Football! Whooooo!

Yay, it's NFL time! There's a whole bunch of non-football stuff going on that I should probably be talking about, but dammit, I love the game, so I'm going to talk about that.

I'm going to start with my team picks, and I'm going all out on this. I've printed off the entire NFL schedule, and I've gone through it picking every single game this season to compile my predicted records for each team. I've never done this before, so let's see what happens! I'll start by breaking down each division and explaining my thoughts on each team and what they're going to struggle with. Bring it on!

Fun note, I wrote down my thoughts on each division, then went through the season schedule. You may notice some discrepancies between my opinion and the win/loss total.

Except the end. That's been my champ for a while.

AFC East
Quite possibly the worst division in football - the AFC South is also in the running - New England is going to run away with this division *again* because everybody else sucks.

NE - 9-7
BUFF - 7-9
NYJ - 4-12
MIA - 2-14

AFC North
Hopefully this winds up being the most interesting division in football this year, as I really hope the hype around Cleveland getting better is real. I'm not expecting the Browns to make the playoffs, but I am expecting them to at least be competitive. The Bengals are in free fall, Baltimore may possibly be in rebuild mode, and Pittsburgh could be without Le'veon Bell for who knows how long.

PITT - 11-5
CLE - 11-5
CIN - 8-8
BAL - 7-9

AFC South
Another dumpster fire division! If Deshaun Watson stays healthy, Houston runs away with this division. I know Jacksonville turned a big corner last year, but they still have Bortles behind center, and that's not good. I have no faith in Tennessee, and Indy is still going to be bad, no matter what Luck does.

HOU - 12-4
TENN - 11-5
JAX - 10-6
IND - 3-13

AFC West
This division is intriguing. If the Chargers decide to not give away games in the last two minutes of games, they should run away with this. Denver is in full rebuild mode, and I think KC is going to take a step back. Oakland... oh man, I already wrote about how bad I think the Gruden hire is, and every sign is pointing it to being even WORSE then I thought! The Chargers should have a solid stranglehold on this division barring my thoughts on KC being wrong.

LAC - 10-6
OAK - 7-9
DEN - 7-9
KC - 5-11

NFC East
I really expect Philly to remain strong, stronger then every other team in the division, and they should have no major problems in division regardless of Foles or Wentz starting. I really think the Barkley pick for the Giants will pay immediate dividends, but they'll still struggle. Washington with Alex Smith is going to be a very stable franchise if not exciting. Dallas is going to be BAD this year. Garrett is NOT a good coach, and they have no good weapons other then Elliot.

PHI - 10-6
WAS - 7-9
DAL - 6-10
NYG - 6-10

NFC North
This might be the best division in football. I think Minnesota is in a good position to repeat, but Green Bay will give them competition. Detroit is going to be ok, I'm not a Stafford believer. Chicago is the great wild card. They're going to win games they shouldn't, and lose games they shouldn't. And I thought this before the Khalil Mack trade.

MINN - 13-3
GB - 11-5
CHI - 11-5
DET - 9-7

NFC South
New Orleans is going to be a monster this year. Atlanta is close - so close - but they're not on the same level as New Orleans. Carolina is going to be mediocre - I'm not a Newton believer - and Tampa is a dumpster fire.

NO - 12-4
ATL - 8-8
CAR - 6-10
TB - 1-15

NFC West
Rams. Holy crap the Rams. My poor Seahawks. San Francisco is a wild card, I'm not a Jimmy G believer yet - he did look great in games that didn't matter last year - and they have some interesting story lines. Arizona is in full rebuild, they want to get Rosen on the field ASAP. And Seattle is... I have no idea. They have a chance to survive and get a wild card, but the more I look into it, the slimmer that chance seems.

LAR - 13-3
SEA - 8-8
ARZ - 5-10
SF - 5-10

Playoff seeding!
AFC
1. Houston
2. Pittsburgh
3. LA Chargers
4. New England
5. Tennessee
6. Cleveland

NFC
1. LA Rams
2. Minnesota
3. New Orleans
4. Philadelphia
5. Green Bay
6. Chicago

Wild Card Round

Cleveland at LA Chargers - LAC
Tennessee at New England - NE

Chicago at New Orleans - NO
Green Bay at Philadelphia - PHIL

Huh, I never pick every home team to win in the wild card round. If it does play out this way, I would be shocked.

Divisional Round

LA Chargers at Pittsburgh - LAC
New England at Houston - HOU

Philadelphia at LA Rams - LAR
New Orleans at Minnesota (ha!) - NO

Championship Round

LA Chargers at Houston - LAC

New Orleans at LA Rams - NO

Super Bowl!

LA Chargers at New Orleans - NO

Geaux Saints!


So this was an interesting practice.

The tragedy that is (so far) Edgar Martinez's hall of fame exclusion.

Before I get into the sheer rediculousness that is the baseball hall of fame, I will caveat this post with one major point:

I'm a huge Mariners fan.

When I was a kid, we'd go to the kingdome, sit in the nosebleeds with our binoculars, and hope to catch a glimpse of Jr, Edgar, or even A-Rod (shudder). So my feelings to my home team and the greatest player in organization history are heavily weighted. That said, I'm going to do my damnedest to take off the rose colored glasses on this one and be objective.

Edgar Martinez just missed election into the baseball hall of fame in his ninth year of eligibility. What this means for those who don't know, is next year (2019) is his last year of eligibility before having to be voted in by the Veteran's committee, a process I both know nothing about, and suspect those committee members also know nothing about.

Now, I can sit here and recite statistic after statistic and talk about where he ranks among hall of famers, with the largest argument against him being the "low" home run total of 309. I could tell you that his career average of .312 ranks above such noted hall of famers like Jackie Robinson, Mickey Mantle, and some shmuck named Hank Aaron. Oh, and just for fun, he hit more doubles (514) then Babe Ruth (506).

No, instead I'm going to focus on one simple, important fact. Something that happened on the very last day of his playing career. After Edgar's final home game on September 25, 2004, Commissioner Bud Selig announced that the Outstanding Designated Hitter Award would be renamed the Edgar Martinez Outstanding Designated Hitter Award.

Edgar still had more games to play, albeit on the road, making him the only active player to play in a sport WITH AN AWARD NAMED AFTER HIM. This has ALWAYS been something done either after a players career or posthumously. While Edgar did not win the award that year, he very well could have won HIS OWN DAMN AWARD.

Now, you may be wondering what point I'm exactly trying to make here. It's actually quite simple. Edgar Martinez played a sport that decided to name an award after him. I will now show you who all has had this distinguished honor in the four major american sports, and see if you can spot the commonality between all of them.

MLB
Jackie Robinson (HOF class of 1962) - Rookie of the Year
Cy Young (HOF class of 1937) - Best Pitcher
Hank Aaron (HOF class of 1982) - Best Batters
Roberto Clemente (HOF class of 1973) - Man of the Year Award
Ted Williams (HOF class of 1966) - All Star Game MVP
Tony Gwynn (HOF class of 2007)- Batting Champ (NL)
Rod Carew (HOF class of 1991) - Batting Champ (AL)

NFL
Walter Payton (HOF class of 1993) - Man of the Year Award
Bart Starr Award (HOF class of 1977) - Leadership Award
Art Rooney Award (HOF class of 1964) - Sportsmanship Award
Vince Lombardi (HOF class of 1971) - Super Bowl Trophy
George Halas (HOF class of 1963) - NFC Championship Trophy
Lamar Hunt (HOF class of 1972) - AFC Championship Trophy

NBA
Larry O'Brien (HOF class of 1991)- Championship Trophy
Eddie Gottlieb (HOF class of 1972)- Rookie of the Year
Maurice Podoloff (HOF class of 1974) - MVP
Red Auerbach (HOF class of 1969) - Coach of the Year
Bill Russell (HOF class of 1975) - Finals MVP
J. Walter Kennedy (HOF class of 1981) - Citizenship Award
Joe Dumars (HOF class of 2006) - Sportsmanship
Jack Twyman and Maurice Stokes (Both HOF class of 2006) - Teammate of the Year Award

The greatest trophy in all of sports

 NHL
...Okay, I'm not doing these ones. There are A LOT, and if you haven't picked up on the point I've been making about all the other awards named after people...

EVERY SINGLE ONE IS IN THEIR SPORTS HALL OF FAME.

No exceptions!

Edgar Martinez has a baseball award named after him. He is not in the hall of fame. This is simply wrong. If he was not worthy of the hall of fame, he should never of had an award named after him. Plain and simple. Voters, you have one year left to get this right. Do it already.

