An Overhyped Legacy

I've been watching the NFL Network's top 100 players of all time and was greatly disappointed to see that Bart Starr was ranked #51. This means that presumably the experts feel that the following group of players were better: Joe Montana, Tom Brady, Peyton Manning, Dan Marino, John Elway, Roger Staubach, Otto Graham, Sammy Baugh, Johnny Unitas, Brett Favre (pukes), and possibly Terry Bradshaw. Some of them sure, some meh, some hell no.

I'm not going to debate this though, none of us watched Starr play, and if you've read my facebook statuses over the past few years you are probably sick of hearing Glassman and myself circle jerk to him.

So whose legacy am I going to attack for the next 5,000 words??? Favre??? Too predictable, too easy. Marino??? Nah, I think his legacy is about right among the experts. Some of the old guys like Graham, Baugh, Unitas, Staubach, or Bradshaw??? Let's keep it current, someone we all saw. Montana??? I should slit my wrists and light myself on fire if the thought ever crept into my head. Manning & Brady will retire as two of the top five ever so it's dumb to go there either.

This leaves us with my boy John Elway. It's not really a mystery how I feel about Elway. Elway though is pretty damn overrated. I've seen lists that put him as a top 3 quarterback which is asinine. Elway is probably a top 15 all time quarterback at best and I'm going to tell you why he's not even really all that much better than Buffalo Bill great Jim Kelly who gets about one zillionth as much praise.

Both Elway and Kelly came out of the 1983 draft. Elway was the 1st selection overall taken by the Baltimore Colts while Kelly went 14th to the Bills. Elway was a star athlete who was also drafted by the Yankees and debated playing baseball for a living. He put up a huge snivelly stink about the Colts and forced his way out like a bitch, similar to Eli Manning. All of this immediately put Elway on the map.

Kelly on the other hand didn't make his way over to Buffalo until 1986, instead opting to play two seasons in the USFL where he was 1984 league MVP and in those two years amassed 9,842 passing yards and 83 TD's (granted against a bunch of shit bums, but still, Jesus Christ).

From 1986 to 1996 both men played in the NFL at the same time and both the Broncos and Bills owned the AFC - which, as we'll get to, isn't saying a whole lot. The 4 or 5 best teams each season were in the NFC.

So what's the two biggest reasons why everyone strokes it to Elway? What does he got that Kelly doesn't.

1. He has a signature, all time moment - The Drive. In the 1986 AFC Championship Game Elway led the Broncos on a 98 yard touchdown drive at the end of the 4th quarter to tie the game and force overtime. The Broncos obviously went on to win.

Now anytime a team has the ball with only a few minutes left every announcer parallels the moment to Elways. It's hard to argue that this wasn't one of the great playoff moments in NFL history, shit was sick, but it makes everyone think "4th quarter comebacks" and "John Elway" like they are synonomous. (In Kelly's first AFC Championship game the Bills were too busy raping the Raiders 51-3 so there wasn't a moment like this).

2. Elway won 2 Super Bowls, Kelly didn't win any. We'll get back to this....
---------------------------------------------------------------------
From 1986 to 1993 the Broncos and Bills represented the AFC in 7 of the 8 Super Bowls (they went 0-7). Here's a breakdown of how their numbers match up in this stretch:

Pro Bowls: Elway 5, Kelly 5 - EVEN
First Team All Pro: Elway 0, Kelly 1 (1991) - ADVANTAGE KELLY
Passing Yards: Elway 26,094 Kelly 26,413 - DEAD ASS EVEN
TD's & INT's: Elway 136-115, Kelly 179-126 - BIG ADVANTAGE KELLY (I was pretty shocked at how badly Kelly rolled him here)
Win-Loss record: Elway 71-45-1, Kelly 76-42 - EVEN
Playoff W/L record: Elway 7-5, Kelly 8-6 - EVEN
Super Bowl Performances: Both fucking blew - EVEN

Let's get one caveat out of the way. The Buffalo Bills in this stretch were more talented than the Denver Broncos... easily. Thurman Thomas, Andre Reed, Bruce Smith, Darryl Talley, etc, etc

The argument could be said that John Elway CARRIED a sad group to 3 Super Bowls and all this success. I can't dispute that, he did. However these two teams didn't quite peak at the same time in this eight year stretch. This wasn't like Brady and Manning having to go through one another to get to the Super Bowl. The Broncos owned the first half of this run, the Bills had the second. They only met in the playoffs once which was the 1991 AFC Championship Game won by Buffalo 10-7. Had they peaked at the same time, I'm sorry to say Broncos fans, your boy Elway doesn't get to a single Super Bowl. The Bills would have squashed them. They were just a much better team.

This leads to another question, who exactly did Elway defeat in the AFC to make this run of dominance in the conference? Talk about STINK. I guess their big rivals were the Browns and big bad Bernie Kosar. Miami was decent in the mid 80's, besides that though who else????

Like I said earlier the top 4 or 5 teams were in the NFC every year. This was about the 49ers, Bears, Redskins, Giants, and Cowboys. In this time frame, 1984 to 1996 in fact, the NFC won 13 straight Super Bowls - 11 blow outs and 2 close games. One of those close games featured the only AFC team who was probably better and should have beaten their NFC counterpart.... the 1990 Buffalo Bills.

In Super Bowl XXV, the Bills allowed Bill Parcells and Bill Belichick to dictate the way this game was played. It was a hard hitting, grind em out, and sustaining drives kind of game. EXACTLY up the Giants alley and not what the high scoring Bills wanted. Nonetheless, Kelly led a nice little drive himself to put the Bills within a Scott Norwood 47 yard field goal of winning the game. We know how it ended... wide right and the only time the Bills would sniff a chance at a title.

In the end though, Elway and Kelly played each other to a draw during this stretch - the PRIME of both players.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Kelly went on to play 3 more seasons. He never made another pro bowl but he had decent years in 1994 & 1995. In 1995 & 1996 the Bills reached the playoffs but by this time their dominant nucleus was growing old. Kelly started to suck in his final year throwing 14 TD's and 19 INT's and it was time to hang em up.

In 1990, 91, and 92 Elway threw for 15, 13, and 10 touchdowns, yes 10. His ratings were 78.5, 75.4 and a Jamarcus Russelesque 65.7.

In 1993 and 1994 Elway bounced back with two nice years as the Broncos started to get him a few weapons but they were still pretty ordinary going 16-16. They weren't anything close to a Super Bowl contender.

Then from 1995 to 1998 Elway (and the Broncos) had a resurgence. By this point he was 35 years old. Had he hooked up with Barry Bonds folks at Balco??? What exactly happened from 1995 to 1998??

Terrell Davis. That's what happened.

Besides Earl Campbell and Eric Dickerson , no running back has had a four year run to start his career like Terrell Davis. No running back in NFL History was better in the playoffs. I won't argue this and anybody who tries to tell me another running back will be yelled down until I lose my voice. Terrell Davis played in 8 playoff games.... here are his numbers (get some tissues).

1996 Loss to Jacksonville: 14 carries 91 yards 1 TD

1997 Win vs Jacksonville: 31 carries 184 yards 2 TD's
1997 Win vs Kansas City: 25 carries 101 yards 2 TD's
1997 Win vs Pittsburgh: 26 carries 139 yards 1 TD
1997 Win vs Green Bay: 30 carries 157 yards 3 TD's - Super Bowl MVP

1998 Win vs Miami: 21 carries 199 yards 2 TD's
1998 Win vs NY Jets: 32 carries 167 yards 1 TD
1998 Win vs Atlanta: 25 carries 102 yards

Gooooood.... Loooorrrrd!!!! In 8 games he totalled 1,140 yards, 5.6 yards per carry, and 12 TD's. If you only count the two Super Bowl years (7 games) he had 1,049 yards and 11 TD's. If you stretched this pace out over 16 games (and let's not ignore that this was done against presumably the best teams the NFL had to offer when everyone knew he was getting the rock) he would have 2,398 yards and 25 TD's.

How did Elway do in this time???

1997 Win vs Jacksonville: 16-24 223 yards 1 TD
1997 Win vs Kansas City: 10-19 170 yards
1997 Win vs Pittsburgh: 18-31 210 yards 2 TDs's 1 INT
1997 Win vs Green Bay: 12-22 123 yards 1 INT, 1 TD Run

1998 Win vs Miami: 14-23 182 yards 1 TD
1998 Win vs NY Jets: 13-34 (yikes) 173 yards 1 TD
1998 Win vs Atlanta: 18-29 336 yards 1 TD 1 INT, 1 TD Run - Super Bowl MVP

These numbers certainly aren't bad, NY Jets game aside, but he wasn't asked to win games. I'll give him credit that ending his hall of fame career as a Super Bowl MVP is a pretty nasty way to do so (but TD wasn't exactly minced meat in that game either).

Pat Bowlen, Denver Broncos owner, has the famous line upon receiving Super Bowl XXXII's trophy: "This one's... for John!" What he really meant to say was: "This one's... for John... courtesy... of TD!"

Elway's longevity was impressive. He was fine taking a back seat in order to get to the promised land which I can only applaud. He remained very effective until the end, BUT he NEVER sniffs even another Super Bowl APPEARANCE, let alone win, without Terrell Davis, one of the greatest RB's of all time.

Thanks to this fortune, Elway has transformed in everyone's mind from the guy who always got rolled in lopsided Super Bowls to a "top 3 quarterback" while poor Jim Kelly has night terrors thinking about Norwood's shank which cost him and his legacy. He will NEVER be mentioned in the same echelon as Elway, a place where he belongs (or where Elway should be?). Drives me nuts....

2010 NFL Predictions

Welcome to what will hopefully be the first of many blogs regarding the 2010 season. I've been a lazy fuck since the NBA Finals but baseball is wicked boring so I'm sure no one would have cared had I written anything anyway.

