Writers of Pro Football Prospectus 2008

22 Sep 2005

Colts Run Wild

Dr. Z's Week 2 power rankings have a new number one: the Indianapolis Colts. In fact, the top six spots are all occupied by new teams. He also ranks the Falcons ahead of the Eagles (and the Redskins ahead of the Cowboys), introduces TV bubbleheads to Alan Ameche, and has his preseason pick to win the AFC North ranked 27th. You know things are weird when the Browns and the 49ers are ranked ahead of the Ravens and Vikings.

Posted by: P. Ryan Wilson on 22 Sep 2005

60 comments, Last at 23 Sep 2005, 3:56pm by TomC


by dryheat (not verified) :: Thu, 09/22/2005 - 9:40am

I don't see how any team other than Pittsburgh could logically by #1 right now. Hopefully, that will change by Sunday evening.

by LnGrrrR (not verified) :: Thu, 09/22/2005 - 9:46am

Coming from a Pats fan....hopefully not ;)

by Bockman (not verified) :: Thu, 09/22/2005 - 10:10am

Who exactly have the Steelers beat? The Titans and Texans? Yawn. Wake me up if they beat the Pats this weekend.

by B (not verified) :: Thu, 09/22/2005 - 10:14am

Who exactly have the Colts beat? The Jags and the Ravens (yawn!)

by Ray (not verified) :: Thu, 09/22/2005 - 10:23am

As much as I like Pittsburgh (and I do, they're my #2 team), I've got to agree that Ravens + Jags > Titans + Texans. This weekend will decide if though if the Steelers can beat the Pats again.


by dryheat (not verified) :: Thu, 09/22/2005 - 10:36am

Hey, the Steelers can only play the teams on the schedule. Fact it, they dominated teams they were supposed to dominate. The Steelers have looked very good offensively and defensively. The same can't be said of the Colts. One could make an argument for the Chiefs over the Colts as well. I'm not saying the Steelers are unstoppable, or even that they have proved they're the best team in football, I'm saying that thus far they have made the best case.

LnGrrrR...I'm a Pats fan as well...I would think you would agree with my wishes.

by B (not verified) :: Thu, 09/22/2005 - 10:38am

First of all, the Titans beat the Ravens head to head. Secondly, Pittsburg destroyed both its opponents, and the Colts barely beat the Jags.

by RowdyRoddyPiper (not verified) :: Thu, 09/22/2005 - 11:01am

I think week two is a little early for people to get fired up about the power rankings. I mean Power = Work / Time, and in week two there hasn't been a lot of work done and there's certainly plenty of time left in the season.

by Ray (not verified) :: Thu, 09/22/2005 - 11:02am

Yeah, but the Colts have Peyton Manning. Isn't that worth like 3 positions up in the power rankings irregardless of performance? (psst, that was a joke, put the torches down)

Actually, it was only a half joke. I'm betting that that even though they haven't showed it yet, everyone expects the Colts offence to be just as good as last year. It's just assumed to be true. So taking that assumption into account, their recent defensive performances rank them #1.

by Paul (not verified) :: Thu, 09/22/2005 - 11:11am

Re #9
Yes but Steelers blocking is worth a couple rankings as well. What other team (besides maybe Denver) could put a third string running back in, who wasn't a starter in college, and get three consecutive 100-yd games (Buffalo last year) out of him? Steeler defense looks as strong as ever, though I do admit they need to play a real team to truly judge their worth. Steelers dominate Pats this week and there is no doubt they are #1. I don't expect domination this week, just a win for the Steelers in a very close game.

by Paul (not verified) :: Thu, 09/22/2005 - 11:22am

Willie Parker is a stud. That he didn't see the field in college is irrelevant now. He breaks long runs and gets yards after contact. You can't just say it's all because of the blocking he gets.

by mactbone (not verified) :: Thu, 09/22/2005 - 11:25am

Brock Forsey got a hundred yards for the Bears. Last year Nick Goings got a hundred for the Panthers. It's not improbable that a third or fourth or in the case of Carolina fifth and more can get a hundred yards. Anyway, there were already rumblings that Parker was going to get the ball more - he may have been undrafted but he wasn't going completely unnoticed. The line is obviously good but I also give a lot of credit to Parker who clearly has skills.