Why Jon Gruden's 10 year deal with the Raiders is the funniest thing in NFL history

Holy crap! It's been over a year since I've written something! Damn.

Now that that's out of the way, let's talk about Jon Gruden.

"Do I need to poop?"

I can't stand the man. His stint on Monday Night Football has been absolutely terrible. On more then one occasion I've described him as a kindergarten teacher - everything is always the best thing ever. This man would have you think Tom Savage is the best quarterback in the league. I'm sure he doesn't believe these things, but it makes his commentary terrible.

Rich Gannon and Jon Gruden

Speaking of Gruden's opinion of quarterbacks, that is one of the things I've never understood. Why is he considered a quarterback guru? Nothing in his coaching career suggests that. Rich Gannon had the best season of his career - a season where he won MVP and led his team to the Super Bowl - the very next season after Jon Gruden left. Yes, Gruden did beat that very same Gannon in the Super Bowl, but it sure as hell wasn't with quarterback play. Brad Johnson was hardly a great quarterback on his best day, he was just tasked with not screwing up with that phenomenal defense they had in Tampa Bay - which Gruden also wasn't responsible for. That was Tony Dungy's baby, and he was run out of town after a winning season the year before. (Probably because he's black, but that's another story). In fact, that Super Bowl run that Tampa had was a crazy fluke. Tampa was okay in the ensuing years, but never put it all together again. Then once Gruden ran things for a while, the team fizzled, he was canned, and Tampa has been fairly mediocre at best since.

Brad Johnson and Jon Gruden

But is this all on Gruden? I mean, I'm just a shmuck sitting here getting angry at MNF whenever Gruden speaks, so maybe I'm just bitter? It's not like we live in an advanced age of stats and metrics where we can actually objectively measure out the success a coach has had over the course of his career.

Oh snap, we totally can!

Let's break down the super basic stuff first, I'm going down the rabbit hole on this one, so buckle up. Gruden's career record as a head coach is 95-81, a career winning percentage of .540. Not bad, but not great. In comparison, Jack Del Rio, the man Gruden is replacing, has a career record of 93-94, a winning percentage of .497, but he has a record of 25-23 - a win percentage of .521 - as the Raiders head coach. Those numbers include the disaster of a season that Oakland had this year as well. Based on those numbers, Gruden is at best a marginal upgrade over Del Rio, and Gruden was given the largest guaranteed contract in NFL history.

Jack Del Rio

So Gruden's contract is the biggest ever given to a coach, and he is definitely not the greatest coach ever. He's not even the best coach in Raiders history. (for those not in the know, this is Gruden's second stint as Raiders head coach) Gruden's record as the Raiders coach is 64-38, a win percentage of .594 (woah, that IS an impressive number!), but that ranks behind John Rauch, John Madden, and Tom Flores, and unlike Gruden's stretch in Oakland, every single one of those guys made a Super Bowl, with Madden and Flores winning two and one, respectively.

Any excuse for Tom Flores!

We can further compare Gruden's record to other coaches who were, at best, mediocre, and nobody thought to give them massive contracts. Like Jeff Fisher. His career record is 173-165, a winning percentage of .512, and trust me, no one is going to try and sign Fisher to a 10 year deal. Fisher was very clearly the problem with the Rams last year, as evidenced by the massive growth the offense took this year with Jared Goff - a player Fisher refused to play - and new head coach Sean McVay.

"I'm as good as Gruden!"

Or better yet, let's compare Gruden's coaching record to Marvin Lewis, the (apparently) unfirable coach of the Bengals who has NEVER WON A PLAYOFF GAME in his 15 years with the team. Lewis' record is 125-112, a win percentage of .527. Whenever the Bengals finally have enough of a spine to fire Lewis, he will more then likely retire as no one will pick him up.

"How am I still employed?"

And finally, my favorite comparison on record - Jim Mora Sr. A career record of 125-106, a percentage of .541, and 0 playoff wins in 15 seasons. Mora's numbers in the regular season are better then Gruden, and most importantly, he's the owner of the best rant in NFL history. None of these guys are going to be remembered as great coaches, and all of them have comparable, or better, numbers as a coach then Jon Gruden.

"Playoffs?"

But wait, Gruden's a quarterback guru! He's a great quarterback whisperer! He won a Super Bowl with Brad Johnson!

Well yeah, Brian Billick won one with Trent Dilfer, and no one thought Billick was great with QB's for that.

Why the hell do people think this? Because he runs a QB camp where he hits guys with pool noodles?

I really wish I was making this up.

Seriously, the stats don't support this. While Gannon's numbers were trending upwards during Gruden's tenure, they didn't reach the rediculous MVP numbers until Gruden left town, and Gruden's old Offensive Coordinator Bill Callahan took over. Gannon threw for nearly 1000 yards MORE that first season, and at the highest completion percentage of his entire career. It's hard to say if that was a fluke or not, because the next season Gannon got hurt, never fully recovered, and retired two years after winning MVP.

So let's look at Brad Johnson's numbers in Tampa then. Before Gruden arrived, in 2001, Johnson threw for just over 3,400 yards, 13 TDs, and 11 INTs, for a QB rating of 77.7. Nothing to write home about, the TD number is low, the INT number is fairly middling, and QB rating is very heavily weighted on touchdowns, explaining the fairly low 77.7 result. Gruden's first year with Johnson in 2002 saw Johnson throw for just over 3,000 yards, 22 TDs, and 6 INTs, for a rating of 92.9.

Wow! What an improvement! I clearly had this wrong!

Not so fast there.

This was the only year like that for Johnson. If Gruden clearly was some QB guru, Johnson would have carried some of that success over to the next season. Johnson had exactly zero success the next year, throwing his career high of 21 interceptions, but nearly 1,000 more yards then the previous year. It's clear that the offense began to run through Johnson primarily, and his numbers suffered greatly for it. Not indicative of a QB guru's touch. Johnson did throw for 26 touchdowns, also a career high, but when a quarterback throws touchdown passes and interceptions at virtually a 1:1 ratio, that is not a sign of good quarterback play.

This is hard again...

Most of what I presented here I knew offhand, using a little bit of research to make sure the numbers were right, I wasn't making this up, etc. However, my knowledge of Gruden's coaching experience was only that of him as an NFL head coach, nothing else. Today all head coaches start somewhere lower on the totem pole, and I thought maybe along his way up, somewhere, Gruden became known as a quarterback guru.

The one teensy, little problem with this... Gruden was never a quarterbacks coach.

Gruden's coaching experience is as follows:

Tennessee: Graduate assistant (1986–1987)

Southeast Missouri State: Passing game coordinator (1988)

Pacific: Tight ends coach (1989)

San Francisco 49ers: Offensive assistant (1990)

Pittsburgh: Wide receivers coach (1991)

Green Bay Packers: Offensive assistant (1992)

Green Bay Packers: Wide receivers coach (1993–1994)

Philadelphia Eagles: Offensive coordinator (1995–1997)

Oakland Raiders: Head coach (1998–2001)

Tampa Bay Buccaneers: Head coach (2002–2008)

Oakland Raiders: Head coach (2018–present)

Now, I would be foolish if I told you a wide receivers coach never works with the quarterback. Clearly, there has to be a relationship of SOME sort to get everyone on the same page, understanding route combinations, option routes, etc. But when you're never tasked with working DIRECTLY with those players, I would argue that your ability to coach them up - and get genuine credit for it - is dissipated. So, since I see no quarterback work prior to 1995, let us examine his tenure as offensive coordinator for the Philadelphia Eagles, and see how everything worked on an offensive level before Gruden, during Gruden, and after Gruden.

This means we get to look at the growth of... Randall Cunningham, Ty Detmer, and Rodney Peete.

Okay then.

Cunningham! Holy crap!

But first, let's look at the total offensive rankings during Gruden's tenure, as he was the Offensive Coordinator, so he gets credit for all the offensive production, not just the quarterback. We'll start in 1993 so you can see where they came from, Gruden took the OC roll in 1995.

1993: 15th
1994: 14th
1995: 25th
1996: 4th
1997: 5th

Woah! That is the first legitimately surprising thing I've discovered on this little journey, Gruden should TOTALLY get credit for that offensive turn around. This also explains how he got the Oakland head coaching position as well, you can't argue with results like that.

But what happened after Gruden left? If he was the primary reason for the success, we should see a drop off, right?