Before getting to my predictions a lot of teams and story lines intrigue the hell out of me. I'm definitely teetering between considering myself a bigger fan of the Patriots or of the NFL in general. At the moment I think the latter is winning out. A combination of having seen titles in my lifetime, witnessing a few straight terrible drafts, BB making crappy transactions or lack thereof in other cases, and gambling/fantasy/survivor/blogging/CFL makes being a fan of the league more appealing. I mean I get it BB, why would you want to improve your team around a top 10 NFL player of all time still in his prime, instead please keep trading back in the draft and passing up on impact players. And by all means play hard ball with players who will help you compete for Super Bowls.

In no particular order I find myself really interested in watching the following teams and would like to see them do well

• 49ers - You all know the boner this franchise gives me. It'll be good to see them playing in January again. How can you not like Singletary either?
  
• Packers - When you hate Favre as much as me, it's really easy to pull for Rodgers & Co. I was going to throw a ton of money on them to win the SB but their odds fell from 11 to 1 down to 8 to 1 in Vegas, guess I wasn't alone. Still tossed $20 on 'em anyway.
  
• Chiefs - The Patriots-West. Charlie Weis may be a fat-ass crappy college coach but he calls a good offense. That and I got Charles in two leagues.
• Eagles/Redskins - Reid completely made the right decision, it's time to roll the dice with Kolb with all that young talent but man, trading McNabb to the 'Skins... will be crazy.
• Raiders - I'll admit, their Defense and lack of JaMarcus has me wondering if they can approach .500 or better with their soft schedule (play the NFC West this year)
• Texans - I feel for the former Oiler fans who haven't seen a playoff game since 1993.

The following teams could experience a breakout of the ebola virus for all I'm concerned

• Jets - Yeah, yeah, yeah we always hate the Jets anyway this isn't earth shattering. The thing is I'm beginning to become jealous of how they choose to approach player transactions (it doesn't help that Felger drives this point home every day on my car ride home). They trade up in the draft to take big time players, open their wallets to top shelf talent, and have a fuck you attitude. What's not to like about that? Would be nice to shut em up and hold them off another year.
• Dolphins - Quick how many teams have won a Super Bowl with a complete pussy ass diva WR instead of lunch pale guys who just do their thing? Quick, quick, quick rack your brain!!! Answer: Two. 2002 Bucs had Keyshawn Johnson who really wasn't all that instrumental in their success and the 2007 Giants had Plaxico Burress (If you said Michael Irvin smash your face into the ground for heresy. The playmaker was flamboyant and eccentric, but no diva). So don't count me in the group who is giddy to see Brandon Marshall in town. For all the hype you hear around Chad Ochocinco, TO, Marshall, Randy Moss, or any other prima donna wide receiver the fact is all they do is flap their gums and put up regular season stats... it's all they care about. Now Ochocinco is a harmless diva but Marshall has some big time problems. It's very disturbing that deceased former teammate Darrent Williams was murdered by people who intended and thought they were firing at Marshall. Have fun Dolphins fans.... it ain't gonna end well.
• Colts - Duh.
• Cowboys - Enough already we know they are hosting the Super Bowl. Guess what, the mothafuckas ain't going to be there. Talk about a franchise who, in recent years, walks with their chests out while having accomplished jack shit. The roster does look good, I'll admit that much, but I'm not throwing my chips anywhere near the center with Romo and Phillips as my QB and Coach.
• Vikings - Another year of the media Brett Favre circle jerk. I'll save you the drama. He has some gun slinging moments where he throws an under hand pass and Jon Gruden creams his pants in the booth, they win some games, maybe approach last year's success, then when it all matters Favre will brown out his pants and subtly avoid all blame in post game and any other interviews down the road. The media will make excuses and Sportscenter will cover it 24/7.

Alrighty time to get to the predictions. These are guaranteed to be very wrong. Here's the thing with predicting the NFL: You always want to pretty much pick the same group of teams who had success the prior year but you KNOW that in all likelihood there will be over 50% new division winners and playoff teams. There will be entirely different conference championship teams and a Super Bowl winner will be crowned that kind of comes out of no where, but not COMPLETELY out of no where.

Quick Example:

2008 Division Winners: Dolphins, Steelers, Titans, Chargers, Giants, Vikings, Panthers, Cardinals
2009 Division Winners: Patriots, Bengals, Colts, Chargers, Cowboys, Vikings, Saints, Cardinals - 3 of 8 were the same

2008 Playoff Teams: AFC: Titans, Steelers, Dolphins, Chargers, Colts, Ravens. NFC: Giants, Panthers, Vikings, Cardinals, Falcons, Eagles
2009 Playoff Teams: AFC: Colts, Chargers, Patriots, Bengals, Jets, Ravens. NFC: Saints, Vikings, Cowboys, Cardinals, Packers, Eagles - 6 of 12 were the same

2008 Conference Championship Games: Steelers vs Ravens, Cardinals vs Eagles
2009 Conference Championship Games: Colts vs Jets, Saints vs Vikings - Entirely Different

2008 Super Bowl Champion: Steelers
2009 Super Bowl Champion: Saints - Neither team was a huge stretch but we weren't exactly expecting them to be hoisting the Lombardi Trophy either.

So here goes... try not to predict based on 2009 results but don't be a complete dildo and pick a Browns-Lions Super Bowl either. Let's walk this fine line.....

AFC East

1st. Miami Dolphins - The AFC East has a brutally tough schedule this year. They play the AFC North and NFC North. The two strength of schedule games is what I feel determines this very tight division. The Patriots play Indianapolis & San Diego, the Jets play Houston & Denver, while the Dolphins play Tennessee & Oakland. I think this plays out a lot like 2008 where the Dolphins just scrap out enough wins to find themselves at 10-6 come season end. Two points to make on Miami.

1. I was talking to Nagle last night and he was scared about the Bills game for obvious trap reasons. When I told him I figure Miami pulls away in the 4th quarter and wins 24-13 or so, he said he didn't care if the final was 3-2, just wants the win. This is exactly their philosophy right through to Sparano. Who the hell cares what the score is just keep winning. I wouldn't be surprised if they finish 10-6 and their PF/PA is close to 0. No style points with these guys.
2. Remember, in 2007 the Dolphins went 1-15. The 2008 record of 11-5 was a bit inflated. The schedule was very easy that season. The 2009 step back was predictable. It was probably one of the strongest 7-9 seasons (had the Saints and Colts both on the ropes but blew each game) I've seen and injuries aside it was probably a better team in 2009. Sometimes you have to take one step back before you take two forward. The 1993 Patriots went 5-11 and were among the crummier teams in the league. In 1994 they came out of no where to rip off a winning streak and go 10-6 while making the playoffs for the first time in a long while. We all figured 1995 would be a coming out party but they had injuries and took a step back going 6-10. 1996 turned out to be that party with an 11-5 record and Super Bowl berth. Both those Pats and these Dolphins got the Parcells connection going on... hmm....

2nd. New England Patriots - Up until the Leigh Bodden injury I had the Patriots winning the division. Nobody has finished with a better record than the Pats in the AFC East since 2000 and 2010 will be no different. I would say 10-6 but because of those two strength of schedule games the Patriots will finish with a worse inter-conference record than the Dolphins. I also get the feeling, just like 2009, that it will be a bit maddening when you see the Patriots PF/PA differential. The Patriots will destroy some teams and lose a ton of tight games.

3rd. New York Jets - I like Rex Ryan's attitude, I love the way they sign their own impact players, I love the swagger, I really love the bamboozle job they did in getting Holmes for a 5th rounder, I like the Cromartie acquisition (17 illegitimate kids and all), I'm not crazy about signing LT the washed up dingleberry, and lastly how can you not love the defense. You're thinking, "Really, Joe, 3rd place, wtf is up with that?"

There are a few things that are going to hold the Jets back. First off, the expectations on Mark Sanchez are completely too high and unachievable. In year two he is still going to struggle at times and flat out lose a game or two for you. It's simply part of the growing process. If this team's expectations were 10-6 and they were under the radar a bit (like the Dolphins) I'd feel better, but they aren't. From Hard Knocks to the countless Super Bowl predictions the bar is wicked high for the Jets. I also think Shonn Greene is injury prone. I don't think they will be able to give him the same number of carries that Thomas Jones was able to provide. If they need to run the rock with LT for a 2 or 3 game stretch this season it's going to end up falling on Sanchez's shoulders. He's a QB that will be most effective throwing 20 passes a game or so, not 40. Lastly, could the Jets have a bigger X on their backs going into this season? To boot the Jets open the season with Baltimore, New England, Miami, Buffalo, Minnesota, Denver, Green Bay. I don't think a 3-4 or 2-5 start is out of the question.

4th. Buffalo Bills - I can tell this blog is going to be long enough as is, let's not spend any time on the Bills. Mark them down for a top 5 pick in the 2011 draft.

AFC North

1st. Baltimore Ravens - For the first time in 76 years (more like 14), the Baltimore Ravens will have a better offense than defense. I like that Flacco has already gotten his sea legs with a pretty impressive 3-2 playoff record to start his career. Couple that with the addition of Anquan Boldin (ugghhhh at least Taylor Price should make a huge impact for the Pats this season, oh wait), the studliest of running backs in Ray Rice, and I think we are looking at a team who scores 400+ points and wins the AFC North fairly easily.

2nd. Pittsburgh Steelers - Had Big Ben not gone out and unleashed his shlong then allegedly rape a girl, I'd have picked the Steelers to bounce back big time in 2010. Much like the Patriots losing Rodney Harrison in 2005, the Steelers (even moreso) were porked without Troy Polamalu. Now that the long haired, soft spoken, animal is back that defense should be flying around again.

Nonetheless it all comes back to Roethlisberger really letting this franchise down. I can't say it any better than Glassman in his predictions, "Remember when Manning missed the preseason in 08? He was bad for like 6 or 7 games before he got going. Big Ben is going to miss 4 games before he even gets to start. Too much to overcome."

3rd. Cincinnati Bengals - The offense is relying on a noodle armed QB, a couple of crazy receivers, a trouble making running back, and a rookie TE. They will NOT go 6-0 in the division again. Mark them down at 8-8.

