Well, the combination of a poor performance by the Bears offense (albeit with another great defensive/special teams performance), plus my fantasy team continuing to crap the bed from a team that looked great on paper to one that can't function (thanks to my boss, a life long Bills fan for jinxing CJ Spiller for me), plus the awful officiating culminating in the officials blowing the Sunday and Monday night games ... yeah, I'm borderline out on the NFL until the real officials are back. Which, incidentally, looks like it might be soon. Or not. Really, who the hell knows? (If you didn't take the time to follow those links, ESPN right now says "Deal between NFL, Refs very close" while Sports Illustrated says "NFL, Referees still not close to a deal." I LOVE headlines and the 24 hour a day news cycle.)
So, with that said, I thought I'd take a look at the shocking reality that is becoming this presidential election cycle. If you've read my political breakdowns here before, you know that I looked at the Republican Primary season from a "who is most likely to win" schema. I will view the general election the same way. That said, some general pointers from history indicate that:
- Presidents with economies in recession don't win re-election.
- A President with an economy this poor hasn't won re-election since FDR
- Barack Obama is the President.
Pretty simple, right? The economy has continued an uber slow recovery, barely creeping along at times. The housing market continues to be in shambles. The Congress hasn't accomplished a thing since the midterm elections split the House and the Senate in 2010. Historically, this election would look like 1976, 1980, or 1992. In each of those elections a weak incumbent, hamstrung by issues, faded quickly and ended up being defeated. 1980 (Reagan over Carter) and 1992 (Clinton over H.W. Bush) are particularly pertinent examples. To wit:
- With Carter, the nation's unemployment rate sat at 7.5% when he took office in 1977. It went steadily down, getting under 6% through much of 1979, but in 1980, an election year, the rate went back up into the 7.2-7.8% rate. Carter also faced a major crisis in the Middle East (the Iranian Hostage situation) and high energy (read: GAS) costs. Keep in mind: unemployment actually exploded under Reagan's first term , eventually going over 10% for ten concurrent months between September 1982 and June of 1983. It started declining at that point, however, and by November of 1984 (election time) the rate was at a much more comfortable 7.4%. You know, .1% less than it was when high unemployment helped to undo Carter in 1980. The message, as always? Beauty is in the eye of the beholder. Whereas unemployment was heading in the wrong direction for Carter, Reagan could argue that things were headed in the right direction. Incidentally, they were proven "right" as unemployment continued to plummet during Ronnie's 2nd term, down to sub 6% his entire last year.
- With Bush, he took over a stable economy that held under 6% unemployment his entire first year. But then those evil economic forces started to creep in and the unemployment rate slowly started creeping up. By 1992 the rate climbed back over 7% (October 1991 to be exact) and stayed over 7% throughout 1992. Although H.W.'s foreign policy was generally (and honestly still is) something to be commended, the economic difficulty brought in Clinton, who saw unemployment rates that Reagan could only dream of, seeing 42 straight months under 5% (and even some months under 4%) to end out his term. During the "Dubya" administration rates held fairly steady, until the end where rates made it to 7% by the time he left office.
Now, if rates over 7% indicate a candidate's doom, Obama's rates above 8% (after three years sitting between 9-10%) should spell certain doom. Of course, if it were that easy, Mitt Romney should be celebrating right now. Right? After all, both Reagan and Clinton were able to breath pretty easy. However, look at the polls right now, and you find a different reality. Every set of polling data that comes out looks better and better for Obama, worse and worse for Romney. Today's Quinnipiac poll shockingly shows Obama up by DOUBLE DIGITS in three major swing states: Pennsylvania, Ohio and Florida. And while this poll shows the largest margins of all polls, it continues the absolute trend among polls moving towards Obama. I won't take the time to break them all down here, but this link gives you a break down of each and every reputable poll. The question, simply put, isn't IF Obama is in the lead, but HOW MUCH is Obama in the lead. Honestly, the more this continues trend this way the more the question becomes: does Romney even have a punchers chance?
So, why is Obama bucking history? I'm not sure I have the answer, but I do know this: Romney needs an unbelievable debate performance, starting next Wednesday, to have even a wing and a prayer of salvaging this thing. Needless to say, I'll try to clear out my schedule to live blog the debate next week. It sure as hell interests me more than the NFL's crappy replacement officials and my awful fantasy football team.
On to the picks:
Last week against the spread: 9-6-1
Last week straight up:8-8
Season against the spread: 25-21-2
Season straight up: 25-23
Thursday Night Game
Baltimore (-13) over Cleveland - Moral of the story: I fully believe Baltimore can blow this line and win by one or two ... but I still can't bet on Cleveland.
Sunday Early Games
Atlanta (-8) over Carolina - Moral of the story: after last week's game against San Diego, is this line high enough?
New England (-5) over Buffalo - no (good) RBs healthy in Buffalo, New England can't lose three in a row... can they?
Minnesota (+5) over Detroit - Moral of the story: I just have a hunch, particularly if Stafford is out.
San Diego (-1) over Kansas City - Moral of the story: I still don't believe in Romeo.
St. Louis (+3) over Seattle - Moral of the story: Bad karma for last week's replacement ref job over Green Bay.
San Francisco (-5) over NY Jets - Moral of the story: Revis out for the year is a huge blow. No offense, struggling defense, and I bet San Fran comes to play.
Tennessee (+13) over Houston - Moral of the story: Houston continues to play like a Super Bowl contender, but this line just feels to high. I'll take Houston to win the game, however.
Sunday Late Games
Denver (-7) over Oakland - Moral of the story: Oakland is confusing me, but I think Peyton is due for a semi-Peyton game.
Arizona (-6) over Miami - Moral of the story: Fool me once, shame on Arizona. Fool me three times (and counting) ...
Cincinnati (-3) over Jacksonville - Moral of the story: I am not glad I ended up with Chris Johnson instead of MJD on my fantasy roster.
Green Bay (-8) over New Orleans - Moral of the story: Good karma for the game on Monday.
Washington (+3) over Tampa Bay - Moral of the story: RGIII can move the pocket; Josh Freeman can't seem to get things done. That said, I need to watch this closely because with all the injuries in Washington I might be missing the bus here.
Sunday Night Game
NY Giants (+1) over Philadelphia - Moral of the story: I'm getting close to out on Philly
Monday Night Game
Chicago (+4) over Dallas - Moral of the story: Both offensive lines are ... offensive. I think the extra time off helps Chicago, and I want this very badly for my Uncle.
Until next time, Thursday night football sucks. Replacement refs suck more!
Wednesday, September 26, 2012
Sunday, September 23, 2012
Losing The Fire: The P.O.V. Review of "Away From The World"
Growing up listening to Dave Matthews Band I wore my copy of Under the Table and Dreaming out. Listening to the album on my walkman, I grew to appreciate the complexity of the music, the use of the sax and violin, and the driving, pushing music mixed in with slower songs. The album flowed, and it was just enjoyable.
The second album the band released (Crash; although Remember Two Things technically precedes both albums) had a bit more edge, but still produced the mix of larger scale songs and slower tracks. By 1998's Before These Crowded Streets I was all in on Dave Matthews Band. While that album took me the better part of a decade to truly appreciate, there is no doubt that the complexities that permeate the first two albums continued through the third installment.
By the release of Everyday, (following the benching of The Lillywhite Sessions; eventually released in slightly watered down form as Busted Stuff) the band seemed to be searching for a different direction. Everyday's pop centric feel was a stark departure from the first three albums, and Stand Up's highly political feel seemed much smaller scale than what the band had been capable of. While most fans agree that 2009's Big Whiskey and the Groo-Grux King was an inspired effort, even this return to glory of sort left true fans longing for something.
But what? As the band "took off" the summer of 2011 to focus on developing a new album most fans took the news to be what it appeared to be on the surface: the band had ground out 20 years of seemingly endless touring, and so they deserved a year off. Yet, between the lines cracks were showing: many members of the band seemed to questioning taking time off. In Charlottesville, VA, in the penultimate show of the 2010 tour Dave himself dropped perhaps the biggest piece of information to that end. That night, in the midst of perhaps the best two night stand the band had put together since the early 2000s, Dave discussed the Band's decision to take a year off. He reflected on on the death of founding band member and close friend Leroi Moore, and then stated that he sometimes wondered "what the hell" he was doing by taking a year off. As a member of that sold out arena that night I can tell you that the general feeling from the crowd was pretty much the same.
In that moment you could see the starts of the ambivalence that Dave feels towards his career at the present time. Throughout the subsequent "off" year (composed of four "Caravans" where the band played three night stands in New Jersey, Chicago, New York (four nights, counting the hurricane), and the Gorge) showed a great deal of energy from Dave, giving hope to the idea that time off, plus some creative studio time, was going to help build on Big Whiskey's momentum and lead to a Renaissance of sorts for the band. Coupled with the news that Steve Lillywhite, the producer of the first three albums as well as much of the material which ended up surviving The Lillywhite Sessions to make the Busted Stuff cut, would be producing the album, expectations were sky high for the new album.
