Bears Overrated?!?!

OK, let me first begin this by saying that I am, as the one or two of you that will from time to time read this blog know, a Bears fan. Let me also state that this is not a post about how what everyone saw yesterday didn't mean anything, or that they are still better than the Chargers, or anything like that. This is an attempt to educate the people out there that think they know something about sports.

Secondly, let me add that I am not against people's opinions. I realize that I am more positive about the Bears than other folks. Of coarse I am, I'm a fan. That is what we do. However, as anyone that knows me can attest, I am a realistic fan. I am not going to try to tell you that you are wrong if you don't think they are as good as I do. I am not going to say you are an idiot for thinking they might not be the best team in the NFC. If that is what you think, fine. I disagree, and I will give you valid points as to why I disagree, but as Chris Berman says, "That's why they play the games"!

Now, the point of this rant is the thought of the Bears being overrated. As I was driving home from my friends house last night after the game, I was listening to sports radio. There was a caller, lets call him "Joe from Jersey" that went on for about 10 minutes about how the Bears are the most "overrated" team in football. He talked about their QB, their losses to New England and Indy last year, and of coarse their loss to the Chargers yesterday.

My response would be this: Joe, do you know what the term overrated means? If not, ask the University of Michigan. What, can't get the Maze and Blue on the phone? OK, let me give you a general definition. It means that a team, for our purposes, has been placed in an elevated status, and then not lived up to this placement. Now I would ask Joe, given this definition, how are the Bears overrated? Let me give some perspective, before Joe gets into a lather.

Last year, from the minute the Arizona game ended in week 6, the Bears were not mentioned among the elite of the NFL anymore, unless you count local Chicago radio and TV people. They were called one of the better teams in the NFC, but I can't think of many "experts" that said they were better than San Diego, Baltimore, New England, or Indy for that matter. This was due in large part to their quarterback, Rex Grossman, and it was deserved. You can not be an elite team when the most important player on your team has a 50-50 shot of being the most important player on the other team too. Now, lets look back at our definition. If no one is saying that they are great, when they aren't great, how are they overrated? What they were was the best team in the NFC. I know this because they went to the Super Bowl from the NFC, and that, stat geeks, is all that really matters. But we'll come back to that.

Lets look at the New England game. They were a 4 point underdog. Wait, let me repeat that, the were a 4 point UNDERDOG. Now, as an underdog, you are supposed to lose. So, when you do lose, how does this make you overrated? You lived up to what was expected. For the record, they were 4 point dogs, and they lost by 4.

OK, now lets return the NFC title and the NFC playoffs. I can honestly say that there were 0, zilch, nada of the experts at ESPN that thought the Bears would go to the Super Bowl. Many of them picked against them in the Seattle game, and all of them, from Mike Golic to Merrel Hodge to Ron Jaworski, picked them to lose to the Saints. Again, I ask, if everyone is saying that you will lose, how are you overrated? Never mind the fact that you actually WON THE F#&*ING GAMES! You were picked to lose. This seems like the exact opposite of our definition.

Now, they of coarse lost the Super Bowl, but again, they were supposed to lose. They were underdogs in Vegas as well as in the eyes of the vast majority of analysts. How do I know, because I am a glutton for punishment and I love to watch as much of this as possible. So again, as above with the Patriots game, when you are supposed to lose, and you do, how is this overrated?

Then finally there is the issue of yesterdays game. Yes they lost. Yes they had 4 turnovers. However, as with the Pats and the Colts, they were supposed to lose. I can think of very few places where I saw them being picked to win. Even Michael Wilbon, a writer for the Washington Post, host of PTI on ESPN, Chicago boy, and unapologetic Chicago sports fan, picked the Chargers to win. See what I am getting at? Again, if you are picked to lose, and you lose, then you did what was expected of you. This doesn't make it ok, but it does mean that you weren't overrated.

Now, if you want to say that the Bears suck, fine. You're wrong, but fine. They are what everyone who has a brain has said, a good team with some serious flaws. Are they in the category with New England, Indy, or San Diego? No. Are they as good as Baltimore? Not sure. Are they better than everyone else in the NFC? Maybe, maybe not. Are one of the best teams in their conference? Yes. Will they make the playoffs? Yes. Can they make the Super Bowl again? Unless the entire defense gets hurt, then yes. They are one of the many teams that are in that second level. They are in their with Dallas, New Orleans, Pittsburgh, Baltimore, Carolina, Seattle, etc. They are a team that is capable of beating any team in the league, while they are also capable of losing to some bad teams. So say that they aren't as good as the best teams, fine. Say they won't go to the Super Bowl, OK. These are statements that I can not definitively say are incorrect. However, you can not, at least correctly, say that they are overrated.