by Geoff C (not verified) :: Thu, 09/22/2005 - 11:37am

I'm an Eagles fan and the Falcons being ranked ahead of the Eagles in Dr. Z's power rankings isn't particularly surprising. Overall, I'd say the Eagles have played better but Dr. Z always tries to keep teams ahead of other teams they beat for the first 4-5 weeks. After that it's pretty much impossible to do across the board.

by Ray (not verified) :: Thu, 09/22/2005 - 11:46am

RE: #10

The Steelers blocking is only worth a couple of rankings if it threw 49 TDs last season. Oops, I guess it's too late. ;^)

It's all about perception. Before the season, many people percieved that the Steelers were going to be worse this year. Many people percieved that the Colts had the best offence in the game. The first two weeks obviously don't bear that out, but since it's only two weeks in, people will still cling to their original perceptions, since the first two weeks here could be flukes for both teams.

The Steelers are being edged up in a "I don't want to get burned when they fail" sort of way, and the Colts are placed on the top in a "Wow that defense is finally playing better; with that great offence, they're unstoppable" sort of way.

by dryheat (not verified) :: Thu, 09/22/2005 - 11:58am

It's nearly impossible to do now. You'd need to put the Saints above the Panthers, then the Giants above the Saints. The Chiefs then Jets then Dolphins then Broncos then Chargers. The Jaguars then Seahawks then Falcons then Eagles then Forty-Niners then Rams. Disregarding the advantage of home field, the rankings would look something like this:

1. Steelers
2. Chiefs
3. Colts
4. Bengals
5. Giants
6. Saints
7. Panthers
8. Buccaneers
9. Patriots
10. Jets
11. Redskins
12. Jaguars
13. Seahawks
14. Falcons
15. Eagles
16. Cowboys
17. Dolphins
18. Broncos
19. Chargers
20. Bills
21. Forty-Niners
22. Rams
23. Bears
24. Browns
25. Titans
26. Raiders
27. Lions
28. Ravens
29. Cardinals
30. Vikings
31. Texans
32. Packers

by Kami (not verified) :: Thu, 09/22/2005 - 12:04pm

Meh, the Colts faced the Ravens' D when they were fired up for their home opener, and a lot of people still felt they were a playoff team. By the second half the Colts were moving the ball, and I think the Ravens are now having coming-down-to-earth syndrome.
The Jags have always matched up well against the Colts in recent years, and Manning was already having an off-day anyway (supposedly he was unusually inaccurate in pre-game practises).
So it's logical to presume that the Colts offense will turn into a pinball machine again, and in going 2-2 on opposing injuring QBs, the defense is suddenly turning heads as well.

That being said, the Steelers look damn good as well, and I don't see how you can take anything away from their wins. Who should be #1 right now is just a toss-up, and I wouldn't get my panties in a wad over it. ESPN likes Indy, CBS Sportsline likes Pittsburg, and...wait, why do you care about Z's rating again?

by Rob (not verified) :: Thu, 09/22/2005 - 12:14pm

RE: #11
"Willie Parker is a stud."

I this is off-topic, but anyone know how long has "stud" been part of football parlance?

It seems like more and more folks (especially yer run of the mill FF columnists) are using it, and I still just can't get over it. A stud is either livestock for breeding or a really hot guy, so forgive me if I can't help thinking about the latent homoeroticism...


"Sexy" draft picks are another one.

by dryheat (not verified) :: Thu, 09/22/2005 - 12:24pm

RE: 17

My HS football coaches always refered to the other teams' top player as their "stud". This was long before the advent of fantasy football.

I'm guessing the phrase has been around for quite a while, and is a metaphor to the top bull or stallion on the farm.

by B (not verified) :: Thu, 09/22/2005 - 12:25pm

Is that like when basketball players are described as "long" or pitchers get the nickname "big unit"?

by Rob (not verified) :: Thu, 09/22/2005 - 12:29pm

And in basketball don't forget about the occasional "great body"!

by Carl (not verified) :: Thu, 09/22/2005 - 12:42pm

"Stud." "Great body." "Big unit." Someone must be paging me!

by MdM (not verified) :: Thu, 09/22/2005 - 12:55pm

Don't forget the guys who have "good bubble" :)

by Homer S. (not verified) :: Thu, 09/22/2005 - 1:01pm

Damn that stupid sexy Flanders.

by andrew (not verified) :: Thu, 09/22/2005 - 1:20pm

Not one of these 2-0 teams has beaten anyone with a winning record (stolen from last year's z col)

by zip (not verified) :: Thu, 09/22/2005 - 1:22pm

I am so glad other people are also aroused, er, confused by the usage of "stud" to describe football players.

by Carl "the stud" (not verified) :: Thu, 09/22/2005 - 1:30pm

"If I had any guts, I'd put Dallas higher than Washington, anyway, and face up to the cries of bloody murder I'd be hearing from Pennsylvania Ave."