And it was under that set of expectations that the 2012 summer tour began. All outward indication was that the band had missed touring the country (Stefan even indicated that he disliked the caravan set up so much that it wouldn't happen again). A smaller, more compact summer tour schedule was released, which was a bit of a head scratcher, but made some sense given the equally surprising announcement that the album wouldn't be released until September, after the summer tour. Perhaps the band was still working on material, wanted to road test some of it, and was planning on using a lighter schedule to help put the finishing touches on the new album.
The first new song confirmed to be on the album was "Mercy," which made its' debut on the Jimmy Falon show staring President Obama. The song felt eerily like a souped up, slower version of the same political sentiment that got the band into trouble with 2005's Stand Up, but it was just one song, and it was one song played without the band backing Dave up. The second track released, "Gaucho," was dropped in typical DMB fashion: a free release to members of the fan association on the evening of the first summer tour show. The song continued with the political theme, but involved the full band to create a great sound behind the struggling chorus lines. Still, if one had to surmise Dave's central thesis after two songs, it could be pretty easily drawn from the two songs released as being "Obama hasn't followed through, the world is going to hell, we've got to do this ourselves or else our kids won't believe in the possibility for change."
The quality musicianship behind "Gaucho" hid this overall lack of driving lyrics well, but the ensuing debuts of "If Only" and "The Riff" served only to misdirect it. The band felt like it was being kept with a muzzle on it at times throughout these songs. It was almost the opposite of the way that Big Whiskey managed to make the band the dramatic center of the group again. Coupled with the confirmation that "Sweet," a song which I saw the debut of at the Chicago caravan the year before, was going to be on the album, and suddenly we were roughly halfway through an unreleased album. Taking stock of it I came to the conclusion that this album would most likely not resonate with me right now, but would be much more meaningful in ten years. I came to this conclusion because much of the material seemed to center lyrically on a depressed melancholy mood wondering if the world was going to hell, what that would mean for one's children, and how to keep the spark alive in one's marriage.
There was even precedent for this: as mentioned above, it took me until my college years to fully appreciate the lyrical depth found in Before These Crowded Streets; whereas I initially thought the album lacked compared to the first two, I now hold the opinion that it is probably the group's crowing achievement. And so I prepared to digest the rest of the album through this schema, expecting to be underwhelmed by the album.
Meanwhile, I saw the group seven times throughout the summer, mostly coming away impressed by the shows. The first show, in Cleveland, was not great, but was salvaged by a Halloween/Tripping Billies encore. This encore would become a semi-staple of the summer tour, perhaps an indicator that the group (which had generally buried Halloween) was trying to make fans happy. Conversely, it could also be an indicator that the group was running cold and needed to bust out songs they usually saved for special occasions to drive up fan reaction. The show in Virginia Beach wasn't bad, and the two night stops in Noblesville and East Troy both lived up to their high standards. The final show, in Detroit, used the same ending of Halloween and Billies to drive up the crowd energy which had been somewhat lacking. Through seven shows I'm still not sure what to make of the group, but it seems like they were having to work harder to make average crowds happy (Cleveland, VA Beach and Detroit) but were able to play like they used to in front of crowds they felt safe with (Noblesville, East Troy).
And then, finally, the album was released. Not surprisingly, the music of the album was restrained, but great when it was allowed to shine ("Belly, Belly Nice," "Broken Things" and "Drunken Soldier" in particular shine through). Surprisingly, however, the lyrics were even worse than the first five songs would have suggested. Sluggish, feeling half baked, the lyrics often seemed to lack the full development you'd expect of a finished album. Many songs have choruses which lack depth, and even songs (like "Drunken Soldier") which seem to be on the verge of traditional DMB big scale lyrical genius end up falling short.
So what does it all mean? I firmly believe, particularly after reading and listening to a number of interviews with Dave it is painfully evident that the lead man of the band is not sure he wants to continuing doing this. The anticipation over a fall tour which looks more and more like it won't happen only serves to drive this point home: new album, with it's strength in the playing of the band, and there is no pending tour. Matthews lyrics are completely lacking, and the band feels muzzled and incapable of overcoming the lacking lyrics. Is it really a surprise that the members of the band who seem most invested in continuing to create more music (Carter, Stefan, and probably Rashawn Ross) are being held back by the front man who's name and voice is the central part of the band?
Compare this to Pearl Jam, with lead singer Eddie Vedder, who manage to continue to pump out new music and reinvent themselves through the years. Whereas Eddie continues to find new ways to express old sentiments, as well as new subjects to explore, Dave Matthews seems mired in... happiness. When you look at the songs that bring the best out of Dave's lyrical development, there is typically two inspiring forces doing the driving. The first is angst: whether of lost love, drug abuse, or confusion over life in general, angst is a central and dark passenger on many classic DMB tracks. The second force, big scale political/spiritual issues has led to the other classic DMB tracks. But now, with a wife, three children, and a comfortable lifestyle, Dave lacks the angst necessary and seems uninterested by tackling the bigger issues.
Sure, he'll take on Obama's failings and the issues with American politics, but he's doing so in a small scale, "Mercy" sort of way. Even his bigger picture attempts, such as the verses in "Gaucho" which paint a beautiful picture of human cultural/political development, he comes to a chorus which simply implores that we "gotta do much more than believe if we really wanna change things." Compare this with the burning drive in "Last Stop" or the melancholic summary of human development in "Dreaming Tree" and you find that "Gaucho" is loaded with potential, yet is impotent due to lacking lyrics.
And, honestly, Dave Matthews deserves this. Great music generally stems from the angst experienced by the musicians or witnessed by them. Dave hit the nail on the head in the pop single "Funny the Way it is" off of Big Whiskey when he mused that "somebody's broken heart becomes your favorite song." When Dave wrote songs about his broken heart, or about his lack of certainty over why we exist, or about where society is going wrong, or why there is war in the Middle East and even humanizing Christ, we could all relate. These were songs the average person could put on and say "yeah, I get it." The vast majority of people can relate to falling on their knees begging someone, anyone to help them make sense of it all, and fearing their own mortality ("When I was young I never think about it, now I can't get it out of my mind"). Now? Dave writes lyrics about things he thinks he should write things about. He's trying to write about broken hearts, but more through the schema of marriage rather than the angst of not having anyone. He writes about his son growing up, but doesn't seem to have a voice to lend to it. He still tries to tackle political issues, but seems to be throwing his hands up and saying "well, I don't know what to do, but I know it's not this, and I'm just not happy with it." He touches on the uncertainty our existence, but the gets lazy with the lyrics (again, "Drunken Soldier").
In sum, Dave Matthews lacks the fire he did when he was younger. This summer he seemed happy to rest on his reputation by busting out all the rarely played epic favorites he knew would fire the crowd up. I wonder now if the band didn't do that because they understood that their mini-renaissance in Big Whiskey was driven by an angst (following Leroi Moore's death) that they couldn't keep going. Dave is happy, comfortable, and tired of the pressure of touring and developing new songs. I think he doesn't want to go there anymore because his angst, the great energy behind the group's high points, is far behind him. Whereas Pearl Jam has managed to reinvent themselves through the years, Dave Matthews Band still is what it always was. The recipe just doesn't work as well when you try to mix it without the fire.
Album Breakdown:
1. Broken Things - 3.5/5
2. Belly Belly - 3/5
3. Mercy - 2/5
4. Gaucho - 3/5
5. Sweet - 3/5
6. The Riff - 3.5/5
7. Belly Full - 4/5
8. If Only - 3.5/5
9. Rooftop - 3/5
10. Snow Outside - 3.5/5
11. Drunken Soldier - 4.5/5
Total: 3.3/5 album rating
The second album the band released (Crash; although Remember Two Things technically precedes both albums) had a bit more edge, but still produced the mix of larger scale songs and slower tracks. By 1998's Before These Crowded Streets I was all in on Dave Matthews Band. While that album took me the better part of a decade to truly appreciate, there is no doubt that the complexities that permeate the first two albums continued through the third installment.
By the release of Everyday, (following the benching of The Lillywhite Sessions; eventually released in slightly watered down form as Busted Stuff) the band seemed to be searching for a different direction. Everyday's pop centric feel was a stark departure from the first three albums, and Stand Up's highly political feel seemed much smaller scale than what the band had been capable of. While most fans agree that 2009's Big Whiskey and the Groo-Grux King was an inspired effort, even this return to glory of sort left true fans longing for something.
But what? As the band "took off" the summer of 2011 to focus on developing a new album most fans took the news to be what it appeared to be on the surface: the band had ground out 20 years of seemingly endless touring, and so they deserved a year off. Yet, between the lines cracks were showing: many members of the band seemed to questioning taking time off. In Charlottesville, VA, in the penultimate show of the 2010 tour Dave himself dropped perhaps the biggest piece of information to that end. That night, in the midst of perhaps the best two night stand the band had put together since the early 2000s, Dave discussed the Band's decision to take a year off. He reflected on on the death of founding band member and close friend Leroi Moore, and then stated that he sometimes wondered "what the hell" he was doing by taking a year off. As a member of that sold out arena that night I can tell you that the general feeling from the crowd was pretty much the same.
