Mr. SKIA's post-draft ideas

One of the unintended consequences of the Bears trade for Jay Cutler -- and the ill-advised one for the late Gaines Adams -- was that it forced the Bears to act in free agency. That is, coming off a horrendous 2-14 year -- What? They went 7-9? Sure as hell didn't feel like it -- the Bears in seasons past would've tried to fill their multitude of holes cheaply and through the draft. But without a pick in the first two rounds and knowing that the beyond-disappointed fan base was clamoring for improvement, the Bears actually went out and spent.

And really, this is the second consecutive offseason where they made bold moves with no regard for cost. No one can accuse the Bears of being cheap anymore, although several people still will. Case in point: the reaction to the jettisoning of Alex Brown in the wake of the Julius Peppers signing. Look, Brown has been a solid player and a good soldier, but he's never recorded more than seven sacks in a season and will be 31 next year. The combination of Mark Anderson and Israel Idonije, both younger and cheaper, should be able to at least match Brown's production.

While I believe the Bears might have signed the relatively-inexpensive Chester Taylor as a complement to Matt Forte regardless, I'm confident that there is no way they would've opened the vault for Peppers if they were still holding the 11th overall pick. Instead we would've gotten an assfull of Jason Pierre-Paul or Derrick Morgan's upside, and while either (or both) of those guys might end up being a force, Peppers is one. Sure, he's also aging, but this team's window of opportunity is small -- the Bears have more old men in prominent positions than the Ft. Lauderdale Wal-Mart -- so they need players who can make an instant impact.

With the Bears still holding five mid-to-late round choices, they hadn't quite pulled a Mike Ditka, and decorum dictated that GM Jerry Angelo attend the draft and make their remaining selections. And considering their limited number of picks, most pundits gave the Bears positive reviews. Because I consider him the authority on all things NFL Draft, here's what Mel Kiper Jr. had to say:

I liked the Bears draft. I liked the pick [of Dan LeFevour]. I think 3-4 years down the road he can help you. ... I like the [Major] Wright pick, they needed help at safety. [Corey] Wootton was a first round pick a few years ago, but had the injury. I gave them a B grade.

And I generally agree with Kiper; basically, I like all the Bears picks but one. What follows is my selection-by-selection breakdown.

Round 3, Pick 75: S Major Wright, Florida; 5'11½", 206 lbs.
NFL.com #105, Scout.com #67, NFLDraftScout.com #134
The best thing about this guy? The name. Absolutely love it. Then again, I'm still wondering how the hell Major Harris didn't become the previous Michael Vick. Anyway, doesn't Major Wright just sound like someone who should be a badass headhunter back there?

In terms of his performance, I like this hit, and he scouting reports on him are generally positive. Most importantly, he brings a straight-ahead speed component that all the Bears safeties save Danieal Manning currently lack.

Best case: Mike Brown
Worst case: Craig Steltz
Money quote: "When you don't pick for the first time until 75, getting a coverage safety in Major Wright to band-aid a position of big need is a good job." -- Peter King, Sports Illustrated

Round 4, Pick 109: DE Corey Wootton, Northwestern; 6'6", 270 lbs.
NFL.com #42, Scouts.com #42, NFLDraftScout.com #71
The Bears best pick, in terms of value. Wootton likely would've gone at least two rounds higher if not for a catastrophic knee injury 18 months ago; while players can return from those kinds of things in eight or nine months, it's usually not until the following season that they round back into form.

Additionally, you can never have too many quality defensive ends, and given the relative uncertainty of both Anderson and Idonije, Wootton was a very good pick. Keep in mind, too, that the Bears are now at a net zero for defensive ends this offseason: They lost Brown and Adewale Ogunleye, and picked up Peppers and Wootton.

Best case: Richard Dent
Worst case: Dan Bazuin, Claude Harriott, Michael Haynes, Karon Riley, Pat Riley, John Thierry; and the list goes on and on (Henry Melton?)
Money quote: "I love the choice of defensive end Corey Wootton in the fourth round. ... He could be a steal." -- Pete Prisco, CBSSports.com

Round 5, Pick 141: CB Joshua Moore, Kansas State; 5'10⅞", 188 lbs.
NFL.com #273, Scout.com #198, NFLDraftScout.com #154
I didn't like this pick at the time, and I like it even less now. I don't think it made any sense from a standpoint of need -- I would've nabbed an offensive lineman here* -- or as the so-called best player available, as the respective rankings show. Is this guy really going to be any better than Corey Graham, Tim Jennings, Woodny Turenne, or last year's drafted Moore, D.J.? I'm skeptical. Meanwhile, I am certain the offensive line could use an infusion of both youth and talent.

* Which brings me to my biggest issue with Jerry Angelo's draft strategy. This was Angelo's ninth draft as GM. In the first year, he drafted two offensive linemen: Marc Columbo and Terrence Metcalf. In the intervening years, he has often used a seventh rounder on a lineman, doing so in each of the last four drafts, but guys drafted in Round 7 rarely crack an NFL roster. Beginning with the '03 draft, do you know how many picks Angelo has used on offensive linemen in the first six rounds? Three. Chris Williams ('08, first), Josh Beekman ('07, fourth), and Tyler Reed, ('06, sixth). Denver and New England, two franchises that consistently have very good offensive lines, have taken 13 and 11, respectively, over the same period.

In my opinion, a team should use at least one mid-round pick on an offensive lineman every year. That's how you build a good offensive line. But the Bears, in the last eight years, have instead selected 13 defensive backs in Rounds 1 through 6 (12 if you don't count Devin Hester). Putting aside that even if you consistently ran the nickel, you would only play as many d-backs as offensive linemen, does Angelo really think this is the way to build a football team, from back to front? As someone so obsessed with getting defensive linemen -- he's selected 13 in the first six rounds since '03 -- it would appear that Angelo believes in the games-are-won-in-the-trenches axiom. I have no idea why he'd adhere to it on one side of the ball, and completely ignore it on the other.

Moore doesn't seem like much of a ball-hawk -- just six interceptions in his career -- but his tackle numbers were strong, and he was honorable mention All-Big 12 the last two years. He supposedly lacks top-end speed, but that's less important given the Bears' scheme than it would be elsewhere.

Best case: Nathan Vasher
Worst case: Roosevelt Williams
Money quote: "Josh Moore has a chance to be a nickel corner in their defense. He has nice cover skills." -- Prisco

Round 6, Pick 181: QB Dan LeFevour, Central Michigan; 6'3¼", 230 lbs.
NFL.com #115, Scout.com #70, NFLDraftScout.com #100
This appears to be the more contentious pick than the Moore one, but I disagree. Quarterback is basically the only position where a guy can increase his value league-wide while on the bench, and LeFevour was a significant bargain at this point. Plus, the Bears were one of the few teams in league that ran with only two quarterbacks last year, so this is a solid selection from a roster-makeup standpoint.

LeFevour, who went to high school just a few miles from where I grew up, put up huge numbers playing in the spread, and most believe that it going to an NFL offense will be a huge adjustment. But that's true of almost all college QBs, and LeFevour supposedly has the arm-strength, size, and athletic ability to at least be a serviceable backup. Considering that sixth-rounders are relative longshots anyway, getting a guy at this point who will almost certainly make the team is a sound investment.

Best case: A mobile Kyle Orton
Worst case: Craig Krenzel
Money quote: "LeFevour was considered by some to be one of the best quarterbacks in the draft, and was a good value at this point." -- NFL.com

Round 7, Pick 218: OT J'Marcus Webb, West Texas A&M; 6'8", 335 lbs.
NFL.com NR, Scouts.com NR, NFLDraftScout.com #267
Who the hell knows with this guy? Obviously, neither NFL.com (whose rankings went 350 players deep) nor Scouts.com (520) thought much of the cousin of longtime-Dolphin Richmond Webb, but I'm thinking that at this point, they might as well gamble on some enormous kid. Even though it has yet to work out in Angelo's first several attempts.

Best case: James "Big Cat" Williams
Worst case: Kirk Barton
Money quote: "He has the size to play at the NFL level, but its going to take a significant amount of coaching for him to realize his potential." -- ESPN.com

And those are your five newest Chicago Bears. If they are lucky, the Bears will end up with two impact players from this class. For obvious reasons, the smart money is on Wright and Wootton. But the real money's on Peppers and Cutler. If both of them don't play like superstars, it'll be far more devastating to the franchise -- and the fanbase -- than this draft ever could be.

*****

A few other draft thoughts:

Gotta admire what the Lions did on Day 1, getting the best prospect in the draft (Ndamukong Suh) and then trading up into the back end of the first to nab Cal's Jahvid Best, a great kid that I covered when he was in high school. Getting impact players on both sides of the ball was huge for a Lions team that has been mostly devoid of talent in recent years. This should mark a huge upgrade for them, and I also liked the Amari Spivey pick.

I didn't understand why the Jets basically gave away Leon Washington (and a seventh rounder) in that deal with Seattle for a fifth-rounder. I know that he had a pretty severe leg injury, but Washington's extremely quick and relatively young. Maybe New York decided there weren't enough snaps for a three-headed monster in its backfield, which just means that not only did the Jets waste significant dollars on a badly-fading LaDanian Tomlinson as a complement to Shonn Greene, but also that the ill-advised signing cost them a productive player in Washington.

