I apologize for the considerable delay between posts. My computer broke and it has yet to be fixed. I'm currently at my wife's work using a computer with high speed internet. For those of you who don't know (which is pretty much everyone) I've spent the last seven months on this site using dial-up because high speed internet is not available where I live. That should give you an indication of where I live. Anyhow, I've been wanting to post something about the Lions for a better part of a week so here goes...
About three weeks ago, I said the following:
"If:
-Houston or SF win their last two games
-Tennessee beats Miami or finishes with a higher SOS than Detroit
-Arizona beats Philly or Indy
-NY Jets beat Buffalo
-Green Bay beats Chicago or Seattle
-Buffalo finishes with a higher SOS than Detroit or beats Cincy
-Detroit loses to New Orleans.
Then, the Lions would own the 2nd pick in the 2006 NFL draft. It would take a miracle for that to happen. As it stands now, the Lions would have a 1/3 shot at the #5 pick if they simply lose to the New Orleans Saints."
Ok, let's see how those things worked out.....
Houston or SF wins their last two games CHECK
Arizona beats Philly or Indy CHECK
NY Jets beat Buffalo CHECK
Green Bay beats Seattle CHECK
Buffalo beats Cincy CHECK
Tennessee finishes with a higher SOS than Detroit Check
Detroit loses to New Orleans DOHHHHH!
The stars were aligned. Everything that needed to happen ended up happening. Bad teams beat good teams. The SOS of schedule battle tipped heavily in the Lions favor. All the Lions needed to do was lose to an equally poor team on the road. It looked like it was going to happen until Joey Harrington decided it was time that he bring the fans of Detroit a W with a game-winning drive. Harrington's irrelevant heroics deprived the Lions of having Matt Leinart or Vince Young for the next 10-15 years. Leinart and Young should both be sending Joey a basket of the finest cheeses the world has to offer. He saved them from having to play in Detroit.
Joey's win moved the Lions from the 2nd pick in the draft to the 9th pick where they'll have a choice of Santonio Holmes or Jason Avant. I know NFL players and coaches say they don't care about the off-season stuff despite how idiotic that stance is. The Lions victory on Christmas Eve only proved that point.
Since I might not get a chance to post something for a few days, I'd like to comment on a few non-Lions, non-draft ruining topics.
First, the bowl season was crazy. In my ESPN Bowl Mania picks, I gave the three highest confidence games to Auburn over Wisconsin, Georgia over W. Virginia, and Michigan over Nebraska. None of those things happened. That was surprising to say the least. I was not surprised that Texas won but it was amazing to watch Vince Young single handily beat the Trojans. It was clearly a game for the ages. A few years from now, the NFL will be littered with players from that game. Vince Young proved that he is capable of being a productive passer from the pocket. Although he's been proving it all season, some draft people may have only begun to notice in the Rose Bowl. I would definitely take Young over Leinart. Leinart seemed shaky in most of USC's big games this year including Notre Dame, Texas, and Arizona St. Leinart also seems to be a bit injury prone. When was the last time Young even got hit hard? Young is bigger than everyone trying to tackle him. He can punish people and run past people. The Lions lost out on a big-time NFL star.
I have a lot of respect for the Ohio St. football program. They have everything that Michigan wants. However, I have to seriouly question Kirk Herbstreit's bias after naming them pre-season #1 next season. The Buckeyes lose Santonio Holmes, A.J. Hawk, Bobby Carpenter, and Anthony Schlegel among others. Ohio St. will be good as usual. In fact, they'll probably be better than Michigan again. But, number one? I don't think so.
Once I get my computer up and running, I'll start focusing a little more on college basketball. There are a minimum of 80 teams right now that could easily get a bid in the NCAA tournament. The bubble will probably be as packed as ever with an abundance of mid-major hopefuls. There are 12 teams in the Big East that have a shot at making the Tournament including DePaul which lost to Old Dominion by 44.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
10 comments:
Who ended up having the better prediction record, straight up, between you and I?
