The Creation of the Unwinnable Presidency

So here he finds himself, going to the American public this Tuesday night to make the case for taking military action in Syria. The Civil War in Syria, which this July went over 100,000 deaths, has been a non-existent topic in the national debate for much of the time it has been raging on. On August 21st, however, footage began to pour out showing civilians dying, apparently the victims of chemical weapons strikes. The US government quickly began to place the blame on the Syrian leadership, including Syrian President al-Assad. The Syrian government had been collecting chemical weapons for years, and had even (allegedly) used the weapons (admittedly, in much smaller doses) already during this conflict.

Today, in an interview with Charlie Rose, Assad not only denied that he was behind the chemical weapons strikes, but also indicated that the evidence that chemical weapons were used was not irrefutable. Assad's administration, hedging their bets, has also indicated that if the weapons were used it was the rebel forces which used them. Into this mess walks President Obama.

He tried and failed to build an international consensus that taking military action against the Assad regime would be prudent. In fact, he ended up with so little support that he is now going to Congress to get approval to take these measures, although he could very easily take action without Congressional approval should the administration deem it necessary for American security. Once it became obvious that the House of Representatives (at least) would be unlikely to back the military action, Obama was left no other option but to go to the well one more time and take his case to the American people.

We have allowed the creation of an unwinnable Presidency in this country. Setting aside, for the moment, the question of if a military strike in Syria is justifiable (let alone if it would be beneficial), let's look at this equation from a strictly political standpoint. There are a number of possible actions that the USA could take in Syria:

1. Do nothing, stay out of the conflict entirely
2. Make small, "behind the scenes" moves designed to influence the outcome of the conflict (ie arm the rebels, send supplies, etc), but make no overt actions
3. Denounce the violence on the international stage and take action to damage Syria economically (sanctions, embargo, etc) or militarily (more directly arming the rebels or influencing those supplying Syria with arms not to do so)
4. Take limited military action, such as enforcing a no-fly zone (ideally risking no lives on either side from US action)
5. Take more involved military action such as cruise missile strikes (risking lives on the Syrian side, including the risk of innocent civilian deaths)
6. Take additional military action such as air strikes (risking lives on both sides)
7. Engage in a limited "boots on the ground" campaign (perhaps to train the rebels or to secure chemical weapons supplies)
8. Engage in a broad "boots on the ground" campaign (highest risk of loss of life on the US side)

All of these actions carry with them a certain amount of risk, even doing nothing (case in point: Nazi Germany). At the present time the USA is pretty firmly sitting in option three, but is looking to take steps to move towards option five or six. Now, for the political no-win situation the President finds himself in. Suppose that Obama looked at the information indicating that their were chemical weapons used, and did nothing. Why, he's a do-nothing President who is soft on terrorism and doesn't stand up for innocent victims of a dictator. Suppose that he make the case for limited military action. Why, now he's a President who only takes half-measures and who is putting the US into situations where we shouldn't be. It's easy to see how he found himself here: "Dubya" used every bit of international trust when it comes to these things, and China and Russia gain a great deal by creating a "powerless" super-power. Make no mistake, the Republicans will decry Obama now for wanting to take military action, but in 2014 will turn around and either a) criticize him for not doing enough, or b) for doing too much.

A no win situation through and through. I feel for anyone who takes on this job. I wonder if he ever looks at it and says "only three years left..."? I can't help but imagine he does. 

NFL 2013 - Week One Picks

Weekly I'll be posting my picks; a reminder that I pull the projected spread from ESPN.com. As I just posted my season preview, there won't be any commentary here, just the picks. Other weeks may be longer with some thoughts on the various teams and match-ups.

Thursday Night game
Baltimore (+9) over Denver / Denver straight up

Sunday early games:
New England (-10.5) over Buffalo/Jeff Tuel
Chicago (-3) over Cincinnati (okay, one thought: can't pick against the Bears week 1)
Miami (+1) over Cleveland
Detroit (-5) over Minnesota
Oakland (+10.5) over Indianapolis / Indy straight up
New Orleans (-3) over Atlanta
Tampa Bay (-3.5) over NY Jets
Tennessee (+7.5) over Pittsburgh
Seattle (-3.5) over Carolina
Kansas City (-3.5) over Jacksonville

Sunday late games:
Arizona (+4.5) over St. Louis
San Francisco (-4.5) over Green Bay

Sunday night game:
NY Giants (+3) over Dallas

Monday night games:
Philadelphia (+3) over Washington
Houston (-4) over San Diego 

The POV's Return ... NFL Pick Time - 2013 Edition

It's that magical time of year again. There are lots of things I want to blog about, but only one thing that consistently draws me out of pseudo-retirement to actually do it: the start of the NFL season.