Finally, I enjoyed the hullabaloo over the Broncos picking Tim Tebow, a move pretty much universally panned by those not affiliated with the University of Florida and the non-bible-thumping populace alike. I'm no Tebow fan, but here's my question: If the traditional way of evaluating quarterbacks results in a failure rate of roughly 50% among first rounders, then what, exactly, did Denver have to lose? Allegedly sound first-round selections -- guys who didn't have questions about where they held the ball, or the length of their release -- such as Ryan Leaf, J.P. Losman, and JaMarcus Russell have been abject failures. So I just don't get raking a team over the coals for ignoring criteria that are clearly broken. Especially considering that with Tebow there's essentially a stop-loss, as pretty much everyone agrees he would make a very good H-back or tight end. And so even if he fails as a quarterback, the Broncos will still have a useful player. That, to me, completely mitigated any additional perceived risk, and made him a highly defensible first-round selection.

Rough Draft: A (Not-So) Brief History of the Chicago Bears

Revised -- and shortened! -- from an entry originally posted 3/31/2009
Share

Typically the NFL Draft is my favorite time of the year. Because while I'm usually a curmudgeonly pessimist when it comes to sports, the draft is a time when anything seems possible and even I can be positive. Unfortunately, with the Bears having traded away their first round pick in the Jay Cutler deal (which I agreed with) and their second rounder to acquire Gaines Adams (which I didn't), I just haven't been feeling it. Even last year, when they were also without a pick until the third round, they had all their slotted choices for most of the offseason -- the Cutler trade didn't happened until April 2 -- and so this is really the first time since I was introduced to the internet that I haven't spent an insane number of hours researching potential Bears draftees.

But the Bears not having a pick in the first two rounds can actually be a good thing, as it's usually those selections that leave me depressed. In a lot of ways, first rounders can only disappoint -- if they're good they're just living up to their draft status, and if they're terrible I end up devising different ways to accost general manager Jerry Angelo to deliver a kick in the teeth. Players from the later rounds, however, can only be pleasant surprises; anything you get from those guys is gravy, and so the potential is almost limitless. Traditionally, Day 2 -- and with the revamped format, Day 3 -- is a time when I can dream of a seventh-round selection like Marcus Monk becoming the next Marques Colston, before the reality of his actual skill level gets in the way.

The Bears were once one of the best-drafting teams in the NFL. They drafted Hall-of-Famer Bulldog Turner with the seventh overall selection in 1940, and Turner was All-Pro seven times; every other selection in that year's 22 rounds combined for one All-Pro season. Eight time All-Pro Bill George was a second-round pick, as was fellow Hall-of-Fame middle linebacker Mike Singletary. The Bears selected Dick Butkus and Gale Sayers in the same draft, for crying out loud. Their 1983 class yielded an astonishing seven starters -- Jimbo Covert, Willie Gault, Mike Richardson, Dave Duerson, Tom Thayer, Richard Dent, and Mark Bortz -- on a team that won the Super Bowl just two years later. That's essentially 1/3 of a championship team's starting lineup from a single draft. Dent and Bortz enjoyed 15- and 12-year careers, respectively, after being selected in the now-defunct 8th round.

From that '83 draft, however, there was nowhere to go but down, and that's exactly where the Bears have gone. It's been especially bad since '87, when snot-nosed Halas family scion Mike McCaskey canned general manager Jerry Vanisi. Then the organization lost its final link to greatness when Mike Ditka was fired in 1993, which is when I'll begin my analysis.

After originally setting out to look at the Bears first round picks, and then later their first three selections, I ultimately settled on their first four picks. This is because I believe that the first four picks are where a team is really looking to fill its needs -- despite the best player available rhetoric everyone spouts -- and they are also the source of a huge majority of a team's impact players.

You're going to have to click on it unless you've set up your electron microscope, but please look at the table below. And really look at it, because the goddamn thing took forever to compile. Anyway, all the players' names are preceded by their draft slot and followed by their position. Reading left to right, the first column has the Bears selections. The second contains what I have deemed to be the best combination of players at the same four positions using the picks the Bears had. Note that the positions do not have to be selected in the same order, just that the same four positions must be represented. The third column is the best overall combination of players the Bears could have had with those picks, regardless of position, while the fourth contains other possibilities they could/should have considered. The fifth column -- headed 'I was prayin' for...' -- has the player I personally wanted that year,* while the last one contains miscellaneous tidbits.

* Let me just preemptively stress that the players in the "I was prayin' for..." column really are the guys I wanted at that time. It seems a tad bit convenient, that someone who calls himself Mr. Sports Know-It-All allegedly liked the guys who ended up being the best players. But in at least two of those cases -- Warren Sapp and Randy Moss -- everyone knew they were exceptional talents, and they only dropped because of marijuana-based "character" issues, which I couldn't care less about. And it's not like I was alone in wanting Sapp and Moss; besides, I was also prayin' for Rickey Dudley and Mike Williams, so it's not like I'm going to make anyone forget Bill Polian any time soon.

What follows is the yearly breakdown. The assigned grades are based more on how well the Bears maximized the talent available in the specific draft, rather than the quality of the players they actually chose; that is, getting two decent starters in a terrible draft rates higher than getting three in a great one.

1993: Curtis Conway was actually pretty effective for some time, but considering the quality of this draft -- and the trio of All-Pros taken consecutively behind him -- it wasn't a very good pick. Carl Sampson and Chris Gedney gave the Bears nothing, and while Todd Perry had some pretty good years, Will Shields is a no-doubt Hall of Famer, assuming they're still letting offensive linemen in. Grade: D-

1994: The Bears picks weren't exactly great, but the entire draft wasn't either, with hardly any stars to be had. John Thierry did nothing but spawn horrible puns like this one: My Thierry on John is that he sucked. I loved Raymont Harris' UltraBack persona, but two quality RBs (Dorsey Levens and Jamal Anderson) were chosen after him, and he couldn't stay healthy. Jim Flanigan recorded an impressive-for-a-DT 40.5 sacks in his six years with the Bears, a span in which he started every game. As for the hoped-for Shante Carver, let's just say that I may have overrated the skills of Pac-10 players a tad during my Cal years. Grade: C-

1995: Some thought it a steal when Heisman Trophy winner Rashaan Salaam fell to the Bears. It wasn't. He just didn't have enough speed to play in the NFL. As a defensive tackle. And sorry Todd Sauerbrun, but unless a guy can average 75 yards a kick with 14 second hang time, I ain't drafting a punter before the sixth round, "HANGTIME" vanity plates notwithstanding. Which is why I didn't in my draft re-creation, taking a guard (which the Bears selected fifth) instead. Grade: F

1996: The Bears actually did a pretty good job here, in terms of getting long-time starters; unfortunately, most of those starts came for other teams. Now 14 years in, Walt Harris and Bobby Engram were still first-string until recently and Chris Villarrial started 148 games in his 11-year career. Even Paul Grasmanis played nine seasons. But the Bears didn't select any stars and this draft was loaded with 'em. Grade: C

1997: As a longtime Notre Dame hater, I wanted to kick Touchdown Jesus in the balls when the Bears blew their first rounder in a trade for Rick Mirer, who'd already proven he was a bust in Seattle. Granted, there weren't a whole lot of great QBs available -- Jake Plummer (29,253) was the only one to even top 3,000 career yards -- but still. At least Mirer actually played, which is more than their three picks can say. Grade: F-

1998: This was billed it as a five-player draft -- Peyton Manning, Ryan Leaf (umm...), Andre Wadsworth (ditto), Randy Moss, and Charles Woodson -- and the Bears were picking fifth. Most people thought they'd get Wadsworth, and I actually would've been happy with that. But I wanted Moss, whose playmaking at Marshall had become a SportsCenter staple. When the Cards took Wadsworth and Raiders Woodson, Moss was practically wearing a Bears uniform. Instead they chose Curtis Enis** and Moss fell all the way to the Vikings at 21, ensuring we'd all have to watch him humiliate the Bears twice a year.

** The only upside was I spent most of his brief career saying "Curtis Enis hurt his penis," which never actually happened but should have. At around the same time, my friend Peter liked to say, "Ow, that's my Dick Jauron." It was all very mature, really.