One comment on the Rose Bowl. I know what Vince can do, heck we all do around here after seeing him run wild on Michigan and lead a night victory in the shoe. I knew Young was going to score points on USC. However, I thought for sure 100% that Matt Leinart and Reggie Bush would not let this team lose in their final game. And it looked like I was going to be right after Bush scored the last Trojan touchdown. USC with a 12 point lead less than 8 to go. That's a lock right? I couldn't believe what I saw and almost still don't. But hell what a game by Vince and what a national title game. It sure lived up to the hype
The last score came at 6:42 left in the 4th with the Leinart TD pass that put them up 38-26. I cannot believe this Trojan team got beat. Young is a great talent but that was simply a Trojan collapse. No other way to put it. USC had that game in the bag, no they had history in the bag, they had the greatest college dynasty ever title in the bag. They just let it slip. Reggie Bush is still going number 1 he'll still make millions. Matt Leinart will still go top 5 and make millions. But their place as the greatest ever in college football slipped right through their fingers in the last 6:42.
I think Harrington's drive vs the Saints was poetic justice. If I were him I'd be laughing about that for years to come. He hasn't been treated all that well in Detroit and I don't think a lot of what has happened is his fault. The guy has more talent that a number of starting QBs in the NFL and if he leaves Detroit, I wouldn't be surprised of he finds a fair share of success in the right system.
I agree that USC had history pretty much locked up with the 12 point 4th qtr lead. I choose not to look at it as USC collapsing although I'm sure scoring zero points in the last 6:42 and not getting that cruical 4th and 1.5 did have a lot to do with the final score. Vince had done the same thing throughout his career. To beat Texas, you have to keep scoring. Michigan didn't do it and USC didn't do it either.
One thing I want to add is that although USC was awesome this season and has been for a few years, there best team was not this year's team. This year's defense was the worst of the three-year run. While USC's place as potentially the best dynasty ever was lost, I don't think that changes the fact that the 2004-05 USC team may have been the best ever and was clearly better than this year's team. Miami in '01 was close as was Nebraska in '95. All three were unbeatable. Good comments. The game was outstanding.
Lombaowski, you are correct. It was poetic justice. The only thing keeping Vince Young, or Matt Leinart (Lions would've had the choice between the two unbelievably) was Joey Harrington! I have to disagree with you though on Harrington's ability. The Lions haven't had the best receivers. There's no question about that. But, Harrington has been awful. I don't know how many Lions games you've seen but he has been terrible for four seasons. Even David Carr had a good year with you and me blocking for him. Harrington has been terrible. He may get the last laugh by keeping Young or Leinart from Detroit, but he doesn't deserve it. He's a good guy and I feel bad for him, but that doesn't change that's he has been brutal.
Hwood. I believe there were 8 differences and we went 4-4 in those games.
You got Navy, Nevada, Nebraska, and BC, and I got S. Miss, Florida, NC State, and Memphis
At least we can now honestly judge Young and Leinart's worth in the NFL instead of seeing them marooned in the graveyard that is Ford Field. If the Fords ever sell the team do you think they would stop sponsoring the stadium naming rights too? Because that is the only way I see the funk being lifted.
"I have a lot of respect for the Ohio St. football program. They have everything that Michigan wants. However, I have to seriouly question Kirk Herbstreit's bias after naming them pre-season #1 next season. The Buckeyes lose Santonio Holmes, A.J. Hawk, Bobby Carpenter, and Anthony Schlegel among others. Ohio St. will be good as usual. In fact, they'll probably be better than Michigan again. But, number one? I don't think so."
What do you think now? I don't assume that you follow Herbstreit's comments all the time, but I don't think you can ever say that he is biased when it comes to his job and how he evaluates the Buckeyes. Many times in the 2003 season (14-0) he did not give them their due (in my opinion, as a Buckeye fan) but this year I simply feel they were very deserving. Only the novice can make the simple assumption that "Ohio State lost 9 starters and X amount of first round draft picks ... and they should not be #1 because their defense is too new and will not be good enough to justify the ranking." You have to look at who those backups are and not just assume they are bums because they did not play last year. In hindsight, obviously we had incredible talent waiting in the wings prior to this year. The novice does not have as much knowledge as Kirk would with him being knee-deep in the college football world. Anyway, my point is that Kirk is more critical than not ... you can't compare his bias towards buffoons like Mark May and Trev Alberts who blatantly homer for their schools, more for the reaction than for actual football analysis.