Of course, in light of how hits are being penalized by the league office in pre-season games, perhaps it's time to acknowledge that the NFL has quietly changed it's name: it's now the National Flag-football League. Somewhere, Dick Butkus is crying.

Anyway, here are my predictions, division by division, for the NFL this year. Along the way I'll give some brief thoughts on my rationale for each pick. As a reminder, I didn't take the time to look up each schedule, pick winners, and such, so the suggested records are just my gut for what feels right ... they won't add up correctly. Starting with the AFC first:

AFC EAST
1. New England (10-6)
2. Miami (7-9)
3. NY Jets (6-10)
4. Buffalo (4-12)

Rationale: Well, I expect this division ... how can I put this lightly ... to suck. Big time. If the Pats were in almost any other Division I would firmly expect them to fail to win the division. But I also believe this division is that bad. Consider: Jeff Tuel is due to start for Buffalo at QB (he's an undrafted free agent), Dirty Sanchez is down and out, but Geno Smith hasn't looked any better for the Jets, and Miami has question marks all over the roster. Out of these three over matched teams, if one team had to catch the Pats I would lean towards the Dolphins, but I can't see it happening. Buffalo's record seems a bit low, but I also feel like one of these teams needs to struggle big time. If E.J. Manual can put it together for the Bills it very well may be the Jets, but as long as Jeff Tuel is garnering snaps in upstate New York, I've got to go with them.

AFC NORTH
1.  Cincinnati (11-5)
2.  Baltimore (10-6)
3. Pittsburgh (7-9)
4. Cleveland (6-10)

Rationale: I'm not sure this division is much better than their AFC East counterparts. Just like in the AFC East there are "dynastic" teams fading to black (New England, meet Baltimore and Pittsburgh), as well as bad teams who will likely continue to be bad (Miami, New York and Buffalo meet Cleveland... although I like Cleveland a bit more than the other three in this grouping). The difference? I don't know where Cincinnati fits in with those paradigms. And that's why I have them pegged to ... I can't believe I'm saying this ... win the AFC North? Wait, that ended up as a question. I need to be more firm with my predictions. Here we go again: I'm picking Cincinnati to win the AFC North? Damn. Oh well, yes I'm making that pick. The real logic behind it is based in the inherent flaws of their three division mates. Baltimore, first off, played insanely over their heads in marching to a championship last year. Flacco played over his head, and earned a big new contract, then lost the main reason he was able to play that well in the playoffs (a suddenly resurgent Boldin, who will likely fade now, but played out of his mind as well). The Raven's D has some pieces to be sure, but it also lost the two biggest leaders on defense (Ray Lewis and Ed Reed). They have Ray Rice, so they stand to make a run at a wild-card, but I don't expect them to be anything close to a juggernaut. As for Pittsburgh, my number two team is poised to take a "number two" on their fan base. There is no running game here, there is an aging and increasingly ineffective defense here, and their is still no offensive line here. Big Ben has two decent WR targets in Emmanuel Sanders and Antonio Brown, but he will struggle to get it to them without time, and he's breaking down due to the number of hits he's taken. I think last year was a sign of things to come, at least until they fix the o-line. The injuries to Heath Miller (last year) and Le'Veon Bell (this year) don't help either. Finally, Cleveland. There is some potential there, but Brandon Weeden still feels like a bust waiting to happen to me, and I'm not sure their D is ready to take a leap to the next level. Their upside is a carbon copy of last year's ViQueens team: awesome running game and solid D makes up for crappy QB play. I just don't believe in them being as good as Peterson and the Minny D was last year. And... finally... will all that unknown, we know what Andy Dalton is, we know what AJ Green is, we know what Green-Ellis is, and we know the Cincy D is pretty good. That looks like the rational pick to me.