Tony Parrish and Olin Kreutz were both very good selections -- really, Lance Schulters and Matt Birk over them was a total toss-up, and at least partially included for variety's sake -- but you've got to nail those Top-5 picks. Grade: C-

1999: Rex Tucker was the only one who gave the Bears anything. Russell Davis was let go way to early, and D'Wayne Bates was chosen because scouting him at Northwestern was much cheaper than booking a flight out of state. In the first round, the Bears were originally on the board at seven, where early projections had them getting local kid Donovan McNabb, whose workouts shot him up the board for the right to be booed by Eagles fans. So the Bears traded down to select Cade McNown, while their original pick became Champ Bailey. Let's just say that history has not been kind to that trade. Grade: Z-

2000: Although I loved his name, I actually wasn't crazy about Brian Urlacher when the Bears drafted him, mostly because the highlight package ESPN showed just wasn't that impressive. (I later realized that this was because all the clips came from the one New Mexico game they had the rights to.) Urlacher ended up being the best sideline-to-sideline MLB I've ever seen. And while Mike Brown ultimately couldn't stay on the field, that's still two top-quality starters from a draft that wasn't all that good. Grade: A

2001: David Terrell was a receiver who couldn't catch, but boy did he look good not doing it. What's particularly egregious is that 2001 was an unbelievable draft for receivers -- Santana Moss, Reggie Wayne, Chad Johnson, Chris Chambers, Steve Smith, and T.J. Houshmandzadeh all were picked after Terrell. Anthony Thomas had a good rookie season and briefly captured the city's imagination courtesy of his cool moniker, but Angelo was right: The A-Train was not a "special back." Plus, taking two players from the same school (Michigan) with your first two picks just reeks of scouting laziness to me. Grade: F+

2002: In a terrible year with very little depth, Jerry Angelo did about as well as could be expected in his first draft. Marc Colombo is a starter for the Cowboys, but had 62 major injuries in his three-plus seasons in Chicago. He was like Kerry Wood and Mark Prior rolled into one, and I mean that literally, too -- he's about the size of both those guys combined. Just a gigantic human being. The Dwight Freeney thing was a complete pipe dream, once again fueled by the experts early projections; he would've looked great in a Bears uniform had he fallen that far, although recently-released Alex Brown gave them excellent value as a fourth-rounder. Grade: B-

2003: The Bears ended up flipping the fourth overall pick to the Jets for a pair of firsts, missing out on perennial Pro Bowlers Terrell Suggs and Kevin Williams in the process. Instead they got Michael Haynes and Rex Grossman.^ Haynes started just four games in his career, but Grossman's the one universally reviled as a bust.

^ I should add that in another overt act of scouting dereliction, the Bears somehow managed to select four players -- Grossman, S Todd Johnson, and DTs Ian Scott and the somehow-wasn't-a-superstar-despite-the-kickass-name Tron LaFavor -- from the University of Florida. I mean, there is NO WAY four guys from the same school could have been the best player available at each spot. That's like a quadrillion-to-one shot.

The Bears did, however, do very well with their next two picks, Charles Tillman and Lance Briggs, both of whom have been top-notch starters from the get-go. They also got some contributors in the later rounds, but whiffing on two top-25 picks in a draft that yielded as many studs as this one really hurts. Grade: C

2004: The Bears did extremely well here in the short term, but this class has aged worse than Nikki Cox. I preferred Vince Wilfork's power over Tommie Harris' quickness, but his agility made him a better fit for Lovie Smith's scheme. Tank Johnson was a great tag-team partner for Harris, but his off-the-field issues derailed his Bears career. Like Harris, Nathan Vasher was very good before durability issues ruined him, and Bernard Berrian's given me almost as much pleasure as a free-agent bust with the Vikings as he did as the Bears' deep threat. Grade: B-

2005: I was absolutely furious when the Bears passed on can't-miss WR Mike Williams in favor of Cedric Benson. Not only did they not have any viable receivers, they also had signed running back Thomas Jones to a four-year deal just a season earlier. Plus, I thought Benson would suck. And his infamous crying on draft day -- when he basically admonished anyone for having the audacity to question his checkered past -- was so appalling that I was wholly convinced he was Curtis Enis 2.0. Of course, now that he's gone, he's turned into Earl Campbell. Perfect.

Mark Bradley wasn't a disappointment when he wasn't injured, which wasn't often. The Bears paid Adewale Ogunleye superstar money for super-so-so production, and Orton's now in Denver, familiarly trying to fend off a guy with a better draft pedigree. Grade: D-

2006: This draft probably got the worst immediate reception, but it actually was one of Angelo's better efforts. With the entire fan base clamoring for more offense -- in 2005, the Bears had finished 26th in points scored and 29th in total offense, and first in points allowed and second in total defense -- Angelo arrogantly used his first five picks (including DE Mark Anderson, who recorded 12 sacks as a rookie in limited playing time) on defensive guys.

Devin Hester was an once-in-a-lifetime force of nature on special teams, but the Bears decided to trade that guy for an overpaid receiver with middling production. Danieal Manning is also very good in the return game, but five years in, the Bears still haven't decided on his position. Dvoracek looked pretty good when healthy, which, like fellow Sooners Tommie Harris and Mark Bradley, was never, and Jamar Williams has shown flashes in his limited opportunities. Grade: C+

2007: Finally, the Bears took the guy that everybody wanted. Unfortunately, Olsen's been a mild disappointment; while productive, he hasn't quite had the breakout many predicted last season. And the rest of this draft was downright terrible. In a rarity for a second round pick, Bazuin has yet to play a game in the NFL. Neither has Michael Okwo. And while Garrett Wolfe is a microscopic dervish on special teams and has improved as a ball carrier, his durability's an issue. Add it all up, and you've got an awful ROI on three top-100 picks. Grade: D

2008: The Bears got their whole 2008 offense in Matt Forte. However, this is what I said last offseason:

Though he was undoubtedly productive, his yards per carry (3.9) worry me a little, and there were a ton of good RBs in this draft.

Chris Williams appears to be the future at left tackle (though he hardly looked dominant last year) and I wouldn't have ignored the medical reports on his back, which has already cost him one season. I like Marcus Harrison, but I thought he would've taken a bigger step forward last year. And while Bennett started last year, he shouldn't have; that amazing chemistry with fellow Commodore Cutler yielded all of two touchdowns. Grade: C+

2009: I liked the Bears draft a lot in the immediate aftermath, but thus far they've gotten far more from their fifth- and sixth-round picks (Johnny Knox and Al Afalava, respectively) than any of their first four. In fact, Henry Melton and D.J. Moore never suited up last year, Juaquin Iglesias played in one receptionless game and Gilbert made one tackle. Still, given they had no picks in the first two rounds and it's still early, I'll withhold my scathing judgment for now. Grade: I

Cumulative Draft GPA: 1.5

And that's the Chicago Bears, not exactly the NFL's honor student. But while the Bears rarely did well as they could have, the same is true for every single team in the league. No organization ever drafts perfectly, or even comes close. Because even when a team gets a 6th-round Pro Bowler, they still passed on him five times just like everybody else. In fact, the key is not to never miss, but to hit home runs just a little more frequently than the competition. Because if you can serendipitously land a Tom Brady every so often, you just might build a championship team.

Reduced to the most basic of terms, the Bears just haven't found enough impact players via the draft. Their 1993-2009 drafts produced four players -- Kreutz, Urlacher, Briggs, and Tommie Harris -- who have earned multiple Pro Bowl berths with the team; as a comparison, the Colts, Patriots, Eagles, and Steelers, have all found at least seven of those guys, and the Lions and Raiders just three. Just like in the standings, the Bears have been much closer to the bottom than the top. Hopefully, even without a pick until the third round, that can change in 2010. It is, after all, the NFL Draft. And anything is possible.

Payton d. Peyton.*

* Can we all agree, once and for all, that Payton with an a is far superior to that with an e? On one side, you've got Walter and now Sean. On the other, a Southern debutante; I mean, really, doesn't that seem like a chick's name? I remain thoroughly convinced that if his name were Payton Manning, he'd have won five or six Super Bowls by now.

To me, more than anything else, I'll remember Super Bowl 40-whatever for the severe pantsing that fellow-Naperville Central Redskin Sean Payton gave Indy counterpart Jim Caldwell. The way the Colts came out to start the game, they clearly looked superior, talent-wise.

Of course, the onside second-half kickoff might have been the greatest call in Super Bowl history, so there's no need to laud Payton for that one -- it was sheer, irrefutable genius. Additionally, anyone can point to Garrett Hartley's trio of 40+ yard field goals, or Tracy Porter's game-clinching interception return as enormous components of New Orleans' championship. But I'd rather focus on several other plays that enabled the Saints comeback and ultimate domination. And I don't use the word domination lightly: sure the game was nip-and-tuck before Manning's pick-6, but after spotting the Colts a 10-point lead, Payton's crew outscored Indy 31-7.

Colts ball, scoreless tie, 7:37 Q1, 3rd-and-5-NO20
Manning pass incomplete to Pierre Garcon
While not a perfect pass, it was catchable for an NFL receiver, and would've been good for a first down. Manning looked annoyed as the Colts settled for a field goal and 3-0 lead.

Saints ball, trailing 10-0, 13:50 Q2, 2nd-and-2-NO34
Reggie Bush 1-yard run
Bush's short run was followed by an unnecessary roughness penalty for a late hit (on Bush) by Philip Wheeler, so instead of facing a 3rd-and-1 -- remember, the Saints were not good in short yardage situations this year -- New Orleans got a first down at midfield. Not only was this kind of penalty very un-Colts-like (and an indication that maybe they weren't entirely on their game) but it was also the biggest play on the drive that led to New Orleans' first points, a Garrett Hartley field goal. Before this drive, I said "They have to score here," because to that point, the Saints had yet to score on two possessions, while the Colts had come away with points on both of theirs.

Colts ball, leading 10-3, 8:30 Q2, 3rd-and-4-IND28
Manning pass incomplete to Garcon
This time an open Garcon drops a perfectly thrown ball from Manning, one that hit him in-stride, right in the numbers and probably would've led to a gain to midfield at least. This was the key play in the game from a Manning-unraveling perspective, as he looked really frustrated coming off the field and wasn't quite the same afterwards; that is, he began to press as the performance of his teammates was not matching his own to that point. In other words, the old Peyton Manning -- the one I said would never win a championship -- re-emerged after this play. Plus it let the Saints offense, which had just completed an 11-play drive, come immediately back onto the field.