In that moment you could see the starts of the ambivalence that Dave feels towards his career at the present time. Throughout the subsequent "off" year (composed of four "Caravans" where the band played three night stands in New Jersey, Chicago, New York (four nights, counting the hurricane), and the Gorge) showed a great deal of energy from Dave, giving hope to the idea that time off, plus some creative studio time, was going to help build on Big Whiskey's momentum and lead to a Renaissance of sorts for the band. Coupled with the news that Steve Lillywhite, the producer of the first three albums as well as much of the material which ended up surviving The Lillywhite Sessions to make the Busted Stuff cut, would be producing the album, expectations were sky high for the new album.
And it was under that set of expectations that the 2012 summer tour began. All outward indication was that the band had missed touring the country (Stefan even indicated that he disliked the caravan set up so much that it wouldn't happen again). A smaller, more compact summer tour schedule was released, which was a bit of a head scratcher, but made some sense given the equally surprising announcement that the album wouldn't be released until September, after the summer tour. Perhaps the band was still working on material, wanted to road test some of it, and was planning on using a lighter schedule to help put the finishing touches on the new album.
The first new song confirmed to be on the album was "Mercy," which made its' debut on the Jimmy Falon show staring President Obama. The song felt eerily like a souped up, slower version of the same political sentiment that got the band into trouble with 2005's Stand Up, but it was just one song, and it was one song played without the band backing Dave up. The second track released, "Gaucho," was dropped in typical DMB fashion: a free release to members of the fan association on the evening of the first summer tour show. The song continued with the political theme, but involved the full band to create a great sound behind the struggling chorus lines. Still, if one had to surmise Dave's central thesis after two songs, it could be pretty easily drawn from the two songs released as being "Obama hasn't followed through, the world is going to hell, we've got to do this ourselves or else our kids won't believe in the possibility for change."
The quality musicianship behind "Gaucho" hid this overall lack of driving lyrics well, but the ensuing debuts of "If Only" and "The Riff" served only to misdirect it. The band felt like it was being kept with a muzzle on it at times throughout these songs. It was almost the opposite of the way that Big Whiskey managed to make the band the dramatic center of the group again. Coupled with the confirmation that "Sweet," a song which I saw the debut of at the Chicago caravan the year before, was going to be on the album, and suddenly we were roughly halfway through an unreleased album. Taking stock of it I came to the conclusion that this album would most likely not resonate with me right now, but would be much more meaningful in ten years. I came to this conclusion because much of the material seemed to center lyrically on a depressed melancholy mood wondering if the world was going to hell, what that would mean for one's children, and how to keep the spark alive in one's marriage.
There was even precedent for this: as mentioned above, it took me until my college years to fully appreciate the lyrical depth found in Before These Crowded Streets; whereas I initially thought the album lacked compared to the first two, I now hold the opinion that it is probably the group's crowing achievement. And so I prepared to digest the rest of the album through this schema, expecting to be underwhelmed by the album.
Meanwhile, I saw the group seven times throughout the summer, mostly coming away impressed by the shows. The first show, in Cleveland, was not great, but was salvaged by a Halloween/Tripping Billies encore. This encore would become a semi-staple of the summer tour, perhaps an indicator that the group (which had generally buried Halloween) was trying to make fans happy. Conversely, it could also be an indicator that the group was running cold and needed to bust out songs they usually saved for special occasions to drive up fan reaction. The show in Virginia Beach wasn't bad, and the two night stops in Noblesville and East Troy both lived up to their high standards. The final show, in Detroit, used the same ending of Halloween and Billies to drive up the crowd energy which had been somewhat lacking. Through seven shows I'm still not sure what to make of the group, but it seems like they were having to work harder to make average crowds happy (Cleveland, VA Beach and Detroit) but were able to play like they used to in front of crowds they felt safe with (Noblesville, East Troy).
And then, finally, the album was released. Not surprisingly, the music of the album was restrained, but great when it was allowed to shine ("Belly, Belly Nice," "Broken Things" and "Drunken Soldier" in particular shine through). Surprisingly, however, the lyrics were even worse than the first five songs would have suggested. Sluggish, feeling half baked, the lyrics often seemed to lack the full development you'd expect of a finished album. Many songs have choruses which lack depth, and even songs (like "Drunken Soldier") which seem to be on the verge of traditional DMB big scale lyrical genius end up falling short.
So what does it all mean? I firmly believe, particularly after reading and listening to a number of interviews with Dave it is painfully evident that the lead man of the band is not sure he wants to continuing doing this. The anticipation over a fall tour which looks more and more like it won't happen only serves to drive this point home: new album, with it's strength in the playing of the band, and there is no pending tour. Matthews lyrics are completely lacking, and the band feels muzzled and incapable of overcoming the lacking lyrics. Is it really a surprise that the members of the band who seem most invested in continuing to create more music (Carter, Stefan, and probably Rashawn Ross) are being held back by the front man who's name and voice is the central part of the band?
Compare this to Pearl Jam, with lead singer Eddie Vedder, who manage to continue to pump out new music and reinvent themselves through the years. Whereas Eddie continues to find new ways to express old sentiments, as well as new subjects to explore, Dave Matthews seems mired in... happiness. When you look at the songs that bring the best out of Dave's lyrical development, there is typically two inspiring forces doing the driving. The first is angst: whether of lost love, drug abuse, or confusion over life in general, angst is a central and dark passenger on many classic DMB tracks. The second force, big scale political/spiritual issues has led to the other classic DMB tracks. But now, with a wife, three children, and a comfortable lifestyle, Dave lacks the angst necessary and seems uninterested by tackling the bigger issues.
Sure, he'll take on Obama's failings and the issues with American politics, but he's doing so in a small scale, "Mercy" sort of way. Even his bigger picture attempts, such as the verses in "Gaucho" which paint a beautiful picture of human cultural/political development, he comes to a chorus which simply implores that we "gotta do much more than believe if we really wanna change things." Compare this with the burning drive in "Last Stop" or the melancholic summary of human development in "Dreaming Tree" and you find that "Gaucho" is loaded with potential, yet is impotent due to lacking lyrics.
And, honestly, Dave Matthews deserves this. Great music generally stems from the angst experienced by the musicians or witnessed by them. Dave hit the nail on the head in the pop single "Funny the Way it is" off of Big Whiskey when he mused that "somebody's broken heart becomes your favorite song." When Dave wrote songs about his broken heart, or about his lack of certainty over why we exist, or about where society is going wrong, or why there is war in the Middle East and even humanizing Christ, we could all relate. These were songs the average person could put on and say "yeah, I get it." The vast majority of people can relate to falling on their knees begging someone, anyone to help them make sense of it all, and fearing their own mortality ("When I was young I never think about it, now I can't get it out of my mind"). Now? Dave writes lyrics about things he thinks he should write things about. He's trying to write about broken hearts, but more through the schema of marriage rather than the angst of not having anyone. He writes about his son growing up, but doesn't seem to have a voice to lend to it. He still tries to tackle political issues, but seems to be throwing his hands up and saying "well, I don't know what to do, but I know it's not this, and I'm just not happy with it." He touches on the uncertainty our existence, but the gets lazy with the lyrics (again, "Drunken Soldier").
In sum, Dave Matthews lacks the fire he did when he was younger. This summer he seemed happy to rest on his reputation by busting out all the rarely played epic favorites he knew would fire the crowd up. I wonder now if the band didn't do that because they understood that their mini-renaissance in Big Whiskey was driven by an angst (following Leroi Moore's death) that they couldn't keep going. Dave is happy, comfortable, and tired of the pressure of touring and developing new songs. I think he doesn't want to go there anymore because his angst, the great energy behind the group's high points, is far behind him. Whereas Pearl Jam has managed to reinvent themselves through the years, Dave Matthews Band still is what it always was. The recipe just doesn't work as well when you try to mix it without the fire.
Album Breakdown:
1. Broken Things - 3.5/5
2. Belly Belly - 3/5
3. Mercy - 2/5
4. Gaucho - 3/5
5. Sweet - 3/5
6. The Riff - 3.5/5
7. Belly Full - 4/5
8. If Only - 3.5/5
9. Rooftop - 3/5
10. Snow Outside - 3.5/5
11. Drunken Soldier - 4.5/5
Total: 3.3/5 album rating
Wednesday, September 19, 2012
2012 NFL Picks Week 3
Sometimes I am very glad that I don't bet copious amounts of money on the NFL. Last week was one of those times. After two weeks, one eighth of the way through the season, almost everything I thought I knew at the season's onset is being called into questions. The AFC East is a bunch of 1-1 teams, with each team having one game where it looked like a potential division champion and one game looking like a scrub. Arizona, one of my picks to be the laughing stock of the league, is 2-0 with a victory over New England, my preseason pick to win it all. Above all else, my Bears proved emphatically that Lovie still has not learned to game plan, or at least that he has no idea how to go after the Packers.
Looking at this another way, consider the following:
- six teams are 2-0; of those teams, Philadelphia, Atlanta, San Francisco, Houston and maybe San Diego can be expected, while Arizona couldn't have been.
- 20 teams (including the entirety of the NFC North and AFC East are 1-1, most of them looking great one week and awful the next.
