England's pass-heavy offense, which effectively creates an average of about 4 less rushing opportunities per game. Even in the absence of the necessity to run, Belichick has quietly managed to get Maroney his essential carries in lieu of wearing him out deleteriously, all the while infatuating their defensive opposition with game planning for the Patriots lethal aerial attack.

Not only is the confidence of a young rusher effectively nurtured by these tactics, but Belichick has ensured optimal health and energy levels in highly valued, highly physical skill player. With a well rested, but battle-tested Maroney in the backfield come January, the elements will not sway the Patriots dominance, but facilitate it. Either the opposition stuffs the box to stop the climate-dependent running game, thus opening up the secondary for the pass, or they rush the passer conservatively and allow Maroney to run all over the field on them. This is the formless attack that Belichick has designed perfectly from game one. He has earned the distinction of greatness for reasons such as these – well, and that dynasty he's orchestrated in New England over the past decade.

To further recount the ways that Belichick has groomed the Patriots for greatness would result in a long-winded almanac deservedly set to music, featuring both food service and an interlude. He may not be charismatic and friendly, nor talkative or honest, but in the management of his on field personnel he has repeated proven his aptitude as an elite field general and strategic luminary. Look for Maroney to hog the ball in the second half of New England's playoff games, especially if they've got a lead on the frosty tundra of Gillette Stadium in Foxborough, Mass. Enjoy as the Patriots steamroll to 19-0 and a Super Bowl ring on the back of their reliable, rested and game-ready running back – err, and that Tom Brady guy, I've heard he's having an alright year.

On the NFL: Look closely, because it pays to pay attention.

The NFL is an interesting beast. With the exception of Brady and Manning, you never know what might happen on 'any given Sunday' – it's sad and cliché, but completely accurate. There are several critical factors that casual fans overlook when enjoying this heralded Sunday pastime. They are characterized below as simplified as possible to give those fans a better appreciation of what it takes to succeed on the gridiron.

Aside from dominating offenses that march up and down the field at the whim of the helpless defense, or the stone-wall defenses that affix the chains in place down after down, special teams can – and often does – determine the victor in the NFL these days. Couple that with the carefully orchestrated annual schedule designed to produce as many 8-8 records as possible, and it pays to dissect the game on every appreciable level.

While the minutia of the game can bog down the most sound analytic minds, therein lies the precise secret to exploiting your enemy and consistent success. This is why NFL coaches work 16-19h days and commonly sleep in their respective offices. It's why every position has its own coach, and why the quarterback watches as much film as the defensive secondary. It's a league where Belichick and Dungy are the only sure things, and it's why those inside the game are increasingly focused on fine tuning the lesser fundamentals.

Turnovers

If you had to place a bet on a game with the aid of one statistic, most would recommend terse examination of the Turnover Ratio (TR = takeaways – giveaways). The TR documents a given teams ability to change the course of the game. The importance of maintaining possession of the ball, and thus effectively controlling field position, while simultaneously stealing the ball from the other teams lead to victories. Year-over-year teams atop the TR list find themselves situated similarly in the overall standings, and this year is no exception. All of the undefeated teams (Indy, New England, Dallas & Green Bay) and other stand-outs (Pittsburgh, Tampa Bay, Seattle; all 3-1) find themselves tied for 5^th or better in this category at +3 or better through 4 games.

The consequence of a turnover is typically favorable starting field position for the opponent, something that 'Big Tuna” Bill Parcels recently touched as one of the most important factors in the game. Continuing with role of field position leads us to punt proficiency.

Punting

Punting signifies the loss of possession following the failure to convert a first down. Quite easily we make the logical extension that the teams that the best teams punt the least. Among the elite teams in the NFL thus far, only the Steelers and the Packers out of the top 10 in fewest total number of punts. To illustrate these consequences with respect to the standings, we just have to compare a few ratios. The 10 teams with the highest number of punts total a meager 35% winner percentage (WP) which projects to an average of 5.6 wins. Excluding the outlying Saints, the 10 teams with the fewest punts have a 68.5%WP, projecting to 10.97 wins.

Where punting is truly critical is fringe teams, those in the middle of pack that rely on field position to squeak out a few extra scores per game. There is a trend among those teams thought to be overachieving through the first quarter of the NFL season. The Steelers (3-1), Titans(2-1), Texans(2-2), Browns (2-2) and Raiders (2-2) leave their opponents with 80 or more yards to score greater than 46% of the time. In other words, in more than 4 of 10 times their foes must start from within 20 yards of their own goal line. This is 6 yards better than the average starting field position over the past 5 years. If this trend continues among average teams, look for their continued success.

Field Goals

Three of the top teams in the league: Indy (4-0), Pittsburgh (3-1) and Dallas (4-0) are ranked 1-3 respectively in total scores via the 3-pointer. Furthermore, when we eliminate the struggling Ravens who occupy the 4^th rank on the list, the surprise Texans (2-2) and undefeated Pats and Packers round out the top 7. While these opportunities may be fostered through their respective strength on offense, it is noteworthy to consider that field position is the difference between a punt and three points, given the same number of yards gained. Before dismissing the importance of field goals examine the New England Dynasty of the past 7 years and you'll find several instances where games were decided by last second field goals. Yes, Adam Vinatieri is a football god, but Belichick is the mastermind behind keeping those games close enough for a field goal to matter.

Other trends in favor of game management and attention to detail are left out for brevity, but team penalties (which correlate negatively to win at -0.21), reduced pass attempts over the past three years (passing correlates -0.17 with wins), and increased rushing (correlate +0.58) desire weight when determining winners in the NFL.

Enjoy the hits, the speed and precision of 60-yard passes and corner blitzing, but allow your mind to wonder unto the microscopic detail of game planning in the NFL to fully appreciate the efforts required to win on a regular basis