Saints ball, trailing 10-3, 4:29 Q2, 2nd-and-17-IND30
Drew Brees complete to Marcus Colston for 27 yards
After picking up two huge third-down conversions on the drive, Payton made a rare bad playcall (one of only two in the entire game, by my reckoning) on first down from the Indy 23, radioing in an end-around by Devery Henderson that resulted in a potentially-devastating 7-yard loss. But Brees and Colston made sure it was moot by connecting on the very next play.

Saints ball, trailing 10-3, 1:55 Q2, 4th-and-goal-IND1
Pierre Thomas no gain
I absolutely loved the call to go for it here, but did not like the play call. At all. If you are going to rush in that situation, you have to use some misdirection. On short yardage, the key is to get the defense to hesitate or move the wrong way; all the action of this play was to the right, and that's where the ball went. Gotta go with a counter or something similar instead. Or come out in a rush-heavy package and go play action. I think Payton guessed that the Colts would expect some sort of play-action, so he came out in a goalline passing formation and ran the ball. Which was an astute tactic; the play just needed some misdirection.

Having said that, going for it was a great call. It's all risk-reward. Going for the TD is worth it because it's an extra four points, and even if you miss you have Indy pinned to the goalline with less than two minutes to play. If you settle for the field goal, then kickoff, you put the Colts in much better position to score before the end of the half, canceling out your field goal or worse. After the failed try, Payton needed his defense to step up. Which it did.

Colts ball, leading 10-3, 0:51 Q2, 3rd-and-1-IND10
Mike Hart no gain
First off, why the Colts didn't rush Joseph Addai here is beyond me; it's as if Caldwell didn't grasp the significance of this play/series, as Hart's only two carries of the game came in this sequence. Addai, meanwhile, was extremely effective against the Saints D, gaining 77 yards on just 13 carries. If the Colts had used Addai more, they likely would've won the game.

As huge as the stuff of Hart was, I loved the way the Payton used his timeouts here. I've railed previously against calling timeouts on defense at the end of a half, but what Payton did was genius. After a four-yard rush by Hart on first down, he didn't burn a timeout. That brought the clock down to 1:06 for second down, with the Colts still 95 yards away from the end zone. This almost ensured another rush by Indy, as they were probably thinking "There's no need to be greedy; we're getting the second-half kickoff (ahem), so let's just get into the locker room with this 7-point lead." Had the Saints called timeout after the first down run (with about 1:40 remaining), the Colts likely would've gone into attack mode. Instead, they rushed again, with Addai's 5-yard gain setting up the 3rd-and-1. And yet again Payton did something brilliant: instead of immediately calling timeout, he let another 12 seconds run off the clock; given the respective field position, that time would be more important to the Colts if they converted than the Saints if they got the stop. Which they did. And starting from near midfield with 35 seconds left and a timeout remaining, they still had plenty of time to get the three points they would've gotten had Payton not gone for it on 4th-and-goal.

So that brings us to halftime, with the Colts up 10-6. Though the Saints hadn't taken the lead, they clearly had momentum; in the second quarter, they ran 27 plays to the Colts' 6.

A couple more first-half notes:

1. As the Saints began coming back, I realized I had made a huge tactical error in picking against them. Not because I should have known they'd win -- New Orleans' karma, my prevailing opinion of Manning, etc. -- but because a part of me wanted to have been right in picking the Colts. Instead of rooting for the Saints whole hog as I should've been -- I hate the Colts/Manning, the NCHS connection -- I was about 80% there, just because I'd committed it to the webosphere that the Colts would win. And it took a little of the enjoyment out of the outcome. So never again; from now on, I'm just picking who I want to win. It's not like anyone's using my picks to gamble. Or reading this blog, for that matter.

2. I've had an assful of the Go Daddy commercials at this point. Look, I know they're trying to skirt the censors, but their see-more-at campaign is one of the worst concepts in the history of advertising. Just show as much as you can on TV and be done with it.

But no. Instead, Go Daddy is asking me to do actual work. I'm supposed to get off my lazy ass, locate a computer, and go to their stupid site? I'm at a Super Bowl party; am I expected to ask my host to borrow their PC for a few minutes, and miss a few plays just to see Danica Patrick not get naked? This has to be the dumbest idea of all time. Yes, I realize that some people watch the game in the comfort of their own homes, with laptops at the ready. But what percentage of the Super Bowl audience would that be? 5%? 2%?

Clearly, Go Daddy believes that: A. Groups of men will leave the game to huddle around their host's PC after seeing the commercial, despite the fact that many people want to see every commercial, and most of these men will be watching the game with their disapproving wives/girlfriends; or B. After the game, people will remember to go to GoDaddy.com to see the rest of their stupid ad. But why in the world would anyone want to watch their PG-13 commercial on the internet when there's actual porn available? Go Daddy is aware there's such a thing as internet porn, right? Jesus Christ, this isn't the 1940s, where we had to hope someone got their hands on a stag film and a 8- or 16-mm projector if we wanted to glimpse the female form. We're in the Golden Age of Porn, for crying out loud. It's totally fucking ridiculous.

Anyway, as for the second half, obviously the onside kick was the turning point in the game; remember, the Colts scored on their first second-half possession, meaning they'd've been up 17-6 had Payton not shown some serious balls. I don't say that because the call was risky -- unexpected onside kicks succeed more than half the time -- but because of the criticism he would have endured had the gambit failed. As we saw with this incident, anytime a coach does something even mildly unconventional, he will be absolutely eviscerated by the mainstream media should it fail. Which is why, in the post-kick scrum for possession, I said, "It doesn't matter if they recover, that was a great fucking call. They had the chance to get it, and that's all the coach can do: put his players in a position to execute. Great call." Unfortunately, for most in the mainstream media, it was the outcome that made the call great. And that's a problem.

As for the rest of the second half:

Colts ball, leading 17-16, 11:33 Q3, 2nd-and-8-No30
Manning complete to Austin Collie for -3 yards
A gain of a few yards here puts the Colts more comfortably into field goal range and sets up a makeable 3rd down, but instead Saints linebacker Jonathan Vilma made a huge play to stuff Collie. Now pushed to the absolute outer limit of 87-year-old kicker Matt Stover's range, on 3rd down Indy should've just tried to make a positive play, either to get more solidly into field goal range or by treating it as four-down territory. Instead, a now-clearly rattled Manning inexplicably threw deep to a well-covered Collie. Which after typing that makes his intended target sound like Lassie in a sweater.

The succeeding play -- Stover's all-too-foreseeable missed field goal from 51-yards -- was obviously enormous, as the Colts flubbed the chance to increase their lead and gave New Orleans highly-favorable field position.

Saints 2-point conversion attempt, leading 22-17, 5:46 Q4
Brees to Lance Moore
Although that stupid chart I hate says this is a must-go-for-2 situation, I think there was at least as much risk involved here as on the onside kick. Think about the negative: if the Saints kick it, they are up six; if the deuce fails, it's only 5. Up 5, two Indy field goals would beat them instead of forcing overtime; given the time remaining that was a distinct possibility. Also if the Colts had then scored a TD, they'd've gone for 2, and a successful try would've given them a 3-point lead. That would mean the Saints would've needed another field goal just to tie. Kick the extra point, and an ensuing New Orleans FG means the Colts would've needed two scores.

Having said that, going for 2 was the right call. It just wasn't quite the no-brainer that the chart claims it to be. Meanwhile, Payton's decision to challenge -- the pass was originally ruled incomplete on the field -- was a complete no-brainer, though for some reason it earned effusive praise from the guys in the booth. The 2 points in that situation -- in most situations, really -- are absolutely huge. In fact, he'd have been a fool not to have challenged. The risk of losing the timeout was certainly worth the difference between a 5- and 7-point lead.

I've heard a few pundits say that they don't understand how the referee could have called this a catch after it had been ruled incomplete on the field, but to me it was clearly, indisputably a grab. Moore had it, lost it as he hit the ground, but then regained full possession with complete bodily control (that is, he was no longer subject to the whims of gravity) before the defender ran by and knocked the ball out with his shin. Catch all the way, and kudos to referee Scott Green for reversing an error -- albeit an understandable one; without the benefit of slow-motion replay, I didn't think it was a catch either -- by one of his officials.

Saints challenge of 2-point conversion attempt, leading 22-17, 5:46 Q4
The Mentalist promo
I'm not positive that this is exactly where it happened, but it was sometime late in the game that I unsuspectingly saw my friend Matt -- who'd done a guest spot earlier this season on The Mentalist -- appear on-screen. With a mustache, no less. This was seriously the most shocking, thrilling part of the entire Super Bowl for me. First Payton, then Matt: Has there ever been a greater day for NCHS alums? The guy was on TV during the most watched program in the history of broadcast television. How cool is that? UPDATE 2/22: I have found Matt's commercial.