4th Cleveland Browns - It's really too bad Hardesty went down for the year, he looked sick in the 4th preseason game before he got hurt. Mangina won't make it beyond this season, but at least Holmgren is calling the shots - I would think they become competitive in the next 2 or 3 years.

AFC South

1st. Indianapolis Colts - The other team I threw money on in Vegas. The over under on wins was 11.5 and the over paid +170. It would totally be my luck that the Colts crap out once I put money on them but doesn't 12 or more wins seem like an absolute mortal lock?

I think it's about time that this is now accepted as fact.... Peyton Manning is the greatest regular season quarterback of all time. Is this even debatable anymore after 2009? He was an artist out there. Every close game he came through. Manning pretty much runs the offense (and quite possibly more than that). You can put him down for a 13-3 record, 4,000+ yards, and 30+ TD's. Sure he's had a good team around him but there is no debate or comebacks to be made, the man is the greatest regular season QB ever, period. Part of me thinks Favre continues to play so that Manning might not break all his records - ain't happenin' Brett. Mark it down, come 2016 or 2017 when Manning hangs them up he'll have smoked all of Favre's records.

Now are the Colts approaching the greatest regular season run in NFL history?

2003-2009: 12-4, 12-4, 14-2, 12-4, 13-3, 12-4, 14-2 - Total 89-23 (.795 win %)

Here are a few more 7 year runs:

Patriots (2001-2007) 11-5, 9-7, 14-2, 14-2, 10-6, 12-4, 16-0 -- Total 86-26 (.768 win %) *If you actually go from 2003 to 2009 the Patriots are 1 game better but then you are cutting out a Super Bowl year... I just can't acknowledge it that way

49ers (1984-1990) 15-1, 10-6, 10-5-1, 13-2, 10-6, 14-2, 14-2 -- Total 86-24-1 (.779 win %)

49ers (1992-1998) 14-2, 10-6, 13-3, 11-5, 12-4, 13-3, 12-4 -- Total 85-27 (.759 win %)

Steelers (1973-1979) 10-4, 10-3-1, 12-2, 10-4, 9-5, 14-2, 12-4 -- Total 77-24-1 (.755 win %)

Quick, what's the difference between the Colts 7 year run and all these other teams? Yup, you got it 1 Super Bowl title vs multiple titles (You didn't think I'd just praise the Colts here did you?)

2nd. Houston Texans - I'm surprised there isn't a bit more hype around the Texans. The offense is going to score a ton of points again with Schaub, Johnson, Foster, Jones, Walter, and Daniels once his knee is good. The defense has quite a few playmakers in Mario Williams, Brian Cushing, DeMeco Ryans, Bernard Pollard (just puked), and rookie CB Kareem Jackson. Mark them down at 10-6.

3rd. Tennessee Titans - I don't like teams that can't pass their way back into a game. If the Titans fall behind by 10+ points I'm sticking a fork in them 9 times out of 10. They need to get ahead in games they play. It reminds me a lot of the 2009 Dolphins. They will be competitive in every game but Manning will have a few game winning drives at their expense while VY won't be able to answer in the reverse situation.

4th. Jacksonville Jaguars - Calling it now. The Los Angeles Jaguars (or potentially a name change) will begin play somewhere around 2013. What a lousy NFL city, what was the league thinking granting them a franchise over Baltimore, St. Louis, or Tennessee who also put in bids at the time?

AFC West

1st. San Diego Chargers - Losing the horribly overrated (at least the past 2 or 3 years) LT (and the painful obligation to give him 20+ touches when he didn't deserve 10), playing their division in 6 games + the NFC West = a pretty sick season. If they don't clinch the division by week 12 I'll be shocked.

Another thing worth noting is that travel tends to be brutal for west coast teams since the majority of the NFL lies on the east coast. Since the Chargers are playing the NFC West they won't have those short week cross-country flights. Look for them to challenge for the #1 seed.

Speaking of cross country flights the Patriots fly to San Diego this season, mark that L down already.

2nd. Oakland Raiders - I don't know why but I think the Raiders could be pretty good this year. Maybe the law of averages and sucking so putridly for 7 years has made me delusional about their potential turn around... almost as if they're just due because you can't suck this much forever?

Remember the best 7 year runs I listed above? Let's check out the Raiders from 2003 to 2009:

4-12, 5-11, 4-12, 2-14, 4-12, 5-11, 5-11 -- 29-83... Goooood.... Lorrrrrd!

3rd. Kansas City Chiefs - If Charlie Weis can make something of Cassel I think the Chiefs could turn around fairly quickly. There is a LOT to like about the roster. Jamaal Charles is a stud, Thomas Jones is the perfect compliment, Ponch has informed me that Dwayne Bowe attended Fitz's offseason camp and lost 30 lbs (look for a big year from him), they drafted McClusterfuck & Tony Moeaki, and this is just on offense. Then on defense Eric Berry has been compared to Ed Reed and fellow rookie Kendrick Lewis may be starting at the opposite safety position. I'm sensing another crappyish 6-10 year, but come 2012 or so they should be fighting for a wild card spot.... that is unless they have to start over at QB.

4th. Denver Broncos - Hmm so I'm not quite sure where Josh McDaniels is going with this. He's turned Cutler and Marshall into a pu pu platter of Kyle Orton/Brady Quinn/Tim Tebow (and his Nolan Ryan windup delivery) and Demarius Thomas. I'm not sure he's going to survive long enough for this to potentially pan out & turn around.

AFC PLAYOFF SEEDS

1. Colts
2. Chargers
3. Ravens
4. Dolphins
5. Patriots
6. Texans

Last team out: Steelers

Wild Card Round: Patriots over Dolphins (c'mon did you really think I'd give the final word in the AFC East to another team?), Ravens over Texans

Divisional Round: Colts over Patriots (I'm not sure who will cover Wayne, Clark, Garcon, Collie, Gonzalez, Addai, Raymond Berry, John Mackey, or anyone else), Ravens over Chargers (San Diego is unseating Indy who unseated the Steelers as playoff choke artists)

Conference Championship: Colts over Ravens - Manning leads a last minute game winning drive. All of New England throws up.

NFC East

1st. New York Giants - They may not be a very popular pick this year but I think the Giants have a nice bounce back season. Let's look at why they fell apart last year:

• New defensive coordinator that TOTALLY didn't pan out - He got shit-canned. D-Line is now back and completely healthy after Umenyiora missed all last season.
  
• Brandon Jacobs and Ahmad Bradshaw were dinged up all year - Both 100% healthy and raring to go this year.
  
• Wide Receiver play was good but a bit erratic - Steve Smith is your possession guy and Hakeem Nicks is going to be a bona-fide stud. Huge breakout year, I'm calling it.
• The Eagles finished higher last season but the transition year to Kolb will probably cost them a few games. The Redskins got better but are still weak at some skill positions. The Cowboys are the chief competition but for whatever reason the Giants own them.

On top of that, man I hate to say this, Eli Manning isn't that bad of a QB. You can at least win with him... and his pubey demeanor.

2nd. Dallas Cowboys - Every time the Cowboys are hyped up to compete for a Super Bowl they crap down their legs. The NFC East is a TOUGH division. The Cowboys play the NFC North and AFC South to boot. I just don't see Romo or Phillips being mentally tough enough to grind out challenging stretches in the season. It seems you always hear about Dallas having 3 game losing streaks mid-year. Tony Romo is a great fantasy QB but I would never want him leading my potential Super Bowl run.

3rd. Philadelphia Eagles - In my opinion, this is pretty much the Green Bay Packers. Long time QB is leaving a good playoff team. There is no debating that the correct move was made to transition the team to your younger QB. I think McNabb will be good in Washington and may kick Philly in the newtons once or twice head to head, but Kolb is going to thrive. It just isn't going to show in the standings in 2010. I do like the Eagles a lot though in 2011 and 2012 as far as a legit Super Bowl contender.... kind of like how I stroke it to the Packers in 2010.

4th. Washington Redskins - Fourth place in the NFC East is probably 7-9 or 8-8. Put the Redskins in the NFC West and they may take the division. McNabb could be the most underrated player of the 2000's and Mike Shannahan instead of Jim Zorn at head coach is like going from Rosie O'Donnell to Scarlett Johanson in a porno with Redskins fans as the lead actor.

I just don't like the rest of that offense at all. The offensive line is terrible, the running backs are geyzers, and I'm not sure there are enough threats at wide receiver. Santana Moss and Chris Cooley should have nice years but will McNabb have enough time to consistently get them the ball?

NFC North

1st. Green Bay Packers - The Packers are going to be nasty this season. Once Sydney Rice was put on the PUP list they pretty much clinched the division right then and there. I liked them to split with the Vikings, go 12-4, and win the division anyway, but now it's a slam dunk. Aaron Rodgers should probably already be called a top 5 quarterback but for dink analysts who still like to put Favre, Roethlisberger, or Rivers ahead of him, they won't be able to after 2010.

2nd. Minnesota Vikings - Brett Favre had a career season at the age of 40 in his 19th season. He had the highest QB Rating, completion percentage, yards per attempt, and fewest Int's in all his years. Can you believe that?

Actually, yes I can. This is marked proof, and one of the best arguments for pro-Brady people in a Brady versus Manning debate, that it is approximately 17,472,183 times easier to play quarterback in a dome than outside in a cold weather environment. Brett Favre didn't get any better. Anyone who says or thinks that is a fucking idiot. You don't get better at age 40. Playing in a controlled environment for at least 8 games a year makes accumulating statistics much easier. That is all that's been proven. Gee, throw a 30 yard pass into snowy wind when it's 10 degrees out or in a 68 degree dome?

I know I already proclaimed Manning the greatest regular season QB ever but what would Brady have done playing >50% of his games in a dome. Shit, what would Favre have done? Would he have 100 more TD's and 100 fewer Int's???? Maybe...