Actually, the current coach of Pennsylvania Ave is a Texan who once owned a professional franchise in the suburbs of Dallas.

He might be a Cowboys fan. He definitely was once a cheerleader.

Unless, of course, the good doctor is extending the "Avenue of the Presidents" to its natural terminus at the Capitol dome. But the senators there would represent every NFL city EXCEPT Washington, D.C.

Hence the city's license plates.

The Redskins' front office is in Virginia, anyway. Down a gravel road (really).

By the way, Boston guys, has John Kerry ever been seen at a Pats' game? Evan Bayh must hate to see a chipper JFK pop his head into the Indiana delegation office on Monday every year to rub in the Colts' flop.

I bet he mangles something.

"Hey, Evan, how about that Layton Manny? Tough, eh?"

I saw Tom Ridge at a Stillers' match last year. A rectangle of a man surrounded by suits talking into their sleeves.

That was funny to watch. He left a few minutes before the Black & Gold scored to win the thing.

Ed Rendell famously attends Eagles' games, sometimes egging fans to pelt opposing players with snowballs.

Would John McCain admit to being a Cardinals' fan? Which team does Hillary root for? Giants or Jets?

Or Bears?

Her husband is famous for his love of the Cowboys.

Two presidents in a row who are fans of the Cowboys. Bipartisan support for Dallas at the highest level. Must eat away at Eagles' fans.

Don't worry, zlions. Gerald Ford was all for the Detroit team.

Gore liked the Titans, and knew enough about throw-weights as the junior senator on the Defense Committee to argue point for point with Easterbrook.

Walter Mondale loved the Vikes, but I'm not sure if Carter would claim the Falcons.

To my knowledge, no U.S. president or viable candidate for the Oval Office has ever supported the Oakland Raiders.

by MDS (not verified) :: Thu, 09/22/2005 - 1:35pm

I just want to commend dryheat on those rankings. Dr. Z (whom I love) seems to take the attitude of, "I keep teams ahead of the teams they beat, except when I don't." Whether you quibble with dryheat's rankings or not, you can't fault his logic.

by Starshatterer (not verified) :: Thu, 09/22/2005 - 1:46pm

MDS (#27 ), dryheat (#15 )--

I'd fault one part of dryheat's ratings: he had a 2-0 team (the Redskins) below a handful of 1-1 teams (Saints through Jets). Lions (1-1) should also be above the 0-2 Raiders.

If you're going mechanical, rather than judgemental, record beats strength of win.

by Dired (not verified) :: Thu, 09/22/2005 - 1:51pm

"Nathan Vasher is the best we have at playing the football." But why is he speaking in dialect? Do I say, "I am the best we have in the journalism?"


Uh, seems to me that 'playing the ball' means specifcially playing in relation to the ball on the field, and not to playing the general sport? When a DB 'plays the football' he's fixated on who has the ball and where it is, as opposed to who's running which routes or where the various players are on the field. Or am I reading a meaning into it that was never there?

by Pat (not verified) :: Thu, 09/22/2005 - 2:05pm

Two presidents in a row who are fans of the Cowboys. Bipartisan support for Dallas at the highest level. Must eat away at Eagles’ fans.

Nah, it just proves what we've always known. Government's corrupt, and the head of government must be very corrupt, and so he naturally leans towards the most corrupt team. Dallas, of course.

by Carl (not verified) :: Thu, 09/22/2005 - 3:02pm

"Lions (1-1) should also be above the 0-2 Raiders."

I'm not so sure, MDS. Although I was a big preseason fan of the Lions (before they lost all depth at QB), losing to New England by 10 or a very good (so far) KC team by a field goal isn't really so bad as losing to a pretty mediocre Bears team by a lot.

Not that it matters. Both divisions don't strike me as particularly tough.

That said, I picked the Chiefs to win it this year, and I'm hoping they don't desert me.

by DavidH (not verified) :: Thu, 09/22/2005 - 3:30pm

15, 28, 31:

How about the 0-2 Chargers being ranked #19?

