With Stanford's upset over Notre Dame and Ohio State's big win over rival Michigan in The Game, the playoff field has narrowed to the existing top four plus Michigan State, Ohio State, Stanford, and potentially North Carolina.
20 Jan 2010
by Tom Gower and Mike Kurtz
Tom: We have a chance for something very unusual this year. This could be the first meeting of No. 1 seeds since Buffalo-Dallas Part II, the sequel nobody wanted.
Mike: I'm sure somebody wanted that game, there were just white coats involved.
Tom: My friends! Anyway, the last No. 1 seed to win the Super Bowl was the 2003 Patriots.
Mike: I suppose that shows how good a job the seeding system did this year? It looks like it has done a decent job of sorting out all of the teams, which is, as you said, rare.
Tom: Well, we've seen a lot of No. 1 versus No. 2 matchups, at least before the last decade, when things frequently went haywire. New England-Philadelphia was the last Super Bowl where both teams had a bye, so along with Tampa Bay-Oakland, that's two of the last 10.
Mike: Why you gotta be so mean to the seeding system? It tries so hard to make you happy, unlike that mean ol' BCS.
Tom: It's an imperfect guide to team quality. Like the Supreme Court, it's infallible because it's final, not final because it's infallible. Otherwise, why have a playoffs in the first place?
Tom: Well, true. If the NFL was so concerned about money, they'd start selling sponsorships on training camp jerseys and partner with lotteries even thought they officially are anti-gambling. Wait, no, they do both of those.
Mike: They do both of those with extreme prejudice. We often get caught up in the team drama and hooplah, especially in the more emotionally charged playoffs atmosphere, and forget that this is all a giant money-making scheme.
Tom: The NFL is good like that. With guaranteed media contracts, some teams may be able to make money in 2011 without even playing any games! This state of affairs is either awesome or incredibly depressing.
Mike: I don't think they two are mutually exclusive.
Tom: "He Who Must Not Be Named did great things. Terrible, yes, but great."
Tom: Sean climbs up to the top, and Vince is done. D-U-N, done.
Mike: Poor Vince. I suppose he guessed wrong.
Tom: Sean has Thomas Jones, Dallas Clark and Jets D remaining. You have Sidney Rice, Ryan Longwell and New Orleans D. All-in on New Orleans and Indianapolis paid off for me, I think, as I'm still only missing Cincinnati D. This really is such a crapshoot. You can win this thing if you get the right two players, who then go off, so it makes sense to overload on one or two teams as much as you can. You just have to hope that, unlike Green Bay, they don't flame out in their first game.
Mike: I'm in second place and I didn't go all-in on any team. In fact, the team I was heaviest in also lost its first game.
Tom: That's a fine strategy, if you want to finish third.
Mike: We'll see who wins, then.
Mike: That would have been impressive if I had done that, yes! Sadly, Doucet flew under the radar.
Tom: Yes, well, his reign of third/fourth receiver terror is over now. As well as Sean's doing, imagine how much better he'd be if he spent his first-round pick on Shonn Greene instead of Thomas Jones. Greene also went unpicked in the best of the rest draft, so he's not the only person who whiffed on that.
Mike: Committees are always a crap shoot. So it's a double crap shoot! Like shooting craps with exploding dice. Or coaching for the Raiders.
Tom: Coaching for the Raiders will end poorly and never look good. Shooting craps is actually good before the dice explode. I have eight of my nine players left, but I don't think I like playoff fantasy football, at least the way it's commonly structured. I wonder if it'd be better if you had a smaller group and did weekly picks. Three or four players, maybe quarterback, two running backs, two wide receivers and a defense.
Mike: That would definitely be interesting, especially when you ran out of actual players at those positions.
