Writers of Pro Football Prospectus 2008

30 Oct 2006

Manic Monday: It's All Over For Some

What do you do when your team's postseason hopes are dead and buried by Week Eight? What sort of Flintstones Chewables was Sage Rosenfels horfing down before the Texans-Titans game, and what does that have to do with Seneca Wallace? Who is Mike Tomlin, and why might he be your team's head coach in a few years? And how in the name of Ocho Cinco did Oakland get outgained, 360-98, and still beat the Steelers? In this week's “Manic Monday�, we attempt to answer these questions and more.

Posted by: Doug Farrar on 30 Oct 2006

29 comments, Last at 31 Oct 2006, 12:19pm by Wanker79


by jonnyblazin (not verified) :: Mon, 10/30/2006 - 5:20am

woops, its jake plummer for the broncos, not delhomme.
I'm impressed by Rob Ryan, but will anyone ever hire a HC with hair like that?

by Subrata Sircar (not verified) :: Mon, 10/30/2006 - 5:28am

Denver's Jake Delhomme?

by Ian (not verified) :: Mon, 10/30/2006 - 5:34am

I have no idea where to put this, but in his Sunday night column Terry Bradshaw says this while talking about Vick:

...I know that Pittsburgh and Cincinnati don't have the greatest defenses...

I think PIT's defense still counts as good Bradshaw.

by Doug Farrar :: Mon, 10/30/2006 - 5:35am

Wow, that was goofy. I have alerted the editors. Thanks for the catch on the Two Jakes...

by Yaguar (not verified) :: Mon, 10/30/2006 - 6:04am

"The Colts also became the first franchise to begin three straight seasons at a 7-0 clip in the modern era. The last teams to win at least their first seven games three years in a row were the 1929-1931 Green Bay Packers, when they were upending such powerhouses as the Dayton Triangles and the Staten Island Stapletons."

Not true. The Colts lost their opener in 2004. At Foxboro, Vanderjagt, wide right. Ring any bells?

The Colts are the first modern era team to have two 7-0 starts in a row, though. Only the Packers, back in the old days, did it three times in a row.

by Marko (not verified) :: Mon, 10/30/2006 - 6:31am

Is anybody else annoyed by Chad Johnson calling himself "Ocho Cinco"? "Ocho Cinco" = Eight Five. Since his number is Eighty Five (not Eight Five), the correct Spanish translation is "Ochenta y cinco." Maybe next time, learn some Spanish, Chad.

by Richard (not verified) :: Mon, 10/30/2006 - 6:46am

6: Ocho Cinco sounds better and that's pretty much the only thing that matters here.

by Theo (not verified) :: Mon, 10/30/2006 - 8:18am
by Doug Farrar :: Mon, 10/30/2006 - 9:00am

Re: #5 - You are correct. This is also being fixed.

by Not saying (not verified) :: Mon, 10/30/2006 - 9:40am

While we're correcting minor errors, I feel I should point out a grammar one, since that is my job. "Irvin's function isn't journalistic; Tiki . . ." The semi-colon there should be a comma.

Oh, and I enjoyed the article. Maybe not as much as I enjoyed Chad Johnson, but still good stuff.

by BlueStarDude (not verified) :: Mon, 10/30/2006 - 10:53am

It's not my job, but I think the semi-colon is ok there; it's separating two independent clauses. I would have used a comma instead of an ellipses, but... whatever.

by dryheat (not verified) :: Mon, 10/30/2006 - 11:11am

Wow...how does a team (Pittsburgh) manage to lose two such games in a four year span?

by Israel (not verified) :: Mon, 10/30/2006 - 11:37am

#12 - I find it hard to see any connection between the Houston game in 2002 and yesterday's game.

by dryheat (not verified) :: Mon, 10/30/2006 - 11:47am

There's no connection between the two, in the sense that there's a common cause. But in both games the Steelers outgained their opponent 350+ to less than 100 and lost. Yesterday was worse, because at least in the Houston game you had the feeling that Pittsburgh could win.