1998: 30th (last)
1999: 30th (second to last, gogo expansion Browns!)
2000: 17th (Donovan McNabb's first full season as starter)

Holy crap, surprise number two, that's a massive falloff. Gruden clearly had a major hand in the offensive success of the Eagles while he was the OC. However, the numbers are going to be terribly muddy to get through as Philly had no reliable QB those first two years, juggling "starters" like Koy Detmer, Bobby Hoying, and current Eagles head coach Doug Pederson - seriously, he started 9 games in 1999 - and when you go through a stretch of QB play like that, your offensive numbers should struggle. Philadelphia also had a new OC for both 1998 and 1999,(Dana Bible and Rod Dowhower, respectively) and first years tend to be rough, as seen by that 25 rating in Gruden's first year, but the fall shouldn't be that complete with a new OC. 1999 also saw a new head coach in Philadelphia in Andy Reid.

I'm not going to break down the changes in the Philadelphia quarterbacks the years Gruden was OC because, frankly, he didn't have one. Philly was clearly looking for a QB and rotated through mediocre starters before landing McNabb in the draft after Gruden left. So let us jump to the next destination where he had a pretty major say in the offense - Oakland.

Chuckie!

Gruden was hired by Oakland in 1998 primarily due to the turn around he had created in Philadelphia's offense - remember, this was done without reliable quarterbacking play, making it even more impressive. His first two years in Oakland, Chuckie went 8-8. He followed that up with a 12-4 record, losing the the eventual Super Bowl champion Ravens in the AFC championship game. His fourth and final year Oakland went 10-6, losing to New England in the infamous "tuck rule" game.

Not a bad tenure as coach. No losing seasons, decent playoff runs, no championships, sure, but he was robbed pretty badly that last year. So let's look at his offense. Here are his rankings.

1998: 18th
1999: 5th
2000: 6th
2001: 7th

Woah! The dude knows offense! I'm starting to wonder if my complaints on him are valid (don't fret, they are, I'll get there) These are FANTASTIC offensive numbers for a first time head coach. The Tampa trade makes more sense now, as that team had a great defense but minimal offense under Tony Dungy.

But this wouldn't be complete without looking at the offense before he arrived and after he left, to see what kind of change he really did make. Let's start by looking at what he was inheriting.

1995: 11th
1996: 8th
1997: 13th

Hmm, his accomplishment no seems less impressive. Don't get me wrong, going from middle of the pack to top of the class is something to be impressed by, but he clearly didn't enter a situation with a bare cupboard. If you know anything about former Raiders owner Al Davis, it was he LOVED offense, and he always had to have the big flashy guy, so inheriting those players that he drafted definitely makes the job easier.

So knowing that he didn't receive a talentless offense, let's see how they fared after he left.

2002: 1st
2003: 25th
2004: 17th

Never a good look for your starting QB

In 2003 Rich Gannon was injured and never recovered, so the numbers were expected to go down. However, in his very first year absent, the offense jumped to 1st in the league. Props to Bill Callahan for sure. Going from 7th to 1st isn't an impossible leap, the ranking of 7th shows that you have the ability to lead the league, but actually DOING it comes down to execution, and yes, coaching.

As far as Gannon's play, obviously 2002 was the best year of his career as he won league MVP and led the Raiders to the Super Bowl - all without Gruden. But let's look at his performance prior and during Gruden, as his post Gruden years were marred by injury.

Gannon was signed as a free agent by Oakland in 1999, Gruden's second year as coach. While in Oakland, Gannon made 4 straight pro bowls (3 under Gruden) and was named first team All Pro twice (once under Gruden). Prior to coming to Oakland, Gannon had only moderate success in Kansas City and Minnesota, so going from average quarterback to All Pro under Gruden is an impressive feat. If he won the MVP while Gruden was coach, that would be even more impressive for Gruden.

But let's look at one teensy little detail about all of this offensive success. Bill Callahan was hired as Gruden's Offensive Coordinator in...(drum roll please) 1998, Gruden's first year as coach.

Holy shit I'm giving Bill Callahan credit for something.

Don't get me wrong, the head coach deserves and should receive credit for the job of the whole team, but the offensive coordinator is the guy who runs the offense, even with an offensive minded coach like Gruden. In Philly, Gruden could take all of the credit for the offensive success because he coached under Ray Rhodes, a defensive minded coach. In Oakland, at best, it HAS to be shared with Callahan. And the year after Gruden leaves? Oakland gets over the hump, the offense becomes the best in the league, and they don't miss Gruden AT ALL. This makes me legitimately question how much of his accomplishments in Oakland are in fact due to him, as the team didn't miss a beat once he left town.

This leads us to our final chapter, Gruden's final coaching spot before being hired last week by the Raiders. The Tampa Bay Buccaneers.

In 2002 the Buccaneers fired Tony Dungy after another playoff loss, with blame placed fairly squarely on the performance of the offense. Almost immediately Dungy was hired by the Colts, and the Bucs floundered looking for a coach for months. They eventually became desperate, and managed to BUY Gruden from the Raiders. The net haul the Raiders received for their coach was 1st and 2nd round draft picks in 2002, a first rounder in 2003, another 2nd rounder in 2004, and 8 million bucks, because why not? The Raiders fleeced the Bucs because Tampa was desperate, and fans and commentators alike were wondering if firing Dungy was the right decision.

So Gruden arriveds in Tampa in 2002. And Tampa kicks ass. Like, everybody's ass. Tampa went 12-4 on their way to the 2 seed in the NFC, with the league's #1 defense and the defensive player of the year, linebacker Derrick Brooks. Tampa then destroyed San Francisco and Philadelphia en route to the Super Bowl before facing Gruden's former team in Oakland - and completely destroying them. I remember the game quite well. I was in high school, and was bummed because I had to go to my job delivering pizzas. I got to watch the first half of the game... and I didn't need to see the second. That Tampa defense absolutely destroyed Oakland from the get go, scoring two defensive touchdowns IN THE FIRST HALF. The game was a joke and never close.

2002 Defensive Player of the Year Derrick Brooks

 But it wasn't the offense that won that game. It was the defense. Put together for years by the recently ousted Tony Dungy and ran by legendary defensive wizard Monte Kiffin. THOSE coaches won that Super Bowl for Tampa, and Gruden even thanked Dungy during the trophy ceremony, even though Dungy was no longer affiliated with the team. You don't do that if you don't think they had a major impact.

But this isn't about defense, this is about Jon Gruden, and as such, it's about offense. So let's look at the rankings during Gruden's tenure.

2002: 24th(won Super Bowl 37)
2003: 10th
2004: 22nd
2005: 23rd
2006: 29th
2007: 18th
2008: 14th

Where in those numbers do you see offensive genius? The year they WON THE SUPER BOWL was the second worst offense of Gruden's tenure. That's... horrible. Brad Johnson was around for two more years, and once Gruden's offense was fully implemented, Johnson threw a career high... in interceptions. The defense began to age and get expensive, so they could no longer reliably fall back on that great defense to win games, and Gruden finished with a career record in Tampa of 57-55, hardly anything impressive. And yet, in 2017 he was inducted into Tampa Bay's ring of honor as the winningest coach in Tampa Bay history. He got that title by coaching for seven seasons, only having 4 winning seasons in that time frame. Once again, not impressive.

This was Gruden's last foray as a head coach. Following a disappointing 2008 season that saw Tampa lose all of their games in the final month of the season, Gruden was canned, and hired as a color analyst for Monday Night Football in 2009. He was so bad at this broadcasting job that in 2016 ESPN hired Sean Mcdonough to make Gruden look competent by comparison.

So a man who hasn't coached in ten years, who hasn't made a significant improvement to his team since 1999, and who already has chosen to hire another failed coach (Tom Cable) is somehow worth a 10-year, 100 million dollar contract? I laughed when I heard this, and I'll continue to laugh as Gruden cashes those gigantic checks.

At least he got a no-trade clause this time around.

I'm only going to say this once.

Before I get into this, I need to make something clear.

I hate Colin Kaepernick.

Can't stand the guy.

He's overrated, overpaid, and under talented. Add all that into the fact that he plays for a team I hate as well makes him a big ol' turd sandwich in my view.

He's just asking to be punched in the face.

Now that that is out of the way,

I support Colin Kapernick's flag protest.

I don't agree with it. But I support it.

People have a really hard time today understanding what our country - and specifically, what our flag - stands for. The most important thing about the USA is our freedoms. It's so important that the word freedom is beaten to death by all politicians and self proclaimed patriots, so commonly used that I'm sure some folks reading this rolled their eyes when I first said freedom.