Tom: Yes, the Super Bowl would be interesting.
|FO Playoff Divisional Results (Players in bold are still active)|
|Aaron||Peyton Manning||18||LaDainian Tomlinson||2||Marion Barber||1||Miles Austin||17||Julian Edelman||16||Percy Harvin||2||Antonio Gates||9||Nate Kaeding||2||IND||7||74|
|Dave||Brett Favre||27||Adrian Peterson||7||Reggie Bush||16||Randy Moss||4||Greg Jennings||19||Robert Meachem||0||Jason Witten||11||Jay Feely||11||NE||0||95|
|Vince||Aaron Rodgers||40||Ray Rice||37||Laurence Maroney||0||DeSean Jackson||7||Donald Driver||4||Chad Ochocinco||2||Jermichael Finley||15||Mason Crosby||8||GB||-5||108|
|Mike||Tom Brady||7||Ryan Grant||7||Cedric Benson||23||Sidney Rice||32||Jeremy Maclin||20||Derrick Mason||6||Brent Celek||5||Ryan Longwell||10||NO||3||113|
|Sean||Philip Rivers||22||Thomas Jones||13||Beanie Wells||15||Vincent Jackson||11||Larry Fitzgerald||27||Steve Breaston||25||Dallas Clark||5||Stephen Gostkowski||2||NYJ||9||129|
|Tom||Drew Brees||24||Joseph Addai||3||Pierre Thomas||6||Reggie Wayne||12||Marques Colson||14||Austin Collie||11||Jeremy Shockey||9||Garrett Hartley||10||CIN||-3||86|
We're still just living in dryheat's world, as he maintains his overall lead from Week 1 by going to 143 points. Being the only person with Early Doucet was certainly a good call. Alas for him, Dustin Keller is his sole remaining player, so consider that lead tenuous. Best poised to pass him is Ryan D, with 127 total points and Pierre Garcon, Devery Henderson, Visanthe Shiancoe, and the Vikings Defense remaining. Podge is 5 points back, and has three of the same players, minus only Henderson, so barring extreme fumble issues by Devery he's likely to remain behind. Chris UK seems to have the third-best shot right now, with Sanchez, Cotchery, Edwards, Garcon, Keller, and the Vikings D; a big passing day from the Jets could put him on top. Oh, and every running back taken in Best of the Rest has been eliminated.
Mike: This segment goes out to people of all colors! Including Expanics!
Tom: isobre el quarterback spectacular Senor Mark Sanchez! Although I used to live in Georgia, I have nothing against North Carolina.
Mike: I like North Carolina. It's a pretty state, and I have a lot of friends from there. Also, it's not South Carolina.
Tom: Even though the two commercials we've saved for the playoffs are both from North Carolina. One thing I like about the commercial is how it doesn't do the expected. You see Black Person on a sofa saying "this sofa is perfect for black people and for white people." If this was a big-budget national commercial, you'd see a cut after "black people" and White Guy would be on the same sofa saying the last part. Actually, check that, I don't like it. I expect that sort of thing -- that tells me they're good, and paying attention to how things should flow. I've praised commercials for subverting conventions, but it doesn't feel like they're doing that. It just feels cheap.
Mike: It doesn't help that I can't make up my mind if it's all a big gag or some kind of instructional video. "This is a sofa. White people can use the sofa! Black people can use the sofa! Expanic people can use the sofa! Who can use the sofa? That's right, everyone can use the sofa."
Tom: "Except that one guy over there, who refuses to use the sofa on weird quasi-religious grounds he refuses to explain."
Mike: I'm just assuming that the sofa works for Asians, also, since it is an amazing and miraculous and wonderful multicultural bit of fabric and fluff.
Tom: High Point is outside the Research Triangle, there are no Asians. They're like black people in Bismarck, you've heard of them, but there aren't actually any.
Mike: The other interesting bit about the delivery is that the actors (I use the term loosely, with no disrespect). "This sofa is great for a white person! ... ... Oh yeah, or a black person!" It's like they have to sit and think about if this sofa really would work out for a black person.
Tom: Yes, there are very sensitive racial decisioins to think about in terms of buying furniture. I won't even mention that both the sofa and the mattress they say are perfect for a white person ... or a black person are both white in color. Oops.
Mike: Oops, indeed. The cherry on top is that this isn't a YouTube joke. The tag line isn't "holy crap look at this insane thing I saw on TV!" It's an official dump by the guys who made it, who are apparently proud of the racially harmonious world of furniture they helped popularize? As far as I can tell, they're good ol' boy versions of Flight of the Conchords.
Tom: Are there all-white furniture stores? I don't go shopping for furniture, ever, so I don't know.