AFC South
1. Houston (12-4)
2. Tennessee (8-8)
3. Indianapolis (8-8)
4. Jacksonville (2-14)

Rationale: The Colts are due for a major regression to the mean: they were outscored over 16 games last year, played insane in close games, and are now going from a last place schedule to a second place schedule. The Titans will go wherever Chris Johnson takes them, I just don't see him taking them anywhere past .500. The Jags should be awful this year. Houston makes almost too much sense, but I don't see any real competition for them in this division unless Andrew Luck makes a HUGE jump from "potential Peyton Manning" to "actual Peyton Manning." Which could happen ... but it's nowhere near the guarantee the five remaining Colts fans are convincing themselves it is.

AFC West
1. Denver (11-5)
2. Kansas City (10-6)
3. San Diego (7-9)
4. Oakland (3-13)

Rationale: I obviously expect it to be a bad year across the AFC, as I see a great deal of weakness here too. The Broncos will take a step back, but should still be good enough to win their division. The Chiefs should make a jump just based on getting a competent QB and a competent coach. The Charges seem to be sailing aimlessly, pretending that Phillip Rivers is still an elite QB (based on my observations and fantasy football rankings, he's not). And the Raiders are tanking for a top pick next year, which is why they are about to start the Pryor kid from Ohio State.

NFC East
1. Philadelphia (11-5)
2. NY Giants (10-6)
3. Dallas (8-8)
4. Washington (7-9)

Rationale: this was the toughest division for me to pick thus far. I could actually talk myself into any of the four teams winning the division, so let's go in reverse order to see how I concluded that last year's worst team would be this year's best team in the NFC East. Washington seems to be a candidate for some regression, and RGIII coming back after an injury is no guarantee to be the RGIII that got things rolling last year. Dallas has all the pieces and talent win going away, but always seems to fall apart when it counts. The Giants are an easy stand by pick, and I nearly went with them, but they also seem to be weaker depth wise than they have been in awhile. That left the Eagles, who have the advantage of a last place schedule, a bunch of talent, and a new offensive scheme which might when them a few games based on the speed and new looks.

NFC North
1. Green Bay (12-4)
2. Chicago (10-6)
3. Detroit (8-8)
4. Minnesota (5-11)

Rationale: By talent alone the Lions should be in 2nd place, but their coach is a nut job who allows his players to be nut jobs, which fails to bring out any discipline in his team. That is why they fail. I expect a big regression from a Minnesota team that played way over their heads last year and is still starting Mr. Sam Steele at QB. The Bears are a mixed bag, but their new MLB looks good, and their O-line may be slowly improving after years of being vomit inducing. The Pack, as much as I hate them, is the class of the division, and should be again this year barring an injury to Aaron Rodgers.

NFC South
1. New Orleans (11-5)
2. Atlanta (11-5)
3. Carolina (7-9)
4. Tampa Bay (7-9)

Rationale: The Saints should have one bounce back year in them with Sean Payton at the helm before they need to reboot the program. The Falcon's D is getting up there, and their passing game will probably regress a bit. The Panthers running game is still a question, their only legitimate passing target (Steve Smith) is old, and I'm not sure Ron Rivera is a good enough coach to overcome everything. Tampa's o-line is already beat up, and that spells doom for their passing game and running game.

NFC West
1. San Francisco (13-3)
2. Seattle (11-5)
3. Arizona (8-8)
4. St. Louis (6-10)

Rationale: this was the toughest division last year, and may be again this year. The Cardinal's D was tough last year, and I believe that the new coach (Arians) will get points out of Carson Palmer and Co. The Rams have more questions than any other team in this division, which is why I expect a bit of regression. Both the top teams have major WR questions and young QBs primed for regression ... but they both have tough teams top to bottom, and I'm a believer in Harbaugh after two years of watching him return San Fran to their previous glory. The 49ers are once again the class of the league, and if Kaepernick is even 90% as good as he looked last year ... hell, 80% even ... they will be good for some time to come.

Playoffs - AFC
1. Houston
2. Denver
3. Cincinnati
4. New England
5. Baltimore
6. Kansas City

Rationale: I don't like having five teams return to the playoffs, but I'm thinking the rest of the AFC might very well be that bad. First round would be Cincinnati over Kansas City and Baltimore over New England. That would leave Houston hosting Baltimore, where their "repeat" run would come to an end, and Denver hosting Cincinnati, where I would expect the Broncos to win. Houston, barring major injuries, is your AFC champion in 2013.