3rd. Chicago Bears - Here is a team that I have had a hard time predicting. Will Martz make Cutler better? Will Cutler keep acting like a wicked pube daddy? Will Forte bounce back? Will any of their wide receivers break out? Will Martz ever throw to Olsen? Is this defense still good?

I'm thinking.... not really, most definitely, not really, probably one of them, probably not, no. Mark them down for 7-9... I think.

4th. Detroit Lions - It's bad but I like a lot of this Lions offense. Fantasy wise I found myself grabbing Jahvid Best, Calvin Johnson, and Matt Stafford in mock drafts. Why in god's name would I want to rely on the shittiest team the past 10 years? But I think they are going to put up some points. The Lions may only win 4 or 5 games but I think they are finally on the right path and will become competitive.

NFC South

1st. New Orleans Saints - No love for the Saints from Vegas. They are 12-1 to win the Super Bowl. The PATRIOTS are 10-1!!! What dingleberry made those lines?

Then again that defense last year had approximately 935 turnovers and 261 defensive touchdowns. Those stats are a bit fluky. They allowed a ton of yards and a lot of points. Those stats aren't fluky. I think the Saints offense is still good enough to win 11 games and take the NFC South, but I don't foresee a repeat.

2nd. Atlanta Falcons - This has become a trendy team to pick to win the division and conference. Anytime booger eating John Clayton backs a team I go in the opposite direction. Has any other burn victim been given a cushier job that he sucks at more than him? ..... what's that? He's not a burn victim?! Fuck, he's ugly.

I remember Clayton coming out each week and picking the Patriots to lose in 2001. Granted this team came out of no where but he was an obnoxious turd about it. His lead story on espn.com was, "The Patriots are a Team of Destiny... Destined to lose to the Rams." Fahk you, Clayton. Why don't you get more sources off of hearsay.

I wonder how he feels now that he has Adam Schefter tossing his salad every day with spot on breaking news?

3rd. Carolina Panthers - The youngest team in the NFL, your Carolina Panthers. It's weird, just two seasons ago they went 12-4 and were legit contenders to reach the Super Bowl. That's what Jake Delhomme will do to you. Now they are a bunch of rookies with Steve Smith at wideout and two studs at running back.

Panthers fans, if they exist, are probably in for 2 or 3 crummy years while they try to turn this ship around. I would imagine they also won't be able to keep D'Angelo Williams & Jonathan Stewart together much beyond this year (which is outstanding fantasy news).

4th. Tampa Bay Buccaneers - Here is a youth movement I'm liking a lot. If Raheem Morris didn't seem so completely unqualified to do an adequate coaching job I'd have them ahead of Carolina.

They are rolling out quite a few rookie or 2nd year players who are going to play a pretty significant roll on the team (Josh Freeman, Kareem Huggins, Mike Williams, Gerald McCoy, and Brian Price). It may result in taking a few lumps in 2010 but it can only make them that much stronger in the next few years.

NFC West

1st. San Francisco 49ers - I can't even conjure up a scenario where the 49ers don't take the division by 2 or 3 games. Six games against the Seahawks, Cardinals, and Rams - absolute worst they will do is 5-1. Four games against the AFC West, Chargers, Raiders, Chiefs, Broncos - that looks like 3-1. I won't even bother looking at who else they play. If they go 3-3 in those games they are 11-5. I think they could end up as one of those wicked soft 12-4 first round bye teams just through that soft schedule - a lot like how the Bears were in 2001 and 2005, the Falcons in 2004, or the Titans in 2008.

Welcome back to relevance San Francisco.

2nd. Seattle Seahawks - I commented previously that 4th place in the NFC East is like 7-9 or 8-8. Well, 2nd place in the NFC West is probably like 5-11 or 6-10. How early could the 49ers clinch this division? Week 9?

I love that people have talked up Pete Carroll like he's going to be a good pro coach. There isn't a single thing he did at USC that makes me think he won't continue to suck in the NFL.

Let's look at what Carroll does exceptionally well:

• Schmooze recruits and work endlessly to get them to commit to USC - In the NFL you have a draft. You either take the player or you don't when it's your pick.
• Fires his team up with a lot of energy and rah rah spirit - Do you really see established veterans rallying around that? Me either.

Carroll left simply because shit is falling over the USC Football program. He knows god damn well all the illegal things that went on and he may as well cash in on a pro job instead of staying for that shit storm.

3rd. Arizona Cardinals - First off, fare thee well to Kurt Warner. My five or six loyal blog readers know how much I like Warner. Definitely sad to see him go since he can still perform at a high level but kudos in getting out before you end up getting rolled - especially when you have 19 children.

On the other side, good riddance Matt Leinart. What a whiny little bitch. Crying everywhere about being outplayed by Derek Anderson and furthermore, getting outplayed by Derek Anderson. Did everyone see Anderson last year? The guy is fucking horrible. Leinart is just another college qb who had no business being drafted as high as he was in the NFL.

He joins the likes of: Brady Quinn, Heath Shuler, Danny Wuerfel, Ken Dorsey, and in two years, Colt McCoy - I'd name more QB's but I don't know shit about college football. Any sport that relies on computers to determine a championship game is pretty dumb and not worth my while.

4th. St Louis Rams - Now that I've told everyone how little I know about college football I have to be a complete hypocrite and pretend that I know what I'm talking about.

That being said, I think the Rams struck gold with Sam Bradford. The kid has a great arm, is very poised, has a good quick delivery, and seems to have that swagger a NFL quarterback will require. The Rams have very little talent around him and this isn't going to turn around over night, but for the first time in four or five years I think things could be looking up in St Louis.

NFC PLAYOFF SEEDS

1. Packers
2. 49ers, yes the 49ers
3. Saints
4. Giants
5. Falcons
6. Cowboys

Last team out: Vikings

Wild Card: Giants over Falcons, Cowboys over Saints
Divisional Round: Packers over Cowboys, Giants over 49ers
Conference Championship: Packers over Giants - The game goes to overtime but Aaron Rodgers shows everyone what a good QB does in OT (i.e. doesn't throw a pick in his own end of the field)

Offensive Rookie of the Year: CJ Spiller - the only good thing in Buffalo
Defensive Rookie of the Year: Rolando McClain
Coach of the Year: Mike Singletary
MVP: Aaron Rodgers <----- Take this one to the bank
Offensive Player of the Year: Rodgers
Defensive Player of the Year: Troy Polamalu

Super Bowl Prediction: Green Bay Packers over Indianapolis Colts
MVP: Aaron Rodgers

So how did I do?

Did I pick at least 50% new division winners? 2009 - Patriots, Bengals, Colts, Chargers, Cowboys, Vikings, Saints, Cardinals. My picks - Dolphins, Ravens, Colts, Chargers, Giants, Packers, Saints, 49ers. 5 new teams out of 8: CHECK

Did I pick at least 50% new playoff teams? 2009 - Colts, Chargers, Patriots, Bengals, Jets, Ravens, Saints, Vikings, Cowboys, Cardinals, Packers, Eagles. My picks - Colts, Chargers, Ravens, Dolphins, Patriots, Texans, Packers, 49ers, Saints, Giants, Falcons, Cowboys. 5 new teams out of 12: NOPE, but not terrible.

New Conference Championship teams? 2009 - Colts vs Jets, Saints vs Viking. My picks - Colts vs Ravens, Packers vs Giants: NOPE, 1 repeat team which isn't awful and out of the question

Surprising but not so surprising champions? Green Bay Packers: Hell no, this isn't going out on a limb at all.

So there you have it, my terrible predictions in which I can't even follow my own guidelines. Hope you enjoyed all 50,000 words of it.

Game 7 & Other Dick-Punch Losses

A lot of my views are pretty in line with Glassman's but I wouldn't say quite that harsh. I don't think the game was fixed nor do I think Stern benefited in any way with one team winning or losing. Had this happened in Game 6 to get us to a Game 7 then I would be a bit more on board.

My thing is this... through 3 quarters of the game last night the two teams were allowed to bang. Dave says it perfectly when he mentions the amount of free throws attempted by each side. The sudden urge to call a tight game in the 4th quarter was ridiculous. As a matter of fact, I told Nagle before Game 7 that if the game is called tight the Lakers would win in a rout whereas if the teams were allowed to play it would be much more beneficial to the Celtics (which it was).

Basically had refs called the entire game the way they called the 4th quarter the Lakers would have won by 25 points.

I could make up my own analogy about this situation, but I heard Tony Massarotti say it perfectly this afternoon. This is equivalent to watching a baseball game where through the first 7 innings the strike zone was very big, but then at the end of the game the ump decides, ok, I'm taking over, and shrinking it down to nothing. You just don't see that, why would you see that?

I have absolutely no problems with the Lakers beating the Celtics legitimately, and they may have anyways if the refs swallowed the whistles. But.... we'll never know, and it's a god damn shame.

So now where does this rank in dick-punch losses for New England teams in recent memory..... I got it ranked #4....

Ladies and Gentlemen, your top 3 brutal losses (in reverse order).

#3. 2006 AFC Championship Game. Colts 38 - Pats 34

Patriots beating the Colts 21-3 then the Colts offense goes bananas in the second half, there are a few rotten PI's, Tom Brady & Troy Brown doesn't convert a game clinching 3rd down, Reggie Wayne fumbles right to himself, then Brady ends the game with a pick. To make matters worse douche bag Peyton Manning won the Super Bowl two weeks later and held up what should have been Brady's fourth trophy.

#2. 2007 Super Bowl. Giants 17 - Pats 14

To this day I would honestly say I think about this game a few times a week. It will haunt me until the day that I die that the Patriots didn't cap off their historic amazing season. Finally a team with the balls to go for perfection (unlike the pussy Colts - how'd that work out Pollian?) then losing it in the final 90 seconds of the Super Bowl cuz some 5th string WR caught a desperation quacker off the side of his helmet. Historically this is the worst loss in my lifetime since history was on the line. However.....