Colts ball, trailing 31-17, 1:33 Q4, 1st-and-goal-NO3
Garcon, offensive pass interference
This game was clearly not every-non-Heroes-fan's-favorite-Haitian's finest hour, and yes I realize that's one of the most confusing string of words ever written. But Garcon, who had been great all year, did not have a good day. Without this penalty, the Colts would've had a 2nd-and-goal from the 3 with just under a minute-and-a-half to play. If they score quickly, still holding all their timeouts they would've had the option of kicking deep instead of trying an unlikely-to-be-recovered onside kick. Garcon's play cost them precious yards and even-more-precious seconds.

Colts ball, trailing 31-17, 0:50 Q4, 4th-and-goal-NO5
Manning pass incomplete to Reggie Wayne
This Wayne drop of a pass right in the ol' bread basket was a fitting end to the Colts' day. Sure, there was under a minute left, and a score here only trims the lead to 7 points. But that means the Colts would've been a successful onside attempt (at this point they had spent one of their TO's, plus lost an additional 40 seconds from the game clock) away from having a chance to tie. Granted, expected onside kicks are only recovered about 10% of the time, but still. Indy would've had a chance.

Coincidentally, one of the first things I said during this game was, "This season has served as a tribute to the fact that Marvin Harrison will be the most undeserving Hall of Famer of all time. And he'll probably go first-ballot. Manning makes anyone good. It's like Duper and Clayton; as soon as they left Marino, they were terrible."

Taking it a little further, we then got into a discussion about the marginal guys (Robert Brooks, Antonio Freeman, Donald Driver, etc.) Brett Favre made look good, and I said that receivers are exceptionally difficult to gauge because their numbers are so quarterback-dependent. Now there are some receivers who are so talented that they make a mediocre quarterback look good -- think Randy Moss in his Minnesota days, with Daunte Culpepper -- but many put up strong numbers solely because they're playing with a great quarterback.

The point is, later in the game I said, "I don't know how good Reggie Wayne is, but the guy has great hands." This came after a nifty snag of a low Manning sideline pass. I then went on to say, "I've seen him make a ton of amazing catches. I don't know how good he'd be without Manning, but the guy catches everything."

So add that to the (very long) list of things I was wrong about in Super Bowl 44.

Untitled

Screw an introduction, too, as I'm pressed for time -- I'm leaving on a family vacation today and won't be back until the day before the Super Bowl. So let's get right to a review of the championship games and my SB pick.

Jets-Colts
All week, I didn't feel very good about having picked the Jets on Monday. I wanted to switch it up, but decided not to since: A. That would be lame; and B. Just like when setting my fantasy lineup, if I make a change and then have the original choice be the correct one, I am much more pissed off and regretful than if I don't make a change and the other option proves to be better. So I left it alone.

I was feeling decent (but not great) when the Jets went up 17-6 on a 48-yard Jay Feely field goal. Mark Sanchez looked sensational and the Jets D was getting to Peyton Manning and causing turnovers. However, all of the things that had been going in the Jets favor during their run -- from a plethora of missed field goals to avoiding injuries -- had already begun to turn. Jets kicker Jay Feely chunked a 44-yarder, and New York was having trouble keeping healthy defensive backs on the field, not the sort of problem you want against the Colts. When Manning sliced through the Jets with a 4-play, 3-Austin-Collie-reception, 80-yard drive in just 58 seconds to pull the Colts within four immediately following the Feely figgie, that was all she wrote for New York. The Shonn Greene injury and another Feely miss -- both on the opening possession of the second half -- proved to be the final nails in the coffin, but there was no doubt in my mind Indianapolis would win after the surgical precision with which they took the Jets apart on that drive.

Saints-Vikings
The end of regulation turned into a battle of things I hate. Just inside the 2-minute warning, the Saints -- after limiting Adrian Peterson to two yards on consecutive snaps -- called timeout with the Vikings facing a 3rd-and-8. I despise this move. Most commonly done at the end of the first half, this strategy almost always comes back to haunt the defensive team. For starters, it takes heat off the opponent's offensive coordinator, allowing him the time to choose his very best play for the given moment as opposed to doing so under duress. Plus, it's just greedy, as the D should just hold the timeout, see if they actually prevent the team from converting the 3rd down, and then spend it if they do. Nine times out of 10 -- sure that's pseudo-scientific, as I have no data to back me up -- it helps the offense, and that's exactly what it did here, as Bernard Berrian made a nice play to pick up 10 yards and the first, leaving the Vikings plenty of time to leisurely make their way down the field. Where the second thing that I hate came into play.

With just over a minute to go, Chester Taylor picked up 14 yards to bring the ball to the Saints 33, into the outer range of kicker Ryan Longwell. The Saints then called another timeout, hoping to preserve a bit of clock after a Minnesota score. With a 1st down and 1:06 remaining, the Vikings ran Taylor up the middle for no gain. They then basically allowed the entire play clock to run down, snapping the ball with just 25 seconds left for an Adrian Peterson run up the middle, which was also stuffed. Now the Vikings, with 19 seconds left, called a timeout (their second) then got their beyond-idiotic 12-men in the huddle penalty.

It's clear that the Vikings' coaches -- or at least uber-genius Brad Childress -- thought, Gee, I know it's only to go to the Super Bowl, but a 50-yard field goal [roughly a 50-50 proposition under the best circumstances, as NFL kickers were 55-of-104 (52.8%) from 50+ in the regular season this year] under the most pressure any kicker could possibly face is surely a gimme. I'm aware that I've railed on this strategy before (most notably in item #7 here), but NFL coaches are still doing this crap. I realize Childress' choice to go conservative may have seen justified when Brett Favre threw that crazy Brett Favre interception on the 3rd-down play, but by then the circumstances had changed. At that point, the Saints knew Minnesota would pass. Plus Favre then had the pressure to make a play to put the Vikings back into field goal range, whereas he could have been conservative -- and yes, I realize I'm talking about Brett Favre here -- on a pass on first or second down.

As for the overtime, the Saints can thank the wording of the instant replay policy for the win. While I've heard a lot of people bitching online and on ESPN about the refs somehow screwing the Vikings, that simply didn't happen. While the pass interference penalty on Ben Leber was questionable, so are a huge percentage of the PI calls I see during games, so that shit just happens. As for the other calls that supposedly screwed Minnesota -- the Pierre Thomas 4th-down conversion/fumble and the Robert Meachem 12-yard "catch" to put the Saints in field goal range -- these plays looked exceptionally close even after viewing several slow-motion replays, and the calls on the field went New Orleans' way. Because of that, there was basically no way the rulings would be overturned.

For starters, as I've said before, spot-of-the-ball calls are almost impossible to change, because of the vagaries of camera angles and whatnot. While it appears that Thomas' losing control of the ball pushed him back short of the 1st down, with him up in the air, we can't tell for sure. Do we know the sideline camera was completely even with the marker? Can you tell exactly where the ball should be spotted? Because the rules state that there must be "indisputable visual evidence" that the call on the field was erroneous in order for it to be overturned. That simply did not exist on the Thomas play.

The same goes for Meachem's catch. The ball can touch the ground if it is controlled by the receiver, and you simply could not tell whether Meachem's hand was underneath it as he slid across the turf. On some of the replays it looked like he didn't have control, and on some that he did, with his hand pinning the ball to his body as it hit the ground. Again, not enough evidence to overturn.

And referee Pete Morelli basically said as much. Note that following each review he said, "The ruling on the field stands," as opposed to the more-definitive "The ruling on the field is confirmed." Because the replays were inconclusive. Had Thomas been called short or Meachem's catch an incompletion, those too would have been upheld. But they weren't, and it helped the Saints reach the Super Bowl.

So where does that leave us?

Super Bowl XXVVVIIIIIIIII: Colts over Saints
I really, really want the Saints to win. I've never liked the Colts, and have already professed my love for fellow Naperville Centralite Sean Payton. Plus, how can you not root for New Orleans?

But one thing keeps ringing in my head: The Colts have now lost just once in the last 26 games they were trying to win (I'm throwing out their "We Surrender in the Name of Health" defeats at the end of this year's regular season.) That's 25-1, with the only loss being in overtime (to the Chargers) in a game in which they never got possession in the extra session. Combined with the fact that the Saints looked awfully shaky at the end of the NFC Championship, with Brees throwing wobbly passes that receivers double-clutched/bobbled/dropped, I simply can't justify picking the Colts to lose.

But I sure would love to see it.

Mr. SKIA's new idea: Post picks pronto

Because I've been so late to the party on so many different bloggable occurrences, I thought I'd get in early with my picks to make it to the Super Bowl.

New Orleans over Minnesota
I'm picking the Saints in part because it's the outcome I want. You see, while I hate the Vikings and I hate Brett Favre, I love Sean Payton. As I've mentioned before, Payton was the quarterback at my high school when I was in elementary school. Sure, many high schools have cooler people than a coach to root for, but when your other athletic -- and trust me, I use that word loosely -- claim to fame plays in the WNBA (Candace Parker), you take what you can get. So I'm a big Sean Payton fan. And, my fandom notwithstanding, Payton is a very, very good coach. And the fella he's facing -- Brad Childress -- ain't.

Besides, just like with Kurt Warner last week, I don't see Favre and the Vikings playing back-to-back perfect games, turnover-wise. They'll have to play error-free offensive football to beat the Saints, and I just don't see that happening.

