The Odd Stat of the Week

Issue: Anything obscure happen in college basketball this week?

Short Answer: If division III counts, then yes.

Reasoning: As February comes to a close, talk begins to turn to college basketball and the "who's in" and "who's out" of the NCAA tournament.  The Big East is tough, the ACC is always good, and the Big Ten is having a year of resurgence.  March should be fantastic this year, as it always is.  However, 3,000 miles away from where I sit right now, something bigger happened this week, and most people heard nothing about it.  The Caltech Beavers are a division III athletic institution.  They are a private school with about 950 undergraduate students (my high school was much bigger).  And, they don't give out athletic scholarships.  Thirty-one faculty and alumni have won the Nobel Prize.  Hence, basketball takes a back seat at Caltech.  Or, maybe they don't even get a seat.  That is why they have been beaten time and time again, at an historical rate.

On February 22rd (or 23rd, depends on what time zone you live in), 2011, Caltech beat Occidental 46-45 (sounds like a high school score, and, something tells me there are high school teams out there that could beat both squads) in their final game of the season.  This is newsworthy because Caltech and Occidental play in the same conference - the Southern California Intercollegiate Athletic Conference (a basketball powerhouse) - and this was Caltech's first conference victory since...January 23, 1985.  That's right, it had been 310 conference games and 26 years since Caltech's last conference victory.  That stat is hard to wrap one's head around.  It seems impossible.  But, when you realize that Caltech finished this year 5-20, locking up their best record in 15 years, you realize how effing bad the Beavers really are.  Last year, the Beavers were 0-15.  The last time they had a winning record was 1954.  They suck so bad the Cincinnati Bengals feel sorry for them.  Maybe.  Let us now play, what-the-world-was-like the last time Caltech won a conference game (Jan. 23, 1985)*:

1. I was only 6 years old.  Wow.  That was a looong time ago.
2. Three days before Caltech's last conference victory, the San Francisco 49ers beat the Miami Dolphins 38-16 in Super Bowl XIX (yes, that is Super Bowl 19 - Green Bay just won Super Bowl 45).
3. Five days after Caltech's last conference victory, a bunch of entertainers got together and recorded "We Are The World" to raise money to combat famine in Ethiopia.
4. "Out Of Africa" won 7 Oscars, including best picture, even though I believe "Back To The Future" should have won every single Oscar that year.
5. The Grammy winner for song of the year was Tina Turner's "What's Love Got To Do With It?", and the award for best new artist went to Cyndi Lauper (anyone feeling really old yet?).
6. "The Cosby Show" edged out "Cheers" and "Family Ties" to win the primetime Emmy for best comedy series.  I miss good TV.
7. The median household income was under $24,000, a gallon of gas was $1.20, a dozen eggs cost $0.80, and a first-class stamp was $0.20.  Sheesh.

Oliver Eslinger, Caltech Head Coach, after the victory**: “Tonight’s win is a testament to the hard work each member of this team, the alumni and the supporters have put into this program. I hope that everyone who has participated in Caltech men’s basketball is able to celebrate a little bit tonight...[w]e still have goals and aspirations that we want to accomplish as a program and this win is another step toward meeting these objectives.”  Goals and aspirations?  Really?  What, like win another conference game before 2037?  Maybe Caltech should just keep pumping out Nobel Prizes, because they will never have another celebration like this:

Wow.  And I thought I couldn't feel any more sorry for these guys.  But, in their defense, they are almost certainly smarter than you or me.  At least they have that going for them.

*I got most of these from Wikipedia, so I don't know if they are correct or not.  But, I think they are.

**The article where I got most of this information.

The Upset of the Century?

Issue: What does Tiger's loss in the WGC-Accenture Match Play tell us?

Short Answer: Not a whole lot.

Reasoning: The Accenture Match Play Championship is set up just like the NCAA basketball tournament.  There are 64 players, set up in a bracket-style golf tournament.  The winner of each match moves on to the next round.  Whomever wins six matches in a row, wins the tournament, and a boatload of money.  Most golf fans love this event because it is different than any other tournament.  In fact, the only other place one generally sees PGA professionals participate in match play, is in the Ryder Cup, which only takes place every two years (and the United States has been getting their butts handed to them over the last decade or so, which makes said match play not as fun to watch).  Plus, throwing in $10 and filing out a bracket with friends is quite fun, and, at the same time, quite impossible.  See, unlike the NCAA basketball tournament, where there is quite a large talent gap between a #1 seed and a #16 seed, the Accenture Match Play has no such talent gap.  The #16 seed in the match play can hardly be considered an underdog.

To wit, the four 1 v. 16 matchups at this year's event looked like this: (1) Lee Westwood v. (16) Henrik Stenson; (1) Phil Mickelson v. (16) Brendan Jones; (1) Martin Kaymer v. (16) Seung-yul Noh; and (1) Tiger Woods v. (16) Thomas Bjorn.  Although 3 of the #1 seeds moved on to the second round, it is not a guarantee.  How about some stats?  Total number of wins for the #1 seeds in 2011?  One.  Martin Kaymer at the Abu Dhabi HSBC Golf Championship on the European Tour.  Total number of wins for the #16 seeds in 2011?  One.  Thomas Bjorn at the Commercialbank (not a typo) Qatar Masters on the European Tour.  Stroke average, combined, for the #1 seeds in 2011?  70.59.  Stroke average, combined*, for the #16 seeds in 2011?  71.25.  A total difference of .66 strokes per 18 holes.  So, unlike the NCAA basketball tournament, a #16 seed upsetting a #1 seed isn't really a big deal.  Or even out of the ordinary.  In fact, Tiger Woods is the only #1 overall seed to ever win the match play.  Six times a player seeded #14 or higher (14, 15, or 16) has won the match play, and only five times has a seed lower than #14 (1-13) won the tournament (Tiger has won 3 of them).  And, in 2002, Kevin Sutherland was a #16 seed and won the whole thing.

So, when Tiger Woods was "upset" by Thomas Bjorn in the first round on Wednesday, it didn't surprise me, and shouldn't have surprised anyone else either.  The only advantage a #1 seed has in this format is the "intimidation factor."  Playing against one of the best players in the world is more of a mental challenge than a physical challenge, in the game of golf.  In past years, those playing against Tiger stood no chance at winning because he had that killer instinct.  Not so much anymore.  At this point, is anyone afraid of playing Tiger Woods?  Absolutely not.  Thomas Bjorn was playing against the weakest #1 seed.  Sure, this is an upset, but in name only.  Plus, Bjorn has a win this year, and exudes the confidence that goes along with that.  Tiger hasn't been confident since a little fender-bender around Thanksgiving-time a year and a half ago.  I wrote about Tiger's return to competitive golf here, and I still hope he can come back and win.  It makes golf more fun to watch.  However, the loss to Thomas Bjorn shows me that him winning again may be farther off than I'd hoped.  Damn.

*The Accenture Match Play was Brendan Jones' first event of 2011.