#1. 2003 ALCS Game 7. Yankees 6 - Red Sox 5

The only game to make me cry like a little girl. Absolutely agonizing defeat when all we knew as Red Sox fans was 85 years of this very same crap.

So in conclusion Celtics fans.... well I don't really know where I am going with this, but now I'm going to go pop in the 2001 Patriots America's Game DVD... I need to cheer myself up.

Game 7 Venting.... Glassman

Anyone who needs to vent after Game 7 feel free and I'll post it... I know Dave needed to, so without further ado, here's his take:

THE NBA: WHERE FIXED CHAMPIONSHIPS HAPPEN



The Fakers. It's not exactly a clever nickname but it couldn't be more fitting really could it? Fake people, fake fans, fake city full of fake boobs, a fake team in a fake league run by a fake commissioner, and most importantly, fake championships.

With that said, here my exact words entering the 4th quarter:

"The refs are actually calling this game even right now. There's been maybe 1 or 2 bad calls either way"

Given what happened, it's amazing that I actually made this statement. But should we really be surprised?

Flashback to January. LA at Boston. Boston up by 1. Seconds to play. Pierce goes to his step back shot but has a hand on Artest as he stops a la Michael Jordan on Bryon Russell. Money and the foul. C's up 3 and will win. Oh wait.. why is Artest in the 3rd row? Huh? The foul was on Pierce. I recently watched this game deciding call on YouTube and it was an even more putrid call than I remember. Artest deserves an emmy for that flop and the ref deserves to be executed for calling it.

Now let's go back to game 7. I had just made my bold statement. C's were up 6 I believe. Gasol takes a jump shot with Glenn Davis in his face. There is no contact. Swish and one. Ugh, AWFUL call. Ok, no big deal. It's just one bad call right? Kobe has the ball behind the 3 point line with Allen defending. Kobe does the move where a player tries to get a foul because Allen's right hand was in the air over Kobe's arm. Foul. 3 shots. Are you fucking kidding me? They call that? In this game?

After everything they've let go? Artest shoulder tackle into Pierce and banks it in. Foul. What the FUCK is going on? And now here it comes...

With 4 minutes left in the 4th quarter, Llama Gasol had the ball on the baseline and was being guarded by KG. KG put his arms in the fetal position and turned his side to Gasol as Gasol rose up over him and missed a shot. Foul.

It was with this shot that game 7 was decided. Not because LA had the lead. Not because it was a great shot. No. It was because that call was the 4th awful, attrocious call in a row that favored the Lakers. In a game where players were ripping each others heads off for 3 quarters, suddenly standing next to a player was enough to committ a foul - as long as you were wearing green while standing there.

At that point, I realized the Celtics would not be allowed to win this game. I refused to watch another second of this debacle. With 4 minutes left, I simply walked outside and waited until the game ended. Yep, you read that right and many friends can confirm it. I absolutely, positively refused to watch anymore of a game that was so obviously fixed. I almost went back in once but was told a 100% clean block on Kobe Bryant had been called a foul.

What is even more mind boggling about all of this is that the Lakers were taking jump shots. They weren't being aggressive. 3 of the 4 rotten fouls I named above were JUMP SHOTS!!!!

For 3 quarters, these teams played the same way. Tough defense and desparate, bad offense. Not one thing changed in the 4th quarter and yet take a look at the Free Throw numbers.

1st - 3rd Quarter: LA 14, Boston 11 (rough average of 5/Quarter & 3.7/Quarter)
4th Quarter: LA 23, Boston 6

These numbers are staggering. 23 to 6 in the 4th versus 14 to 11 for the first 3 quarters. Any rational, respectable, human being with half an ounce of common sense can absolutely agree that that reeks of fix. Had Jack Nicholson been officiating, there would've been less foul calls on the Celtics. Yet despite not changing their style of play one bit, the Lakers received more than QUADRUPLE the FT'S in the 4th quarter as they did in any other quarter.

What I want to know is why? I want to find David Stern and beat this information out of him. Why Stern? Why fix this game?

How could you do this to all those diehard Celtic fans who poured their heart and soul into every game? Who lost sleep every night before a game and every night after a loss? To hand another title to the arrogant, bandwagon, cocky, undeserving, condescending, assholes that are the LA Lakers is despicable.

Now hard working, good guys like KG, Paul Pierce, and Ray Allen will end their competitive careers as losers while evil, whiny, arrogant pricks like Phil Jackson, Kobe Bryant, and Derek Fisher walk out as winners? Whatever happened to good things happen to good people?

What's worse is that most of their faggot fans are so busy sucking Kobe's dick that they won't admit that any of their titles were fixed. ARE YOU FUCKING BLIND? 23 FTs to 6?? SIX!!! Sound familiar Kings fans? Until your team is on the wrong end of a fix, you'll never know how it feels. I always thought I understood what happened to the 2002 Kings. I was wrong. It wasn't
until last night that I finally got it.

I will never again watch a live NBA game. I will always secretly root for the Celtics and against the Lakers but I will not watch. This is after 23 years of watching my Celtics faithfully every year. I will never acknowledge this Lakers title or their 2002 one. Ask me how many titles they have and I will answer 14.

In 27 years, I have never, EVER felt this cheated in any walk of life. Everywhere you turn, people are talking about it. I checked countless forums, facebook, and even yahoo answers last night. Every other question is about the refs and the fact that this game was fixed. I guess it is comforting to know that people all over the country are just as outraged and that somewhere... 3,000 miles away... there are millions of people in Sacremento who truly understand.

NBA Finals and more random thoughts

Warning: I'm pretty jacked up for tonight's game so everything written below has a bunch of swears and foul language... if this offends you, too fuckin' bad :)

The NBA Finals kick off tonight after another ridiculous 76 day lay off. Hopefully by August the season will be wrapped up... here's a list of some random thoughts and opinions to help ya kill a little time at work.

- The 2-3-2 playoff format really ought to go away in all sports, and especially in basketball where home court means more. I could argue that the road team has a tougher challenge to wrap things up at home since game 5 is at home instead of game 6 but then again eff the road team, how about you earn home court advantage. Instead I'll steal this directly from Larry Bird, the home team *should* play game 5 at their place. This is often a tremendously important game that can tip a series in one team's favor. It's stupid that this game is played by the team with the worse win/loss record. All NBA series up to this point follow the much better 2-2-1-1-1 format. From what I understand the reasoning is for the national media to travel less. If I were David Stern I'd hold a press conference announcing the cancellation of the 2-3-2 format. When the first whiny ass media member stated to me that this isn't fair for them, I'd pause, cough gently, clear my throat for a solid 30 seconds then calmly say, too fucking bad you pussy... then walk away.

- I was watching a show on the 1960's Boston Celtics and really I couldn't be more impressed. You look back and see 11 titles in 13 years and you just figure, well they had the best team and players therefore back then you just plow through the competition. However the Celtics didn't always have the best record in their own division. They twice finished 2nd and in 1969 finished 4th. During this time frame though the Celtics went a perfect 9-0 in Game 7's. SICK

Just about every season in this run they had to go through Wilt Chamberlain the most dominant scorer in NBA history.

The best moment to me is in this clip after the 1969 NBA Championship: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j26xl9HP758

If you skip to the 7:06 mark you can see abc's interview with Bill Russell. You can tell the man poured his guts out as he's at a loss for words to start the interview. This was Russell's final game and just hearing him speak I can't see how any teammate wouldn't want to run through a brick wall for the man.

I rescind my Lakers post as the greatest dynasty in NBA history!!!!

- Just kidding about the last remark, it's definitely a very open debate. I thought of a point that I missed in my write up....

Basically everyone (especially in this area) has to realize the question is NOT who has had the better of the Celtics-Lakers rivalry. We know this answer, but instead which team has had the most success in franchise history....

always think of the good stuff afterward, oh well

- Turning my attention to a few things in baseball that piss me off....

1. Jim Joyce - I won't beat this to death, just call the guy out, a fucking perfect game trumps you trying to call a close play safe. It's not about you ya tard. You shouldn't have had to even apologize, just call him out to begin with.

2. Bud Selig - Not overturning the call... pretty good decision (thick sarcasm)... baseball is so gay, I hate hate hate hate the stupid purist bull shit.... Pitchers hitting is worse than watching nascar, the lack of replay is unacceptable, the lack of accountability in the steroid era both in the game and in the media is a joke... I still love the game but I kind of feel until I have kids of my own who start playing little league or softball, baseball may slide down and stay at #3 or #4 on my sports radar...

3. I heard Bobby Valentine on ESPN boasting about the wonderful parity in the MLB. Which is fine, he's right a lot of teams are doing really well. He then pointed out that the last 5 world series champs have been different (White Sox, Cardinals, Red Sox, Phillies, Yankees)... sure that's great

Then the dink says well the NFL has the same teams every year... pauses... except the Saints last year....

Well, Mr. Valentine ... The year before we had the Cardinals in the SB for the first time ever, 2 years before that the Bears and Colts for the first time in a trillion years, the year before that the Seahawks for the first time, the year before that the Eagles for the first time in forever, the year before that the Panthers for the first time ever, the year before that the Bucs for the first time ever and Raiders first time in forever, 2 years before that the Ravens first time ever, year before that Titans first time ever and Rams first in a while, year before that Falcons first time ever....

As a matter of fact here are the NFC Champs going backwards... I'll stop once the same team has been there on my list 3 times... Saints, Cardinals, Giants, Bears, Seahawks, Eagles, Panthers, Bucs, Rams, Giants (there's 2), Rams (2), Falcons, Packers, Packers (2), Cowboys, 49ers, Cowboys (2), Cowboys (3).... 18 years it takes and 13 diff teams played in the SB

Translation... shaddup Bobby

- I guess it's always relative but man right now the Lakers are so far #1 in my team hatenicity it isn't even funny... then again football is about 3 months away... the Colts will probably reclaim this spot... as for the Yankees - read above, baseball is fading mcgee in my mind

- My prediction for the finals is the Celtics will win in 6... the Lakers are still a soft, fruity, snively, showtime wannabe, lame ass, oooh look at us we are a celeb team... I don't want to hear about how they dismantled the big bad tough Suns or the Jazz...