Jets over Indy
I made the mistake last week of picking the high-flying passing attack and home field advantage (San Diego) over a punishing ground attack, stout defense, and superior coaching (the Jets). My justification then was the quarterbacks, because I felt more confident in Philip Rivers than Mark Sanchez. Well, Peyton Manning's ostensibly has an even larger edge over Sanchez -- and the Colts passing attack is higher-flying, and their home-field more advantageous, for that matter -- but I'm still going with New York.

Like my NFC pick, this one comes largely from the heart. One, I've never bought into Manning as a winner, and think it would be perfect poetic justice if his lone championship -- one which I had said again and again he would never win -- came courtesy of my Bears. But what would be even more poetic and infinitely justicier would be for the Jets to be the team that knocks Indy out of the playoffs. Because the Jets are only in the playoffs because the Colts handed them a victory in Week 16.

Or at least that's the common perception. While it's true there's no guarantee the Jets would have lost that game, then-unbeaten Indy did lead 15-10 in the third quarter (and had possession of the ball) when coach Jim Caldwell made the karma-annihilating call to pull Manning and the rest of his starters, sacrificing the chance to do something truly historic in the annals of sports. The decision was not a popular one with the hometown fans for obvious reasons; to not even try to maintain a perfect season is, well, a rather imperfect strategy. But I don't think anyone ever expected this: that the 29-15 comeback win would propel the Jets into the playoffs, and put them in position to knock out the Colts.

Let's review:
1. Instead of pursuing immortality, the Colts essentially guaranteed themselves a loss, preferring to ensure the health of their starters for a prolonged playoff run.
2. Indy fans felt betrayed, and Caldwell -- who to that point had been unbeaten in his coaching career -- almost instantaneously became a bit of a pariah.
3. The Jets won that game, which ultimately allowed them to make the playoffs; their thrashing of the Bengals in Week 17 would have been meaningless had they lost to the Colts.
4. The Colts now face the possibility of being denied a prolonged playoff run by the Jets, a team they would never have seen in the postseason had they been focused on winning a football game -- and, by extension, making history -- instead of a misguided and overly-conservative agenda to stay healthy in order to make the prolonged playoff run that the Jets currently imperil.

I mean, the Jets winning, it has to happen, doesn't it? Rookie quarterback playing on the road be damned, it has to happen. The only thing that could possibly prevent it is that it's perhaps a little too perfect. But god do I want to see it.

So that's what I've got for Super Bowl 40-whatever-the-hell-we're-on: Jets vs. Saints. Of course, at last count this poll on ESPN.com had it as the least likely pairing, with only 9% of nearly 150,000 fans choosing it (compared to 42% for Colts-Saints and 38% for Colts-Vikings). Even in New York, only 41% of the people think the Jets will win, and most of them think that if they do, they'll face the Vikes. Truth be told, I see an interesting Super Bowl matchup regardless of the outcomes this week: Colts-Saints pits two great offenses and would-be undefeated teams that most people thought were the two strongest throughout the regular season; Colts-Vikings is two of the top-10 QBs of all-time trying to get that elusive second ring to propel themselves solidly into the top-5; Jets-Vikings would give us a lesser version of Favre vs. the Packers, with most players in the New York locker room reportedly not interested in joining one of Favre's Wrangler-clad pick up games; and finally Jets-Saints, which is the irresistible force vs the immovable object, to decide once and for all if defense really does win championships.

In truth, Jets-Saints is probably the least interesting matchup, story-wise. Which is exactly why it'll be the one we get.

Mr. SKIA gets caught up, the NFL

Now that we are down to the final four in each conference -- and the wild card round, wherein my picks would have been horrendous had I committed them to the eternity of this here blog, is mercifully over -- I can talk a little football.

I was feeling pretty good last week, as my NFC preseason top-3 were all in the playoffs, with 11+ wins each. Then the Eagles and, more importantly, the Packers (my preseason Super Bowl champs) got knocked out, and I'm back to looking like a chump; of the four teams I projected to be in the conference finals -- Packers-Saints and Steelers-Patriots -- exactly one of them is still alive.

So maybe I don't know much, but I'm still going with:

New Orleans over Arizona
Despite the way they played over the last month or so, I still like the Saints. In fact, the way they ended the season reminds me a lot of Arizona last year, and they did alright once the postseason began. As for the Cardinals, I just don't see another flawless Kurt Warner performance; instead, expect one of Arizona's patented turnover fests.

Minnesota over Dallas
Can I pick neither? I can't stand either team, and think both coaches are subpar, with Brad Childress significantly subparrer. But now that the Cowboys are no longer playing with the patented Bill Simmons no-one-believes-in-us edge -- suddenly, they're everybody's darling -- I expect them to vomit all over themselves. While I don't like the Vikings either, somebody's got to win.

Indianapolis over Baltimore
I want to pick the Ravens, I really do. I hate the way the Colts ended the season, giving up a chance at history just to rest guys for the playoffs, and I think that gives them awful karma. But given Joe Flacco's performance last week, I just can't see how he leads them to a win at Indy.

San Diego over Jets
This is the perfect barometer for what it takes to win in today's NFL playoffs: a high-flying passing attack and home field advantage; or a punishing ground attack, stout defense, and superior coaching? While I hate to go against Darrelle Revis (who might be the best player in football right now) and with Norv Turner, this one, for me, comes down to the quarterbacks. I feel much more confident backing Philip Rivers than I do Mark Sanchez.

Jesus, did I really just pick all home teams? Well, that ain't gonna happen -- if I had to pick upsets, I'd rank them Jets, Cowboys, Ravens, Cardinals in order of confidence -- but I'll stick with what I've got. What a hack I am.

In other football news, I just want to highlight this passage from a recent (for me, anyway) post of mine, which had been pulled from an ESPN.com chat with my comments added in red:

lawrence (stowe vt)
Why wouldnt the bears bring in someone that Jay cutler knows and trusts like Mike shanahan? Because the Bears are cheaper than a Wal-Mart sweater.

Jeff Dickerson (11:45 AM)
Fair point. My best guess is that Shanahan would cost roughly $10 million per season, and command about a 4-5 year contract. Then you would have to pay Lovie over $10 million sit out the next two years. Also remember that Shanahan would want a lot of control over personnel. How would he work with Jerry and his people? That's why it's not just a simple fix. In a perfect world, yes, the Bears would eat all that money and bring in one of these high profile coaches. But this isn't a perfect world. Alright, this is where I really started getting annoyed. According to Forbes.com, Lovie and Jeff Fisher are the two highest-paid coaches in the league. Both make $5.5 million per season. As stellar as Shanahan's reputation is, there is NO WAY IN FREAKING HELL that he commands a salary that's 82% higher than the most lucrative current deal. Especially not with fellow Super Bowl winners Bill Cowher, Tony Dungy, Jon Gruden, and Mike Holmgren also available to varying degrees. Shanahan will get in the $7 million range. Which is still way too rich for the Bears' blood.

In becoming the new coach of the Washington Redskins, Mike Shanahan agreed to a five-year, $35 million contract. Toot-toot goes my horn.

Putting the dick in Dickerson

In my latest effort to generate readership, I have been going to chats on ESPN.com and asking questions as Mr. SKIA. Today I went to the ESPNChicago.com Bears chat, and was astounded by how comically uninformed one their alleged Bears experts, Jeff Dickerson, is. What follows is a transcript of the chat, with all typos left in, and my responses to the questions and critiques of Dickerson in red.

Jeff Dickerson (11:31 AM)
What's up everybody! Let's break down Bears vs. Rams....just kidding. Fire away with all your questions (no pun intended). Oh I get it. That's hilarious.

scooter (chicago)
do you believe the bears have contacted Colwer? I would never answer a question from somebody who can't even get a guy's name right. We're not talking Houshmandzadeh here.

Jeff Dickerson (11:34 AM)
No. However, that's not to say that Cowher wouldn't be a great choice to replace Lovie. But at this very moment, the Bears are likely to bring back Smith in 2010. So if Lovie is coming back (barring a total disaster to Rams, Lions, etc), why would the team contact Cowher? John Clayton made that point very clear yesterday on the Afternoon Saloon. Being "likely" to bring back Lovie isn't the same as being certain. So if they're even considering it, wouldn't it behoove them to find out if the better candidates would even be interested in the job? Wouldn't that be the smart thing to do? Not that the Bears always do the smart thing, but to imply that they'd have no reason to contact Cowher is ridiculous.

Kyle McEntire (Springfield,MO)
I saw a rumor on Yahoo sports that the Bears could possibility be looking for a new GM. I know this is just a rumor but can I start to plan a party for the day Jerry Angelo get fired? we need someone that wants to win. Say what you will about Jerry Angelo -- and there are plenty of bad things to say -- but the Cutler trade should have eliminated any doubt about his desire to win. He probably should be fired, but he's also been hogtied by the McCaskeys' nickel-clutching ways.

Jeff Dickerson (11:37 AM)
Jerry Angelo is under contract for four more years. Plus, the NFL is heading towards a lockout in 2011. The Bears probably don't think this is the best time to change general managers, given all those circumstances. However, Angelo's draft record since 2003/04 is very suspect. He deserves all the criticism coming his way. But I do think Jerry does want to win.

scooter (chicago)
i like John Clayton, but trust Hub Arkish a little more. He said the Bears have reached out to Cowler so that's why i asked what you guys thought C'mon man. That's twice. You're making us all look bad. And Dickerson, why the f are you taking two questions from this moron?