Parity at its Finest

Issue: Didn't you already use that title once?

Short Answer: Sort of.  For this hilarious video post.  But, this is "parity," not "parody."

Reasoning: My old high school teammate Tim wrote on my Facebook page about an article from the Wall Street Journal about the craziness going on in the sports world, and, especially the state of California.  I went in search of the column but quickly realized I am not a member of the WSJ online, and have no desire to be one ("disposable income" is not in my lexicon these days).  So, I am going to just go off what Tim said was in the article, the crux of which is the state of parity in athletics - California being the microcosm of said parity.  I'm not sure words can describe how much I love parity, but you know I'm going to try.

The NBA sucks.  I hate it, and I don't watch it.  Usually, it is 8 guys standing around watching two guys play one-on-one.  I'd rather watch college basketball, where guys dive on the floor and attack the rim, for pure love of the game (or because they are attempting to impress NBA scouts - either way, I don't care, the passion of the college game makes it better).  However, our parody-in-sports journey begins with the NBA.  The L.A. Lakers are one of the few west coast teams (in any sport) that seem to escape the east coast "media bias."  People love the Lakers, and always have - not just in Los Angeles.  The L.A. Clippers have always been the red-headed stepchild of the Lakers.  They are never good, and, in fact, are usually the laughingstock of the league (kind of like the Bengals in the NFL - this is why I don't feel sorry for Clippers fans).  But, this year, Los Angeles has been introduced to an ex-Oklahoma Sooner named Blake Griffin.  Folks, if you haven't seen this guy, then you don't watch any highlight shows.  His dunks are of legend.  He is the brightest superstar the entire league has right now (everyone hates LeBron; people are tired of Carmelo; and Kobe is just as whiny as he's always been), and he is an L.A. Clipper.  Strange.

But it gets even more strange.  California has never had a slew of great college football teams.  However, the University of Southern California, over the last 10 years, has been a constant in the top-10 rankings.  They have competed for, and won, National Championships and Heisman Trophies (Carson Palmer anyone?  Ha!).  But, who would have thought the best college football team in California (and one of the best in the country) last year would be the Stanford Cardinal?  Have you ever met anyone from Stanford?  I have.  I played collegiate summer baseball with quite a few kids from there.  And, the only thing I remember about each and every one of them is how socially awkward they were.  Most didn't talk.  When they did, nothing but nonsense came spewing forth.  Myself and the rest of my teammates chalked it up to them being too smart for their own good.  You know, trying to dumb everything down for the idiots on the team (although Andrew Luck doesn't seem to be that smart).  Anyway, my point is, how can such socially awkward, smart-as-can-be, non-athletic kids make up the best college football team in California?  My guess is Jim Harbaugh.  This one may not last long.

Finally, we get to college basketball.  The UCLA program is the best ever.  USC is usually not bad.  Stanford is hit or miss (socially awkward kids aren't usually good at basketball either).  So, who is leading the way this year?  San Diego State and St. Mary's.  Huh?  The best thing to ever come out of San Diego State is Marshall Faulk (not a basketball player) and the best thing to come out of St. Mary's is a bunch of people with degrees (although my former minor league teammate Mark Teahen went to St. Mary's - best I can do).  At the time this post went to press San Diego State was 27-1 and #4 in the coaches poll (for those of you who don't believe coaching matters - Steve Fisher anyone?); St. Mary's was 22-6, coming off two straight losses (one to lowly San Diego University - I hope they were without their best players for some reason).  UCLA is not great.  USC is not good.  Stanford is turrrrible.  It's nice to see some of the little guys get their comeuppance.  And, it's nice to see some of the big guys take a fall.  I love parity in all sports - it makes it more fun to watch (which is all I do anyway).

I'm going to Las Vegas and putting all my money on the Padres to win the World Series.  Alright, maybe not.

The Odd Stat of the Week

Issue: Are you the type of person who typically gives credit when credit is due?

Short Answer: Sure I am, but...

Reasoning: ...I really despise everything Pittsburgh.  I don't watch hockey at all, but I hate the Penguins.  The Pirates haven't been relevant in years, but I still can't stand them.  Thankfully, since Pittsburgh is a smaller sized city, they don't have teams in all of the major sports, and, they only have one college program to speak of, the University of [crappy city] (Duquesne and Robert Morris are neck and neck for the next best).  So, as a longtime Cincinnatian and Bengal fan, I am afforded the opportunity to direct most of my hatred toward the Steelers.  And, rightfully so.  The Steelers have won three-times as many Super Bowls as the Bengals have been to.  Their quarterback (I'm not denying his talent here people - he is good, no doubt about it) has to be one of the biggest d-bags on the planet, and he is a Super Bowl winner two-times over (thank you Green Bay Packers).  And, just typing the name "Hines Ward" makes me want to vomit (he went to the University of Georgia too - I've been hating him for quite awhile). I don't hate them because they are good, but that makes me hate them more.

But, the NFL season is over (thanks again to the Packers), so I've been watching a lot of college basketball, and, living in Cincinnati (Big East team), I watch a lot of Big East games.  Quite a few of these games have featured the top-5 ranked University of Pittsburgh Panthers.  In watching the Panthers play I have realized a few things: 1) I like their Head Coach, Jamie Dixon; 2) I don't hate the team as much as I would like, you know, because of the "Pittsburgh" across their chest; and 3) They are damn good.  Even in the game the Panthers most recently lost at St. John's, they were winning most of the game (after the first ten minutes), and were beat on a lay-up where the St. John's player stepped out of bounds.  The Panthers are fundamentally sound and play great defense.  I think I may have them going far in my tournament bracket (even though the Big (L)East usually lays an egg in the tourney).

My Odd Stat of the Week will tell you that the Panthers have been damn good for awhile, and have been that good without much in the cupboard.  On February 7, when Pittsburgh won at West Virginia, they solidified their 10th straight season with 20+ wins and 10+ Big East wins.  With the parity that exists today in college athletics, that is nothing short of unreal.  Especially because they have done it in what is considered the top conference in the nation, by most (not me).  Pittsburgh has also done this without a single first-round NBA draft pick (they have had only four total first-rounders ever: Jerome Lane (of Bill Raftery "send it in Jerome!" fame as he broke the backboard) and Charles Smith in 1988, Eric Mobley in 1994, and Vonteego Cummings (uh, what?) in 1999).  Since 2002, when this streak started, Pittsburgh has only had 4 total players drafted, all in the second round (Chris Taft in 2005, Aaron Gray in 2007, and Sam Young and DeJuan Blair in 2009).  Good coaching, fundamental basketball, tough defense, and even tougher players, all of whom are unselfish, have made the Pittsburgh Panthers into a formidable force in college basketball.  And that makes me like them.  A little bit.

Women's Lib

Issue: Women's sports again?

Short Answer: Kind of.