Will this stop Joe from Jersey and those like him? No. These types will continue to spew out all the "knowledge" they have. Most of which will be false, and that is fine. I'll just have to either turn it off, or listen, get pissed, and write a blog to vent and cool off. Ultimately, anger me though it does, this is is one of the things that make sports so great. There are few things that bring out as much passion and opinions as sports. I just hope that people will start using the correct terms and not calling any team that loses overrated.

Football Preview - note: not soccer

Well, John-O decided to give a little nod to the upcoming football season, and sense I have some free time, I will as well. While not as desperate as some people are, seeing as how the Cub are about to make things interesting (Yes, I am serious), football is still king, so lets dance, shall we?

First some general comments, thoughts, and such. Let's first tackle the "surprise" category. I have a few. Two of them are last years Super Bowl teams. Now, I am not too worried about the Bears. They are still stout defensively, and should be at least as good on offense. However, as many people have stated, we need to see what Rexy does before we get too excited. Another thing working in their favor is the weakest division in major league sports.

Then there are the Colts. I am a bit concerned with them. In fact, I think it is going to be quite the struggle to win the division. First off, I think the division as a whole will be better. I think both Jacksonville and Tennessee are legit threats and I think Houston will be improved, if not good. Then there is the defense. This was THE problem for the Colts last year. Now yes, they turned it around in the playoffs, but which D is for real? The one that was there for 4 weeks or the one that was there for 16? Also, they not only added next to nothing, but they lost no less than 4 starters, including 3 of their 4 opening day starters in the secondary. I just am concerned when you lose key players to your biggest question area. We'll see though.

I am also not totally sold on the Chargers. I need to see this again for me to really believe it. I am not doubting that they are a talented team, but they had a dream season from "the other LT" last year, and it always seems that there is a playoff team from the previous season that struggles the next one. They have a new coaching staff, and they are in a very good division. I am not saying they will miss the playoffs, or even not win their division, I am just saying I am not sold.

Lastly, in the negative, are the Cowboys. I just don't get it. Yes they are in a weak division, and yes they made the playoffs last year, but why are people so in love with this team? They have the single biggest distraction in sports, a quarterback that had a terrible end to a surprisingly successful season, they have an iffy defense, and a new coach who has never been successful as the head guy. So why all the love? I just don't get it.

As for surprisingly successful teams, it seems everyone is going with the 49ers, so I will stay away from them and go with Arizona, for what is possibly the third of forth season in a row. Their is a ton of talent and they are no longer being held back by the ineptitude of their head coach. Their offense should be as good as anyone, and their D has too many Pro Bowlers to not be decent.

Now, for predicitions:
AFC East: Patriots - can't see how you can make a case for anyone else. Buffalo is improved and the Jets are solid, but still.
AFC North: Steelers - I think they turn things around this year. They had some injuries last year, and that hurt. Plus, I think Baltimore is too old.
AFC South: Colts - I'll take them, but I think it is a dog fight, especially with them visiting all 3 opponents early on.
AFC West: Chargers - Again, I'll take them, but it is not an easy choice.
Wild Cards: Broncos and Bengals - Cincy is so talented and, theoretically, should have fewer off field issues. I think Jay Cutler will be a star, NOW!

NFC East: Redskins - I know what you're thinking, and yes, this is a bit of a stretch, but they played very well at the end of the season last year, Jason Campbell will start from day 1, and Clinton Portis should be healthy. Plus, i think Dallas, the Giants, and the Eagles are all junk.
NFC North: Bears - this is the biggest lock in football. Terrible division and the best D in the conference.
NFC South: Panthers - Most talented team in the conference. They could easily be the best. If healthy, Steve Smith is the best player in the NFC.
NFC West: Seahawks - This is their last year in the catbird seat. '9ers and Cardinals are coming.
Wild Cards: Saints and 49ers - Saints could easily win their division and the '9ers are the best of whats left.

AFC Playoffs:
Round 1 - Colts over Bengals, and Steelers over Broncos
Round 2 - Chargers over Colts, and Pats over Steelers
Championship - Pats over Chargers

NFC Playoffs:
Round 1 - Saints over Seahawks, and 49ers over Redskins
Round 2 - Bears over 49ers, and Panthers over Saints
Championship - Panthers over Bears

Super Bowl - Panthers over Patriots. That's right, I said it. Partially wishful thinking but also partially due to the fact that the odds on favorite never seems to win.