If we wanna go really mechanical and let W-L record AND who-beat-who have priority over judgement also, here's mine:

1 Pittsburgh
2 Kansas City
3 Indianapolis
4 Tampa Bay
5 Cincinnati
6 Washington
7 N.Y. Giants
8 Jacksonville
9 Seattle
10 Atlanta
11 New Orleans
12 Carolina
13 Philadelphia
14 New England
15 N.Y. Jets
16 Chicago
17 Buffalo
18 Tennessee
19 Miami
20 Denver
21 Dallas
22 Detroit
23 San Francisco
24 St. Louis
25 Cleveland
26 San Diego
27 Oakland
28 Baltimore
29 Arizona
30 Minnesota
31 Houston
32 Green Bay

by B (not verified) :: Thu, 09/22/2005 - 3:43pm

Didn't Dubya choke on a pretzel while watching a Baltimore Ravens game? I'm not sure if the choking was Kyle Boller related or not, but I think that indicates he's a Baltimore fan.

by Carl (not verified) :: Thu, 09/22/2005 - 3:50pm

For what it's worth, Sagarin's Markov work (with a VERY limited comparative dataset at Week 2), lists the following top 10:

1 Indianapolis Colts
2 Pittsburgh Steelers
3 New England Patriots
4 Philadelphia Eagles
5 Kansas City Chiefs
6 New York Jets
7 Tampa Bay Buccaneers
8 Jacksonville Jaguars
9 Cincinnati Bengals
10 Buffalo Bills

Of his Top 10, I have the Colts, Steelers, Pats, Eagles, Chiefs, Bengals and Bills in my final season predictions for playoff spots.

by Carl (not verified) :: Thu, 09/22/2005 - 3:54pm

The best 0-2 team, for Sagarin, is Baltimore at 16 (middle of the pack).

He has the 1-1 Lions at second to last, and the Cards in the bottom spot.

I bet they've been there before.

The Raiders have had the toughest schedule; the Giants, the easiest.

Pat, in Pure Points, the Eagles are tops.

I don't believe that (see Vick, Michael), but it's what his computer said. In Pure Points, the 49ers are the worst team.

We'll see.

by Carl (not verified) :: Thu, 09/22/2005 - 4:00pm

Well, the Dolphins also were playing. Maybe he was watching for ol' Jeb's sake.

Or maybe it had something to do with having to follow the curious trajectory of Jay Fiedler's passes.

John Kerry later attacked Bush, saying the Commander in Chief really choked the pretzel, not the other way around.

Moveon.org blamed Halliburton.

by TMK (not verified) :: Thu, 09/22/2005 - 4:05pm

That game where a patriotic pretzel gave his all was the 2001 playoff in Miami, so Bush was choking on Elvis Grbac actually leading a successful drive. That game was also notable for inspiring the mistaken belief that Terry Allen could be a productive playoff running back, a notion quite quickly disproven by Pittsburgh the following week.

And Halliburton did get the no-bid contract for rebuilding whatever damage was done to the living quarters, but they refused to allow an outside audit to inspect either the "damage" or the quality of the repair.

by the Drew (not verified) :: Thu, 09/22/2005 - 4:18pm

#29 beat me to it. "Playing the football" is an expression that a football writer (let alone the best we have in the journalism) really should be familiar with. At least once a game, an announcer will use it, often in conjuction with "playing the man" when a pass interference penalty is called.

by B (not verified) :: Thu, 09/22/2005 - 4:21pm

Thanks for clearing that up. Watching Jay Feidler and Elvis Grbac in a playoff game would make me choke, too.

by The Pretzel (not verified) :: Thu, 09/22/2005 - 4:31pm

He held me down and Laura choked me. And he was NOT watching football. That's just a lie.

He was watching Lifetime Movie Channel.

by Carl (not verified) :: Thu, 09/22/2005 - 4:37pm


I made the mistake of clicking on your name, then going to Lifetime's search and punching in "Football."

The first player mentioned? Jason Sehorn.

Go figure.

The next player? Rodney Peete. I bet his publicist screwed him on that one. "ESPN not calling you back for Budweiser Hot Seat? Rod, have I got a deal for you! Lifetime!