And if I'm wrong... Nagle... I will come back here and write a big long post about how horribly wrong I was and how great the Lakers are... I don't expect to write anything, go celts!

Greatest Franchise in NBA History Debate

The two greatest franchises in NBA history are the Boston Celtics and Los Angeles Lakers. There is no arguing this statement. However there is plenty to argue about regarding which of these two is the best. Below is Glassman's argument for the Celtics and my argument for the Lakers. Enjoy!

Boston Celtics - by Glassman

THE NBA'S BEST FRANCHISE: BOSTON or LA?

When you look at these two teams, it's immediately obvious that they are the two best teams in NBA history by light years. Combined, they have 50 finals appearances and 32 championships. More than 50% of all NBA champions are either from Boston or LA. That's just insane.

The Lakers are a finesse team. They play offense. They score points and they look good doing it. It's cool to be a Lakers fan. The Celtics are a team built on hard work and effort. They play defense. They're clutch. They play ugly, scrappy games and find ways to win them.

But the obvious question becomes - Which franchise is better?

The simple way to answer this is to say that Boston has 17 titles to LA's 15 and therefore they are better. Afterall, it's all about winning the title. Fans don't care about the details as much such as: regular season win % or playoff appearances - both of which the Lakers have more of.

Rather than take the easy way out, let's examine how these two great franchises arrived at their respective titles.

As you will see, the Lakers have been handed success time and time again in the form of hall of famers falling into their laps, while the Celtics have had to earn all of their titles through hard work and good draft picks. I'm not saying the Lakers didn't work for their titles but given the amount of opportunities they've been given, they have severely underachieved. Read on and you will see what I mean. Further, Boston is clutch in the playoffs. They are 17-3 in the finals. LA finds as many ways to choke in the finals as to win. They are 15-15 in the finals.


So let's begin...


THE EARLY YEARS 1950-1969

The 50's Lakers were the 1st NBA dynasty and they owe it all to George Mikan, the most dominant center of his time. Thing is, the Lakers didn't draft Mikan. He had already been playing professional basketball for years and was the best player hands down. When his original team (the American Gears) folded, its players were put into a draft for the 11 NBA teams to select from. Every team had a 9% chance of winning the rights to Mikan and wouldn't you know it, the Lakers won that pick. As a result, they won 5 titles in 6 years.

The Celtics took over as the powerhouse team in the late 50's with GM and coach Red Auerbach building a team the old fashioned way. Good trades, great drafts, and hard work. Auerbach's system was revolutionary and completely changed the game of basketball. He invented the fast break, tough defense, and the 6th man. When you combine this system, the best coach in NBA history, and extremely talented players it's a recipe for success. The Celtics would win 11 of the next 13 championships including 8 in a row. I can't put into words how impressive that is, so I won't try.

During this great run of titles, Auerbach drafted the following:

1956- Bill Russell*, Tom Heinsohn, KC Jones (probably the absolute most sickest draft any NBA team ever had)
1957- Sam Jones
1960- Tom "Satch" Sanders
1962- John Havlicek aka "Hondo"
1969- Jo Jo White
1970- Dave Cowens
*Bill Russell was technically acquired in a trade on draft day. Red traded future hall of famer and all-star Center Ed Macauley for Russell. I point this out only because the trade was seen at the time as a balanced one. It wasn't Dickfuck McGee for Wilt Chamberlain like all the Laker trades were.

All of these draft picks have had their numbers retired and most are in the hall of fame. It's incredible that a team that was so dominant could actually find this kind of talent in the draft.

The Celtics didn't beat just anybody for their 11 titles though, a staggering 7 of the 11 titles came against the Lakers. In fact, the Lakers did not win a single title in the 60's. They lost EVERYTIME. The worst of these HAS to be 1969 though.

In 1969, the power of the league shifted when reigning MVP Wilt Chamberlain, the most dominant center of his time, was traded to the Lakers for... get ready for it now... Darrall Imhoff (the Knicks center who Chamberlain scored 100 points on), Jerry Chambers, and Archie Clark. I'll sum it up like this: 3 stinkin' piles of garbage were traded for the best scorer/rebounder the game had ever seen. What it came down to is that Chamberlain wanted out of Philly and he wanted to go to a winner. This gave the Lakers, Jerry West, Elgin Baylor, and Wilt Chamberlain. There are 3 major positions in basketball and one could argue that the Lakers had the best player at all 3. Surely that would be enough to beat the now older than dirt Celtics? Nope. The Celtics defeated these Lakers 4-3 in a huge upset. LA led 2-0 and had home court. No team had EVER lost a finals series with a 2-0 lead but the Lakers managed to find a way. Boston took game 7 on LA's home court in a wild finish 108-106.


THE MIDDLE AGES 1970-1995

After 1969, many of the Celtics retired including Bill Russell. Boston fell to Earth in 1970 but they still had a core of guys leftover - Havlicek, White, and Cowens. Despite having a stacked team, LA won just one title in 1972 while also losing 2 more in 1970 and 1973.

Boston rose again in the mid 70's and won 2 more titles in 1974 and 1976 with Auerbach as the GM and Heinsohn as the coach running Red's system. The players and coach that led this charge were all drafted and developed by the Celtics.

In 1975, reiging MVP Kareem Abdul-Jabbar, the most dominant center of his time, was lured from the Bucks for a big contract and the chance to play for the Lakers. At this point he already had won 3 MVP awards. He was traded for... (drum roll) Walt Wesley, Elmore Smith, Brian Winters, Dave Meyers, and Junior Bridgeman. In summary: 5 rotten pieces of shit for the best center in NBA history (in my opinion).

The 80's saw the rivalry renewed. The Celtics drafted Larry Bird in 1979. In 1980, Red traded the 1st and 13th picks in the draft for 2nd year big man Robert Parish and the 3rd pick. With the 3rd pick he drafted Kevin McHale. Again, you see Boston acquiring top talent via the draft and smart trades.

These Celtics would win 3 titles in 5 tries with both losses coming to the Lakers. LA was certainly the better team of the decade taking 5 titles in 8 tries. LA's 1985 victory over Boston marked the first time that the Lakers had beat the Celtics in the finals. The 1987 rubber match was marred by the fact that Len Bias - who many compared to Michael Jordan - had died of a drug overdose when he was drafted by Boston in 1986.

Boston met tragedy again when another star player died. This time it was Reggie Lewis. The deaths of Bias and Lewis set Boston back by decades and it would be a long time before they would win the finals again.

Neither franchise would win in the 90's. LA made it there in 1991 but they were old and soundly beaten by Chicago.


THE CURRENT ERA 1996 to PRESENT

In 1996, Shaquille O'Neal, the most dominant Center of his time (anyone else notice a pattern here?) was traded to the Lakers... oh wait, no he wasn't traded... he just went there "because". For some odd reason, players in the NBA love to go to LA. Especially, big dominant centers. O'Neal led the Lakers to 3 titles in 4 appearances in 2000, 2001, and 2002.

Had it not been for an arrogant, enormously huge prick, LA could have more titles. However, Kobe Bryant just couldn't stand that Shaq was "the man" and his constant bitching, crying, and whining was all Shaq could take. Even the reserved Phil Jackson left briefly.

However, after another early playoff exit in 2006, Kobe was now crying, bitching, and whining about not having enough help. You gotta love irony, haha. In 2007, LA stole - er, I mean traded for - Pau Gasol. Gasol was already an established, dominant Center, blah blah blah, you know the deal. In return LA sent future hall of famers Kwame Brown, Javaris Crittenton, Aaron McKie, and some draft picks. Except that none of those bums will be in the hall of fame and I'd bet my life that none of them are even in the NBA anymore.

However, in 2007, the Celtics did some trading of their own. Old veterans Ray Allen and Kevin Garnett were looking to play for a winner and the Celtics were shopping. The C's essentially traded away their whole team and all of their draft picks to form "the big 3".

Naturally, in 2007, Boston played LA in the finals. EVERYONE was picking LA in 4 or 5. 9 out of 10 experts picked LA. What a bunch of fucking idiots. Boston beat LA in 6, just as every C's fan had predicted, and they closed it out with the ultimate "fuck you, in your face" game beating LA by 39 in the clincher in Boston. To add insult to injury, Boston pulled off the biggest finals comeback ever in LA in game 4 in front of their arrogant, annoying fans by coming back from a 24 point deficit. Yet another finals choke job by the Fakers.


I'll end this with 5 quick reasons why the Celtics are better.

1) The Celtics are more successful. They have 17 titles and 31 hall of famers. The Lakers have 15 championships and 16 in the HOF. Boston owns a dominating 9-2 edge over LA in the finals, a 40-27 edge in the playoffs, and a hefty 152-120 edge in the regular season.

2) The Celtics are one of the original franchises. Their best talent (Bird, Russell, Cousy, Havlicek, Pierce, McHale, Auerbach) was drafted or traded for at a young age and developed in the C's system.

The Lakers, by contrast, are nothing but hired guns. They would have EXACTLY ZERO CHAMPIONSHIPS if they didn't pay top dollar to lure Kareem, Chamberlain, Shaq, Gasol, and Phil Jackson away from their original teams to live in Hollywood. Hell, even the team itself was stolen from it's original city.

3) Russell is the Jackie Robinson of basketball. One of the pioneers who broke the color barrier. First black coach in sports. The Celtics were the first team to start 5 black players.

4) Boston is a better sports town. Blue collar diehard fans. LA is filled with transplants and celebrities and the team priced real fans out of the Staples center long ago.

5) Kobe Bryant is easily the most hateable player the NBA has ever known. Outside of LA fans does anyone like him? If you're not a Laker fan, then you most likely hate the Lakers. They're the Yankees of basketball.