- The remaining six teams are 0-2; of those teams New Orleans might be the biggest surprise, but Kansas City has certainly surprised me with their level of stink (roped in by Romeo Crennel again!)
Twenty teams doing a Jekyll/Hyde act ... I suppose that explains a bit of why I have no idea who to pick this week. However...
9-6-1 against the spread. That was my record last week, which shocked me (again, I struggled with the late games). 9-7 straight up. In a week that felt totally hectic, my picks weren't actually that bad. So what to make of all of it? I have a few thoughts on the NFL right now:
1. The replacement officials have added a degree of variability to the product on the field. The Rams-Redskins game was the most blatantly physical game in the better part of a decade. The Falcons-Broncos game showed the same thing: teams are looking for ways to take advantage of the rules. Mike Lombari was on the Score (670 AM Chicago) this week and stated that he hasn't seen one instance of the illegal contact call made this year. This rule, remember, was the "Peyton Manning Rule," instituted after Bill Polian whined to the NFL about the Patriots playing physical defense on the Colts WRs. Essentially, you can't contact a receiver at all after 5 yards ... except the first two games of this year when, apparently, you can. The officials have yet to completely blow a game, at least as near as I can tell (and please understand that I've only seen one game this year so far: Bears V Colts). But the impact of the officials is vastly changing the way teams are playing.
2. The regression of the big three is fully in progress. Last year Rodgers, Brady and Brees were heads and shoulders above all others in the league. This year all three are playing much more human. Take it from me (starting Rodgers on my fantasy team): this is very real. It has also led to those three starting the year 2-4. If I had given you that bet at the start of the year you would have said they'd have more than two wins.
3. With all the young QBs starting in the league right now teams don't have the consistency they might have had with a veteran hand at the helm. Couple that with some atrocious offensive lines (Chicago and Pittsburgh) and you have a huge number of teams that will look all world one week, and worth of the top pick in the draft the next.
If I had to do a power ranking of the NFL teams, grouped by where I see them fitting into the big scheme, it would look this way:
Top Pick Here We Come! (The Matt Barkley Sweepstakes)
32. Oakland (0-2) - After making Ryan Tannehill look like Joe Montana, I believe Oakland is that bad.
31. Cleveland (0-2) - I still don't believe in Brandon Weeden.
30. Kansas City (0-2) - And that's how my AFC West pick loses me after two games. ROMEO!!!!!
29. Jacksonville (0-2) - I still don't believe in Blaine Gabbert.
28. Tennessee (0-2) - Their offensive line is downright offensive, leading to Chris Johnson getting 24 yards on 19 carries, leading to my fantasy team completely being a nightmare. Thanks Tennessee offensive line.
27. Miami (1-1) - AND I still don't believe in Ryan Tannehill
26. Arizona (2-0) - Yeah, I still don't believe. Also, I might be a bit upset that Larry Fitzgerald had 4 yards receiving last week. Yes, he's on my fantasy team.
The Best of the Bad Teams (good enough to rope you in, bad enough to blow a game when you bet on them)
25. Minnesota (1-1) - Ponder is probably the second best QB on the roster, yet he starts.
24. Indianapolis (1-1) - Luck will be up and down this year, but looks like he has the tools. Again, however, a porous offensive line.
The Team That Might Just Be Screwed This Year (as if bounty gate didn't already prove that)
23. New Orleans (0-2) - This just seems like the type of year where everything that can go wrong will go wrong. If I was Drew Brees I'd take out insurance against a significant injury.
The Complete Enigmas (teams that could go either way, and have huge question marks)
22. Carolina (1-1) - Is there a running game in Carolina?
21. St. Louis (1-1) - Is Sam Bradford a franchise QB?
20. Buffalo (1-1) - Is there talent here, or is it just an illusion? What is Ryan Fitzpatrick?
19. Seattle (1-1) - Should Russell Wilson really be starting over Matt Flynn?
18. Washington (1-1) - Can this offense adapt and gain complexity?
17. Cincinnati (1-1) - Can the Bengals play with the big boys? They sure looked bad against Baltimore.
16. Tampa Bay (1-1) - Are the Bucs 10-6 quality (2010) or as bad as last year? Can Schiano coach with the big boys?
15. Detroit (1-1) - Can a team win without any semblance of a running game? Also, can a team survive a coach who struggles with emotional control?
14. Dallas (1-1) - Can their offensive line block like they did against the Giants, or will they be as porous as they were in Seattle?
13. Chicago (1-1) - Will Lovie ever be able to game plan for a better team? Can the offensive line ever learn to block? Will they stay health? At what point will Urlacher punch Lovie for wasting his prime with stupid offensive schemes? And, above all else, is Cutler a leader?
12. NY Jets (1-1) - Good Sanchez? Bad Sanchez? Wither Tebow Christ?
11. Pittsburgh (1-1) - Again, porous offensive line, aging defense, no running game... can this team win with great coaching and Big Ben?
10. Denver (1-1) - Can Peyton stay healthy? Can he throw deep down field? How will he do now that his remaining 14 games are outdoors?
The Teams With The Talent To Win (should be factor because...)
9. San Diego (2-0) - They've had talent for awhile... but they still have Norv...
8. Baltimore (1-1) - They might have a more dynamic offense ... but are they getting old, and is Flacco consistent enough?
7. Green Bay (1-1) - they still have Rodgers ... but has he peaked?
6. Philadelphia (2-0) - they are talented ... but barely beat the Browns...
5. NY Giants (1-1) - They won it all last year ... but are off to an unimpressive start.
4. Atlanta (2-0) - They should have a clear run to the division title ... but is Matt Ryan ready to make the leap?
3. New England (1-1) - They have more defense this year ... but is Brady getting over the hill?
2. Houston (2-0) - They have offense and defense and have looked as good as they should.
1. San Francisco (2-0) - They look locked in and ready to go. Period.
With all that as the background, on to the picks:
- Last week against the spread: 9-6-1
- Last week straight up: 9-7
- Season against the spread: 16-15-1
- Season straight up: 17-15
Thursday Night
Giants (+3) over Carolina - This line seems off to me, so I'll take the Giants + the points in a game that ESPN is telling me is a toss up. Also, I just want to reiterate how absolutely stupid Thursday night football games are. On my list of reasons why Roger Goodell is the worst commissioner this side of Gary Bettman, this is somewhere on the top ten.
Sunday Early Games
Bears (-8) over St. Louis - I am giving Lovie one more chance: I'll be able to watch this one and I have some faith that the problem is just that Green Bay has some combination of his and Cutler's number. But if they don't look great in this game it might be time for the year's first "why can't we fire Lovie, this guy sucks" blog rants.
Buffalo (-3) over Cleveland - Assuming that the Bills actual level of performance fall somewhere between their week one debacle against the Jets and last week's evisceration of the Chiefs, this line seems right.
Tampa Bay (+8) over Dallas (Dallas straight up) - I think Dallas will bounce back to win, but I get the feeling that Tampa will be a tough out. Of course, if Dallas loses my uncle will get a week of "what's wrong with the Cowboys" sports radio... which is nice.
Detroit (-4) over Tennessee - I've exited the Titans bandwagon. I just hope that the Lions porous defense can resurrect Chris Johnson's corpse for my fantasy team's well being.
Indianapolis (-3) over Jacksonville - Really this comes down to a simple formula in my mind: Luck > Gabbert.
Jets (-3) over Miami - This just feels like the Jets bouncing back to establish their place as one of the better teams that isn't really that good. Miami, on the other hand? I'll just say that Rex Ryan might give up his defensive genius card if he can't take advantage of Tannehill.
San Francisco (-8) over Minnesota - As you can see from my power rankings, I'm in on the 49ers.
New Orleans (-9) over Kansas City - A stoppable force meets a moveable object! I think coach Brees can find a way against Coach Romeo. Just saying.
Cincinnati (+3) over Washington - Just a hunch here, but this game is the perfect line and could go either way.
Sunday Late Games
Philadelpia (+4) over Arizona- This HAS to be where the wheels come off for Arizona, right? RIGHT?
Atlanta (+3) over San Diego - Norv Turner can't start 3-0... right?
Houston (-3) over Denver - Until Peyton Manning proves he can throw the ball 50+ yards in the air I've got questions. Houston should be able to cover the spread on the road here. This should be the game of the day, however.
Pittsburgh(+5) over Oakland - Based on my power rankings I shouldn't think about this. So I won't.
Sunday Night Game
New England (+3) over Baltimore - If New England hadn't inexplicably crapped the bed last week this is Patriots -3. I'll take the points, but this game should tell us a great deal about both teams.
Monday Night Game
Green Bay (-4) over Seattle - I can't root for Green Bay (unlike my brother), and I'm always hoping for the epic "Rodgers throws for six TDs, 700 yards, and the Packers STILL Lose"... but I need to see something from Mr. Rodgers right about now for my fantasy season. I think he does it here.
Looking at this another way, consider the following:
- six teams are 2-0; of those teams, Philadelphia, Atlanta, San Francisco, Houston and maybe San Diego can be expected, while Arizona couldn't have been.
- 20 teams (including the entirety of the NFC North and AFC East are 1-1, most of them looking great one week and awful the next.