(Pause. Sounds of irate QB)

"No, really. They want to know about that time you got a call during the Cardinals' game. You know, the one where your wife told you she was having twins and you had to leave the game to go to the hospital?"

More from Lifetime, advice for women:

"Guys often get cranky when it comes to mixing women and football, because they assume you're just going to complain. This Sunday, try watching the game with an open mind. Listen to the sports commentators; they can give good insight into the players' personalities and personal struggles, making the game all the more interesting. Make some yummy food (When else is it considered completely appropriate to pig out on chips and dip?), sit back, relax, and have fun."

In reality, my wife just nags.

"What's the point of all this? What are they doing for world peace?"

"It's my job, baby. I have to watch."

by Carl (not verified) :: Thu, 09/22/2005 - 4:39pm

And whenever I'm watching the game, I sure as hell want to kick any announcer in the balls the second I hear anything about some guy's personal life.

Save that for print, buddy. I'm trying to watch 3rd and 3!

by Carl (not verified) :: Thu, 09/22/2005 - 4:42pm

"If you start to feel out of your element, think of a quote Kathie Lee Gifford had embroidered on a pillow when her husband, Frank Gifford, was still a football commentator: "We interrupt this marriage to bring you a football game."


by Carl (not verified) :: Thu, 09/22/2005 - 4:43pm

"4. Butts
They're tight, they're young, and they're in Spandex."

I'm blind! I can't see! Kill me, Bill Parcells! Kill me now like a dog!

by Pretzel (not verified) :: Thu, 09/22/2005 - 4:45pm

You're welcome.

by Ray (not verified) :: Thu, 09/22/2005 - 4:52pm

RE: Carl “It’s my job, baby. I have to watch.�

Lucky b*stard. I wish I had that one to fall back on...

Really, you should know better than to peruse the Lifetime website. You're putting your manhood in mortal danger just by looking at it. Stop now and save yourself!

by Carl (not verified) :: Thu, 09/22/2005 - 4:56pm

Ray, I thought I could suck it up until I got to the Gifford pillow and the men's butts in spandex.

At that point I chipped out the Q on my keyboard and gouged out my offending eyeballs.

Damn you, Pretzel!

by Pretzel (not verified) :: Thu, 09/22/2005 - 4:58pm

I'm a sensitive man, confident in my sexuality. I don't mind having a strong, assertive woman express her feelings, Carl, and neither should you.

For example, I love the color Aqua. There. I said it.

And the Eagles. I love me some Eagles. Mmmmmmmm.

Why fight it, Carl?

by DavidH (not verified) :: Thu, 09/22/2005 - 4:59pm

Carl, 34:

Are you trying to brag about your preseason predictions by comparing them to the Sagarin ratings? If so, interesting choice to brag about Buffalo when they're the third-rated team in their division. And Cincy when they would be out of a playoff spot if you assign them by his ratings. Let's go down the list:

1. Indy AFC D1
2. Pitt AFC D2
3. New England AFC D3
4. Philly NFC D1
5. Kansas City AFC D4
6. NY Jets AFC WC1
7. Tampa Bay NFC D2
9. Jax AFC WC2
11. Atlanta NFC WC1
12. Washington NFC WC2
17. Seattle NFC D3
22. Chicago NFC D4

If it's ike that, I got Indy, NE, Philly, KC, TB, Washington. Which means I suck. To be fair, I have the Jets and Bears as the first teams out in their conferences, but whatever...

Of course, now that I've typed all this I realize strength of schedule is important, and that a team being in the top 10 at least = "good" so your choices look good. I have 6 of his top 10 in the playoffs, so you beat me by one.

And if you look at his bottom 5 ... they are 5 of my worst 6 by record. But I think everyone expected that.

My point? I don't know. I just like to play with rankings and predictions.

by DavidH (not verified) :: Thu, 09/22/2005 - 5:02pm

Oh, you know what, I think I have a spreadsheet already pretty much set up with this year's schedule, so I can plug his ratings in and see what the final records would be using his HFA adjustment. That'll be fun.

...Why doesn't he list that himself I wonder?

by Carl (not verified) :: Thu, 09/22/2005 - 5:05pm

I would look over your rankings, David, but I poked out my offending eyeballs with the Q key.

I think either Buffalo or New England will win the best division in football. I'm leaning, of course, toward New England. The computer didn't know what to do with the Bills' QB, but knew exactly how to appraise the D, TB and special teams.