Jeff Dickerson (11:39 AM)
I understand. I like Hub as well. Great guy...who used to always bring me free copies of PFW when I produced the Dick Jauron show in 2000. But it really doesn't make sense that the Bears would have already reached out to Cowher. Who reached out? Ted Phillips...no. Jeryy...no. Virginia...no. So, what McCaskey has the authority to make such a bold move. I don't question Hub, I just question the chain of command at Halas Hall. That's why I tend to think Cowher hasn't been contacted by anybody who can make that type of decision. Who reached out? Um, how 'bout an underling acting on the orders of any of those above-mentioned individuals?

Tyler (Iowa City)
What Bears coaches do you expect to be fired after this season? Assuming Lovie keeps his job -- no sure thing, despite the pile of money owed to him, especially if they finish with double-digit losses -- I'd hope he'd at least be forced to bring in someone to coordinate the defense. And then there's also the foregone conclusion that Turner and his Randle-P.-McMurphy-at-the-end-of-Cuckoo's-Nest playcalling will be gone. As long as that's the case, offensively all the rest is window dressing.

Jeff Dickerson (11:42 AM)
Lovie already fired some of his defensive staff last year (Lloyd Lee, Brick Haley), so all the changes will likely come on offense. All of the coaches on that side of the ball may be in trouble. We've discussed the names before, but usually when the offensive coordinator (Ron Turner) gets the axe, most of his staff goes with him. Although we should point out that only Harry Hiestand arrived with Turner in 2005. The rest were all Lovie picks in 2004. What does who hired them have to do with anything, other than as a mitigating factor of Turner's seeming incompetence, i.e. the other offensive coaches are not "his guys"?

lawrence (stowe vt)
Why wouldnt the bears bring in someone that Jay cutler knows and trusts like Mike shanahan? Because the Bears are cheaper than a Wal-Mart sweater.

Jeff Dickerson (11:45 AM)
Fair point. My best guess is that Shanahan would cost roughly $10 million per season, and command about a 4-5 year contract. Then you would have to pay Lovie over $10 million sit out the next two years. Also remember that Shanahan would want a lot of control over personnel. How would he work with Jerry and his people? That's why it's not just a simple fix. In a perfect world, yes, the Bears would eat all that money and bring in one of these high profile coaches. But this isn't a perfect world. Alright, this is where I really started getting annoyed. According to Forbes.com, Lovie and Jeff Fisher are the two highest-paid coaches in the league. Both make $5.5 million per season. As stellar as Shanahan's reputation is, there is NO WAY IN FREAKING HELL that he commands a salary that's 82% higher than the most lucrative current deal. Especially not with fellow Super Bowl winners Bill Cowher, Tony Dungy, Jon Gruden, and Mike Holmgren also available to varying degrees. Shanahan will get in the $7 million range. Which is still way too rich for the Bears' blood.

Phil (Chicago)
Does Stephen Jackson run wild on the bears defense this week? Yes. Yes he does.

Jeff Dickerson
He better not. Although Jackson is really the only thing working for the Rams. Jackson did not practice on Wednesday because of back spasms, so hopefully that will slow him down this week. The Bears simply cannot afford to lose this game. Might as well cancel the final four games if that happens. And this is where I completely lost my shit. Jackson won't go off because: A. Dickerson thinks that he better not; B. The Bears can't afford to lose the game (unlike any of their previous losses, especially the last few, which were clearly affordable); and C. The season might as well be over if they lose. Well what in God's name do any of those things have to do with the Bears actually being able to stop Jackson? Nothing. Zero. Zilch. Basically, Jackson wasn't going to run wild because Dickerson didn't want him to. (Note: While Jackson did go for 112 yards on 28 carries, the Bears did manage to hold him out of the end zone.)

David (Oil city, PA)
What is the most important aspect to improve for the bears to get better on offense? The line. It's been terrible, and this is what happens when you totally ignore the position group in the draft for the better part of a decade. Thankfully, the Bears lack a first-day pick, so they won't have the terrible luxury of being able to inject any immediately-playable talent into the line via the draft.

Jeff Dickerson
Line play. Both the offensive and defensive lines have been below average this year. They have to address the tackle spot (maybe Chris Williams is the ultimate answer at LT, can Omiyale play RT?). Also, has anybody else noticed that Olin Kreutz is having a very disappointing season? Should they look elsewhere at center in 2010. Might not be a bad idea. I think the defensive line problems speak for themselves. Get some people that can pressure the quarterback...please. Getting an impact pass rusher should also be a snap without a selection in the first two rounds.

Peter (New Jersey)
Do you think the following will be with the bears next year?:-Pisa-Pace-Anderson-Oleguye-June-Manning Manning, Anderson, and Tinoisamoa, in that order in terms of likelihood. Ogunleye most likely of the rest to return, but only if he's willing to go short-term for fewer dollars than he currently makes.

Jeff Dickerson
If 2010 is played without a salary cap -- Manning and Anderson will be restricted free agents. My guess is both would be back. Wale probaly leaves via free agency. Pace likely retires. I would bring Pisa back, because he is a very talented guy. And I have no idea about Cato June, I think we need to see him play before making any decision. Not really sure what the no cap reference means. I thought Manning and Anderson were restricted regardless.

Eric (Chicago)
Jeff, who cares how much Shanahan or Cowher or anyone else would cost...if it means a championship, guess what? Pay for the head coach that will WIN the Super Bowl, not get us there then suffer the Super Bowl hangover then be out after 3 years from being there...see the trend? Yes, I see the definitive trend exhibited by your single data point. Excellent work, Pythagoras.

Jeff Dickerson
Eric, you're preaching to the choir. But those financial issues matter to the Bears. They make the final call.

Thomas (Aurora)
Jeff, after your last comment of mainly offensive coaches being removed this year, I have a question. How can that make any sense considering most are hand-picked by Lovie and he is controlling the defense and both sides of the ball are failing miserably. So is this season just considered a wash even with the terrible perfromances game after game? For sure, both sides are in need of a shakeup.

Jeff Dickerson
Lovie has pick all these defensive coaches. When he initially put together his staff in 2004...Drake, Spencer, Boras (not Scott) all came in with the new regime. When Turner took over the next year, he brougt in Harry Hiestand. Pep Hamilton arrived in 2007, but let's not waste our time talking about him. Lovie also runs the defense and the scheme. Bottom line...life isn't fair in the NFL. It doesn't matter who put together the staff; if Lovie wants to put himself on more solid ground -- which I'm sure he does -- changes will be a-comin', on both sides of the ball.

Sean (Erie, PA)
If Turner is fired and the Texans firing Kubiak after the season who would be a better fit in Chicago Kubiak or Wies? As long as neither of them are in the Turner family tree, who cares?

Jeff Dickerson
Kubiak...no doubt about it. But I wonder if he'll go with Shanahan somewhere to be his coordinator. No doubt about it? Based on what? If it's the style of offense, please elaborate.

Mr. SKIA (MrSportsKnowItAll.com)
Why wouldn't Jackson run wild on the Bears this weekend? Because the Rams are bad? The Bears defense is far worse than the Rams ground attack, so the idea that they might as well have to cancel the final four games if Jackson goes off has nothing to do with whether or not they'll actually be able to stop him. Yeah, give 'em hell, Mr. SKIA!

Jeff Dickerson
If the Bears were smart (debatable), they'd put nine in the box. If Kyle Boller and Donnie Avery beat them through the air, then run for cover. Gee, stacking the box against the Rams? I'm sure no one had tried that yet. Or maybe, just maybe, that's exactly the kind of front Jackson had been facing all year, and he still entered the game as the NFL's No. 2 rusher.

nathan (arlington heights)
would it be a good combo to hire cowher and weis as offensive coordinators.. then fire babich and replace him with lovie? If you are a retarded baboon, then yes, that's a good idea. While bringing in Cowher and Weis would be positive, it'd be unprecedented for a highly-paid head coach to accept a demotion to coordinator.

Jeff Dickerson
I think Smith and Babich are a package deal. No way Lovie takes that type of demotion. Sorry, but I think Smith cans Babich's ass if it means saving his own.

Matt Williamson
Hey everyone. Matt Williamson from Scouts Inc. filling in for a half hour to talk Bears...let's keep this rolling. Thank God.

I'm mad as hell, and I'm not going to take it anymore

Fuck the Bears.

They are a horrible football team, and the entire coaching staff should be fired. The Bears make more mental mistakes than any team I've ever seen. And I'm not just talking NFL. Or even professional sports. They are fucking terrible.

Is anybody coaching this team? How can a team of professionals be so clueless? I can't think of a single thing that I want to watch less than another Bears game. I'd view The Jay Leno Show on an endless loop for the rest of my days before I'd willingly sit through another one of their crapfests. It is seriously disgusting.

And don't even get me started on Jay Cutler. Having rarely seen him play, I was in support of the trade, because I thought the Bears needed to do something bold. Well, they did. And it likely has set them back several years.

Remember when ESPN.com's KC Joyner caused an uproar during the preseason for saying that Cutler would remind fans of Rex Grossman? Well, he was dead wrong. Grossman's good games outnumbered the bad by about 2:1. Cutler, meanwhile has had two shitbombs for every decent performance. Bob Avellini, Mike Tomczak, or Chris Chandler would have this team at 6-3.