Mike: Not really, white furniture isn't very popular. It stains easily and doesn't go with much. I imagine they use white furniture in the commercial because they did some color tests and it worked out better than brown. Or, of course, some insidious hidden agenda.
Tom: Yes, the Klavern Furniture Store, where employees wear white hoods.
Mike: Again, North Carolina. Not South Carolina.
Tom: Right, gotcha.
Mike: Part of me says that this is actually a great gesture in a place where their normal is so much different from mine, but still. That would be referencing a terrifying, Friday Night Lights kind of normal.
Tom: I think they missed something in the commercial. When you go to their Web site, they have a link for furniture and for electronics. In the commercial, however, you only see some TVs in the background. They don't mention electronics in the commercial. Therefore, by negative implication, maybe there are racial differences when it comes to buying electronics!
Mike: Logic! I wonder if the other electronics stores tell you astoundingly obvious things, like "this toaster can be used by a man, or a woman!" Oh, wait, ha ha, women cannot understand technology!
Tom: I'll be sure to e-mail your wife and tell her not to read this week's column.
Mike: She's a bigger fan of the trope than I am. We were watching Star Trek, one of those episodes where Uhura was ostensibly in charge (but was never actually shown doing in-charge things, because it was the 1960s), and Kirk was yelling "Where is my ship?" She chimes in with "Well, Uhura's in charge, I bet they're off shoe shopping!" I'm trying to figure out how we as a species survived the '60s. I'm drawing a blank.
Tom: That is another thing about this commercial. It may fight against racial prejudice, but all the people who provide this wonderful, miraculous furniture are men. Women only buy the stuff. You could thank Richard Nixon's famed silent majority. Or, more realistically, the creation of the AFL, which brought football to cities that could support it but didn't have a team and wouldn't have received one without it. All of this in the time-honored American traditions of fun and profit.
Mike: And giving us superior football! It is a difficult balancing act.
Tom: Well, part of the reason it was a difficult balancing act was because the only time they didn't have a cigarette in their mouth was when they were taking a drink.
Mike: And then the '70s happened and everyone got to hate the hippies, the end!
KEEP CHOPPING WOOD: Kick the challenge flag! Don't kick the challenge flag! Vincent Jackson should have been content with his spectacular grab and watching Rex Ryan lose what looked like a very good challenge, but no, he had to go and stupidly cost his team 15 yards with a selfish and stupid move. That it ended up costing San Diego relatively little is immaterial; that he did something selfish and stupid in the final minutes of a close game is unforgivable.
MIKE MARTZ AWARD: From 2004 to 2006, the San Diego Chargers under Marty Schottenheimer amassed a cumulative record of 35-13, but lost their first playoff game both years they made it. GM A.J. Smith had, of course, put together a talented roster, but a Proven Playoff Winner was needed to put his team over the kid. Enter Norv Turner. Now, the more elephantine of you might remember Norv's immediate previous head coaching job consisted of two years in which he won a total of nine games. But, well, Al Davis and all that, and besides, Norv had won a playoff game his previous head coaching gig and looked to have one of the league's best teams until his owner decided it was a good idea to sign and play Jeff George. And that playoff game Norv won? Against the Detroit Lions. The post-Barry Sanders Detroit Lions. The 8-8 and outscored on the year (ok, only by 1) Detroit Lions. Oh, and Norv's Redskins lost their next game, against a team with a mediocre-at-best rookie quarterback (the Shaun King-led Buccaneers) thanks in part to a key late kicking mishap. See, Chargers fans, Redskins fans feel your pain, at least when they're not joining the rest of us in laughing in your general direction. See you in the Pro Bowl, Norvalicious!
COLBERT AWARD: Lovers of the unconventional award choice, your Scramble writers considered giving this week's Colbert Award to Brad Childress for listening to the exhortations of the Vikings' fight song (lyrics here) and scoring an unnecessary late touchdown, but really, there's only one choice here and that's Rex Ryan's decision to go for it on fourth-and-1 to win the game, rather than give the ball back to San Diego with a chance to win.
12 comments, Last at 21 Jan 2010, 6:49pm by beargoggles