MVP - Tom Brady
Coach of the Year - Mike Nolan (49ers)
Offensive ROY - Adrian Peterson (Vikings)
Defensive ROY - Laron Landry (Skins)

A New Arena for a New Era

Tonight, I received some interesting, at least to me, information. Apparently, over the past few days, the board of trustees at Indiana University were meeting, in relative secrecy at IPFW, one of their satellite campuses in Gary, Indiana. The meeting was held here, most likely, as to not sound any alarms or draw any attention to the meeting. So what was discussed at this "secret meeting"? The decision to build a new basketball arena at Indiana University, to replace Assembly Hall.

Upon first hearing about this, I was a little surprised, a little disappointed, and a little angry. Assembly Hall is a place that means a lot to me. It is where I saw my first live sporting event. It is the home of my favorite sports team, and where I saw so many games as a student on campus. It had become synonymous with Indiana hoops. In the '70's, '80's, and '90's is was considered one of the loudest, and most difficult places to play in the country. It just seemed wrong, and a little unnecessary to knock it down.

However, upon further thought, I realized that this was not only ok, it was actually a good (not to mention inevitable) turn of events. Assembly Hall, once a jewel of the Big 10, has become one of it's older and smaller venues. It only holds 17 thousand people (compared to the 26 and 24 thousand held by the Kohl Center in Madison, Wisconsin and the Value City Arena in Columbus, Ohio respectively). It is slowly beginning to show its age, and it can no longer hide the fact that of those 17 thousand seats, about 4 thousand of them are terrible places to watch a game.

The arena is, for all intents and purposes, a square and there are about 60 seats in each "corner" where you are literally up against the upper level. The angle of the seats coupled with the closeness to the bottom of the upper level make it nearly impossible to see the entire court. I vividly remember watching a game against Michigan State my last year in which my roommate and I had to move to the tunnel to see because we were almost completely unable to see the game at our end of the floor.

Then there are the seats at the top of the upper level. Rarely, unless it is Purdue, Michigan State, or a team that is contending for the conference title, are many of these seats filled. They are always sold, which allows IU to call the game a "sell out", but you can almost always have your pick of seats up there. The reason? A. the angle is so steep that you often feel like you might fall forward onto the floor. And B. you feel like you are miles away. In this day and age of arenas with "not a bad seat in the house", this is unacceptable. Especially if you want to view yourself as one of the 3 or 4 top programs in college hoops.

Now, weren't all these issues there back in the '80's? Yes, they were. So why not the outcry then? Two words: Bob Knight. Not only would he not allow any changes to the arena, but there was no need. All those seats were filled just by him. For one reason, the product was great. Also, there was always the chance you might see him throw a chair, or break a phone, or something like that. Knight was such a draw that it didn't matter where you played your games. He would've sold out a barn with holes in the roof during a rain storm. However, add together the fact that Coach Knight is gone to the recent struggles the Hoosiers have had, and it is not surprising that attendance has dropped each year since Coach left.

Now, with a new coach and a new athletic director, the Hoosiers are re-building the program. In fact, they are re-building the entire sports program. They are building new baseball and softball fields. They are closing in one end of Memorial Stadium, creating a smaller version of the horseshoe in Ohio State. They are building a brand new basketball practice facility as well as installing new weight equipment throughout the campus. With all these changes, it seems only right that the new Hoosiers hoops team has a new place to play.

The arena will not be finished until at the earliest 2009, and most likely well after that. It should have 20+ thousand seats, and should have far fewer bad tickets. I have little doubt that they will be able to carry over the "old time gym" feel that helps make Assembly Hall so special. After all, one of the single best indoor sports facilities in the country is just up the road in Indianapolis at Conseco Fieldhouse.

I know there will be some closed minded people that will think that this is a travesty, and just helps show everything that is wrong with the world, and all that. To that I say simply this: I would wager that you are the same people that are bitching about how bad the seats are when you are banished to the upper level, or are unfortunate enough to get one of the corner seats. Look, buildings get old. What was good 30 years ago, is not necessarily good today. Look at what is happening in baseball. They recently built a new Busch Stadium in St. Louis, will soon be building a new Fenway Park and a new Yankee Stadium, and I promise (sorry my fellow Cub fans) a new Wrigley Field is on the way. Teams/schools are losing too much money by not having the capacities they should, and many of these older stadiums and parks are just plain un-safe.

Ultimately, I would say this to anyone who wants to complain about this. Get over yourself. If they can build a new Yankee Stadium and a new Fenway Park, then they can build a new Assembly Hall, because comparatively speaking, we aren't even a blip on their radars. But of coarse, that's just my opinion, I could be wrong.