As I suggested, Markov isn't going to be important until there are so more games in the dataset.

By the way, the computer put New England in as a wildcard. I'm not sure I'm willing to accept that yet.

by Carl (not verified) :: Thu, 09/22/2005 - 5:18pm

By the way, it seems as if Lifetime has a show called "Wild Card." I clicked on it to see if it had anything to do with the prospects of the Jets or Redskins.

Nah. The description:

Joely Fisher is back for another season of "Wild Card" as the quirky fraud investigator Zoe Busiek. When this high-octane character isn't getting herself into difficult work situations, she's busy playing mom to her sister's three children whom she's been raising since her sibling's death. Chris Potter reprises his role as Dan Lennox, Zoe's handsome super-sleuthing co-worker. Along with their new boss M. Pearl McGuire (Loretta Devine), the team tracks down and exposes crazy cases of all kinds based on real-life events.

by DavidH (not verified) :: Thu, 09/22/2005 - 5:20pm


I would look over your rankings, David, but I poked out my offending eyeballs with the Q key.

I totally forgot this was the same thread I posted those rankings in. The ones posted here were just to try and obey the rules talked about in the thread. My actual pre-season predictions are different. My bad. Not that you care (or should).

by TMK (not verified) :: Thu, 09/22/2005 - 5:36pm

It's OK, David; by the looks of his last post, Carl has now replaced his "Q" key.

Whether he has resolved his Oedipal issues is another matter, of course.

I can tell you that any show that lets you look at Joely Fisher while pretending to be sensitive to your wife isn't a bad thing, btw.

by DavidH (not verified) :: Thu, 09/22/2005 - 5:50pm

So I figured out why Sagarin doesn't plug in his ratings and HFA adjustment to get the outcome of each game. It gives ridiculous outcomes, because I'm not taking into account that being a favorite does not equal "100% chance of winning." But what the hell, I already did it, so...

If Sagarin's favorites win every game, here are the playoff spots, along with records:

d1 KC 16-0
d2 Indy 15-1
d3 Pitt 15-1
d4 NE 12-4
wc1 NYJ 12-4
wc2 Jax 11-5

d1 Philly 14-2
d2 TB 12-4
d3 Seattle 10-6
d4 Chicago 8-8
wc1 NYG 10-6
wc2 NO 9-7

1st draft pick - Arizona, 1-15

That was using RATING. Here is PUREPOINTS:

d1 Indy 15-1
d2 Pitt 15-1
d3 KC 14-2
d4 NE 13-3
wc1 Jax 12-4
wc2 NYJ 11-5

d1 Philly 15-1
d2 TB 11-5
d3 Seattle 10-6
d4 Chicago 10-6
wc1 NYG 9-7
wc2 Washington 9-7

1st draft pick still Arizona 1-15


So anyway, none of this is useful, I just find it interesting.

by Steve (not verified) :: Fri, 09/23/2005 - 1:22am

Holding a power ranking this early in the season is like holding a beauty pageant in a nursery. It's disturbing (and disgusting), completely pointless, and way too early to mean a thing. I put as much faith in a power ranking this early in the season as I put in a horoscope from a palm reader on the Jersey shore.

For as many faults as the BCS has, at least college football has enough sense not to come out with an official listing until they've played enough games to be able to tell a little bit about the teams.

by TomC (not verified) :: Fri, 09/23/2005 - 1:39am

#29 & #38:

I'm pretty sure that was one of Z's patented "I'm so far down the list I'm gonna make a weak-ass joke and who cares if anyone gets it." I predict his next mailbag column will contain sentences to the effect of: "Yes, yes, I know what 'playing the football' means; waddya think I do for a living? I was at #20 and bored as hell, so sue me."

by Ray (not verified) :: Fri, 09/23/2005 - 11:34am


Everyone knows they're pointless (and not just early in the season, either). But they're still fun read and tear apart. ;^)

by Adam H (not verified) :: Fri, 09/23/2005 - 1:34pm

"They have an undrafted rookie tight end from Fresno State named Stephen Spach. I have it on good authority that his name was shortened from Spinach"


by TomC (not verified) :: Fri, 09/23/2005 - 3:56pm

I predict his next mailbag column will contain sentences to the effect of: “Yes, yes, I know what ‘playing the football’ means; waddya think I do for a living? I was at #20 and bored as hell, so sue me.�

And indeed he does. (linked via my name)