That doesn't strike you as unlikely?

by Sophandros (not verified) :: Mon, 10/30/2006 - 12:05pm

Because several players will say "Eight Five" instead of "eighty five", Ocho Cinco makes a little sense. Plus it's pretty funny. I await the Ocho Cinco Name Generator, like the Ron Mexico Name Generator...

by B (not verified) :: Mon, 10/30/2006 - 12:17pm

14: I guess the common cause is they started a QB with a concussion or Tommy Maddox.

by calig23 (not verified) :: Mon, 10/30/2006 - 12:25pm


Well, actually, Maddox had suffered an injury (temporarily paralyzed or something) just a few weeks before against Tennessee. The Houston game was his first game back.

by fromanchu (not verified) :: Mon, 10/30/2006 - 12:27pm

14: the key connection is that in both cases, many of the pittsburg defenders were unsung.

by Athelas (not verified) :: Mon, 10/30/2006 - 12:39pm

A comma would connect the word Tiki to the first clause, but I believe he used a semi-colon to connect Tiki to the 2nd clause. (Where is the grammar thread around here?)

by Not saying (not verified) :: Mon, 10/30/2006 - 1:06pm

Re: 11/19

If you look at it in context, I think it should be that the "Tiki" part is addressing Tiki directly. Direct address must be separated by a comma. The elipsis seems to show a pause in the thought process, a change of direction at the elipsis (which could be a semi-colon). That says to me that the semi-colon should be a comma, that the "Tiki" address is part of the first thought.

Sorry about this, but it is my job, both directly and teaching others about it.

by dbt (not verified) :: Mon, 10/30/2006 - 1:22pm

the correct punctuation should be:
"...isn't journalistic, Tiki; his function..."

by MRH (not verified) :: Mon, 10/30/2006 - 2:57pm

I went to a football column and a grammar debate broke out.

by B (not verified) :: Mon, 10/30/2006 - 4:42pm

17: I guess the similarity between the games is rushing an injured QB back to face a seemingly inferior opponent.

by GlennW (not verified) :: Mon, 10/30/2006 - 6:02pm

> Yesterday was worse, because at least in the Houston game you had the feeling that Pittsburgh could win.

Yes, I see a lot of parallels between the games, but I thought the Steelers were in a position to win yesterday though. The Steelers did fall into a bigger hole (>= 8-point deficit) earlier against the Texans, and they were not in a position to tie the game in the final minutes as yesterday. But this loss hurt more because it's likely (for practical purposes) a season-ending loss. The loss to the Texans was kind of a mulligan for a rusty Tommy Maddox; he did bounce back and was not ultimately the cause of that flawed team's demise (that'd be the defense). Agreed that in both games the result was wildly improbable based on the way the game was played, and the total yardage spread was even greater in the Texans' game (422-47).

by Becephalus (not verified) :: Mon, 10/30/2006 - 7:12pm

I did not even notice the sentance in question, but as long as it is not obscuring/confusing meaning who cares. Liguistics for the win! Overly conservative editors and English professors for the lose. Of course if it is screwing with the meaning, then by all means nitpick away.


by Vince (not verified) :: Mon, 10/30/2006 - 9:45pm

#6: You've never heard a player refer to himself as (for example) "Eight-Five?"

by Marko (not verified) :: Mon, 10/30/2006 - 10:16pm

Vince, I have heard a player refer to himself as "Eight Five" (for example). But far more common is for a player to refer to himself as "Eighty Five." How do we know that Chad Johnson is trying to refer to himself as "Eight Five" instead of "Eighty Five"? We don't.

Also, in the NFL Network commercial with Chad Johnson, just before it refers to him as "Ocho Cinco," it refers to him as "Eighty Five." That's inconsistent.

On the other hand, Peter King in today's MMQB made the same point that I did about the correct Spanish translation. So if I'm thinking the same thing as Peter King, maybe I'm just wrong.

by tunesmith (not verified) :: Mon, 10/30/2006 - 11:29pm

wow, this thread is awesome.

by Wanker79 (not verified) :: Tue, 10/31/2006 - 12:19pm

Re: 25

Overly conservative editors and English professors for the lose.

Lose [looz]; verb

Loss [los]; noun