Los Angeles Lakers - by yours truly

Let me begin my post by letting it be known throughout the legion of my 7 or 8 blog readers that I am a Celtics fan through and through. More than just a Celtics fan though, I despise the Lakers. Kevin McHale clotheslining that turd Kurt Rambis is something I could watch forever on a loop. There is an endless list of the things I hate about the Lakers. I hate how rooting for the Lakers is cool. I hate their stupid colors. I hate that going to a Lakers game seems to be more about who you'll see in attendance than watching the team play. I hate that no matter what city you watch on tv there are 4 or 5 random pubes wearing a Kobe jersey even though the Lakers aren't playing. I hate how the Lakers are always a soft fruity finesse team. I hate how the team clearly had the name Lakers because of all the lakes in Minnesota but now it makes about as much as sense as the Utah Jazz. I hate that I still think "Lakers" is a pretty cool team name anyway. I hate that big time free agents always want to be in LA over any other city. I hate the absolutely attrocious calls I'd see in the Kobe/Shaq playoff era. I hate that it is basically fact that the refs took the 2002 NBA title away from the Sacremento Kings and gave it to the Lakers yet the douche bag Laker fans still have the nerve to call them the Queens. And I especially hate that the Minneapolis/Los Angeles Lakers are the greatest franchise in NBA history.

I know you are probably muttering to yourself, "But wait a minute, Joe, the Celtics have 17 championships to the Lakers 15. Head to head in the finals the Celtics are 9 - 2 against the Lakers. "

The fact of the matter is of the Celtics 17 championships 11 of them came between 1957 and 1969. In this time the Celtics were 7 - 0 against the Lakers. Any Laker fan or rational human being on the planet can absolutely positively agree that the Celtics dynasty during this time is the greatest in all sports history. There is just no disputing the incredible dominance.

However, the Celtics team history stretches from 1946 to 2010, while the Lakers is from 1948 to 2010. If you cut out this thirteen year stretch of dominance you are left with 51 more Celtics seasons and 49 Lakers. In this time frame, it isn't even close who is the better team.

Nonetheless, I cannot pick and choose which years to count and which to avoid in my argument. I will give you the cold, hard facts of the Celtics 64 year history and the Lakers 62 year history.

Fact #1 - The Boston Celtics have won 17 NBA Championships. The Los Angeles Lakers have won 15.

Of the Celtics 17 NBA titles 2 came in the 1950's, 9 in the 1960's, 2 in the 1970's, 3 in the 1980's, 0 in the 1990's, and 1 in the 2000's. This includes a 22 year gap between titles in 1986 and 2008.

Of the Lakers 15 NBA titles 1 came in the 1940's, 4 in the 1950's, 0 in the 1960's, 1 in the 1970's, 5 in the 1980's, 0 in the 1990's, and 4 in the 2000's.

The number of teams in the BAA/NBA from 1946-1947 to 1968-1969 ranged from 8 to 14. In the 1970's this grew from 14 to 22 teams. In the 1980's this reached 25 teams. In the 1990's there were 29 teams. Then in the 2000's the Charlotte Bobcats made it 30 teams.

Couldn't we all agree that it is far easier to win an NBA title when you are 1 of 8 teams as opposed to 1 of 20 something or even 30? I also would assume that free agency and salary caps didn't loom over every franchise back then either.

I'm sure we'd all agree that the New England Patriots winning 3 titles in the 2000's when they competed against 32 teams in a free agent/salary cap era was more impressive than the Green Bay Packers of the 1960's who basically could keep players throughout their career. It's not to say we don't tip our cap to Green Bay but there are just far fewer obstacles.

Jumping back to the Celtics - Lakers, the Celtics won 11 titles when the league was miniscule in size to the Lakers 5 titles. Since this time (1970 and forward) the Celtics have won an additional 6 titles to the Lakers 10.

Fact #2 - The Celtics have made 20 NBA finals while the Lakers have made it to 30 (these numbers do not include 2010 - both teams could notch another appearance).

It's easy to crap on the Lakers for losing so many NBA finals but wouldn't reaching the finals be greater than not reaching the finals? The 10 fewer seasons the Celtics did not make the finals correlate to them having lost sometime BEFORE the finals.

Here's an example of what I mean. The Celtics made the finals in 1984, 1985, 1986, and 1987. The Lakers made it in 1984, 1985, and 1987. Each team won 2 titles and the Lakers went 2 - 1 against the Celtics over these 4 years. So who had the better run.... THE CELTICS!!!!! The head to head didn't matter, the Lakers forgot to show up in 1986!!! They lost to the effin' Rockets before reaching the finals!!! Reaching the finals > Not reaching the finals.

I can make the same argument for 2008 & 2009. The Celtics had 1 title (over LA), the Lakers had 1 title but made it both years. Who had the better two year period? The LAKERS!!!! In my opinion it is always best to have made it as far as you could!!!

Also think about this, the Lakers have made 30 (possibly 31) NBA Finals in there 62 year history. Wouldn't one be impressed with a team who made the playoffs 50% of the time, let alone the finals?

Fact #3 - The Celtics have made the playoffs 48 times while the Lakers have made it 57 times.

To put this in perspective the Lakers have NOT made the playoffs 5 times!!! That's just stupid. They failed to reach the playoffs in 1958, 1975, 1976, 1994, and 2005. The longest stretch not making it was 2 seasons. Year after year, generation after generation you can always count on the Lakers to be a dominant force. From Mikan, to West, to Baylor, to Chamberlain, to Magic, to Kareem, to Shaq, and to Kobe the Lakers have just trotted out absolute superstars for 62 years!

The Celtics have made the playoffs in 48 of 64 seasons which certainly is outstanding as well. However since the 1986 title the C's have fielded some pretty craptacular teams - many of which were strung together for years at a time. This includes teams that lost 50, 49, 67, 46, 31 (in a strike year of 50 games), 47, 46, 49, and 58 games.

There is no disputing that the Lakers have never had a lull in their dominant franchise history. The Celtics were a bit top heavy in that their former years were by far and away their most formidable.

Fact #4 - Lady luck sometimes needs to be on your side.

I'm by no means attributing either team's success entirely on luck but you do need to get some good breaks along the way. The Celtics had to deal with the tragic loss of two immensely talented players that could have helped extend their run into the late 1980's. Losing Len Bias and Reggie Lewis were two very large blows to the Celtics success. In the Celtics 67 loss season of 1997, they had two lottery draft picks. All anyone could envision was how good Tim Duncan and Keith Van Horn would look in Celtics green. Low and behold the C's ended up with the 3rd and 5th picks that year.

Lady luck was kind to the Lakers when Chris Wallace and the Memphis Grizzlies traded Pau Gasol to the Lakers for a bag of pubes and some used toilet paper. The Lakers were also pretty fortunate that the Charlotte Hornets felt it was smart to trade Kobe Bryant for Vlade Divac & a bin of beard grooming kits.

All in all, when you comb through the facts - fuck I hate to say it - the Lakers are the greatest franchise in NBA history. And what makes me even more miserable is that this 62 year run of dominance isn't going to stop any time soon, unless that slut Lady Luck decides to stop sleeping with those bastards out west.

Quit Being a Bitch

I will admit this. I'm very late in coming over to the Lebron James hateration club. As a matter of fact I didn't really hate Lebron at all. I will always of course root for the Celtics but should they fall I would probably rest my rooting interests on "The King."

There are a number of reasons for this:

1. I hate Kobe, I hate the Lakers, and I hate their stupid fans a ton - This is the NBA. It's a league where your Cinderella feel good teams may win one round but they sure as shit aren't winning a championship. Therefore to stave off another Lakers gay ass championship I will put my alliance with a team and star player who I think could beat them. So out of necessity I would pull for, wouldn't quite say root for, the Cavs n James.

2. Cleveland deserves a title - If you think New England was ever down on its sports luck you haven't met our friends in Ohio. Cleveland has three professional sports teams: Indians, Browns, and Cavaliers. Of these three teams the Browns were the tits in the 50's and 60's. That's it. The 1964 Browns are the last Cleveland team to win a title. Since that time these fans have dealt with: John Elway raping them in the 1986 AFC Championship with The Drive, Earnest Byner blowing the AFC Championship game the next year with The Fumble, a boner of a loss to the Raiders in I believe either 1980 or 1983 where they were down a point and instead of running to set up a FG threw an INT, the Browns being moved to Baltimore, no football from 1996 to 1998, the New Browns coming in and sucking for 10+ years, the Ravens (the old Browns) winning a Super Bowl and being a perennial playoff team, the Indians getting good directly as a result from the strong vibes of the Major League movies, the Indians then blowing the 1995 World Series to the inferior Braves, the 1997 Indians & namely Jose Mesa REALLY blowing the World Series to the Marlins, the 1990's Indians in general never winning a championship despite being so dominant, the 2007 Indians blowing a 3 games to 1 lead to the Red Sox where a win left them against the inferior Rockies, the Cavs losing in 1989 on Michael Jordan's famous buzzer beater over Craig Ehlo, the team sucking giants balls for a good 10 years, then landing a franchise saving first pick in James, who still hasn't delivered because he hasn't really stepped up the last two years in the playoffs, AND TO BOOT the Cavs could lose this year and legitimately see James go on to the Knicks or Bulls. Needless to say I sympathize with these fans.

3. James' game, in my opinion, is much more likable than Kobe's. He's a phenomenal teammate, great passer, jokes with the guys, and doesn't call them out publicly although it's pretty apparent he hasn't really had the talent he needs around him and no one would really blame him if he were to bitch. Whereas Kobe is just a giant pube of a human being.

However these feelings changed just about a week ago. Sure, I still feel sorry for the Cleveland fans but that sally-ass, pussy-elbow, left handed free throw shooting bull shit was some of the lamest nonsense I've ever seen.

All James is accomplishing by crying about his wimpy "injury" is he gets to protect the Lebron James product. It's pretty friggin expected that this man will win multiple NBA championships. Maybe his elbow is a little sore (I'm sure just about every player is at this point) but what's there to gain by faking this lame injury???