Of all of our freedoms, none are more important then our freedom of speech and expression. This enables us to say whatever we want. At all times. No matter what.

A major problem that has been happening in this country the last decade or so is the reaction to destroy people who are using this freedom to speak honestly about how they feel about something, and their feelings are against the majority. Whether it is someone being anti-gay marriage, pro-immigration, or whatever it is, they're immediatly lambasted for it, forced to apologize, and if you made those comments on social media, odds are you lose your job.

Look, I'm not supporting a lot of these messages. But we live in a country that was FOUNDED ON THE PRINCIPALS OF FREEDOM. Free Speech has GOT to be free. People need to be able to say what they want on topics no matter what. The first ammendment doesn't exist to protect speech you like, it exists to protect the speech you don't want to hear. Just because you disagree with something doesn't make it inherently bad or wrong. What Kaepernick is doing is EXACTLY what the flag is supposed to stand for. For freedom.

The freedom to make these comments or protests against the main stream should be celebrated. Most countries in the world don't celebrate free speech like the USA does. In many places all speech against a leader results in death. Can you imagine that in this country? All of the political channels would have new hosts every single week.

So when someone is exercising their right of free speech by making a statement that is important to them, don't hate them for it or call them unpatriotic because you disagree. Celebrate them. And if you don't like it? Engage them. Talk to them. Have a civil discourse of ideas. That was the idea put forth when this country was founded.

Tomorrow if Kaepernick sits, he is celebrating all that the flag stands for. If he stands because he is forced to, that is everything that the flag is supposed to protect him from. Yes, I understand the irony in that his protest of the flag is in fact celebrating what the flag stands for, but instead of sending him death threats, useless online petitions or whatever other form of message you choose, understand he is doing this for something he believes in, and try to educate yourself at least a little bit to understand why this is happening and why he feels and thinks this way.

I'll end with this video.

Categorizing musical numbers

Because I'm a sane and rational individual, I have begun categorizing songs from Disney movies, and breaking them down into somewhat of a taxonomy.  With that short introduction, here are the five categories I have come up with, along with some sub categories that also exist within them.  It is important to note that songs can fall in multiple categories.

1.  The Exposition Songs

The most common of all songs in a musical, as most real exposition in a musical is done in song.  When this is NOT the case, the musical is usually pretty bad (I'm looking at you, Rent) and the story is not progressed through the music, making the addition of the songs... not very important.  These songs are categorized by explaining plot points, providing character background, and any other plot important device achieved in song.  This family of songs also has two sub categories - the theme, and the montage.

Theme:  Pretty self explanatory, an exposition song that explains the theme of the story or provides the thematic tune used throughout.  The Muppets is a good example of a recent version of this, as "Life's a Happy Song" is the the background music for most of the movie.  "Fathoms Below" from the Little Mermaid is a good example of a thematic song that sets the table for the movie, sort of explaining what the musical will be about.

Montage:  Once again, self explanatory.  An original song over a montage is extremely common in Disney musicals, as there is usually a large passage of time that occurs in the movie.  These songs don't necessarily explain the plot in their song, but become exposition songs when paired with their visual counterparts.

2.  The Villain Song

This is Disney I'm talking about here, villain's sing.  And it's usually unpleasant.  Sometimes this is an exposition song as well, but it doesn't have to be.  This is usually a song who's sole purpose is to identify the villain and confirm to the audience that "Yep, that's the bad guy."  Ursula's song "Poor Unfortunate Souls" is a great example of this category.

3.  The Love Song

Disney movies have love songs.  They usually don't advance the plot, they're just love songs.  Enjoy them, most of them are pretty good.  "Beauty and the Beast" from Beauty and the Beast is probably Disney's greatest example of this category.

4.  The Gibberish Song

Disney is kind of well known for making songs without real words.  Or, if there are real words, it's impossible to comprehend, or they're presented in a tongue twisting fashion.  The premiere example of this category is Bippidy Boppidy Boo from Cinderella.  If Lewis Carrol had a stroke while writing, that is the song he would create.

5.  The Money Song

A lot of times a song comes up that doesn't really fit these categories, but it's the song heard on the radio, re-released by different artists, or just the one marketed the most.  This song is there to make money for the movie.  Not always the best song in the movie, but for whatever reason it either becomes the most marketed or is the most marketed by intentional design.  "Let it Go" from Frozen is the overkill example of this category.

So there are the five categories of Disney songs.  Listening to the Disney station I created on Pandora for Nate, I am able to assign one of these categories to every song I hear, and so far with little or no argument from the wife about what is what.  To give an example of how the songs in a movie can break down, I'll assign the songs from The Little Mermaid into their appropriate categories.

Fathoms Below - Exposition, theme category.  This song sets up the story, explains the mermaid legend, and even introduces the idea that fisherman are evil.

Part of your World - Exposition song.  This song explains Ariel's desire to be human and how she thinks the human world is different, setting up the plot of the entire movie.

Under the Sea - Money song.  Possible Exposition.  This song is the one every kid loves, the one they sang along to growing up, the one Disney marketed.  And rightfully so.  I say it is also possibly an exposition song, as the purpose of this song is to explain to Ariel why going to the human world is a bad idea.

Unfortunate Souls - Villain song.  Sang by the villain, the song is dark and doesn't exactly advance the story, just talks about her ability as a... contract negotiator?  Sure, let's go with that.

Les Pouissons - Gibberish song.  I know the song is in French and that's a real language, but between the thick accent and the fact his laugh is used to finish a line of rhyme, this is a gibberish song.  Doesn't really do anything other than that.

Kiss the Girl - Love song.  Money Song.  The obligatory Disney love song, it mildly advances the plot, but not by a lot.  This is also a money song, as this was another song successfully marketed independent of the movie.

So there's a breakdown of one Disney classic, you can do the same to all others.  I'm sure there are more categories out there, but this is what I have so far.  Open to debate!

The road to hell is paved with good intentions.

 *Important note - if you're gonna comment on this, PLEASE read the whole thing.*

*It should also be noted that I have never been discriminated against in any way, nor denied service from an institute based on some uncontrollable factor of my person.  Not having that experience probably changes my opinion, even though I will do my damnedest to prevent that, and look at this openly and objectively.*

This is a little late to the party, but I feel necessary to talk about Indiana Senate Bill 101, better known as the Religious Freedom Restoration Act of Indiana, or RFRA.  And in talking about this, I'm pretty sure I'm going to anger everyone reading this in some way, mostly because I have opinions in line with both sides of this bill.

The first thing I think is necessary is some clarification.  There seems to be a mob consensus that this bill legalizes discrimination against the LGBT community.  That is not true.  The core of this law states very simply that religious liberty of individuals and corporations can only be limited by the least restrictive means of furthering a compelling government interest.  What that translates to is unless the government can present a compelling interest or reason, they cannot restrict an idividual or business their right to practice their religious freedom. 

On the surface, that sounds like the first amendment, and would be a very good thing.  In fact, I would wager that if you presented that language to people who loudly oppose this bill (as I do - more on that later) they would be for that.

However, what IS true is that groups wishing to use this law to discriminate against the LGBT community will attempt to do so

Unfortunately, because of other laws in Indiana (or rather, lack of other laws) they will be successful in doing so.  This is because prior to this bill there was no law in Indiana that protected LGBT groups from discrimination.  Businesses in Indiana could already deny service based on sexual orientation.  Nothing was stopping them.

And first angry responses will be to this - I'm kinda okay with that.

I'm a big supporter of the free market, and truly believe that if a business wants to deny service to someone, they should be able to.  For whatever reason.  There used to be signs up in stores that said things like "We reserve the right to refuse service to anyone."  As a capitalist society with a free market, we should allow businesses to practice in whatever manner they please.  A business enacting a policy that is poor for business should not be illegal.  It's simply a poor business decision that the company will pay for, either from lower profits of from complete failure.  But if a company chooses to deny access to any party for whatever reason, they should be allowed to.  I don't necessarily think this is right, or even fair, but it is what I believe.  As long as we live in a capitalist society we as a people should look at businesses in this way.

Several years ago I was a constant figure in the Games Workshop store in Marysville.  That store - and company - try to foster a family friendly environment.  They do this by enacting language rules, telling people to be nice, simple things like that.  However, a change to policy had to be made when one customer was constantly open carrying his fire arm into the store.  This man was doing nothing illegal, and he would tell you that constantly, but the presence of his weapon was making many other patrons of the store uncomfortable, and some didn't want to be there when he was open carrying.  So the store enacted a policy denying open carry patrons to the establishment.