Reasoning: I remember an episode of Seinfeld called The Subway, in which Elaine is on her way to a lesbian wedding in which, she, is the best man.  While on a crowded subway, Elaine engages in a conversation with another woman, who is standing next to her.  The conversation went something like this (from memory only - my apologies if this isn't exactly how it went):

• Woman on Subway: I remember 20 years ago when a man would give up his seat for a woman!
• Elaine: Yeah,  It's kind of ironic.
• Woman on Subway: What's ironic?
• Elaine: Women's lib.  We have spent all these years fighting for equality, but we have lost a lot of the "niceties" that went along with being a woman, like having a man give up his seat for you.
• Woman on Subway:  No.  What does "ironic" mean?

A story came my way this week (thanks to my brother (yes, again) and my good buddy Doug, both of whom sent me the same link within 15 minutes of each other) that gives another example of women's lib gone bad.  The story is out of Des Moines, Iowa, where a star wrestler was on his way to compete for (and possibly win) a state title.  Joel Northrup finished his regular season with a 35-4 record and was one of the favorites for the 112-pound (which is what I weighed in approximately 2nd grade) state title.  But, Northrup forfeited his first match of the state tournament allowing his opponent to move on to the next round.  Why?  Because his opponent was a freshman from Cedar Falls named Cassy Herkleman.  Yes, Cassy is a girl.  And a decent wrestler.  She finished her season with a 20-13 regular season record, is one of two girls who have ever qualified for the Iowa wresting state championship (the other also qualified this year), and, is now the only girl to have ever "won" a state championship match.

Northrup's own words as to why he couldn't compete against Cassy:  "Wrestling is a combat sport and it can get violent at times...[a]s a matter of conscience and my faith I do not believe that it is appropriate for a boy to engage a girl in this manner. It is unfortunate that I have been placed in a situation not seen in most other high school sports in Iowa."  (How about ANY other high school sports in Iowa.  Especially a full-contact, full-gouging, full-grabbing sport.)  Now, Northrup, whether he is extremely religious or not, chose a perfect excuse as to why he couldn't wrestle.  I'm not saying he made it up to escape wrestling, and possibly losing to a girl, but, in this day-in-age, questioning someone's religious beliefs puts you in the same category of bigots, as racists.  So, most everyone, including all interviewed for the article, said they not only supported Northrup, but admired his conviction.  I don't question Northrup's religious beliefs, but I do question him not competing.  See, I think everyone would agree that it is not appropriate "for a boy to engage a girl in this manner," but, somewhere along the line, women and the Iowa High School Athletic Association, decided differently.  They decided that since there isn't girl's wrestling, any girl who wanted to wrestle, would do so with the boys.  That is the only "fair" way.  And being fair (or politically correct) is where this thing went completely array.

You see, in my opinion, equality means that all parties have equal bargaining power, i.e., no one has the upper-hand.  Equality has been wonderful for women, in every outlet, since it began in the mid-1800's.  Even within the world of sports, Title IX gave women equal athletic scholarships to men (you can see my opinion on that here).  But, I wonder how anyone can think that allowing a girl to wrestle with boys makes anything equal.  Let us think for a moment about the 20 young boys who lost to Cassy this year.  How do you think they are being treated by their 16-year old classmates?  Do any of my male readers out there remember how girls made you feel when you were 16 (and possibly still today)?  Do any of you remember the changes you were going through at that age?  Could you now imagine being that age and being asked to wrestle on a mat, with a girl, both of you barely clothed, and grab, pull, grope, squeeze, and hold on tight?  No Thanks.  Joel Northrup was in an absolute no-win situation.  If he wrestles and wins, he was supposed to (and he violates his religious beliefs).  If he wrestles and loses, he makes history.  And not in a good way.  (sidenote: Cassy did not win.  She may have been the first girl to move on to the second round of the state tournament (an accomplishment that should not go overlooked), but she only did so by default.  I hope the "record book" denotes that fact.)

I hope I am not admonished for what I am about to say, but here goes anyway - women are NOT equal to men in sports [as I duck and cover].  In everyday life there is no doubt that a woman can do anything and everything a man can do.  In the sports world a woman can do everything a man can do, except, you know, dunk over Kevin Garnett, hit a homerun off of Roy Halliday, tackle Adrian Peterson, win the Masters, etc.  Women have their own sports because they cannot compete on a level with men.  And, in a circumstance where a woman can possibly play with the men (Annika Sorenstam and Billy Jean King, maybe) we should let them dominate women's sports instead of making them a sideshow attraction in men's sports (we didn't go around looking for a new species of athlete for people like Babe Ruth, Michael Jordan, and Tiger Woods to compete against - we just let them dominate, and enjoy the ride while watching).  In a case where there is no women's equivalent sport, e.g., wrestling, maybe, just maybe, we should encourage girls to pursue a different sport.  Because allowing girls and boys to compete on the same playing field in a sport like wrestling, for better or for worse, equal or not, is completely unfair.

Nick Lachey (I Kid You Not)

Issue: Dude, please don't tell me that you are writing about teen idols now?

Short Answer: Only if relevant.

Reasoning: Many of you readers out there that are from Cincinnati, know that many in this city claim Nick Lachey as a hometown hero (I do not.  Boy-band members never count on my list of heroes.  Pete Rose, yes.  Nick Lachey, no.).  However, back in the day when Jessica Simpson was still relevant (and smokin' hot) I did tune into her and Nick's reality show on MTV occasionally (dude, she was REALLY hot back in the day), and I gained some newfound respect for Lachey.  As hot as Jessica was, you could tell how frustrated he was with how utterly stupid she was (and, I assume, still is).  Other than that though, I do not necessarily respect any other "work" that Lachey has done.  But, he is still an outspoken fan of the Queen City, and often wears the gear of the University of Cincinnati, and the Cincinnati Reds and Bengals in public, for the world to see, which I do enjoy.  However, I am always skeptical of a boy-band member's sports knowledge (I mean, really?).  In a post on ESPN.com on February 14, that I'm sure most (if not everyone) missed, Nick Lachey, former member of 98 degrees (haha), showed that he is probably a better general manager than Mike Brown (then again, who isn't?).  Instead of summarizing, I am going to re-post*.  Try to remember that this is Nick Lachey speaking, and, the fact is, I think I agree with everything he says:

Nick, let's start with some background. How long have you been a Bengals fan and what were some of your best and early memories?

Nick Lachey: I've been a Bengals fan for the better part of 30 years. The first season I can remember getting interested in football was the year we went to our first Super Bowl against the 49ers. That was the era of Ken Anderson, Cris Collinsworth, Isaac Curtis, Pete Johnson, etc. That season, two things were born: A lifelong passion for the Bengals and an absolute hatred of the 49ers. They remain a thorn in the Bengals' side.

Who is your favorite Bengal of all time? Why?

Nick Lachey: My favorite Bengal of all time is easily Anthony Munoz. Aside from being the greatest offensive lineman that ever played the game, he is also the Bengals' lone representative in the NFL Hall of Fame. As intimidating as he was on the field, he has always been the most approachable and respectful person off of it. I remember meeting him as a young boy and being shocked by how nice he was to me. As a native Cincinnatian, I have a great deal of respect for how he has embraced our community as well. He has chosen to continue to call Cincinnati home long after his playing days and has done a great deal for the city there. As great as he was as a player, I can easily say he is an even greater human being.