Playoffs - NFC
1. San Francisco
2. Green Bay
3. New Orleans
4. Philadelphia
5. Atlanta
6. Seattle

Rationale: This would leave two "projected" 10-6 teams (Chicago and the Giants) out of the playoffs, so obviously do think the NFC is a better league. That said, I'm a bit happier two have two newbies in this group. First round would be Seattle over New Orleans and Atlanta over Philadelphia. That would lead to a San Francisco versus Seattle second round, which I see San Francisco winning. Green Bay and Atlanta again would be fun, and I see Green Bay winning this year. Again, the top two seeds advance and I see the top seed moving on to the Super Bowl.

Pre-Season Super Bowl Prediction: San Francisco over Houston

Rationale: Any way you slice it, this is a "chalk" prediction, but I guess I'm thinking this will be a "chalk" year. I think that San Fran has a ton of talent, and that the AFC is weak enough for Houston's talent to finally outweigh their ability to shoot themselves in the foot. At least until the Super Bowl. Outdoors, in NYC (er, New Jersey) in winter? Yeah I'd take the 49ers and their ground game and D in that scenario.

2013 NFL Playoff Picks - Divisional Round

Last week's results:

Houston 19 Cincinnati 13 (I won against the spread and straight up)
Green Bay 24 Minnesota 10 (I won straight up but lost against the spread... damn you Joe Webb!!!)
Baltimore 24 Indianapolis 9 (I won against the spread and straight up)
Seattle 24 Washington 14 (I won against the spread and straight up)

So: 3-1 against the spread, 4-0 straight up.

This week brings four matchups that can best be described as "tasty." Whereas last week we had to suffer through Cincinnati, Minnesota, Indianapolis and RGIII's knee, this week we get what should be four great games. However, the AFC lines are SUPER high leading to the terrible situation where I get tempted into hedging a pick by taking the points but picking that team to lose.

Baltimore (+9) over Denver

The rationale: See, that's exactly what happened! It's like I couldn't even avoid it. How can I take the Ravens, plus the points? Here's how: one TD, seven INTs. That's Peyton Manning's career numbers outdoors in the cold in the playoffs. He's had an otherworldly year, and it's not going to be windy or snowy in Denver, but it will be around 10 degrees and dropping throughout the game. However, I don't know that I believe Baltimore can WIN the game outright. They looked great last week, but were playing one of the worst playoff teams in the history of the NFL according to advanced metrics. This week, they go on the road and play the presumptive MVP. Besides, doesn't it feel like Peyton is SUPPOSED to host the AFC title game?

The pick: Denver 24 Baltimore 23 (FG as time expires)

Green Bay (+3) over San Francisco

The rationale: I think the Packers peaked way too early last year, and it bit them in the ass in the playoffs. This year? They were left for dead early, gradually got healthy on defense, and are peaking at the right time. Even scarier? Aaron Rodgers had an incredible year, only nobody noticed because of the years that Peyton, ADP, and RGIII had. Meanwhile, San Francisco's defense has looked positively human since the injury to Justin Smith. The game is in San Fran, where the weather is fine, but this Packers team can light it up. Under the gun, who are you going to pick: Colin Kapernick or Aaron Rodgers? Yeah, I thought so.

The pick: Green Bay 27 San Francisco 20

Seattle (+3) over Atlanta

The rationale: Atlanta looks very poor in all advanced metrics: they can't run, their D isn't good, and their special teams is average at best. Seattle, on the other hand, ranks in the top five in pretty much every advanced metric. The only thing that gives me pause is the injury to Clemons, the DE in Seattle, and how much that will hurt their ability to get up field on the pass rush. Against a pretty good Atlanta passing offense, that could be a huge issue. But Seattle just seems to have that feel this year. They can play you on your terms: make them play high octane, they score 50+; make them go the other way, and they grind out the win. Sans the Clemons injury, this is easy. Even after his knee went out, I still feel pretty good about this.