- The remaining six teams are 0-2; of those teams New Orleans might be the biggest surprise, but Kansas City has certainly surprised me with their level of stink (roped in by Romeo Crennel again!)
Twenty teams doing a Jekyll/Hyde act ... I suppose that explains a bit of why I have no idea who to pick this week. However...
9-6-1 against the spread. That was my record last week, which shocked me (again, I struggled with the late games). 9-7 straight up. In a week that felt totally hectic, my picks weren't actually that bad. So what to make of all of it? I have a few thoughts on the NFL right now:
1. The replacement officials have added a degree of variability to the product on the field. The Rams-Redskins game was the most blatantly physical game in the better part of a decade. The Falcons-Broncos game showed the same thing: teams are looking for ways to take advantage of the rules. Mike Lombari was on the Score (670 AM Chicago) this week and stated that he hasn't seen one instance of the illegal contact call made this year. This rule, remember, was the "Peyton Manning Rule," instituted after Bill Polian whined to the NFL about the Patriots playing physical defense on the Colts WRs. Essentially, you can't contact a receiver at all after 5 yards ... except the first two games of this year when, apparently, you can. The officials have yet to completely blow a game, at least as near as I can tell (and please understand that I've only seen one game this year so far: Bears V Colts). But the impact of the officials is vastly changing the way teams are playing.
2. The regression of the big three is fully in progress. Last year Rodgers, Brady and Brees were heads and shoulders above all others in the league. This year all three are playing much more human. Take it from me (starting Rodgers on my fantasy team): this is very real. It has also led to those three starting the year 2-4. If I had given you that bet at the start of the year you would have said they'd have more than two wins.
3. With all the young QBs starting in the league right now teams don't have the consistency they might have had with a veteran hand at the helm. Couple that with some atrocious offensive lines (Chicago and Pittsburgh) and you have a huge number of teams that will look all world one week, and worth of the top pick in the draft the next.
If I had to do a power ranking of the NFL teams, grouped by where I see them fitting into the big scheme, it would look this way:
Top Pick Here We Come! (The Matt Barkley Sweepstakes)
32. Oakland (0-2) - After making Ryan Tannehill look like Joe Montana, I believe Oakland is that bad.
31. Cleveland (0-2) - I still don't believe in Brandon Weeden.
30. Kansas City (0-2) - And that's how my AFC West pick loses me after two games. ROMEO!!!!!
29. Jacksonville (0-2) - I still don't believe in Blaine Gabbert.
28. Tennessee (0-2) - Their offensive line is downright offensive, leading to Chris Johnson getting 24 yards on 19 carries, leading to my fantasy team completely being a nightmare. Thanks Tennessee offensive line.
27. Miami (1-1) - AND I still don't believe in Ryan Tannehill
26. Arizona (2-0) - Yeah, I still don't believe. Also, I might be a bit upset that Larry Fitzgerald had 4 yards receiving last week. Yes, he's on my fantasy team.
The Best of the Bad Teams (good enough to rope you in, bad enough to blow a game when you bet on them)
25. Minnesota (1-1) - Ponder is probably the second best QB on the roster, yet he starts.
24. Indianapolis (1-1) - Luck will be up and down this year, but looks like he has the tools. Again, however, a porous offensive line.
The Team That Might Just Be Screwed This Year (as if bounty gate didn't already prove that)
23. New Orleans (0-2) - This just seems like the type of year where everything that can go wrong will go wrong. If I was Drew Brees I'd take out insurance against a significant injury.
The Complete Enigmas (teams that could go either way, and have huge question marks)
22. Carolina (1-1) - Is there a running game in Carolina?
21. St. Louis (1-1) - Is Sam Bradford a franchise QB?
20. Buffalo (1-1) - Is there talent here, or is it just an illusion? What is Ryan Fitzpatrick?
19. Seattle (1-1) - Should Russell Wilson really be starting over Matt Flynn?
18. Washington (1-1) - Can this offense adapt and gain complexity?
17. Cincinnati (1-1) - Can the Bengals play with the big boys? They sure looked bad against Baltimore.
16. Tampa Bay (1-1) - Are the Bucs 10-6 quality (2010) or as bad as last year? Can Schiano coach with the big boys?
15. Detroit (1-1) - Can a team win without any semblance of a running game? Also, can a team survive a coach who struggles with emotional control?
14. Dallas (1-1) - Can their offensive line block like they did against the Giants, or will they be as porous as they were in Seattle?
13. Chicago (1-1) - Will Lovie ever be able to game plan for a better team? Can the offensive line ever learn to block? Will they stay health? At what point will Urlacher punch Lovie for wasting his prime with stupid offensive schemes? And, above all else, is Cutler a leader?
12. NY Jets (1-1) - Good Sanchez? Bad Sanchez? Wither Tebow Christ?
11. Pittsburgh (1-1) - Again, porous offensive line, aging defense, no running game... can this team win with great coaching and Big Ben?
10. Denver (1-1) - Can Peyton stay healthy? Can he throw deep down field? How will he do now that his remaining 14 games are outdoors?
The Teams With The Talent To Win (should be factor because...)
9. San Diego (2-0) - They've had talent for awhile... but they still have Norv...
8. Baltimore (1-1) - They might have a more dynamic offense ... but are they getting old, and is Flacco consistent enough?
7. Green Bay (1-1) - they still have Rodgers ... but has he peaked?
6. Philadelphia (2-0) - they are talented ... but barely beat the Browns...
5. NY Giants (1-1) - They won it all last year ... but are off to an unimpressive start.
4. Atlanta (2-0) - They should have a clear run to the division title ... but is Matt Ryan ready to make the leap?
3. New England (1-1) - They have more defense this year ... but is Brady getting over the hill?
2. Houston (2-0) - They have offense and defense and have looked as good as they should.
1. San Francisco (2-0) - They look locked in and ready to go. Period.
With all that as the background, on to the picks:
- Last week against the spread: 9-6-1
- Last week straight up: 9-7
- Season against the spread: 16-15-1
- Season straight up: 17-15
Thursday Night
Giants (+3) over Carolina - This line seems off to me, so I'll take the Giants + the points in a game that ESPN is telling me is a toss up. Also, I just want to reiterate how absolutely stupid Thursday night football games are. On my list of reasons why Roger Goodell is the worst commissioner this side of Gary Bettman, this is somewhere on the top ten.
Sunday Early Games
Bears (-8) over St. Louis - I am giving Lovie one more chance: I'll be able to watch this one and I have some faith that the problem is just that Green Bay has some combination of his and Cutler's number. But if they don't look great in this game it might be time for the year's first "why can't we fire Lovie, this guy sucks" blog rants.
Buffalo (-3) over Cleveland - Assuming that the Bills actual level of performance fall somewhere between their week one debacle against the Jets and last week's evisceration of the Chiefs, this line seems right.
Tampa Bay (+8) over Dallas (Dallas straight up) - I think Dallas will bounce back to win, but I get the feeling that Tampa will be a tough out. Of course, if Dallas loses my uncle will get a week of "what's wrong with the Cowboys" sports radio... which is nice.
Detroit (-4) over Tennessee - I've exited the Titans bandwagon. I just hope that the Lions porous defense can resurrect Chris Johnson's corpse for my fantasy team's well being.
Indianapolis (-3) over Jacksonville - Really this comes down to a simple formula in my mind: Luck > Gabbert.
Jets (-3) over Miami - This just feels like the Jets bouncing back to establish their place as one of the better teams that isn't really that good. Miami, on the other hand? I'll just say that Rex Ryan might give up his defensive genius card if he can't take advantage of Tannehill.
San Francisco (-8) over Minnesota - As you can see from my power rankings, I'm in on the 49ers.
New Orleans (-9) over Kansas City - A stoppable force meets a moveable object! I think coach Brees can find a way against Coach Romeo. Just saying.
Cincinnati (+3) over Washington - Just a hunch here, but this game is the perfect line and could go either way.
Sunday Late Games
Philadelpia (+4) over Arizona- This HAS to be where the wheels come off for Arizona, right? RIGHT?
Atlanta (+3) over San Diego - Norv Turner can't start 3-0... right?
Houston (-3) over Denver - Until Peyton Manning proves he can throw the ball 50+ yards in the air I've got questions. Houston should be able to cover the spread on the road here. This should be the game of the day, however.
Pittsburgh(+5) over Oakland - Based on my power rankings I shouldn't think about this. So I won't.
Sunday Night Game
New England (+3) over Baltimore - If New England hadn't inexplicably crapped the bed last week this is Patriots -3. I'll take the points, but this game should tell us a great deal about both teams.
Monday Night Game
Green Bay (-4) over Seattle - I can't root for Green Bay (unlike my brother), and I'm always hoping for the epic "Rodgers throws for six TDs, 700 yards, and the Packers STILL Lose"... but I need to see something from Mr. Rodgers right about now for my fantasy season. I think he does it here.
Wednesday, September 12, 2012
2012 NFL Picks Week 2
This week I will miss every football game due to work (Thursday and Sunday) and Class (Monday). I am officially tired of doing 80+ hours of work, school and practicum every week. I made it to the half way point of my 3rd of 32 weeks before announcing it on a blog. I think that's a victory.