With the high expectations coming in, where would last season rank for you among Bengal disappointments?

Nick Lachey: I think this last year was the most disappointing season in the history of the franchise for me. Certainly there were more pathetic seasons for Bengal fans in terms of record, but none with as many expectations as we had for the team in 2010. I think the most frustrating aspect for me was that we seemed to be in every game, and simply found a way to lose. We never really got blown out but made just enough mistakes and committed enough foolish penalties to take ourselves out of the game. I can handle being soundly beaten by better teams, but beating ourselves was difficult to stomach.

Quarterback Carson Palmer wants out and threatens to retire. Were you surprised? As GM, Nick, how would you handle this situation?

Nick Lachey: I was surprised by Carson's comments simply because he has been so hesitant to step up and say anything in the past. There have been many situations in the past few seasons when you would want and expect your highly paid franchise QB to step up and be the leader of the team, on and off the field. Carson has never been willing to be that guy. He remained silent, seemingly willing to let the chips fall where they may, collect his check and go home. I remember the days of Boomer Esiason, and let's just say I wish Carson had more of Boomer in him. Now, when Carson decides that he doesn't want to deal with it anymore, he finally shows the backbone Bengal fans have long waited to see and makes an ultimatum to be traded or retire. I'm the first to admit that the Bengals can be a tough team to play for at times, but they also made you the highest-paid player in the NFL at the time and you owe it to them and the fans to show some resolve, be a leader and fight through it. Being a very highly compensated franchise QB in the NFL is more than learning terminology and throwing passes. It's about being a leader, and Carson has proven that he cannot be that. If there is a team that thinks he is worth trading for, do it.

Building off that subject, how would you characterize the current state of the franchise?

Nick Lachey: ABYSMAL! Now that I'm done assaulting Carson, let me also explain why I can't blame him for being fed up. Short of the Los Angeles Clippers, who I also happen to be a fan of, the Bengals may be the most poorly run franchise in professional sports. Since Mike Brown has taken over, we've been the laughingstock of the league, all the while supported by a fan base that has refused to give up on the team. After years, even decades of "bungled" draft picks, unfortunate injuries, and off the field embarrassments, I see this as a breaking point for the Bengals and the fans in Cincinnati. People are tired of giving their hard-earned money to a team that seemingly cares more about growing the family fortune than it does about competing for a championship. So many years of futility has created an atmosphere of perpetual losing that no player wants to be a part of, Carson being the latest example. I feel bad for the players and the community that supports them. I think it's time for Mike Brown to admit he's not the football man he thinks he is and hire people who are. As an owner, I think you owe it to the fans who have so loyally supported your team and made you a lot of money in the process to field the best team possible. I think we can safely say that a team that has Mike Brown making personnel decisions is certainly not the best team possible. If he did the right thing and hired someone to take over those duties, he would instantly go from being Cincinnati's public enemy No. 1 to its newfound hero. Hope is a powerful thing, and as Bengal fans, that is all we're asking for.

Lastly, as the most high-profile Bengals fan out there, what message would you have for other Bengals fans who are losing hope?

Nick Lachey: As Bengal fans, we have endured so much over the past 20-plus seasons, with little in the way of satisfaction. We have paid for a new stadium, signed up for public seat licenses and continued to sell out a stadium for a team that has seldom performed to expectations. I have leased a suite for the past five seasons and commuted back and forth from Los Angeles to watch the team I love, many times flying back feeling as if the joke were on me. My message to the fans in Cincinnati would be this -- the power is in our hands. It's time that, as a fan base, we demand more from the team we so passionately love and support. Cincinnati is a rabid football town and we deserve to have a team that cares about winning as much as we do. As hard as it is, the only way we can show our resolve is to quit blindly supporting the same old dysfunctional, losing cycle that is the Mike Brown Bengals. The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results. Albert Einstein said that and he was a pretty smart guy from what I've heard. Bengal fans, don't go insane.

*Thanks to James Walker, author of the AFC North blog @ ESPN.com (full article is above, but here is the link, just in case you want it/need it/don't believe Nick Lachey really said all these things).

The (Belated) Odd Stat of the Week

Issue: So, you do realize you didn't have an Odd Stat of the Week last week, huh?

Short Answer: I was torn...

Reasoning: You may have noticed some changes to Uncommonly Sports recently.  Last week I added a Facebook "Like" box to the page (after a bout with attempting to make a Facebook "fan" page, but instead making a "group" page and causing all sorts of people to receive e-mails they never signed up for and possibly forever losing them as loyal readers - thanks to Facebook, for that humbling experience); and I also added "labels" in the right-hand column, which give the reader folders full of posts with like content.  And I noticed an abnormality - 16 NFL posts.  The next closest is college football, with 8.  Granted, when I started this blog football was in full-swing, and it only makes sense that I would write about it the most.  So, last week I came upon a few "stats" that I thought were worthy of the "Odd Stat of the Week" moniker.  One of them NFL, one of them college basketball.  Since the NFL has completed its season, I thought I should do the college basketball post.  And then, I thought, screw it.  One more NFL post won't hurt anyone (I hope).

There have been a plethora of game-changing plays in Super Bowl history.  Who can forget (Super Bowl number in parentheses) Lynn Swann's juggling catch against the Cowboys (X), or Marcus Allen's 74-yard touchdown run against the Redskins (XVIII), or David Tyree's impossible catch against his helmet to take down the undefeated (almost) Patriots (XLII), or Desmond Howard's 99-yard kickoff return for a touchdown to give Brett Farve his only Super Bowl victory (XXXI), or John Riggins shredding the Dolphins defense, on a 4th-and-1, for a 43-yard touchdown (XVII), or Joe Montana's touchdown pass to John Taylor with under a minute to go against the Bengals (XXIII - curse you Barney Bussey!), or Santonio Holmes' amazing catch and tap-both-feet-down-in-the-corner-of-the-endzone against the Cardinals (XLIII), or John Elway getting spun around like a top but still picking up the 1st down, leading his Brocos over the Packers (XXXII)?  But, none of these plays were as game-changing as the good old, run-of-the-mill (if that's possible) pick-to-the-house.

See, in Super Bowl history, teams that have had an interception return for a touchdown, are now 11-0.  In fact, the last three Super Bowl winners have had one - Nick Collins for the Packers this year, Tracy Porter for the Saints last year, and James Harrison's 100-yarder against the Cardinals the year before.  Basically, you can take all of your fancy catches, tough runs, great tackles, pressure-packed field goals, and, chuck them out the window.  Forget everything.  Teams should take the entire two weeks before the Super Bowl and work on intercepting footballs and then finding a member of the other team to put on the ground.  Invent a new defense that contains 8 defensive backs, where all players are going for that decisive pick-six.  Alright, maybe not.  The stat does make sense, as an interception for a touchdown is a momentum-shifter and a morale-crusher.  But, you would think one team, somewhere in 45 Super Bowls, would do it in a losing effort.  I have no doubt that if the Bengals ever get back to the Super Bowl, they will be the first to accomplish this feat.