That man, who was doing nothing illegal (I really want to stress that), had made his presence bad business, so the store denied him access until he removed his weapon.  This was a good policy for the store that resulted in a positive for the business.  This was not an attempt to deny this man his second amendment rights, it was simply a policy put in place for the sake of the business.

While the above situation is similar to what businesses will now try to do in Indiana, I do understand why RFRA is bad not just for Indiana, but for the country.  Mostly because good ideals in promoting equality were not on the agenda of the people who supported this bill.

It is also important to know that a national bill was passed in 1993 called the Religious Freedom Restoration Act.  There is a national bill on the books - for over twenty years - with very similar language to what was passed in Indiana.  This was the law under which Hobby Lobby successfully challenged covering birth control for their employees in 2014.  In fact, after the Hobby Lobby decision, ten states have passed individual RFRA bills, making Indiana's situation far from isolated, or unique. 

It is also important to understand that many members of congress who originally signed the 1993 RFRA are horrified at the direction the interpretation has taken, and never foresaw this direction of that bill.  Insert title of column here.

The problem in Indiana's bill though is the same problem that happened in the Hobby Lobby case, and that is simply in stating that corporations are people.  In Indiana SB 101, a person is defined as "a partnership, a limited liability company, a corporation, a company, a firm, a society, a joint-stock company, an unincorporated association," which means that the applications can be used towards businesses and their ability to refuse service to people they deem violating and individuals religious beliefs. 

Indiana Attorney General Greg Zoeller is an outspoken opponent of LGBT equality, and has written many briefs disagreeing with same sex marriage, and appealed the supreme court legalization of same sex marriage in his state.  Zoeller viewed the passage of this bill as a way to fight back against legalization of same sex marriage, meaning one of the state's highest legal figures plans on abusing the broad language of this bill.

When RFRA was signed in Indiana, lobbyists from two groups who loudly oppose same sex marriage, the American Family Institute and the Indiana Family Institute, were invited to attend the private signing of this bill.  When two groups who clearly intend to do exactly with this bill what Governor Pence claims he didn't know could be done with it are invited to attend his signing of said bill, there is clearly an ulterior motive present. 

(Quick side note, the Indiana congress is now trying to change the language in the bill to not make it an LGBT discrimination tool.  These are the same people who voted 40-10 to pass the exact same bill three days before it was signed by Governor Pence.)

And this is why I do loudly denounce this bill.  The lobbyists and congressman who pushed this bill intend to use it as a discriminatory tool.  It is a modern version of a Jim Crow law.  This is institutionalized racism.  Unopposed or unchecked, it is designed to lead to more laws of that nature, and that is sad considering the advances in feelings of this country in regards to LGBT communities. 

...but yet I feel if a business doesn't want to open their doors to anyone who is LGBT, they should be able to do so.  It's a weird tightrope to walk, I know, but that is honestly how I feel.

Super late super quick picks

Nothing of note this week, just quick picks.  Home team in bold

New Orleans(-3) over Carolina - yay!
Tampa Bay (+7) over Cleveland
Arizona(+2.5) over Dallas
Philadelphia (-1.5) over Houston
Kansas City(+8.5) over NY Jets
Jacksonville(+10) over Cincinatti
San Diego(+2) over Miami
Minnesota(pick) over Washington
St. Louis (+10) over San Francisco
Denver (-3) over New England
Oakland (+14) over Seattle
Baltimore(-2) over Pittsburgh
Indianapolis(-3) over NY Giants


Last Week:            6-9
Overall:                  52-63-4

Derailed plans

So I had a plan to write about a bunch of issues with the NCAA and how they handle amateur status, but then my high school had an active shooter on campus, and that kinda trumps... basically everything.  Not all the facts are known yet, but I will relay a very awesome story that has come to light in this dark time, and it is yet another reason why I think sports matters to the intrinsic fabric of our lives.

Oak Harbor, scheduled to play Marysville Pilchuck this Friday night, conceded the game to MP even though it had major playoff seeding implications for both times, effectively giving MP homefield advantage for the playoffs.  This simple gesture was very kind, but it didn't end there.  Oak Harbor then showed up at the vigil for MP tonight.  It was such a huge gesture that I really feel goes beyond sports and can help heal the town - even a little bit - and Lord knows that Marysville can use as much of that as possible.

Here are my NFL picks for this week.  Home team in bold.

Denver(-9) over San Diego - yay!
Detroit(-3.5) over Atlanta - and that's not a typo, a game in London is a home game for nobody.
Kansas City(-7) over St. Louis
Tennessee(+3) over Houston
Minnesota(+2.5) over Tampa Bay
Seattle(-5) over Carolina
Baltimore(-2.5) over Cincinatti
Miami(-6) at Jacksonville
Chicago(+5.5) over New England
Buffalo(+3) over NY Jets
Arizona(-2) over Philadelphia
Oakland(+6.5) over Cleveland
Indianapolis(-3.5) over Pittsburgh
Green Bay (+2) over New Orleans
Dallas(-10) over Washington

Last Week:         4-11 - oof.
Overall:              46-54-4

The Percy Harvin Era

I was going to do something in depth on the lack of oversight in sports on the actions of their players, but then I heard this.

What?!?!?

Seriously, what?

I'm absolutely shocked by this move.  Not as much as the Trent Richardson deal last year, but still shocked.  And Seattle didn't fleece the Jets like the Browns did to Indy either, which also makes it a head scratcher.  I've looked through the list of 2015 free agents to see if there is someone that Seattle could target for next year that they're looking at, and I don't see anyone that their current teams would let walk - unless Denver is unable to hold onto both Wes Welker and Demarius Thomas.  Dez Bryant in Dallas and Randall Cobb are also going to be FA's, but I don't see them leaving their teams.

I'm trying really hard to understand this move.  John Schneider hasn't steered me wrong yet, I mean, a Super Bowl win in year 3 of your complete retool of a team is probably the best turn around in league history, maybe in sports (Note to self - look up the turn around time in Boston for Theo Epstein). 

But I look at what Harvin has done in his time in Seattle.

2013 - 1 catch, 17 yards, 0 TD's
2014 - 5 catchs, 122 yards, 0 TD's, and 11 carries for 92 yards and 1 TD.

Obviously, his best game his entire time in Seattle was in the Super Bowl, where he had 1 catch for 5 yards, 2 carries for 45 yards, and 1 kick return for 87 yards and a very memorable - and back breaking - touchdown.

These numbers do not excite me.

In fact, they're terrible.  Absolutely abysmal.  Getting a mid round pick for those stats is... Fantastic!

Seriously!

This guy is hype!  He has done next to NOTHING in a Seahawk uniform, but everyone wants him because of the potential he has.  His proven ability to change games - in Minnesota anyways - blinds people to what his apparent ability has been this last year and a half.  It could be a system thing, but I know personally I cringe whenever he's hit, because I keep thinking the next hit will get him hurt.  Maybe that risk wasn't worth it.  I have no idea.

I'm still very confused by this deal, and the more I look into it, I wonder why the Jets made this trade.  Not Seattle, but the Jets.  I mean, I don't think it's going to impact Seattle's offense, because lets face it, he wasn't a part of the offense here.  Part me of is worried this will be an Adam Jones-esque trade, where he plays for a VERY long time at a very high level in his new home, but the more I look into his career numbers and injury history, I doubt that very much.  I guess I'm mostly shocked that they traded him after playing in only 8 games (counting the post season) and not trying to get him to work.

Makes me think there is something else going on behind the scenes.  He was very vocal about his displeasure in Minnesota, but I haven't heard as much as a peep out of him in Seattle, so I dunno.  I guess it remains to be seen.

Week 7 picks, home team in bold

New England(-9.5) over NY Jets - oops
Atlanta(+6) over Baltimore
Tennessee(+5.5) over Washington
Seattle(-7) over St. Louis - though Seattle has played bad in St. Louis the past couple years
Cleveland(-5.5) over Jacksonville
Indianapolis(-3) over Cincinatti
Minnesota(+5.5) over Buffalo
Chicago(-3) over Miami
Detroit(-2) over New Orleans
Carolina(+6.5) over Green Bay
San Diego(-4) over Kansas City
Arizona(-3.5) over Oakland
NY Giants(+6.5) over Dallas
Denver(-7) over San Francisco
Houston(+3) over Pittsburgh

Last Week:          7-7-1   
Overall:               42-43-4

Quick week 6

Getting ready to head out for the weekend, so no time for a proper post.  Quick run down of what I've seen in the league, then my picks.