Anyway, a reminder that I pull the lines right from ESPN.com on the scoreboard page. Before I dive into the week 2 picks, last week I went:
- 7 and 9 against the spread
- 8 and 8 straight up.
Not the best start, but something manageable to build on for the rest of the year.
On to this week's picks:
- Chicago (+6) over Green Bay (Chicago straight up) - Cutler to Green Bay secondary: "enjoy Brandon Marshall: try playing physical with him." I'm generally not in favor of too much trash talking when the opponent has owned your jock (literally, I think the Packers have owned Jay's jock since he came over from Denver). I'm going to take this as not so quiet confidence rather than being overzealous. Either way, I'll be at work all night so I'll have to get updates via the cell phone. HUGE bummer. Thursday night NFL games are stupid.
Sunday early games
- Bills (-3) over Chiefs - I'm already regretting my preseason predictions for both of these teams. A special thanks Chan Gailey and Romeo Crennel for only taking one week to remind me why they are bad coaches. Are the Jets and the Falcons that good, or were these teams that bad? Either way, I'll drink the CJ Spiller Kool-Aid for one week at least... while I start him on my fantasy team.
- Cincinnati (-7) over Cleveland - One week after Baltimore showed the Bengals how they play football in the big boys league they get Brandon Weeden (he of the 5.1 QB rating). It's like comfort food, right? The logic here is simple: Cincinnati can't be as bad as they looked last week, but Cleveland easily can.
- Indianapolis (+2) over Minnesota - I think Andrew Luck will be motivated after all the RG3 talk he's hearing this week. Minnesota has a good pass rush, and Peterson looked fine last week, but Luck has the ability and will put it all together a number of weeks this year. I believe this may be one of them.
- Oakland (-3) over Miami - Yes, I think Ryan Tannehill his that bad. Look up Kyle Boller for my favorite comparison. Still, with the whole "west coast team coming east" thing it would make me feel a whole lot better if this line were under the field goal line.
- New England (-14) over Arizona - Check please!
- Tampa (+9) over NY Giants (Giants straight up) - I didn't do so hot with my hedges last week, but I'll try to hedge the Giants again and see if I have any more luck. I liked what I read about the Bucs defense last week, and I didn't like what I saw out of the Giants against Dallas.
- Ravens (+3) over Philadelphia - Did nearly losing to the Weeden disaster wake Philly up? No matter what, that Ravens offense looked even better than advertised on Monday night. Give me the points.
- Carolina (+3) over New Orleans - I tried to hedge last week with the Saints, but I fear that this may be one of those years where everything that can go wrong will go wrong for my friends in New Orleans.
- Houston (-8) over Jacksonville - is Houston ready to make the jump? If they are, this should be an easy line for them to cover.
Sunday Late Games
- Rams (+3) over Washington - I think Jeff Fisher will have a game plan to stop RGIII and the Baylor offense that Washington ran effectively against New Orleans last week.
- Dallas (-3) over Seattle - I don't know why this line isn't higher. I know that given the home field advantage this really makes Dallas a six point favorite, but doesn't it feel like it should be higher after what we saw last week for both of these teams?
- Jets (+6) over Pittsburgh - it was only one week, but until the Jets show they aren't that good, or the Steelers prove they aren't too old, I've got to take the points for the road dog here.
- Tennessee (+6) over San Diego (Charger straight up) - a second hedge, but one I don't feel much of anything about. How's that for saying "I wouldn't bet on this game if you gave me your money to do it"?
Sunday Night Football
- San Francisco (-7) over Detroit - The Lions barely escaped last week against the Rams. Meanwhile, the 49ers thumped Green Bay convincingly. Furthermore, Harbaugh is the hot head to pick in the coaching matchup. Again, I wish I wasn't working all day Sunday so I could live blog the handshake here.
Monday Night Football
- Atlanta (-3) over Denver - I'll give Atlanta the benefit of the doubt here, but Michael Turner looked washed up last week, and Peyton looked like the Peyton of pre-neck surgery. This really is a toss up in my mind, which is why the line is where it is.
Enjoy football everyone! Please, do it for me :-)
Anyway, a reminder that I pull the lines right from ESPN.com on the scoreboard page. Before I dive into the week 2 picks, last week I went:
- 7 and 9 against the spread
- 8 and 8 straight up.
Not the best start, but something manageable to build on for the rest of the year.
On to this week's picks:
- Chicago (+6) over Green Bay (Chicago straight up) - Cutler to Green Bay secondary: "enjoy Brandon Marshall: try playing physical with him." I'm generally not in favor of too much trash talking when the opponent has owned your jock (literally, I think the Packers have owned Jay's jock since he came over from Denver). I'm going to take this as not so quiet confidence rather than being overzealous. Either way, I'll be at work all night so I'll have to get updates via the cell phone. HUGE bummer. Thursday night NFL games are stupid.
Sunday early games
- Bills (-3) over Chiefs - I'm already regretting my preseason predictions for both of these teams. A special thanks Chan Gailey and Romeo Crennel for only taking one week to remind me why they are bad coaches. Are the Jets and the Falcons that good, or were these teams that bad? Either way, I'll drink the CJ Spiller Kool-Aid for one week at least... while I start him on my fantasy team.
- Cincinnati (-7) over Cleveland - One week after Baltimore showed the Bengals how they play football in the big boys league they get Brandon Weeden (he of the 5.1 QB rating). It's like comfort food, right? The logic here is simple: Cincinnati can't be as bad as they looked last week, but Cleveland easily can.
- Indianapolis (+2) over Minnesota - I think Andrew Luck will be motivated after all the RG3 talk he's hearing this week. Minnesota has a good pass rush, and Peterson looked fine last week, but Luck has the ability and will put it all together a number of weeks this year. I believe this may be one of them.
- Oakland (-3) over Miami - Yes, I think Ryan Tannehill his that bad. Look up Kyle Boller for my favorite comparison. Still, with the whole "west coast team coming east" thing it would make me feel a whole lot better if this line were under the field goal line.
- New England (-14) over Arizona - Check please!
- Tampa (+9) over NY Giants (Giants straight up) - I didn't do so hot with my hedges last week, but I'll try to hedge the Giants again and see if I have any more luck. I liked what I read about the Bucs defense last week, and I didn't like what I saw out of the Giants against Dallas.
- Ravens (+3) over Philadelphia - Did nearly losing to the Weeden disaster wake Philly up? No matter what, that Ravens offense looked even better than advertised on Monday night. Give me the points.
- Carolina (+3) over New Orleans - I tried to hedge last week with the Saints, but I fear that this may be one of those years where everything that can go wrong will go wrong for my friends in New Orleans.
- Houston (-8) over Jacksonville - is Houston ready to make the jump? If they are, this should be an easy line for them to cover.
Sunday Late Games
- Rams (+3) over Washington - I think Jeff Fisher will have a game plan to stop RGIII and the Baylor offense that Washington ran effectively against New Orleans last week.
- Dallas (-3) over Seattle - I don't know why this line isn't higher. I know that given the home field advantage this really makes Dallas a six point favorite, but doesn't it feel like it should be higher after what we saw last week for both of these teams?
- Jets (+6) over Pittsburgh - it was only one week, but until the Jets show they aren't that good, or the Steelers prove they aren't too old, I've got to take the points for the road dog here.
- Tennessee (+6) over San Diego (Charger straight up) - a second hedge, but one I don't feel much of anything about. How's that for saying "I wouldn't bet on this game if you gave me your money to do it"?
Sunday Night Football
- San Francisco (-7) over Detroit - The Lions barely escaped last week against the Rams. Meanwhile, the 49ers thumped Green Bay convincingly. Furthermore, Harbaugh is the hot head to pick in the coaching matchup. Again, I wish I wasn't working all day Sunday so I could live blog the handshake here.
Monday Night Football
- Atlanta (-3) over Denver - I'll give Atlanta the benefit of the doubt here, but Michael Turner looked washed up last week, and Peyton looked like the Peyton of pre-neck surgery. This really is a toss up in my mind, which is why the line is where it is.