Spitgate

Issue: The currently-most-famous-loogey was spat by...?

Short Answer: Tiger Woods.

Reasoning: This weekend, while most of the PGA Tour was competing in the AT&T Pebble Beach Pro-Am, Tiger Woods was in Dubai, playing in the European Tour's Dubai Desert Classic.  Tiger shot 66 on Friday to move into contention, and was inevitably one shot back heading into Sunday.  He fired a final round 75, and, needless to say, didn't win.  But, on this Monday, the story wasn't about his choke-job on Sunday, but rather about a loogey he spat on the 12th green after making a feeble attempt at birdie.  I find it laughable that the story here is about some spit, but, unfortunately, the European Tour made it the issue.  See, the European Tour reprimanded and fined (an undisclosed amount) Tiger for his actions.  And this has been reported on every media outlet (re: ESPN) all throughout the day (literally, on ESPN).  Since spitgate became national news, Tiger took to Twitter to apologize: "The Euro Tour is right – it was inconsiderate to spit like that and I know better. Just wasn’t thinking and want to say I’m sorry."  (No citation needed - I was watching ESPN most of the day.)

First, let me say, this is completely ridiculous.  Everyone who agrees with the fine does so because they say it is "disgusting" and "rude" because other players may come along and put their ball down right in his spit.  Really?  First of all, what are the chances of that?  A zillion to one?  Probably more.  Second, what are the chances the spit is still in a huge puddle on the green and hasn't soaked into the ground?  You know, because the ground tends to soak up water and all.  And, even if someone's ball did roll through the spit, and then that person touched it, at least it's Tiger Woods' spit and not someone like Sergio Garcia's (nothing against Spanish people or anything, he just strikes me as an ass) spit.  Tiger Woods' actions did not warrant a fine, nor did they warrant national attention.  He was outside, on a golf course, which, in my eyes, is open ground for spitting.  Whenever and wherever.

However (three out of four straight words with the word "ever" in them!), I cannot fully condone Tiger's actions, because I am what they like to call a "golf purist."  I believe there is no place for a temper in golf; that players should take care of the course they play on so those that come after them can enjoy the same course they did; that players should be considerate of those playing around them; and that golf carts are an example of how technology has made the game worse (along with equipment, balls, and everything else in golf these days - although I must admit, it is more interesting to watch a 330 yard drive than it is to watch a 270 yard drive.  Trust me on this one.).  Tiger broke most of these rules.  I play golf all the time and I played baseball all my life.  Trust me when I tell you that I engage in the act of spitting on an occasion or two (million).  I don't ever spit on the green, not because I'm worried about a player behind me putting his (or her) ball in it, but because I respect the course too much to do so.  A golfer's only opponent is the course he (or she) is playing on, so Tiger, by spitting on the green, basically spit on his opponent, because his opponent was beating him.  And beating him badly.  It was a classless move at a time when he was clearly frustrated.  But, after the negative attention it has brought him, I'm betting he never does it again.

And, I'm still rooting for him to win again and do what I said here.

Thanks To My Brother. Again.

Issue: Do you, or does your brother, actually write this blog?

Short Answer: I do.  I think.

Reasoning: As more people start reading this blog (or just clicking on the page to give me a false sense of security), I start getting more e-mails about ideas, or articles, or videos that people think are relevant.  I love getting these e-mails because it makes my job a bit easier.  But, it also makes me feel like others are doing my job for me, or that I am ripping off other people's ideas (DISCLAIMER: if you are one of the people who send me stuff, please don't stop - I'm not complaining!).  My brother Casey, who has been mentioned here at Uncommonly Sports a time or two, is the lead perpetrator of this activity.  He is an intellectual, who spends a lot of time reading everything, so when he sends me something, I pay attention to it (even if it is a video, a la, the one we have here).

What we have below is a video featuring University of Connecticut redshirt junior quarterback, Johnny McEntee.  In the video, McEntee self-describes himself as a "trick-shot quarterback."  Intriguing.  Let's take a look at this video:

Now, while I believe every throw in this video is possible, here are a few reasons that I am a little skeptical:

1. The credits at the end of the video list all of 6 people (one is McEntee and two others are other UConn football players (well, one is the kicker, so I guess he's not really a football player, but you get the point)), and the only one that caught my eye was "Edited by Kyle Campbell".  I'd like to talk to Mr. Campbell about what he really edited.  Technology is so flawless today that many people will question the validity of these throws because we all know, through the magic of editing, my little sister could be a "trick-shot quarterback."
2. Anyone who actually can make all these throws would have to know that people may doubt what they see on this video.  Why not have a disclaimer before every throw?  Or edit in some of the throws that were failures?  We all know he didn't make all these throws on the first try, so why make a video that purports just that?  Some of these throws could have taken 100 tries or more (at least I think so), so I think it would have been more impressive to say "it took me 5 tries to do this, but here is the successful throw."  Makes more sense to me, but what do I know?
3. The throws McEntee makes in this video are the equivalent of hitting the small bullseye in darts (or maybe even better).  I have watched professional darts on TV before (it is actually a lot cooler than you would think) and even the best dart throwers in the world can't hit their mark every single time.  Just saying.
4. What are you saying about yourself as a quarterback when you can make all these throws, including some blindfolded, but you literally have zero career stats.  Seriously, this guy has never thrown a pass, or had a rushing attempt, or thrown a pick, or gotten sacked.  Ever.  Check out his bio page from UConn's website.  And, I can add in that he played in two games in 2010 and again amassed zero stats - but he can throw a ball into a basketball hoop from 40 yards?  Maybe, but I doubt it.
5. This video can only add pressure to McEntee's attempts to become a good quarterback.  He has shown on this video that he can make any and every throw, so interceptions should never happen.  Nor should incompletions.  Or losses.  See what I mean?  This video may get McEntee some publicity, but the last time I checked, trick-shot quarterbacks didn't get paid very well.
6. And, most telling - there are only two of Johnny's "trick-shots" that garnered any sort of reaction from anyone who was present.  Obviously, in most of the shots, there is a cameraman and one other person, but wouldn't they go nuts?  Wouldn't the camera start shaking because the cameraman was jumping around going crazy?  It happens twice, which makes me believe he made those two throws (and some of the others that are cool, but not jump-around-going-crazy throws) on his first try (or second or third), and all the others took forever and no one was excited, or, Mr. Campbell (the editor) did a fantastic job.  I'm going with the latter.

With all that said, I have no idea how real this video is.  I don't know how many takes each one took, or if all of it is editing magic.  I'm not sure I even care though, because this video is pretty darn cool.

The Demon Deacon

Issue: You played college baseball, right?  How come there hasn't been a single post about it?

Short Answer: I was just asking myself that the other day...