The pick: Seattle 34 Atlanta 24

New England (-10) over Houston

The rationale: Houston has not looked good since they played my Bears in a knock down, drag out brawl. New England, on the other hand, looks great. They seem to be getting healthy at just the right time, and I agree with Bill Simmons: the brain trust in New England has to know that they may not get another shot at the title. They had to have felt that way last year, and after blowing the Super Bowl to be here again, they have to be hyper focused. Besides, simply put, if Denver wins doesn't it feel like Brady v Manning HAS to happen this year? And don't you want it to? I do. Let's run it back one more time boys.

The pick: New England 35 Houston 17

2013 NFL Playoff Picks - Wildcard Round

Well, with a month off, I'm back for the playoff picks. The drive for 11-0 is on again. Hopefully I make it past the first game. Again, I will pick against the spread, but indicate also who I think will win and by what score.

Houston (-4) over Cincinnati

The rationale: I know that Houston hit the last quarter of the year with some pretty significant struggles. I know that Cincinnati's defense was incredibly tough down the stretch. But here's the deal: the Texans might actually benefit from losing the bye week, as it will give them no time to think about the end of year struggles. After blowing the game to Indy last week they went right into game planning for Cincinnati. I have to believe that somewhere in there is the team that started 11-1, and showed the ability to score with the best and defend with the best. That, plus the fact that the Bengals are, well, the Bengals, make me lean towards Houston covering the spread.

The Pick: Houston 24 Cincinnati 17

Minnesota (+8) over Green Bay

The rationale: Green Bay could be in trouble this game under the philosophy that they let a team in the playoffs they had a chance to eliminate last week. In two games against the Pack this year Minnesota's Adrian Peterson ran for over 400 yards. If he has that kind of production Saturday night the Pack may be in trouble. I can't overstate how much I'll be rooting for the the ViQueens in this game, and I think they'll give a good game. That said, in football you have to give the advantage to the team with the elite quarterback. And, in this game, the elite QB is not Mr. Samantha Steele.

The Pick: Green Bay 28 Minnesota 23

Baltimore (-7) over Indianapolis

The rationale: the Colts periphery numbers spell this out. The Colts scored 30 fewer points than their opponents this year, yet won 11 of 16 games. The Colts went 9-1 in games decided by less than a TD, a stat which always regresses back to the mean. The Colts are young, inexperienced, and the "feel good story." The Ravens have won at least one playoff game in each of the past four years. Perhaps Indy keeps it close, but it would be a major upset if the Ravens did not advance.

The Pick: Baltimore 31 Indianapolis 17


 Seattle (-3) over Washington

The rationale: in a year like this, it seems like Seattle has something going for it at the right time. Russell Wilson is the lesser known of three rookie QBs in the playoffs, but if things go the way I think they will he will be the last one standing after Sunday.

The Pick: Seattle 27 Washington 20

On Tragedy

As mentioned in my picks post, the Kansas City Chiefs yesterday experienced a great deal of trauma. This, occurring in the midst of a season that was already trying in a good many ways. When Scott Pioli and Romeo Crennel went in to work Saturday morning I'm sure that reality was bearing down on them. The type of reality that weighs heavily on a team with one win through eleven games. The type of reality that comes up when your fans start a "save Kansas City" movement that has more members than people who show up for your games. The type of reality that increases each week when you realize that the end result of this year will be your employer moving on without you.

By mid morning, however, I'm sure that these concerns, worries and thoughts were far from the minds of Pioli and Crennel. These two men, who inspired a great deal of vitriol from a good many persons in the greater Kansas City area, suddenly had real things to deal with. In watching a member of their team, a subordinate, kill himself on company property in front of them, these men were unexpectedly driven into a complex area.

We know that Jovan Belcher took his own life shortly after thanking these men for everything they had done for him. We know that he did this after taking his girlfriends life earlier that morning. What we don't know is why Belcher did this, or if there was even any rationale behind it. The reality is, we may never know. For the majority of us, the lack of resolution will not impede anything, as this story will fade into the news cycle. For those involved with this tragedy, however, the questions will stick forever.

I should acknowledge that this tragedy wasn't even the only NFL related trauma yesterday, as a staffer was found dead at the Cleveland Browns' facility as well. But the common thread between the two, the taking of one's life, is over shadowed by the murder involved in the Kansas City case. One of my favorite writers, Bill Simmons, stated on his twitter handle that the NFL was making a mistake by even playing the game today in Kansas City. For once, Mr. Simmons and I disagree.