I am so fucking pissed.

The strange thing is, I fully expected the Bears to lose this game. I didn't have any misconceptions about their shittiness, so it wasn't like the outcome was a surprise. But the loss was so frustrating, nauseating, and repugnant -- and ultimately completely avoidable -- that I find myself pushed completely over the edge. The Bears totally gave the game away to a crappy Niners team. Gave it away.

I said after the Bengals debacle that Lovie Smith had lost me as a supporter. Well, now I'm throwing in the towel on the entire organization.

Just to get this out of my system, I'd like to make a list of terms that I'd use to describe this Bears team. I'll try not to repeat any of the ones I've used above:

Infuriating
Fucktarded
Sickening
Awful
Depressing
Inept
Soul-crushing
Intolerable
Mortifying
Dreadful
Bumbling
Horrendous
Idiotic
Embarrassing
Vomitty
Malignant
Aggravating
Disgraceful
Maddening
Horrific
Appalling
Testicle-stomping
Moronic
Disappointing
Shameful
Suicide-inducing
Incompetent
Sharty

Feel free to add your own down below. It's pretty therapeutic, actually.

9 Weak Thoughts: Week 9

1. The Bears are terrible.
And if you've been watching, I don't even need to expound.


2. WTF Tommie Harris?
His punch on Deuce Lutui on the fourth play of the Bears' nauseating 41-21 loss was one of the stupidest, most immature things I've seen on a football field. Wasn't Harris supposed to be a paragon of character? What the hell has happened? The guy's making Tank Johnson look like Tim Tebow.


3. The Bears are so bad, I actually chose to watch KC-Jax for awhile
Granted, it was while every other game was at halftime. But still. People in Jacksonville don't even want to watch Jacksonville. Nor can they, due to the fact that they haven't sold out in 8 years.


4. Andy Reid is a horrible challenger.
And I typed that thought before he challenged a spot of the ball for a second time in the Eagles 20-16 loss to the Cowboys. I don't have the data to back it up, but just from watching a ton of games I know that spot-of-the-ball plays are almost never overturned, because the standard of "indisputable visual evidence" is almost impossible to meet due to the vagaries of camera angles and whatnot. It's just not an exact science, unlike whether a receiver has gotten both feet inbounds. So challenging them is a total waste.

I don't watch a lot of Eagles games, but every time I do, I come away thinking that Reid is a horrible coach. He routinely makes head-scratchings calls, and manages the clock almost as poorly as he does his challenges. But his teams are overwhelmingly successful, and he has a 102-65 record, which basically means he's averaged 10 wins a season for a decade. So is this a case of him being an exceptional coach in other areas, or is he just the beneficiary of some very talented teams? Considering the fact that until this year, he had one of the most well-respected defensive coordinators of all time (in the late Jim Johnson), I'm beginning to think that Reid has just been very lucky to have been blessed with such fortunate circumstances.


5. Running back-by-committee is totally out of control.
And I don't just mean that from a fantasy perspective. When one RB is a clear stud, to dilute your offense by not using him is, in a word, rigoddamndiculous. Case in point: the Carolina Panthers.

DeAngelo Williams is one of the very best running backs in football. While Adrian Peterson is in a class of his own, he's right there at the top of the second tier with Maurice Jones-Drew, Chris Johnson, and Michael Turner.* In yesterday's 30-20 loss to the Saints, Williams had 21 carries for 149 yards and 2 TDs. That's a shade over 7 yards a carry. His backfieldmate, Jonathan Stewart, gained 24 yards on 13 carries.

* God help me, I seriously considered putting Cedric Benson in there. Makes my stomach turn, but he's a completely different guy now.

Even if you take out Williams' 66-yard TD run -- and I don't know why you'd do that, as it did, in fact, count, and was a pretty important play in the game -- he still averaged over 4 yards a pop. That's twice what Stewart got.

I understand that Stewart has some value. Coming into the game, he was averaging just under 4.9 yards a carry and had scored four TDs. It's good to have a guy like him to keep your workhorse fresh. But on what I considered the most important drive of the game -- Carolina's first possession of the second half -- Williams was mostly watching from the sidelines.

This was the crucial possession of the game. The previous time the Panthers O had the ball, they led 17-3 at the 2-minute warning. But the Saints kicked a figgie at the end of the first half, and then took the second-half kickoff and went 80 yards on just four plays to make it 17-13. So between possessions, their 2 TD lead had shrunk to just four points. Carolina desperately needed to respond in a big way to reclaim some momentum if they had any hope of pulling the upset. And by that I mean a TD, because a field goal basically meant a tie game was inevitable.
Starting at their own 21, the Carolina O methodically moved into Saints territory. Facing a 3rd-and-6 from the NO 32, Williams reeled off a 9-yard run. To that point on the drive, he had three carries for 23 yards.

Well, he was quickly replaced by Stewart, who'd also come in (and was stopped for no gain on his lone carry) after Williams' 10-yard 1st-down run earlier. Am I to believe that DeAngelo Williams gets winded after running 9 yards or more? Or that, coming out of freaking halftime, he needed a breather after three carries? Regardless, Stewart came in and had his number called on four consecutive snaps, picking up 4, 2, 2, and 1o yards, getting tackled at the 1-yard line on the last carry. I have to believe that Williams would have found his way into the end zone there. Instead, the drive wheezed out -- mostly due to a mishandled snap which took them from 1st-and-goal at the 1 to 2nd-and-goal from the 7 -- and the Panthers kicked a field goal. Not that it was entirely Stewart's fault, but when you choose to have your best player on the sidelines in such a crucial juncture of the game, you open yourself up to some big-time second guessing. Needless to say, the Saints quickly scored to tie and again to lead, and ultimately rolled to 8-0.

Interestingly, at the end of the aforementioned drive, the Panthers brought Williams back into the game for a 3rd-and-goal play from the 6. This is exactly the instance when the better-receiving Stewart should be deployed. Instead, Williams let a TD pass bounce off his hands. I don't even like the Panthers (or own Williams in either of my fantasy league), but I was still screaming at my computer throughout this entire sequence.

Admittedly, a bit of Bears game-related frustration might've contributed.


6. Chris Johnson is the most exciting player in football.
The guy is amazing. If he turns the corner, he's pretty much gone, because he's so fast that defensive backs rarely take the proper angle on him. Every time he touches the ball, your heart is in your throat because you know that he can take it the distance. Watching him is like watching Devin Hester trot onto the field to receive a kick circa '06-'07. He's just electrifying.

While I was thinking about this last night, something occurred to me: Chris Johnson is exactly what Reggie Bush was supposed to be.


7. I loved seeing the last-second, pre-field goal time out burn a coach.
I don't have anything against trying to ice the kicker, but I hate the trend in recent seasons (since coaches got the ability to call timeouts from the sidelines) to call a TO at the very last second before the snap, when no one hears the whistle and the kick is launched anyway, only to be told it doesn't count. I absolutely hate it. It's stupid as hell.

But perhaps the stupidest example of this came in yesterday's Texans-Colts game, when Indianapolis coach Jim Caldwell called a timeout right as Houston's Kris Brown was to attempt a field goal in the final seconds of the first half. The reason coaches attempt this tactic is to dial up the pressure on the kicker in an effort to make him choke. But Brown's attempt was from 56 yards away. Those kinds of kicks aren't missed because of choking; they are just flat missed because they are at the very end of anybody's range and nearly impossible to make without repetitions. But Caldwell called the last-second time out, and (as usual) Brown and everyone else went through with the play. And the kick sailed. But essentially, Caldwell had just given Brown a practice swing, basically allowing him to properly calibrate his kicking alignment. Given a second shot chance, Brown nailed it to give the Texans their first points. This undoubtedly gave Houston some momentum heading into the break, and they then took the second half kickoff and marched down the field to turn what had been a mild laugher into a 13-10 game.

Caldwell proved to be a quick study, though. When Brown lined up to attempt a 42-yarder at the end of the game with the Colts clinging to a 20-17 and holding all three timeouts, Caldwell just let him kick away. And Brown chunked it. Because you see, every once in a while, a guy just chokes on his own.


8. I have to say, I liked seeing the Bucs in those old unis.
Of course, I also used to own an all-orange Buccaneers cap that was the envy of every man.** I liked the Bucs when they were terrible, and yes, they have been much better since the uniform change. But at least their old unis were unique; there was no doubting who was on the field. They should bring them back fulltime.

** That is until my friend Adam snatched it, wore it to class, and some chick he was into said something like, "Umm, it's not Halloween." Needless to say, he promptly returned the pilfered lid.


9. I understand it was a joke, but I have to believe that the commissioner's office was not amused by Chad Johnson's dollar "bribe."
Look, I know that Johnson is a clown, and there is no way that he was trying to influence the call when he was holding a dollar as the referees were reviewing a catch of his -- which by the was reversed and called an incompletion. But with all the "the-fix-is-in" conspiracies of the modern sports fan, Roger Goodell isn't going to like the integrity of his officials being a part of a joke. Of course it wasn't a real bribe attempt, and yes, a $100 bill would've looked much, much worse. But with the commissioner's office having recently fined Johnson $10,000 for wearing the wrong color chin strap, I have to believe they're going to take a little more than a single out of his wallet this time around.