I'm not too sure if the NFL is conspiring against the Seahawks, but two of those Percy Harvin touchdowns that were called back were not penalties.  While a penalty occurs on nearly every play in the NFL (seriously, watch left tackles.  They always jump early) the ones they called either didn't happen or weren't penalties.  Combine that with the leaked memo of the league not scheduling Seattle at home in primetime because the games are blow outs - yet thursday night football is a "good" thing - makes me think that the league may be doing this intentionally.  I'd say this is me questioning the integrity of the league, but I think this last month plus has shown that the league has no integrity, so I'm not too sure what I can question about them.

Dallas doesn't suck.  They are defying every tenet of Jason Garret's coaching philosophy and thriving because of it.  If DeMarco Murray can get his fumbling problem under control and they make him the workhorse the entire year, this team is dangerous.  Until Tony Romo inevitably Romos all over the place.

I still don't think New England is good, but I have nothing to base it on anymore.  I have no idea what is going on in the AFC, it seems like anyone can beat anyone.  Except Jacksonville and Oakland.  They can't beat anyone.

The picks.  Home teams in bold.

Indy(-2.5) over Houston - yay!
Tennessee(-5) over Jacksonville
Tampa Bay(+3) over Baltimore
Denver(-9.5) over NY Jets
Detroit(+2) over Minnesota
New England(-3) over Buffalo
Carolina(+6.5) over Cincinnati
Cleveland(-1) over Pittsburgh
Green Bay(-3) over Miami
San Diego(-7.5) over Oakland
Atlanta(-3) over Chicago
Dallas(+8) over Seattle
Washington(even) over Arizona
NY Giants(+2.5) over Philadelphia
St. Louis(+3) over San Francisco

Last Week         9-5-1
Overall              36-37-3  

Heads up! Plus week 5 picks

This past weekend, the University of Michigan came under scrutiny for allowing Shane Morris to continue to play after "exhibiting concussion like symptoms."  Coach Brady Hoke has been weathering fans calling for him to lose his job all week because of this... and because Michigan is very, very, bad.

And that's the problem here.  If Morris stayed in and led Michigan to a victory, we would still be hearing about this, but, frankly, no one would care.  That's the problem with sports.  Whenever a league, team or coach preaches player safety as their highest priority, I laugh.  Winning is the highest priority.  If player safety happens to allow for winning, then they will follow that protocol. 

Look at what has happened to Robert Griffin in his career in the NFL.  He was thrust onto the field in his rookie year clearly not 100%, but he presented the Washington football team with their best chance to win.  He's still beat up in the Wild Card round of the playoffs, and his knee explodes in a loss to Seattle.  Nobody was decrying the injury during the game, but once Washington lost, it became a massive story in sports - why did he(the coach) keep Griffin in, why did he allow him to keep playing, why did he risk further injury to his superstar quarterback?

Because a coach isn't retained based on the health of their players.  They're retained based on wins and losses.

After Griffin's knee surgeries in the offseason, his projected recovery time was conservatively listed as one year.  So he instead comes back after eight months, doesn't take a single snap in the preseason, but since he represented Washington's best chance to win, he's handed the ball opening weekend on a "healed" knee and played absolutely terrible.  When head coach Mike Shanahan's job was clearly lost, THEN he decided to look out for player health, and that was when he benched Griffin for the remainder of the season for player safety reasons. 

So what does it take to get a team to care about player safety?  Have a lost season and a lame duck coach.  That's the combination needed to get it done.

But wait!  Michigan has that!  So why the hell did Hoke not pull Morris?

Because Hoke still thinks he has his job.

This massive blunder has had Hoke and the University apologizing all week for the "oversight" and "mishandling" of Morris.  I'm really glad smell-o-vision doesn't exist yet, because I can nearly smell the bulls**t  in those answers through my television.  Michigan plays in the third largest stadium in the world.  That is not a typo.  Number three in the ENTIRE WORLD.  It seats almost 110,000 people, and the entire stadium saw Morris stumble around and look greatly confused after taking that hit.  He was wobbling like a frat boy.  And yet, somehow, the entire coaching staff of Michigan didn't notice this.  Of course they saw him wobbling around.  But they didn't think they could win without him.  So they kept him in.

With all the new information coming out about concussions, the frequency at which they occur, and more importantly, the permanent damage that they cause, the fact that not a single person has lost their job for this is sickening.  As far as I'm concerned, leaving a concussed player on the field in today's game is grounds for being charged with reckless endangerment.  But an important thing to remember, is college football often emulates the NFL, and once again, that is where they got this idea from, even in an era of heightened concussion awareness.

In 2011, the Cleveland Browns kept Colt McCoy in the game after he suffered a concussion, and never administered any of the league's concussion protocol on the sideline, even though McCoy lost consciousness on the field, and couldn't remember the play that knocked him out.  Even after claiming that they (the Browns) did not know that McCoy was concussed, in his postgame interview they dimmed the lights because they were hurting McCoy's head.

What?!?!?!

It's not like he was suddenly hung over!  He had a F**KING CONCUSSION!  And still they adamantly claimed they did not know he had suffered a concussion during the game.  Medical personnel attended to him on the field, they helped him walk off the field and still claim he was fine.  This was at the beginning of the NFL's player safety "crusade" and the Heads Up program.  This was allowed to fly under the radar nationally because 1) the NFL was still infallible at this point, and 2) it was the Cleveland Browns. 

Brady Hoke does not have either of those things to hide behind, and he will lose his job this year, but unfortunately, it won't be because of his blatant disregard for the safety of his players.  And from a college coach no less, he's supposed to help mold these kids into adults, not mentally disabled young men.  College coaches go into the homes of their players, and convince their parents that they will be there to look out for the best interest of their kid, and to ensure that they receive everything they need.  In sports, this has always been a lie, and at least now, everyone at Michigan knows that Hoke never meant any of that.

Here are the week 5 picks.  Home team in bold

Green Bay (-8) over Minnesota
Bears (+2.5) over Carolina
Cleveland (+1) over Tennessee
Philadelphia (-7) over St. Louis
Atlanta (+4) over New York Giants
Tampa Bay (+10) over New Orleans
Houston (+6.5) over Dallas
Detroit (-6.5) over Buffalo
Indianapolis (-3.5) over Baltimore
Pittsburgh (-6) over Jacksonville
Arizona (+7.5) over Denver
Kansas City (+5) over San Francisco
San Diego (-6) over New York Jets
Cincinnati (-1) over New England
Seattle (-7) over Washington

After reading my last week's picks, I'm pretty sure I wrote down the wrong pick in more then one situation (like Carolina over Baltimore), but I'll stick with what I wrote.

Last Week:        6-7
Overall:             27-32-2

Week 4 picks

After a rough start, I made some ground last week and am closing in on at least being .500.  Now we have bye weeks, so let's break down what we've learned so far:

Chicago is really good.
Green Bay is not very good.
Dallas isn't as bad as everyone (myself included) thought
Jacksonville is terribad.
So is Miami.
And Cincinnati is amazing.  Like, really, really, really good.

Here are the picks!  Home teams in bold

Washington(-3) over NY Giants.

Whoops.  While the streak of terrible thursday night games is kept alive, the streak of the home team winning is not.  NY looked sharp, and Eli looked good - a rare combo indeed - and Washington looked like, well, what they're supposed to look like with Cousins.  All of Cousins' statistics support that this is the type of QB he is, so I dunno, maybe the din to have him start over RGIII will die down a bit now.

Chicago(+2) over Green Bay

Why the pack are favored here, I do not know.  Green Bay needs this win badly, so they have that going in their favor, but Chicago is simply better then Green Bay.  My only concern with Chicago is their injury situation moving forward.  Losing Tillman for the year, combined with nagging injuries to Marshall and Jeffries is not good.  If Chicago can stay healthy, they are playing like one of the best teams in the NFC.  Green Bay, on the other hand, is not.

Houston(-3) over Buffalo

I still like me the Bills, but they've looked bad at times, and while Houston is on pace to match last years 2-14 mark, I think their defense makes up for them having Ryan Fitzpatrick at quarterback, and with the game being in Houston, I see the Texans getting the W here.

Indy(-7.5) over Tennessee

I'm not a fan of the line, but Tennessee has shown me no reason to think they can even cover this game.  I don't think Indy is great, but I think the Titans are that bad.