Enjoy football everyone! Please, do it for me :-)
Monday, September 3, 2012
2012 NFL Week One Picks
Here are the week one picks:
1. Dallas (+4) over New York (New York straight up)
2. Chicago (-9) over Indianapolis
3. Philadelphia (-9) over Cleveland
4. St. Louis (+9) over Detroit (St. Louis to win)
5. New England (-6) over Tennessee
6. Atlanta (-3) over Kansas City
7. Minnesota (-4) over Jacksonville
8. Washington (+9) over New Orleans (New Orleans straight up)
9. Buffalo (+3) over NY Jets (Buffalo to win)
10. Miami (+11) over Houston (Houston straight up)
11. Green Bay (-5.5) over San Francisco
12. Seattle (-3) over Arizona
13. Carolina (-3) over Tampa Bay
14. Pittsburgh (+1) over Denver (Pittsburgh to win)
15. Cincinnati (+6) over Baltimore (Baltimore straight up)
16. San Diego (-1) over Oakland
1. Dallas (+4) over New York (New York straight up)
2. Chicago (-9) over Indianapolis
3. Philadelphia (-9) over Cleveland
4. St. Louis (+9) over Detroit (St. Louis to win)
5. New England (-6) over Tennessee
6. Atlanta (-3) over Kansas City
7. Minnesota (-4) over Jacksonville
8. Washington (+9) over New Orleans (New Orleans straight up)
9. Buffalo (+3) over NY Jets (Buffalo to win)
10. Miami (+11) over Houston (Houston straight up)
11. Green Bay (-5.5) over San Francisco
12. Seattle (-3) over Arizona
13. Carolina (-3) over Tampa Bay
14. Pittsburgh (+1) over Denver (Pittsburgh to win)
15. Cincinnati (+6) over Baltimore (Baltimore straight up)
16. San Diego (-1) over Oakland
The P.O.V. NFL 2012 Preview
And here we are, once again, ready for some football. Even watching Alabama tear Michigan apart couldn't change one fact, one reality: the NFL is king. And, at the present time, no sport (professional or "amateur") can even lay siege to the crown. Concussion worries, official lockout, player safety concerns at an all time high... none of it matters. Fantasy football, 60 inch home TVs with HD, gambling... it all points to the NFL as king.
Before we dive in, in case you are curious about previous years, here are links to my 2011, 2010, and 2009 (In the 2009 article you'll find a recap of the 2008, 2007 and 2006 preseason super bowl predictions from my previous blog as well).
Last year I picked the Pats correctly to win the AFC, and in 2010 I picked the Steelers correctly to win the AFC. In 2009 I failed to pick anyone correctly for the Super Bowl (blame that one on the Jay Cutler honeymoon phase of my life), but in 2008 I picked the Steelers correctly to win it all. In 2007 I picked the Pats correctly to win the AFC, and then, in 2006, I had picked the Colts to beat the Bears in the super bowl (still wish I could take that one back). Long story short, I've managed to correctly pick at least one Super Bowl contender in five of six years. Looking closer, however, and I can safely place much of the responsibility for that great record on the fact that I've ridden the Pats and Steelers hard each year. This year? Well, you'll just have to see if I'm still riding those teams, or if I'm going to go outside of the box for the AFC (the NFC, mind you, I'm only 1 for 6 on in the last six years, and zero for my last five).
As a final disclaimer, I don't take the time to research who plays who to determine exact records. The records below, in fact, couldn't actually happen (probably anyway) as they probably don't add up. On to the picks:
AFC East
1. New England (12-4)
2. Buffalo (9-7)
3. NY Jets (7-9)
4. Miami (6-10)
The reasoning: New England has the NFL's most high octane passing game and just added a deep target for the first time since Randy Moss was breaking records in their 16-0* year. They also added a great deal of depth to the defense, which should help given that their team was one of the worst on defense last year. The big reason to pick New England here is that, in light of their defeat last year in the Super Bowl, you can expect Brady and company to be hyper focused on winning it all. Brady is still one ring short of being able to open the Brady V Montana book for greatest of all time, and after watching what happened to Manning I'm sure Tom realizes tomorrow is not guaranteed to anyone. The rest of the division depends heavily on what you believe about quarter back play and defense. I believe that Fitzpatrick is a much better QB than Sanchez/Tebow (Sanchbow? Tebez?) or Tannehill (usually not a good sign when your rookie QB couldn't complete passes with accuracy in college). In fact, the only reason that I'm not placing the Jets dead last in this division is because I really think Tannehill will be that bad. I also believe the Bills defense will be improved, while the Jets continues to back slide (Revis is the only thing holding them together). Long story short, this division is still the Patriots to lose, and I don't think they will.
AFC North
1. Baltimore (11-5)
2. Pittsburgh (9-7)
3. Cincinnati (7-9)
4. Cleveland (3-13)
The reasoning: first, after picking Cleveland to make the playoffs last year (I plea concussion on that one), I had to put them back down. I don't believe drafting modern era Chris Wienke was the right move, let alone starting him, and I just could see it being another long year in Cleveland (besides, when was the last time something went well for Cleveland sports fans). Beyond Cleveland, the division is a bit of a toss up for me. Baltimore's defense is aging and the loss of Terrell Suggs will hurt quite a bit. But Pittsburgh's defense is equally old and the Pittsburgh offense is minus their starting running back and their offensive line is in shambles (for, by my count, year ten in a row). I believe in Big Ben much more than Joe Flacco, and Pittsburgh's receivers are, on paper, better than Baltimore's are. Still, something just tells me that the Steelers are in for a down year, and that Baltimore will do just enough to put it together to win the division. As for the Bengals, I don't believe in their coach, and I think that a regression back makes sense for this team. Moving forward, however, this division may be Cincinnati's to lose as the Ravens and Steelers continue to age.
AFC South
1. Houston Texans (11-5)
2. Tennessee Titans (10-6)
3. Indianapolis Colts (5-11)
4. Jacksonville Jaguars (3-13)
The reasoning: Houston always finds a way to play back towards the pack and I don't see that ending this year. I expect a big bounce back year for Chris Johnson in Tennessee, and Jake Locker has all the tools to become a quality starting QB in the NFL. I think that Luck will have a more successful rookie year than Peyton did, but much of that is due to the change in NFL rules since 1998. As for the Jags, I'm not sure I like much of anything coming out of Jacksonville this year. I would say there is an outside chance that the Colts could make a run at this division, but I still can't buy into the Rookie QB leading a ten game turn around angle. So, for now, this is the best stab at it.
AFC West
1. Kansas City (11-5)
2. San Diego (8-8)
3. Denver (8-8)
4. Oakland (6-10)
The reasoning: This division is an entire toss up and I could easily see any of these four teams ending the year in first. The Chiefs promise to have a tough running game and solid defense, leaving their biggest question mark at QB with Matt Cassel. The Chargers have the most talent of any team in the division, but they also have a history of underachieving greatly and they have Norv Turner inexplicably still entrenched as their head coach. Denver has the biggest question mark of all in Peyton Manning's health. Oakland seems to be mired in an era of "whatever can go wrong will go wrong." In other words, I could see this division end in the exact opposite way I've predicted here and I wouldn't be surprised. But, for now, I see Kansas City and their easier schedule moving up to first.
NFC East
1. Philadelphia (12-4)
2. NY Giants (10-6)
3. Dallas (7-9)
4. Washington (6-10)
The reasoning: The year after the "Dream Team" fell apart in Philly I see some rebound with a defense that looked great at the end of last year and an offense that is capable of scoring in bunches. The Giants always tend to trend backwards after a great year, and I see that staying consistent this year. All the injuries in Dallas already bode for a long year for the team and Washington should make some strides with a QB under center more talented than Grossman, but I still see them bringing up the rear in this division.
NFC North
1. Chicago (13-3)
2. Green Bay (10-6)
3. Detroit (9-7)
4. Minnesota (5-11)
The reasoning: the biggest concern that I have about picking my Bears to finish first is Urlacher's bulky knee. I have a hard time believing that he will be able to play at anything close to 100% this year, and, as we've seen in the past, Urlacher tends to be the key to a successful defense in Chicago. The Bears have the talent to overcome, but only if Lovie is actually willing to run a defense outside of his Tampa 2 (history indicates he probably won't). That said, the Bears should have by far the most dynamic offense in my life time, if not team history. And, if recent NFL history has shown us anything its that you can skimp on defense if your offense can move the ball. As for Green Bay, I see some regression for them, particularly with no running game or defense to speak of. I see the same for Detroit, and (spoiler) I see this as a lull that leads to their coach getting fired when it carries into next year. Minnesota, playing with three playoff caliber teams in their division, will be lucky to get to five or six wins.
NFC South
1. Atlanta (12-4)
2. New Orleans (10-6)
3. Carolina (7-9)
4. Tampa Bay (6-10)
The reasoning: With New Orleans hamstrung by suspensions I see the door opening for the Falcons to make the jump, so to speak, into the upper half of the NFC title contenders. I still see New Orleans, led by Drew Brees, making a push for a good record. I think that Cam Newton will struggle more than people expect in year two (given his final eight games last year) and I think that there is plenty of work to do in Tampa before the Bucs are ready to compete for the division.
NFC West
1. San Francisco (10-6)
2. St. Louis (9-7)
3. Seattle (7-9)
4. Arizona (4-12)
The reasoning: I'm still not sold on this division as being anything other than a cakewalk for out of division foes, but I suppose that San Francisco's defensive advantage and coaching advantage gives them the edge here. I think St. Louis will see a big bounce back from Sam Bradford, and Jeff Fisher tends to be able to take even poor teams into the average category. From there on out Seattle is starting a rookie third round pick, and Arizona is in shambles.