A Kingdom of Conscience

I want to take a moment and talk about something other than sports. My buddy John-O has done some very good film critiques and reviews on here, and I wanted to do something along that line. However, I will not be talking about a new movie, but one that has been out for a couple years now. That movie is Kingdom of Heaven. More precisely, the Director's Cut of Kingdom which you can buy at your local DVD store, and is a completely different movie than what was seen in theatres.

As the 4 of you that may have looked at my blog might have noticed, I have a quote from the film as my little intro line. You may have wondered why I chose this movie. After all, it was widely considered a flop. The most press it received was the scathing attacks on its "political" views and such. To be totally honest with you, I was somewhat disappointed with the theatrical release as well. I am a huge fan of Ridley Scott, and was quite excited to see his next, great, epic action film (after Gladiator of coarse). However, I think this was one reason for my disappointment. I went into this with the wrong hopes, and this was due in large part to the studios marketing of the film.

The studio did not at all like Ridley's original cut of the film. They felt it was too long, too slow, too boring. They wanted another Gladiator. They made Ridley cut over an hour out of the film and marketed it as the summers first big action blockbuster. The problem is, this is not what it is, nor what it was ever meant to be. What the film was supposed to be was a great story about some very interesting characters during a period of the crusades. It was never meant to create the action/adventure buzz that Gladiator did. It was never meant to say who was good and who was evil, or right and wrong during this long, huge battle for Jerusalem. It was meant to be a historical story, with one man's point of view, and a dramatized tale, involving real historical characters, to give people some information about a time period that most know very little about.

I have recently become a huge fan of the History Chanel and was lucky enough to watch several documentaries about the Templar Knights and others from this time period. Having seen these shows and learned the truth, as far as scholars know it, about these men and this time period, I felt that much more prepared to watch and understand Kingdom then when I saw it in the theatres back in 2005.

The directors cut starts out with Ridley explaining the differences between this cut and the theatrical version and why they are so different. He, to the extent he can without being black-balled, rips 20th Century Fox for forcing him to release a movie that was not at all what he set out to make. (On the special features discs there is a feature length documentary about the making of Kingdom from start to finish in which he explains that he thought he had proved his abilities enough to have them trust him, which is why he holds a certain bitterness towards Fox even to this day).

I do not want to give a blow by blow account of the film, so I will more focus on the major differences between the directors cut and the theatrical cut. While the basic arch of Balian, (Orlando Bloom - the lead character) and the other main characters is the same, there are a great deal more details, explanations, and layers given to them and their stories. You learn a great deal more about Balian's past. You learn more about the King's sister, Sibilla (Eva Green) as well as many other main characters.

I don't think I can stress enough how much more information you get in the Director's Cut. One of the things that the theatrical was criticized for was the lack of story flow. It seemed to jump around a lot. There was never a nice flow to it. It always seemed that there were things missing from the story, or from a certain scene. This second version is how it was originally meant to be. The story actually makes sense. You understand why certain characters act certain ways. You understand why a certain moment is important. You understand all that has taken place leading up to the only sure villain, and Sibilla's husband Guy de Lusignan, taking the thrown after the king's death. In fact, this is part of the main sub-story that was removed.

That sub-story is that Sibilla has a son, and by the rightful succession of things in those times, he would take the thrown after the king, King Baldwin who by the way was a leper, passed on. However, he does not for a reason I will let you discover when you watch the Director's Cut. In the theatrical version, Guy is simply given the thrown. You are left wondering why, or even how this happens.

Another main story segment that is left out, or not explained is what really happens to our main characters after all this. In the theatrical version there is simply an end, with what seems like no real rhyme or reason. However, in the Director's Cut, you get much more detail into how things really finished for Balian, Sibilla, Guy and others.

There are also longer battle scenes, although they do not add any new ultra exciting sequences or anything. You see more of the build up to the battles as well as the strategies of the Muslims and the Christians once the battle begins.

You spend more time getting to know King Baldwin and the Muslim leader, Saladin. You begin to understand why they have so much respect for each other as adversary's and leaders. You see their compassion as well as their devotion to their beliefs.

I hope that those of you that saw the original version and didn't like it will be be willing to give it another chance. For those of you that have not seen it at all, I would recommend watching the Director's Cut first, then, if you choose, watching the theatrical to see what I am talking about. I promise you, you will not have the same disappointment that most had when walking out of the theatre. You may even sit back and realize that this was a wonderful movie that did not get it's fair shake because of the short sightedness of some people in suits with very little film knowledge.

Let The Madness Begin!