Carolina(+3) over Baltimore

Carolina looked terribad against Pittsburgh last week, but Baltimore isn't very good either, and Steve Smith is full of murder for this game.  Seriously, he had a short fuse his entire career, he's going to straight waterboy someone in this game.

Detroit(-2) over New York Jets

I have no faith in anything the Jets do.  Like, at all.  Take this Detroit defensive line against Geno Smith, and then throw in a helping of Reggie Bush and Calvin Johnson on offensive... yeah, this is going to end badly for the Jets.

Pittsburgh(+7.5) over Tampa Bay

This line is high because of their dismantling of Carolina, but Tampa Bay is soooooo bad that it makes sense.  Pitt is being bit badly with the injury bug like Chicago, but they got some very good play from their subs against Carolina, so they might be able to weather it out after all.

Oakland(+3.5) over Miami

No bold for a home team because this game is in London.  Once again, the NFL plays the international s**tbowl in London, which has become such a time honored tradition.  There's a reason they send bad teams there, they need to get butts in seats to watch them play somehow.  I like Miami - I really do - but this weird Tannehill situation I feel is too much of a distraction for a team that showed last year they're not too good at dealing with distractions.  Derek Carr might have a breakout game this week too, I think he's got a good chance of being the future in Oakland.

San Diego(-13) over Jacksonville

Another huge line, but when you've played like the Jags, you get these lines.  San Diego is looking better and better, and the second coming of Philip Rivers appears to be here.  As long as their season doesn't ride on the health of Ryan Matthews (like it has in may years past) they should play pretty well throughout this year, and be able to blow out the teams they're supposed to - like Jacksonville!

On the other side, I'm glad Gus Bradley went to Bortles as early as he did.  You drafted that kid #6 for a reason.  He's looked good in practice and preseason, and he has some exciting young receivers on the field.  Fix that offensive line, and you have a decent offense.

Atlanta(-3) over Minnesota

Minnesota's win over St. Louis is looking more and more like a fluke, and they're not putting up a fight at all - which pisses me off because I truly believe Teddy Bridgewater is the future there, and the team has already given up.  Ugh.  Atlanta's offense looks great, and they should roll over a tired and distracted Vikings team.

Philadelphia(+5) over San Francisco

Two things really quick - I pick against San Fran every week because I don't think they're any good, and second, NO MATTER HOW BAD THEY PLAY THEY ARE STILL FAVORED!  Why?  This makes no sense.  Philly is super explosive, the Niners are not, and even worse, San Fran has shown vulnerability to big plays AND fast offenses.  Add that into the fact they're trying to throw the ball all day with Kaepernick and not run the ball with their surprisingly good two headed monster of a backfield in Gore and Hyde, and you have the recipe for disaster.  And yet, even after all of that, they are STILL FAVORED.  Ugh.

New Orleans (-3) over Dallas

Dallas has not been as bad as people thought they were going to be this year.  The defense has actually looked good, and Jason Garret FINALLY realized running the ball instead of throwing it 50 times with Romo is a better way to play offense.  Seriously, I've been complaining about this for years with Garret.  Back when Wade Phillips was the coach, he was calling the offense when Owens was in town, and they had this (at the time) great tandem at running back with Marion Barber and Julius Jones.  What they did to teams when they ran the ball simply wasn't fair, and yet they still threw the ball more then they ran at almost a 2:1 ratio.  When they hired him as the head coach, I laughed because of that fact, and then everyone was shocked when he did THE EXACT SAME THING HE DID AS AN OFFENSIVE COORDINATOR.  I'm pretty sure the definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.  This year Dallas is playing smart, simple defense, running the ball, and besides week one, protecting the ball.  They're not terrible, but I still don't think they're any good.

The Saints have Drew Brees, and Dallas has corners who pout and storm out of meetings.  That doesn't sound like a good combo for Dallas.

Kansas City(+3) over New England

This pick is more about what I think about the Patriots then it is Kansas City, and New England has simply not looked good this year.  They have a long way to go to get to where they need to be, but I don't think they do it in Kansas City.  The only thing New England has going for them in this game is the fact that Andy Reid is on the opposite sideline, and if this game comes down to one final possession, then New England will win as Reid will inevitably do what Andy Reid does best and show us the worst clock management in football.

Last Week:      8-7-1
Overall:           21-25-2

Week three picks!

I kinda hate talking about football!  I'm mad at myself for loving the game!  But it's like crack!  I can't stop.

I... can't.... stop....

Here are the picks, home team in bold.  Hopefully I'll do better then last week.

Atlanta(-6.5) over Tampa Bay

I'm shocked this line wasn't higher, the only game Tampa has been in was against St. Louis, and they still didn't look good in that one.  Obviously the results seem obvious now, but don't be surprised if Tampa pulls out another 0-16 season, which I think would make them the only team in history to do that twice.

Buffalo(+2) over San Diego

Buffalo has all the karma and mojo in the world going their way, they're not moving to Canada, the best player in Bills history who isn't a murderer is cancer free, and they have exciting, young players.  San Diego is going to be riding high after the win over Seattle, and I think they'll look past Buffalo.  I'll be shocked if Buffalo loses this game.

Dallas(-1.5) over St. Louis

As bad as Dallas was in week one, I thought their defense actually looked pretty good against San Francisco.  They did hold them scoreless in the second half.  St. Louis got stomped at home by the horrible Vikings, and barely beat Tampa Bay.  I expect a bad Dallas team to easily win this one.

Philadelphia(-6) over Washington

I think Cousins fits the Redskins scheme better then Griffin, and when your head coach doesn't seem bothered that the starting QB is out for a while, you know he thinks the same thing.  However, this is the NFC East, and everyone there blows, but I think Philly wins and covers simply because of their crazy speed offense.  I'm not expecting Washington to get 10 sacks again either.

Houston(-1.5) over New York Giants

Bwahahahaha, this Houston defense is going to eat Eli Manning alive.  I know this line is this low because of Ryan Fitzpatrick, but c'mon, this is silly.

Minnesota(+10) over New Orleans

I think the Saints will win here, but their defense is pretty bad, so I don't see them covering. This might be the last we see of Matt Cassel before Teddy Bridgewater comes in and becomes their franchise quarterback.

Seriously, I loved the Bridgewater pick for Minnesota in the draft.  I think he's the real deal, and I think he will be a very good quarterback in the league for many years.  Big fan of Bridgewater.

Cincinnati(-7) over Tennessee

Cincinnati is slowly turning into Seahawks light.  Their defense is playing phenomenally, Dalton is playing smart, and they have a great running game.  They'll dominate in the AFC this season, since the AFC is, well, NFL light.

Cleveland(+2) over Baltimore

Cleveland is 1-1, but they've played great in both those games.  Welcome Baltimore, playing their first road game of the season, and coming to a pretty rabid fanbase.  There will be a few Ray Rice signs in the stands, that's for sure.  I don't see Baltimore playing better then Cleveland here, I'm pretty sure the Browns will win this one straight up.

Green Bay(+2.5) over Detroit

Rodgers is better then Stafford.  Yeah, Megatron is better then, well, everybody, but I don't think the Lions will be able to either stop Rodgers, or keep up with him.  The NFC North is up for the taking - unless Chicago grabs it by the haunches - so I don't really trust any of these teams.  But I do think the Pack is better then Detroit, even in Detroit.

Indianapolis(-7) over Jacksonville

I don't like this line because of how Indianapolis has been playing, but Jacksonville is really bad.  They need to go ahead and start the Blake Bortles era to give the fans something to cheer for.  I expect Indy to win, but I really don't know if they'll cover.

Oakland(+14.5) over New England

Oakland is bad - worse then I thought they'd be - but this is too many points to not take.  New England is going to win this game, but they're not the New England of old either.  I'll take the points here.

Arizona(+3) over San Francisco

San Francisco, coming off of a bad home loss and a weird win over Dallas, heads to the first place(!) Cardinals and are FAVORED?!?!  Yeah, this is one that is simply wrong.  Kaepernick clearly shows he wants to give the other team the ball as much as possible, a problem normally showcased by Carson Palmer on Arizona.  Arizona plays defense the way San Fran wants too, but I just can't see the Niners winning this one on the road.