Basically Sportscenter and reporters who take turns giving him HJ's will make the story even bigger than it already deserves to be. Then when (not if) the Cavs blow it - whether it'd be to the Celtics, Magic, or Lakers - James can fall back on his sore wittle elbow as the excuse to why he STILL hasn't delivered.

Is it just me or does this seem as if it is becoming a trend?? James and the Cavs look unbeatable in the regular season, and hell I admit I was ready to hand them the trophy the past TWO seasons, then in the playoffs they look very ordinary. They are lucky to not be down 2-0 to the aging freaking Celtics!!

We will have our answer in about a month, but if I were to bet I would say an NBA Finals loss to the Lakers and an offseason filled with mysterious elbow excuses & Lebron James free agency tour is what's in store.

At least the Cleveland fans have Mike Holmgren in town to turn around the Browns, right?

Top 5's

This time of year sucks. No football for a good five months and no meaningful football for about seven months. So here's a bunch of top 5's... mostly football but with a few other lists sprinkled in...

Super Bowl Favorites for 2010

5. Dallas - Had only they canned Wade Phillips for a Bill Cowher/Jon Gruden/Mike Shannahan type coach
4. Green Bay - Love Rodgers and where that shit is going
3. Indianapolis - I sniff a hangover but then again they'll win 12+ games and take that division
2. San Diego - I think losing LT and the obligation to feed his old ass the rock will be a weight off the Chargers shoulders
1. New Orleans - Drew Brees is a pimp

Teams that will make the playoffs after a 2009 miss

5. Panthers - Hog tie Jake Delhomme and launch him off a cliff... Start Matt Moore (anyone really who won't fuck it up)
4. Titans - They aren't as good as the 2008 13-3 record but they don't nearly suck as much as the 0-6 start... I'd peg them at 10-6 and a wild card spot
3. 49ers - Kurt Warner's retirement opens the door for San Fran to take that craptacular division
2. Giants - Waaaaay too good to be finishing 8-8
1. Steelers - Keep... Polamalu... HEALTHY!!!

Teams to fall off after making the playoffs in 2009

5. Patriots - The Dolphins and the Jets are younger and getting better n better each year... the Pats need to make some noise this offseason
4. Eagles - This team should be in the playoffs again but I'm afraid of how they'll handle the McNabb situation. The right move would be to ship him off and start the Kevin Kolb reign in Philly but who knows what they'll do.
3. Jets - I love the Jets roster but you just never know with young teams. They could fall off a bit in year 2 of the Sanchize era or they could go 12-4. Neither would shock me.
2. Cardinals - I'm not a Matt Leinart believer
1. Bengals - Will NOT be going 6-0 in the division again

If I started an expansion team and could have 1 QB for 1 Year it would be...

5. Aaron Rodgers - The only blemish I see so far is that he takes far too many sacks..
4. Ben Roethlisberger - Classic case of taking your stats and shoving em up your ass... Man has intangibles through the roof
3. Tom Brady - I'm thinking year 2 after the injury is more like the Brady of old and less like Carson Palmer after his knee injury
2. Peyton Manning - hmmm well where will this expansion team play? In a dome, maybe I put Manning #1... in a cold wintery city he may drop to 3 or 4
1. Drew Brees - The man put on a clinic at the Super Bowl with good, but not great talent around him.

If I could pick a QB and have him at least a good 5-7 years...

5. Tom Brady - A teeny weeny bit fearful of how it'll play out for Tom... I should be struck down for such blasphemy
4. Philip Rivers - Like I said above, losing LT is going to be huge for the Chargers... just wait and see
3. Peyton Manning - Manning will age gracefully and still be very effective right down to the end of his career
2. Drew Brees - 31 years old and should be plenty good this decade to come
1. Aaron Rodgers - I'm the conductor of the Aaron Rodgers train... hop aboard

Top 5 NBA Title contenders this season (just for the record 3 through 5 don't matter on this list)

5. Spurs - Eh maybe they have a big upset in em
4. Magic - Still a tough matchup for the Cavs
3. Mavs - Sure... why not...
2. Cavs - Regular season is paralleling last season... gotta not shit the bed before the finals this time
1. Lakers - Champs til someone knocks em off

Top 5 best uniforms in the NFL... I always go for simple over too much shit going on... fewer colors is a huge plus and I don't like teams who have like 19 variations of their uniform... I also like uniforms that are tried and true lasting years and years

5. Jets - Ditching the all greens and going back to the Joe Namath unis was a great move... probably have the best helmet in the NFL
4. 49ers - Losing the busy maroon unis that I linked above for the cherry red Joe Montana 1980's look was very smart... more teams need to take notice
3. Colts - I hate them with every fiber of my being but they look good out there... Royal blue and white, simple as hell and you'd think Johnny Unitas was running out of the tunnel onto the field.
2. Raiders - It's too damn bad they suck so much cuz that is a nice looking uniform. Remember when the silver and black meant something?
1. Saints - Black and Gold are so solid together. Simple design and I love the logo n helmet

I also like the Steelers, Cowboys, Chiefs, Browns (home), Packers, and Bears

5 Worst Uniforms...

5. Redskins - Just a dumb team name and dumb logo... imagine if they had a derogatory name/logo for any other ethnic group? People be up in arms...
4. Rams - Here is a classic case of trying to modernize something that already looked great and failing
3. Bengals - Just ugly crappy uniforms... and another team with 76 different variations... each of them sucking
2. Seahawks - I admit that the Seahawks uniforms needed an update but the blue on blue with a tint of lime green is awful... and those alternate unis they wore against the Bears were the worst atrocity in NFL history... the man who decided to put that out there should be killed
1. Bills - Here is a team with a fantastic throwback uniform and a decent former uniform but instead decided on this heinous look

I also hate the Chargers, Broncos, Panthers, Jaguars, and Titans

Top 5 Running Backs of my lifetime - In other words if I could pick a player and have him for the duration of his career on the Pats

5. LT - He's a snivelly bitch but I can't leave him off the list he was a sick player
4. Marshall Faulk - He could run, catch, block, was smart as hell, scored a ton of touchdowns, and from what I gather was a good teammate too
3. Barry Sanders - I don't know that Barry Sanders fits the bill of a running back I'd build a championship team around... he'd run for 2 yards, -4 yards, then bust one for 35... however it would have been friggin sick to have seen him play in person during his prime
2. Terrell Davis - Crazy how quickly he has been forgotten but I'd match TD's prime with any running back in NFL history... a shame injuries ended his career so soon
1. Emmitt Smith - A start to his career that rivaled TD along with longevity hardly anyone has ever seen... heart of a champion and an absolute battering ram to get you 4 yards every carry.

Top 5 Dumbest NHL Teams - I'm still not over the ridiculous amount of over expansion that went on in the 90's

5. Florida Panthers - People in Miami have better things to do than watch hockey..
4. Atlanta Thrashers - Let's give Atlanta another sport where they don't show up to things...
3. Columbus Blue Jackets - So Cleveland and Cincinnati have proven to be decent Ohio sports towns but instead you stick a franchise in Columbus? I couldn't even name 1 player to have ever played for the Blue Jackets
2. Nashville Predators - Really? It was a good idea to put an EXPANSION team in Tennessee of all places???
1. Phoenix Coyotes - There has never been one crystal of ice in Arizona... they don't care about hockey whatsoever... move these guys back to Winnepeg!!!

Top 5 Nastiest Teams in Tecmo Super Bowl for NES

5. Bears - Very underrated team... Neil Anderson and Brad Muster are solid rb's and the D has a lot of nasty players in Mike Singletary, Richard Dent, and company
4. Oilers - If you like to pass it doesn't get better than Moon and four nasty receivers in Hill, Givens, Jeffires, and Duncan
3. 49ers - The niners have a solid ass hall of fame offense with Joe Montana, Jerry Rice, Jon Taylor, Brent Jones, Roger Craig, and Tom Rathman but they don't really have that go to pass rusher which is a must... Charles Haley and Ronnie Lott are solid on defense but not quite top tier
2. Giants - They don't have the greatest offense but Meggett n Andersen are strong enough and LT (the real and original LT) is sick nasty
1. Bills - People may not agree but tell me where the Bills are weak? Thurman Thomas, Andre Reed, James Lofton, QB Bills (Jim Kelly), Bruce Smith, Darryl Talley... strong ass team but I won't lie I'd take any of the top 3

* Not putting the Raiders in here... Bo Jackson is a 1 man attack... Two plays against the computer may work but against another person doesn't cut it

5 Crappiest Teams in Tecmo....

5. Bucs - The Bucs actually have a few decent players but if you were to simulate 50 seasons they might make the playoffs in 3 of them
4. Cardinals - Can anyone name any player from the Cards? Via Sikahema and Johnny Johnson are the only two coming to mind... they have been a pretty miserable franchise for a good 75 years... Tecmo is no different
3. Seahawks - VERY underrated shitty team... they fly under the radar but if you try to play with them you will quickly realize that they don't have shit for players
2. Colts - Jeff George has a strong arm but after that they don't have shit for playmakers...
1. Patriots - Steve Grogan didn't even play in 1991... he retired and we know why... good God he sucks in Tecmo. The Pats defense is littered with slow ass guys too.... I wish I were lying but I've played in/simulated THOUSANDS of tecmo seasons and not one time, NOT ONE TIME has the Patriots made the playoffs (unless I controlled them). I've seen them finish 7-9 once and 8-8 once.

5 Best Characters on The Office

5. Kevin - I love his deliberate slow talking.. especially in the solos to the camera
4. Jim/Pam - They were better in the older episodes
3. Andy Bernard - Ed Helms just friggin kills me... he plays the goofball perfectly
2. Dwight - Rainn Wilson has been forever typecasted
1. Michael - He's everything you'd want in a main character... polarizing as all hell, selfish, unprofessional, flat out terrible at his job... He drives everyone crazy yet he shows his softer side here and there

That's all for now....