Reasoning: College baseball is a fringe sport.  Most college baseball programs are supported by the football team and all the money they make.  In fact, only two sports are profitable on the college level - men's football and men's basketball (sorry ladies - even though, how can anyone be shocked that women's amateur sports aren't profitable?).  Occasionally, however, men's baseball can be profitable.  Case in point - my junior year at Georgia Tech.  We spent quite a few weeks ranked as the #1 team in the nation.  Mark Teixeira was our 3rd baseman that year (and Jason Basil was our left fielder!), and we were generally considered one of the teams that would ultimately vie for the National Championship.  We won the ACC Tournament Championship, we hosted (and won) the Regional Tournament (beating Stetson University in the finals), and we hosted a Super Regional in which we were beaten by the University of Southern California (who went on the be National Runner-Up).  After all that, we actually made money for the school.  The only reason I know this, is because they made a huge deal out of it.  Georgia Tech was ecstatic, because it doesn't happen often.

That is why it sometimes flies under the radar when a big story happens in the college baseball realm.  No large media outlet takes the time to report on it because they are afraid that no one will care.  I, a mere blogger, don't have the same problem.  So, when my good friend Doug sent me a news article yesterday, that had to do with college baseball, I immediately wanted to write a blog post about it.  Then, I actually read the article, and I can't tell you how moving it was.  I'm shocked (sort of) that I haven't heard more about it elsewhere.  The fact that this story takes place at Wake Forest, which is part of the ACC conference in which I played college baseball, only made me want to get this story out there even more.

Kevin Jordan is a freshman at Wake Forest.*  He signed a national letter of intent in 2009, before his senior season in high school.  Toward the end of that senior season he was diagnosed with "ANCA vasculitis, a type of autoimmune swelling caused by autoantibodies. The immune system produces normal antibodies to fight infection in the body. However, an autoantibody is an abnormal antibody that attacks a person's own cells. ANCA stands for Anti-Neutrophil Cytoplasmic Autoantibody and when these autoantibodies are present in the kidneys, it causes a leaking of blood and protein into the urine and eventually results in kidney failure."  At 18 years of age, Kevin had to start kidney dialysis three times a week.  When that didn't improve his kidney function, he went through dialysis every single day, from 11 p.m. to 8 a.m.  Doctors also told him that the next step (and maybe only step) was a kidney transplant.  18 years old and having to think about a kidney transplant.  It doesn't seem quite fair.  Kevin's parents were both tested, along with his brother, and none were a match.  During the fall of 2010, head baseball coach Tom Walter had told Kevin's father, Keith, that he would be willing to go through a compatibility test, to see if he was possibly a match for Kevin.  And, after all the family members failed to match, that is exactly what Tom Walter did.  And guess what?  He was a match.  Now, it is one thing to go through a compatibility test, and entirely another to actually donate a kidney.  Tom Walter, only 11 days after finding out he was a match, decided he would do just that.  On February 7, 2011, Tom Walter, head coach at Wake Forest, donated one of his kidneys to Kevin Jordan, freshman baseball player.  That, ladies and gentlemen, is the definition of selflessness.

After the surgery, Coach Walter stated that "[c]ertainly, the best-case scenario is that Kevin and I just lead a normal life...Forget the baseball part of it for now. If he gets back on the field, that's going to be the best story of all. That's when (the media) are going to be calling back for another press conference, because that's going to be the great story, when he makes it back to the playing field. But, take that aside, just him having a normal life, where he can be a normal college student and not be hooked up to a dialysis machine from 11 o'clock at night to eight in the morning every night and just be a normal freshman."  Yes folks, life does come before baseball, and it's nice to see someone is such a high position realize that, and pass that lesson onto his players.

I was thinking about how to end this post when I realized the author of the linked article below said it best already (and if it ain't broke...): "Wake Forest's slogan for the 2011 baseball season is '[w]hat are you willing to sacrifice to help make this team better?'  Head coach Tom Walter's intent was to have his players thinking about sacrifice bunts, moving runners over, and giving up personal glory to help the Demon Deacons improve as a team.  But what Walter chose to sacrifice is greater than simply hanging in on a curve ball and taking one for the team."

Somehow, I know I will find myself rooting for Wake Forest this year (as long as they aren't playing Georgia Tech), and deservedly so.  Thank you, Coach Walter, for being the man, coach, and mentor that we should all strive to be.

*All direct quotes and information taken from the Wake Forest Athletics site.

The Bungles

Issue: Since you are from Cincinnati, and you are a Bengals fan, does that mean I have to read about them?

Short Answer: Yes.  It does.

Reasoning: Because they piss me off.  The end.  Totally kidding.  It is because the rest of the football watching world cannot possibly understand what it's like to be a Bengals fan.  Alright, I will give some deference to Lions fans out there (anyone?  anyone?).  The latest in the long line of colossal mistakes by the Bengals front office (re: Mike Brown) is the hiring of Jay Gruden as offensive coordinator.  Jay played football in the Arena League and coached in the Arena League.  His only NFL experience came...wait for it...in Tampa Bay, under his brother Jon.  Let's be honest, having Jon Gruden as an older brother is really what Jay is known for.  Which got me to thinking...have the Bengals ever engaged in nepotism before?  And, how did that turn out for them (thanks to Mike P. for the idea - swiped it from his Facebook status)?

To clarify, http://www.dictionary.com/ defines nepotism as "patronage bestowed or favoritism shown on the basis of family relationship, as in business and politics."  I believe the Bengals have engaged in this practice a time or two, with Jay Gruden being the latest example.  Let's take a look at some others, ranked from least egregious to most egregious:

1. Katie Blackburn - She is the daughter of Mike Brown (we will get to him later) and the Executive Vice President of the Cincinnati Bengals.  I'm not sure what the Executive Vice President actually does, except, you know, help promulgate a losing franchise.  Actually, what she does do is act as the chief negotiator for the Bengals.  She did go to law school (as did I) and she did probably take a class on negotiation (as did I - it was called "Alternative Dispute Resolution") and her last name is "Brown" (in Cincinnati, that is not a good thing (no offense to someone out there with the last name "Brown" who is NOT related to this family)), so that means she (like I?) is qualified to negotiate professional football contracts, right?  Wrong.  She does fall at #1 on the list (meaning the least egregious) because she never shows up negatively in the news.  Oh, except for the one time she admitted rooting for the Steelers in the playoffs.  Alright, she sucks.
2. Jordan Palmer - You know you suck at football when this is what your Wikipedia page looks like.  Sad.  For you non-Bengals fans (probably most everyone by now), Jordan Palmer is Carson's brother, and the Bengals back-up QB.  He lead UTEP to one bowl game in 4 years as the starter.  He was drafted by the Washington Redskins in 2007, got cut, signed with the Arizona Rattlers of the Arena League, then signed with you-know-who after the 2008 season.  His career NFL statistics*: 10-15(!) for 59 yards, 0 TD, 2 INT, 4 sacks, 1 rush for 4 yards.  Yes, this is the Bengals back-up QB.  Welcome to the hell that is being a Bengals fan.
3. Dave Shula - Dave is the son of former coach Don Shula, who many consider one of the greatest coaches ever (he lead the 1972 Dolphins to an undefeated season and Super Bowl Championship).  Since Don was so good, obviously his son would be good, right?  So wrong it's not even funny.  The parallels between Dave Shula and Jay Gruden are actually quite scary.  Jay Gruden got his start because his brother hired him in Tampa Bay; Dave Shula's first job was under...wait for it...his father Don in Miami in 1982.  In 1989, Jimmy Johnson hired Dave as Offensive Coordinator, but after two years on the job, he was demoted.  So, what did the Bengals do?  Hired him as the Assistant Head Coach in 1991, and then gave him the Head Coach job in 1992, at age 32 (watch out Marvin, looks like Jay Gruden will be the Head Coach pretty soon).  The Bengals, not surprisingly, went 19-53 during the Dave Shula era - and average of about 4 wins a year.  Everyone knows the Bengals were terrible during that stretch, but, realize that Dave Shula had no business running the show in the first place.  Which leads me to...
4. Mike Brown - The biggest idiot in NFL history.  He is the son of legendary football-man Paul Brown, who is credited with the founding of both the Cleveland Browns and Cincinnati Bengals.  Allow me to let Geoff Hobson, the official Bengals beat writer to explain more about Paul Brown**: "Paul Brown has to be on the Mount Rushmore of NFL coaches. From 1946 to 1955 he led Cleveland to 10 straight championship games in two leagues. Not only that, he founded two teams, the facemask, playbooks, the draw play, year-round coaching staffs, and the 40-yard dash while putting the word 'Pro' in 'Football'. Three years after giving birth to the Bengals he coached them into the 1970 playoffs for the quickest postseason bid for an expansion team until the Jaguars and Panthers emerged in the '90s with an unlimited checkbook."  No one, and I mean no one, is heaping any like-praise on his son, Mike Brown.  I typed "Mike Brown" + "Bengals" into google and http://www.mikebrownsucks.com/ was the second result on the page.  Nice.  Mike Brown's record as owner/GM?  114-205-1.  Solid.  Brown's teams have never won a playoff game.  The Bengals have finished over .500 twice under Brown (since 1991!), meaning they have only made the playoffs twice during his tenure.  The Lions have made it 6 times during that same stretch.  Brown was the fastest owner to 200 loses, and, the slowest to 100 wins.  Since 1991, 13 teams have started 0-8 - the Bengals have done it 4 of those 13 times.***  The only way the Bengals are ever going to change is if Mike Brown steps down, which we know won't happen.  I guess Bengals fans will have to wait until he takes a dirt nap.  I don't wish ill on anyone, but I am tired of losing.  Let's hope Jay Gruden ends this trend.  Oh, and Fah Q Mike Brown. 

*Taken from NFL.com.
**Taken from bengals.com.
***Most stats taken from this Brown-bashing article.

A Tribute to a True American Hero

Issue: Today is the Super Bowl though.  What gives?

Short Answer: Already did a Super Bowl post (see below).  This is way better anyway.

Reasoning: Allow me to set the scene for some of the coolest video I have ever seen:

• Setting - The 16th hole at the TPC Scottsdale Stadium Course (I have actually played the Desert Course at TPC Scottsdale, but that has absolutely nothing to do with anything).  This hole has become its own entity over the last decade.  In 2008, Tournament sponsor FBR (the sponsor is now Waste Management) added 3,000 more bleacher seats to bring the total capacity, for the 16th hole only, a very short par-3 at about 150 yards, to over 20,000.  And most are ridiculously drunk.  The whole setting is basically the exact opposite of what you would expect at a golf course on the PGA Tour.  But, man is it cool to watch.  The fans boo the players when they miss the green, and leave putts short, and play it safe.  However, when you do something good, the place absolutely erupts.  It is pure, unadulterated fun, and it makes a relatively benign tournament in February, into something worth watching.  Here is video of Tiger Woods making a hole-in-one at the 16th in 1997 (the reason I chose this video is because of the sheer raucousness of the crowd, and, when they pan away as he is walking off the tee, you can see beer cups, bottles, and cans being chucked onto the tee by fans.  Awesome.):

• Cast - The video clip stars Billy Mayfair.  He will never be considered a great golfer by PGA Tour standards, but he has won 5 times (none since 1998).  He is aging, and he actually had to go back to Q-school after the 2010 season, since he finished 142 on the official money list.  He did, however, attend Arizona State University, and fans at the 16th hole love ASU alumni (re: Phil Mickleson).  In the video, Billy Mayfair pays homage to another former Arizona State Sun Devil, Pat Tillman.  For those of you who don't know, Pat Tillman played safety for Arizona State and then the Arizona Cardinals.  He was a fantastic athlete.  He was also a fantastic American.  Shortly after the attacks of September 11, 2001, Pat Tillman decided to walk away from a career in the NFL to join the Army Special Forces.  He was killed in Afghanistan in 2004, most probably by friendly-fire (author Jon Krakauer penned quite a literary piece called Where Men Win Glory: The Odyssey of Pat Tillman, which details the events surrounding his death.  Heck of a read.).
• Climax - Billy Mayfair, a decent-at-best PGA Tour golfer, heads to the 16th hole at TPC Scottsdale in the 2nd round (which actually took place on Saturday due to frost delays earlier in the week.  Yes, frost delays in Phoenix.  Winter sucks.).  The 16th tee at TPC Scottsdale is the place where even professional golfers get nervous.  No one wants to get booed by 20,000 people.  So, Mayfair ups the ante (and the pressure) by donning a Pat Tillman Arizona State jersey.  That alone would have stopped anyone from booing him, no matter what.  But, what happened next, kinda makes you wonder...

Thank you Billy Mayfair.  And, thank you Pat Tillman - a true American hero.

The Odd Stat of the Week, Super Bowl Edition

Issue: Who is better, the Steelers or the Packers?

Short Answer: The Green Bay Packers.

Reasoning: Ladies and gentlemen, I am going to make an outlandish assertion: the Green Bay Packers were THIS close [pan out to a shot of me holding my thumb and index finger extremely close together.  No, like, really, really close] to being considered one of the greatest teams ever.  That's right, I said "ever."  When people think about the greatest teams ever, usually, overall record is the only stat that is considered.  A Super Bowl victory no longer matters.  I say this, because the 2007 New England Patriots, who went 18-0 before losing to the New York Football Giants in the Super Bowl, usually crack the list at #2 of "Greatest NFL Teams of All Time."  The #1 team is obviously the 1972 Miami Dolphins who went 17-0 and actually won that all-important game at the end of the season.  So, how, at 10-6, can the 2010 Green Bay Packers almost (I know, horseshoes and hand grenades) be considered one of the best teams ever?