I think that thus far the Chiefs have found a remarkable ability to handle everything well. This flies directly in the face of a disastrous year full of mismanagement by the Chiefs staff. The team consulted with the NFL, who initially left some of the decision to them. The team met and decided as a group they wanted to play. Crennel decided he wanted to coach. The team held a moment of silence before the game, most importantly, to remember the victims of domestic violence.

The Chiefs find themselves between a rock and a hard place in this one, for sure. First, should they have played? Having had a very (very) brief existence as an athlete in High School I can say that the effort of coming together as a team has the ability to help heal. Particularly for these men, hurt and damaged by what transpired, doing what they know is essential. To that end, as a professional who endured a tragedy, I know how hard it is to weather. I also know that the longer you wait to return to "normal" the more painful it is. The magnitude of this tragedy will stay with most of these men for their lives. But delaying the return to the life they know would do nothing but create more difficulty and more pain.

Secondly, should Crennel have coached the team? By the same logic I presented above, finding a way to return to normal can help to give room to breath. Crennel, by all accounts, is a good man (albeit not a great head coach). He most likely will carry what he saw with him the rest of his life. If he is anything like those of us who have dealt with a tragedy like this, he will always wonder "what if?". Finding a way to return his life to a semblance of normalcy, if only for a bit, will help him to deal with the very raw pain.

Finally, this is an opportunity to draw together as a fan base, and the tough choice would have been how to do it. If you are a teammate of Belcher, you knew the man and, by all accounts liked the man. If he had simply (for lack of a better word) taken his own life, this would be complex. With the murder-suicide angle, it becomes an impossible road to navigate of complex emotions. I guarantee that there are those in the Chiefs organization who desire a way to acknowledge their teammate. I know how tough the decision to handle the moment of silence must have been. I am thankful that they settled on the right option.

And so, in the end, this moment will pass, and quickly. The year will end, and Pioli and Crennel will be let go. Perhaps with more grace now, and more appreciation from the fans who have wanted them gone, but they will be let go nonetheless. The Chiefs will move on to their next group of management, and try to build a team to compete. The investigation will happen into the murder, and it will be closed. And, so crucial to consider in all of this, a little 3 month old will grow up wondering why. Thank goodness the Chiefs players, and the NFL at large, are already moving to provide for her, because her life has been put on a different track long before she had any control over the direction it was heading.

Tragedy strikes each of us differently. Some have the ability to use the tragedy to remind them of the good times they've had, and then feel joy. Some wonder why, and move on while battling for answers they will never get. Some get stuck in the tragedy, refuse to move past it, and exist in the depths of despair, constantly grieving. Tragedy, grief, and sorrow are complicated things indeed. I wish the best to those dealing with the aftershocks of these tragedies in Kansas City and Cleveland, as well as those dealing with countless other difficulties around the globe. I hope that all involved can find peace.

NFL WEEK PICKS - WEEK 13

My thoughts and prayers go out to everyone involved with the situation in Kansas City. Particularly, due to my line of work, my thoughts go out to the coach, GM and other Chiefs staff who witnessed Javon take his own life. Cris Carter just made a good point about NFL personnel needing to become even better crisis managers. As someone who has gone through a number of trainings on suicide prevention and crisis management, I know that it is important, but can be easier said than done.

Last week against the spread: 6-10
Last week straight up: 10-6

Season against the spread: 99-73-4
Season straight up: 122-53-1

So last week was a rough week for the picks. Even a late rally didn't help the series of bad picks that Sunday morning brought. We'll see if we can get back on the horse.

Thursday Night

Atlanta (+3.5) over New Orleans

Sunday Early

Buffalo (-6) over Jacksonville
Chicago (-3) over Seattle
Indianapolis (+7) over Detroit
Minnesota (+8) over Green Bay - Green Bay straight up
Houston (-7) over Tennessee
Kansas City (+5) over Carolina
San Francisco (-8) over St. Louis
New England (-8) over Miami
NY Jets (-6) over Arizona

Sunday Late
Tampa (+10) over Denver - Denver straight up
Oakland (+1) over Cleveland
Cincinnati (-1) over San Diego
Pittsburgh (+10) over Baltimore - Baltimore straight up

Sunday Night
 Philadelphia (+11) over Dallas - Dallas straight up

Monday Night
NY Giants (-3) over Washington