I think we can agree that OSU is one of the top defenses in college football? (As is Michigan's defense, so I'm not posting to debate that.) Who should be #1?
"Reggie Bush is still going number 1 he'll still make millions. Matt Leinart will still go top 5 and make millions."
Wow, those were a couple anonymous predictions that sure went down in flames! :)
Yike,
I was born in Columbus (moved to Michigan when I was four). 90% of my family lives there. I make several trips a year. I know the Ohio State program as well as most OSU fans. I am well aware of the players they bring in. That comment that I made about OSU being rated too high coming into the season wasn’t based on ignorance. It was based on common sense. You are taking the opportunity to gloat which you have the right to do. OSU is #1. But, don’t let that get in the way of sound reasoning. You are arguing that a talented, young, back-up should perform at the same level as a four-year All-American starter. That just isn’t reasonable. So there is every reason to say a team loses x first round picks and x starters so they should have a problem playing at the same level. That’s how it works 99% of the time even for the most talented teams. Granted, it seems to have happened this year but to predict that ahead of time would require bias. Nobody predicts they’re going to win the lottery (or at least nobody with common sense). Anybody who predicted OSU’s defense to be just as good after losing those players would have to be biased. Just because OSU’s defense is sweet doesn’t mean that people should have known that. Good, yes. Best in the nation, no way. That just wasn’t a logical thought heading into the season. Also, ever since week two, Ohio State has topped my weekly list for the team with the best chance of going undefeated. So I wouldn’t exactly say I was down on the Buckeyes this year.
As for Herbstreit being biased….I don’t think he is a biased analyst. I think some of his thoughts can be biased. Herbie is actually my favorite college football analyst on TV. What I do give him credit for as far as predicting OSU #1 is having a good idea early on (at the end of last season) just how bad the state of the top ten would be this season. I don’t think he makes that prediction if there were legitimate alternatives to rate #1.
Thanks for the comments.
Go Blue!
"You are arguing that a talented, young, back-up should perform at the same level as a four-year All-American starter. That just isn’t reasonable. So there is every reason to say a team loses x first round picks and x starters so they should have a problem playing at the same level. That’s how it works 99% of the time even for the most talented teams. Granted, it seems to have happened this year but to predict that ahead of time would require bias. Nobody predicts they’re going to win the lottery (or at least nobody with common sense). Anybody who predicted OSU’s defense to be just as good after losing those players would have to be biased. Just because OSU’s defense is sweet doesn’t mean that people should have known that. Good, yes. Best in the nation, no way. That just wasn’t a logical thought heading into the season."
That is not what I'm arguing at all. What I'm saying is that you can't rule out a defense being dominant because they lost a lot of folks. I'm arguing that Kirk, in his position as a premier college football analyst with his connections to the university, has insight that you and I do not have. That is not a cut on you, you took it like that but I'm just saying we operate with a lot less knowledge and insight. Yes, to the novice there is every reason to believe there will be a fall-off. Normally there will be, 99% of the time probably. (1) We are novices, regardless of where our families live and where we grew up. (2) Kirk is not a novice, and he has advantages and insight into the program that we do not, never had and never will have. Kirk using that knowledge does not make him biased ... other things might, but not his views on the #1 team and what he might or might not have seen in the defense coming into the year. My WHOLE POINT was to say that you cannot simply RULE OUT the possibility of having a great defense this year because we lost a lot of defense last year to the draft.
I don’t think Ohio State’s D is the best in the nation, and I don’t think Kirk does either. This is about Ohio State’s defense being GOOD ENOUGH to compliment their stellar offense to the extent that they could be a legit #1 to start the year. The majority of voters thought that way, were they all biased?
And I'm not boasting, I'm not that type of person. I do however like to say "hey how about that, look at what you said 7 months ago does seems so sure now does it?" I'm not always right of course but I like looking back at what we thought and how things turn out.
Yike,
Fair enough! I apologize for mistaking your comments as being something different than what they were. Kirk is a very good analyst, no doubt. Thanks for the comments.
Go Blue!
Jake
Post a Comment