As Mike Florio at ProFootballTalk reports (via the Wall Street Journal) the Packers are the first team in NFL history to lose six games in a season, all of them by four points or fewer.  In fact, they are the first team to even lose five games in a season, all by four points or fewer.  The only team in history to lose four games by four points or fewer was the 1987 Washington Redskins, who went on to win the Super Bowl.  So, it seems the Packers were THIS close [the thumb and index finger again] to possibly being undefeated.  Let us review their losses:

1. Week 3 @ Chicago - The Packers were flagged a season high 18 times for a season high 152 yards (their next highest total was 66 yards).  The Packers had a touchdown wiped out by a holding call, an interception erased with a roughing the passer penalty, and another interception wiped out by a pass interference call.  Devin Hester broke the record for most return TD's in the history of the NFL, and he did it in the 4th quarter.  And still, it took a Robbie Gould field goal with 4 seconds left, for the Bears to pull the game out, 20-17.
2. Week 5 @ Washington - After a sloppy game for both teams, and a mostly sloppy overtime period, Aaron Rodgers threw an interception to LaRon Landry at the Green Bay 39-yard line.  After two costly Green Bay penalties, Graham Gano hit a 33-yard field goal to give the Redskins a 16-13 victory.
3. Week 6 vs. Miami - Really?  They lost to Miami at home?  This is why betting on the NFL is impossible.  Or so my buddy told me.  Aaron Rodgers tied the game with 13 seconds left to go on a 1-yard scamper (first time I have ever used the word "scamper" - not as cool as I thought it would be).  After a Packer punt in overtime, the Dolphins took over on the Green Bay 48, ran 7 plays, kicked a field goal, and escaped with a 23-20 victory.
4. Week 12 @ Atlanta - Aaron Rodgers fumbled on the Atlanta 1-yard line in the 2nd quarter (oops), and the Falcons turned that into a touchdown just before the half (even though Tony Gonzalez may not have actually made the catch on a 4th down conversion to keep the drive alive).  Fast forward to 4th and goal with a minute left in the 4th quarter, when Aaron Rodgers scrambles out of the pocket and finds a streaking Jordy Nelson in the end zone to tie the game (I'm sure you have seen this highlight on ESPN ad nauseum).  However, a 15-yard facemask penalty on the ensuing kickoff meant doom for the unlucky Packers.  Matt Bryant hit a 47-yard field goal with 13 seconds left to give the Falcons a 20-17 win.
5. Week 14 @ Detroit - This had to knock some people out of their survivor pools.  Remember, don't bet on the NFL.  Oh, and this was tied for the biggest blowout suffered by the Packers in 2010.  Four points.  Aaron Rodgers got hurt, Matt Flynn came into the game, the Packers scored 3 points, and lost 7-3.  Let's move on.
6. Week 15 @ New England - The Packers suffer another 4-point loss.  It's a wonder how they could get their psyche back in tact, and make a successful playoff run, after suffering back-to-back blowouts like this (I hope you are sensing my sarcasm by this point).  Did I mention Matt Flynn again played instead of Aaron Rodgers?  And he threw 3 touchdowns.  Maybe people who were riding the Patriots all the way to the Super Bowl should have realized how bad their defense was (myself included - I picked the Patriots over the Jets to knock me out of my survivor pool.  No worries, I still got a little piece of the pie).  Still, the Packers lost 31-27.

The moral to the story?  Since the Packers lost 6 games this year, they will never be considered one of the best teams ever - even if (when?) they win the Super Bowl.  But, one could make an argument that the Packers didn't really play a bad game all year.  Why would the Super Bowl be their first one?  Packers 27, Steelers 17.  Or so I hope.  I can't stand to see the Steelers win another Super Bowl.

National Signing Day?

Issue: What is that?  Some sort of Declaration of Independence recreation?

Short Answer: I wish it were.

Reasoning: Tomorrow, February 2, 2011, marks the day when numerous high school seniors (who also happen to be fairly good at football) finally decide where they are going to "attend" college.  Or, shall I say, where they are going to play football, all the while acting like a college student.  Sort of.  If you are reading this, and you are excited about "national signing day," then you are part of the problem.  You, and ESPN, who is televising 10 hours of coverage on ESPNU.  That's right, 10 hours of children (yes, 17 and 18 year olds are still children) sitting in front of a slew of microphones, announcing that next year they will "take their talents" (I guarantee that at least one kid uses LeBron's line, thinking it's funny, even though it will be nothing more than sad) to some university by picking one of the five hats in front of them and putting it on their head.  And people care about this.  Or, perhaps more acurately, there is money to be made off of it.  Why else would ESPNU televise it for 10 hours?

Folks, this is utterly ridiculous.  Most of these kids will not be prepared to play at the college level next year anyway.  The game will be too fast for them.  So, in turn, a lot of them will redshirt, maybe unwillingly.  Then the kid is going to be upset and transfer somewhere else, or sit out the entire year as a redshirt.  Then, why should we have cared about his "press conference" in the first place?  We shouldn't have.  And the fact that ESPN is telling you that you should care, makes me think, that ESPN thinks, that you are dumb ("you" meaning second person everyone, not "you" in particular).  Now, to say that a recruiting class, as a whole, means nothing, is incorrect.  Having a good recruiting class for any school, in any sport, is extremely important.  And, I don't mind if fans pay attention to that and care about that, i.e., "our recruiting class was ranked 2nd in the nation...I hope these guys pan out!"  But, to have individuals picking a school on national TV, is asinine at best.

Let me tell you about the day I decided when I was going to take my talents to Atlanta (that's where Georgia Tech is, for those of you who don't know).  The early signing period for baseball players is sometime in November (c'mon people, this was 14 years ago - I don't really remember the exact date!).  So, a few days before that magical date, I received my "national letter of intent" in the mail (remember, this was 1996 - I wonder if they are e-mailed and electronically signed these days?).  A few days later, on "national signing day," I sat down at my kitchen counter, with my dad, signed my name on the dotted line, folded the paper back up, stuck it in the envelope provided, and put it in the outgoing mail.  Dad patted me on the back, and I went back to watching TV, with a smile on my face.  No cameras.  No fanfare.  No media.  And I was ranked as the #1 prospect in the state of Ohio.  No joke.  Now, I realize that baseball does not make millions of dollars for universities, and, well, football does.  But when I was 18, I didn't live under the delusion that anyone really cared (outside of my immediate family and friends) where I was going to go to school.  Today's youth has been brought up in the "me" era of reality TV and people who are famous for no reason (the Kardashians, Paris Hilton, everyone on MTV, etc.).  These kids have been lead to believe, probably by those closest to them, that they deserve the attention they are getting.  They don't.  Yet.  Too many "top prospects" fizzle out in college (mostly because of beer) no matter what sport they play, so it shouldn't be a big deal where these kids are going to college in the first place.  Let's wait and see if they can handle the pressures of wearing a big time school's name on their chest before we start telling these kids how great they are.

So, when you are looking for something to watch on TV tomorrow, please, please, please, avoid ESPNU.  Don't be part of the problem, start being part of the solution.  If there is one.