AFC Playoffs (in order of seed)
1. New England
2. Houston
3. Baltimore
4. Kansas City
5. Tennessee
6. Buffalo
NFC Playoffs (in order seed)
1. Chicago
2. Philadelphia
3. Atlanta
4. San Francisco
5. Green Bay
6. New Orleans
First Round:
1. Baltimore over Buffalo
2. Tennessee over Kansas City
3. Atlanta over New Orleans
4. Green Bay over San Francisco
Second Round:
1. New England over Tennessee
2. Baltimore over Houston
3. Chicago over Green Bay
4. Atlanta over Philadelphia
Championship Games:
1. New England over Baltimore
2. Chicago over Atlanta
Super Bowl:
New England over Chicago
And there you have it: the 2012 NFL Preview. I went back to the well with the Patriots as my pick, as well as with Chicago as my pick for the third time in seven years. If it ends up being Pats and Bears right now you have to go with the Pats given their experience and their huge coaching advantage. But, if history is any indicator, there will be far more turnover among playoff teams than shown here. No matter what, it should be a fun time.
Before we dive in, in case you are curious about previous years, here are links to my 2011, 2010, and 2009 (In the 2009 article you'll find a recap of the 2008, 2007 and 2006 preseason super bowl predictions from my previous blog as well).
Last year I picked the Pats correctly to win the AFC, and in 2010 I picked the Steelers correctly to win the AFC. In 2009 I failed to pick anyone correctly for the Super Bowl (blame that one on the Jay Cutler honeymoon phase of my life), but in 2008 I picked the Steelers correctly to win it all. In 2007 I picked the Pats correctly to win the AFC, and then, in 2006, I had picked the Colts to beat the Bears in the super bowl (still wish I could take that one back). Long story short, I've managed to correctly pick at least one Super Bowl contender in five of six years. Looking closer, however, and I can safely place much of the responsibility for that great record on the fact that I've ridden the Pats and Steelers hard each year. This year? Well, you'll just have to see if I'm still riding those teams, or if I'm going to go outside of the box for the AFC (the NFC, mind you, I'm only 1 for 6 on in the last six years, and zero for my last five).
As a final disclaimer, I don't take the time to research who plays who to determine exact records. The records below, in fact, couldn't actually happen (probably anyway) as they probably don't add up. On to the picks:
AFC East
1. New England (12-4)
2. Buffalo (9-7)
3. NY Jets (7-9)
4. Miami (6-10)
The reasoning: New England has the NFL's most high octane passing game and just added a deep target for the first time since Randy Moss was breaking records in their 16-0* year. They also added a great deal of depth to the defense, which should help given that their team was one of the worst on defense last year. The big reason to pick New England here is that, in light of their defeat last year in the Super Bowl, you can expect Brady and company to be hyper focused on winning it all. Brady is still one ring short of being able to open the Brady V Montana book for greatest of all time, and after watching what happened to Manning I'm sure Tom realizes tomorrow is not guaranteed to anyone. The rest of the division depends heavily on what you believe about quarter back play and defense. I believe that Fitzpatrick is a much better QB than Sanchez/Tebow (Sanchbow? Tebez?) or Tannehill (usually not a good sign when your rookie QB couldn't complete passes with accuracy in college). In fact, the only reason that I'm not placing the Jets dead last in this division is because I really think Tannehill will be that bad. I also believe the Bills defense will be improved, while the Jets continues to back slide (Revis is the only thing holding them together). Long story short, this division is still the Patriots to lose, and I don't think they will.
AFC North
1. Baltimore (11-5)
2. Pittsburgh (9-7)
3. Cincinnati (7-9)
4. Cleveland (3-13)
The reasoning: first, after picking Cleveland to make the playoffs last year (I plea concussion on that one), I had to put them back down. I don't believe drafting modern era Chris Wienke was the right move, let alone starting him, and I just could see it being another long year in Cleveland (besides, when was the last time something went well for Cleveland sports fans). Beyond Cleveland, the division is a bit of a toss up for me. Baltimore's defense is aging and the loss of Terrell Suggs will hurt quite a bit. But Pittsburgh's defense is equally old and the Pittsburgh offense is minus their starting running back and their offensive line is in shambles (for, by my count, year ten in a row). I believe in Big Ben much more than Joe Flacco, and Pittsburgh's receivers are, on paper, better than Baltimore's are. Still, something just tells me that the Steelers are in for a down year, and that Baltimore will do just enough to put it together to win the division. As for the Bengals, I don't believe in their coach, and I think that a regression back makes sense for this team. Moving forward, however, this division may be Cincinnati's to lose as the Ravens and Steelers continue to age.
AFC South
1. Houston Texans (11-5)
2. Tennessee Titans (10-6)
3. Indianapolis Colts (5-11)
4. Jacksonville Jaguars (3-13)
The reasoning: Houston always finds a way to play back towards the pack and I don't see that ending this year. I expect a big bounce back year for Chris Johnson in Tennessee, and Jake Locker has all the tools to become a quality starting QB in the NFL. I think that Luck will have a more successful rookie year than Peyton did, but much of that is due to the change in NFL rules since 1998. As for the Jags, I'm not sure I like much of anything coming out of Jacksonville this year. I would say there is an outside chance that the Colts could make a run at this division, but I still can't buy into the Rookie QB leading a ten game turn around angle. So, for now, this is the best stab at it.
AFC West
1. Kansas City (11-5)
2. San Diego (8-8)
3. Denver (8-8)
4. Oakland (6-10)
The reasoning: This division is an entire toss up and I could easily see any of these four teams ending the year in first. The Chiefs promise to have a tough running game and solid defense, leaving their biggest question mark at QB with Matt Cassel. The Chargers have the most talent of any team in the division, but they also have a history of underachieving greatly and they have Norv Turner inexplicably still entrenched as their head coach. Denver has the biggest question mark of all in Peyton Manning's health. Oakland seems to be mired in an era of "whatever can go wrong will go wrong." In other words, I could see this division end in the exact opposite way I've predicted here and I wouldn't be surprised. But, for now, I see Kansas City and their easier schedule moving up to first.
NFC East
1. Philadelphia (12-4)
2. NY Giants (10-6)
3. Dallas (7-9)
4. Washington (6-10)
The reasoning: The year after the "Dream Team" fell apart in Philly I see some rebound with a defense that looked great at the end of last year and an offense that is capable of scoring in bunches. The Giants always tend to trend backwards after a great year, and I see that staying consistent this year. All the injuries in Dallas already bode for a long year for the team and Washington should make some strides with a QB under center more talented than Grossman, but I still see them bringing up the rear in this division.
NFC North
1. Chicago (13-3)
2. Green Bay (10-6)
3. Detroit (9-7)
4. Minnesota (5-11)
The reasoning: the biggest concern that I have about picking my Bears to finish first is Urlacher's bulky knee. I have a hard time believing that he will be able to play at anything close to 100% this year, and, as we've seen in the past, Urlacher tends to be the key to a successful defense in Chicago. The Bears have the talent to overcome, but only if Lovie is actually willing to run a defense outside of his Tampa 2 (history indicates he probably won't). That said, the Bears should have by far the most dynamic offense in my life time, if not team history. And, if recent NFL history has shown us anything its that you can skimp on defense if your offense can move the ball. As for Green Bay, I see some regression for them, particularly with no running game or defense to speak of. I see the same for Detroit, and (spoiler) I see this as a lull that leads to their coach getting fired when it carries into next year. Minnesota, playing with three playoff caliber teams in their division, will be lucky to get to five or six wins.
NFC South
1. Atlanta (12-4)
2. New Orleans (10-6)
3. Carolina (7-9)
4. Tampa Bay (6-10)
The reasoning: With New Orleans hamstrung by suspensions I see the door opening for the Falcons to make the jump, so to speak, into the upper half of the NFC title contenders. I still see New Orleans, led by Drew Brees, making a push for a good record. I think that Cam Newton will struggle more than people expect in year two (given his final eight games last year) and I think that there is plenty of work to do in Tampa before the Bucs are ready to compete for the division.
NFC West
1. San Francisco (10-6)
2. St. Louis (9-7)
3. Seattle (7-9)
4. Arizona (4-12)
The reasoning: I'm still not sold on this division as being anything other than a cakewalk for out of division foes, but I suppose that San Francisco's defensive advantage and coaching advantage gives them the edge here. I think St. Louis will see a big bounce back from Sam Bradford, and Jeff Fisher tends to be able to take even poor teams into the average category. From there on out Seattle is starting a rookie third round pick, and Arizona is in shambles.
AFC Playoffs (in order of seed)
1. New England
2. Houston
3. Baltimore
4. Kansas City
5. Tennessee
6. Buffalo
NFC Playoffs (in order seed)
1. Chicago
2. Philadelphia
3. Atlanta
4. San Francisco
5. Green Bay
6. New Orleans
First Round:
1. Baltimore over Buffalo
2. Tennessee over Kansas City
3. Atlanta over New Orleans
4. Green Bay over San Francisco
Second Round:
1. New England over Tennessee
2. Baltimore over Houston
3. Chicago over Green Bay
4. Atlanta over Philadelphia
Championship Games:
1. New England over Baltimore
2. Chicago over Atlanta
Super Bowl:
New England over Chicago
And there you have it: the 2012 NFL Preview. I went back to the well with the Patriots as my pick, as well as with Chicago as my pick for the third time in seven years. If it ends up being Pats and Bears right now you have to go with the Pats given their experience and their huge coaching advantage. But, if history is any indicator, there will be far more turnover among playoff teams than shown here. No matter what, it should be a fun time.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)