Seattle(-4.5) over Denver

Seattle is rarely on primetime in Seattle because the league doesn't like how badly they beat their opponents.  Seattle beats the crap out people at the clink.  Denver is no exception.  One thing I am very concerned about in this game is the return of Wes Welker - not for his ability as a receiver, but for his ability to stay on the field.  Welker is becoming more and more concussion prone, and he is fearless across the middle of the field.  That is a bad combo, and with how hard Seattle hits - especially over the middle - I worry for his health.  I like Welker, I wish him the best, but I'm worried something bad will happen to him in this game, and if not on Sunday, then this season.  I hope I'm wrong, but I don't think I am.

Miami(-3.5) over Kansas City

Miami is playing really well.  The loss of Moreno hurts - badly - but Kansas City is without Jamal Charles (I think - he's been listed as a game time decision) and if he doesn't play that really evens out the playing field, and when both teams are without their best backs, I'll go to the home team every time.

Carolina(-3) over Pittsburgh

Pittsburgh is really bad.  Like, really, really, REALLY bad.  And I don't think people realize that.  I think people see the name Pittsburgh and they just assume "Oh, they're always good, they'll continue being good."  Not this year.  It's also starting to look like the pick of Carolina as a team plummeting back to earth after last year is going to be wrong as well.  This is a primetime game with Cam Newton, and I think he'll put on a show.

Bears(+2.5) over New York Jets

The Bears just beat favored San Francisco on the road, and now they go on the road to the much worse New York Jets, and are still underdogs?  They're winning this one, I'm sorry.

Last Week:  5-11
Overall:       13-18-1

What the hell is wrong with Jameis Winston?

With what will probably be the worst week in the history of the NFL over, we're seeing teams (except San Francisco) do the right thing in regards to how they treat their players who have done terrible things.  After Carolina and Minnesota put their respective players on the exempt list (and I really don't know what that is), Arizona Cardinals running back Jonathan Dwyer was charged with a myriad of assault charges stemming from a July incident in his home, and Arizona didn't hesitate and placed him on the exempt list as well.  Sure, it took a massive change in the court of public opinion to cause this quick decision by Arizona, but at least they are doing the right thing now.  It remains to be seen what happens with Ray McDonald in San Francisco, as it is clear that both Jim Harbaugh and San Fran's ownership were only paying lip service to their statements that these domestic violence cases need to be handled harshly.  Yeah, I don't like San Francisco, at all, but seeing them as such big hypocrites and basically spitting in the face of the NFL's biggest scandal in years just makes my hatred of them all the more justified.

But I'm not here today to talk about the NFL, though that wall of text above may beg to differ.

Today, I'm talking about the massive troubles with Jameis Winston, especially in light of everything happening in the NFL today.

Sometime on September 17th, Winston jumped up on a table in the student union building at Florida State and yelled out - I'm quoting here - "Fuck her in the pussy!"  Apparently this is a new internet meme of which I am not familiar with.  Why he decided to do this, I don't know.  While this incident on its own is very stupid, it is by no means a sign of a massive character flaw...

...until you take into account his previous issues, and his reaction to them.

This all starts back in November of 2013, when Winston was accused of sexual assault stemming from a December 2012 incident.  While no charges were filed, massive discrepancies and missteps taken by the Tallahassee Police Department in the investigation were later revealed, and it seems very clear that the police handled this terribly and possibly even looked the other way to help out the star quarterback.

Having plead his innocence throughout the entire investigation, the case was closed on December 5 2013 with no charges filed.  Instead of acting contrite and thankful, Winston went the route of "I told you so" and acted very entitled to this result, preaching his innocence to the world.  It should be noted that even the most rudimentary amount of legal knowledge reveals that no charges being filed means nothing about innocence or guilt.  It simply means the state didn't think they would win in court - or they didn't want to prosecute him.

This issue then faded, seemingly resolved, when Winston then decided it would be a good idea to steal crab from a public market in April of 2014. 

What?

He claimed he "forgot" to pay for them, but there is video of this incident, and it is very clear that he took them intentionally.  He was given an adult civil citation, and again appeared at a press conference where he didn't apologize, tried to rationalize his actions, and smiled a lot.  This is his MO when he gets in trouble.  Hunt down his press conferences and listen to him.  He acts entitled - because he's treated that way - and never takes responsibility for his actions.  Hell, ESPN keeps running an interview with Winston where he talks about how he IS a role model and wants to be one.  He thinks kids should look up to him.  This is the mindset of an entitled kid who has been coddled by his coaches, his team, and his University.

Now this latest incident happens, and with this chain of events, it is very clear that we have a pattern of behavior, and not some isolated incidents.  (By the way, there are other incidents that happened where no charges were filed, like stealing soda from a Burger King)  Florida State has looked at all of these incidents as they occurred, and his total punishment from the University for all of this is....

Three baseball games, and the first half of this upcoming game against Clemson.

That's a great way to get the point across.

Florida State is coddling this guy and refuses to punish him solely based on his football ability.  With everything happening in the NFL right now with player conduct, I find it shocking that a university wouldn't take a hard line... until I thought about it a bit more.

With the Ray Rice/Ray McDonald/Greg Hardy/Adrian Peterson situations, most people have been screaming at the NFL to address these problems, not individual teams.  The same does not happen in the NCAA, because the NCAA is basically owned by the power conferences.  Don't believe me?  Read this and tell me they're not in the pocket of the power conferences.   So the NCAA won't push around any big schools, but they have no problem dropping random sanctions on other players who don't have the power of a strong university behind them.  If Winston played for some other school in Florida, say, FIU, he would not be playing at all right now.  I believe that with every fiber of my being. 

But I'm not writing this to talk about the problems with the NCAA, I'm here writing about Winston.  The fact that he though this latest incident was a good idea on any level is a massive red flag to all 32 NFL teams.  They see this stupid, stupid kid and everything he keeps doing and they say to themselves "Gee, if he does this in college, why would he not do this in the pros with millions of dollars at his disposal?"  Given the state of the NFL's public image currently, I have a hard time seeing teams using a high draft pick on a guy who will more then likely get suspended multiple times by the league.  These incidents are a pattern of behavior, not coincidence.

Football is apparently played.

Today marks the day when I would normally make my picks for the weekend - at least, that was my goal to continue last week.

As I'm sure everyone is aware of now, the news cycle this past week was dominated by the NFL for very non football things.  Not only is the video of Ray Rice abhorrent, it is appearing more then likely that the NFL saw the video released on Monday and still decided on the two game suspension for Rice.  It wasn't until the video was released to the public that they decided to change their decision, and only because they lost public opinion.  As more news pours out regarding the handling of this case, it has created a call for Roger Goodell to step down in light of his handling of this situation and other egregious charges.

This is all known, and mostly agreed upon by sensible people of the world.  Believe it or not, as much as I am not a Goodell fan, the NFL handling this the way they did doesn't start with him.  I present to you the curious case of Leonard Little.

In 1998, Leonard Little was suspended for 8 games.  Since this predated things like TMZ, and hell, the internet news cycle completely, the reason for it got swept under the rug.

Leonard Little killed a woman.

He was convicted of killing Susan Gutweiler while driving drunk.  He was convicted of manslaughter and received 4 years probation.  Less then six months after this conviction, Little was back on the field for the St. Louis Rams, and played another decade in the league.  During that time, he won two NFC championships, was named to the All Pro team, and won a Super Bowl.

He also won the Ed Block Courage Award in 2005.  This isn't the man of the year award, thank god, but it is still a prestigious award given to the player who "exemplifies commitment to the principles of sportsmanship and courage."

Earlier that year he received his second DUI and was sentenced to two years probation.  He was not suspended.

While Goodell definitely handled this entire situation completely wrong in every single sense, this isn't the first time this has happened in this league, it's just that now we're able to actually have all the information on the event in question.  If Leonard Little killed Susan Gutweiler today, things would be very different then they would have in over 15 years ago.  And for those of you who don't know, Goodell was not commissioner of the league when Little did this.

Here are my week 2 picks.  Home Team in Bold

Baltimore (-3) over Pittsburgh
Miami (even) over Buffalo
Washington (-6) over Jacksonville
Tennessee (-3.5) over Dallas
Arizona (-2.5) over NY Giants
Minnesota (+3) over New England
New Orleans (-6.5) over Cleveland
Atlanta (+6) over Cincinnatti
Detroit (+2.5) over Carolina
Tampa Bay (-6) over St. Louis
Seattle (-6) over San Diego
Houston (-3) over Oakland
Green Bay (-8) over NY Jets
Denver (-11.5) over Kansas City
Bears (+7) over San Francisco
Indianapolis (-3) over Philadeplhia



Last week:  8-7-1
Overall:      8-7-1