Ah yes. It's here. The single greatest even in all of sports. For many of us, this coming Thursday and Friday rival Christmas and Thanksgiving as the top two holidays of the year. I for one have not worked or gone to school on the opening Thursday and Friday of the tournament since I was old enough to know what was happening. That, sadly, will change this year, but oh well.

So, yesterday we finally got the brackets and all the guessing as to who was in and who was not is finally over. I will get into what I thought were some terrible errors and omissions by the committee, including what I think is the single worst of all time, later. For now, lets look at who did get in, make a few comments and see how I think things will shake down.

First off let me say that I have not won a pool since I was about 8. I have been very close. One year I didn't miss my second game until the second weekend (and then the wheels just totally fell off). Another year I got everything but one right from the Elite 8 on. That being said, I have been the bridesmaid many times of late, and have resigned myself to doing it again. But, this is one of the most fun things I do all year, so here we go.

Lets first look at some of the more interesting seeding. I was not at all surprised with the four #1's. I know some people still had UCLA as a one, and I think had Kansas or Ohio State lost, they would've been. Some of the more interesting things I saw involved many "power conference" teams getting higher seeds than I thought they deserved.

Maryland as a four seems way high to me. I know they were very hot at the end of the year, but then they lost to Miami in their conference tourney. Also, with the exception of the final week of the regular ACC season, they had been little more than a bubble team. Now they are a 4?

Sticking in the ACC, I thought both Duke and Virginia Tech were higher then they should be. I, for one, thought the ACC was largely average this year and may not have deserved 6 teams. I really think Duke is being seeded on their name more than what they did this year. They lost most of the big games they played including getting rolled in their first round ACC tournament game. I think a 7 or an 8 would've been more correct. Virginia Tech seemed to really tail off at the end of the year. they have some good wins (UNC, @ Duke, @ BC) but couldn't beat an injured NC State team in the ACC tournament.

Another conference I thought got more than they deserved was the Big 10. This hurts, being an IU fan, but I am stunned that both Illinois and Purdue got in. I thought one might, but both was a surprise. No one in the conference won on the road, with the exception of Ohio State, and I just think there were some teams from other conferences that deserved a ticket more than these two.

Now, for how I see things shaking down. I see a lot of upsets. This year, more than most, the top seeds are very flawed. I think there are quite a few higher seeds that are ripe for an upset. Wisconsin at a 2 is a possible quick out. Yes they have Alando Tucker but they struggle to score and are missing one of their best players in Brian Butch. I think both Duke and V Tech are ripe for upsets as well as almost everyone from the Midwest region. I have #4 Maryland, #5 Butler, and #6 Notre Dame all losing in the first round and I have Wisconsin losing in the second round.

As for the power teams I think that Florida and Kansas will be the only #1's to make it to Atlanta. I have Texas beating North Carolina (before losing to Georgetown), Ohio State losing to Tennessee (who only lost to the Buckeyes on a last second 3 from Ron Lewis in Columbus earlier in the year) before Tennessee falls to Texas A&M. Once we get to Atlanta I think the best game will be the rematch between Kansas and Florida (Kansas won early in the year). I see Florida winning this one while Gerogetown has little trouble with Acie Law IV and the Aggies. Florida will then battle Georgetown in what promises to be one of the better title games in recent years.

There you go. I have Florida cutting down the nets again. I know it is near impossible to repeat these days (only Duke has done it since the great UCLA teams) but this team is just too good. That being said, I am no longer shocked by anything that happens in this tournament, and that is what makes it great. George Mason anyone?

Now that we have looked at the good, I want to voice my frustration with the selectioncommittee. Let me first say that I know they have a terribly difficult job. I think there are always teams that should be in or out in each tournament, but for the most part I think they do a good job. Well, this year I think they really messed up.

First off, they seemed to further the stigma that the "BCS" conferences are the most important. This year there were only 6 mid-major, at-large teams invited, down from 8 last year and 12 the year before. Left out were worthy teams such as Drexel, Appalachin State, and Missouri State. This seems especially strange given the amazing story that was George Mason the year before. You would think that the committee would want to capitalize on this and maybe give the benefit of the doubt to a few more of the smaller schools, but I guess not. They even have two mid-majors who people were talking about as "bracket busters" playing each other in the first round (Butler vs. ODU). Are they trying to ensure that the Elite 8, Final 4 and title game are full of power conference teams?

Then there is the amazingly puzzling absence of Syracuse. Now, let me admit from the jump here that I am very biased. After Indiana, Syracuse is one of the few teams that I really follow. I think Jim Boeheim is one of the more under-rated coaches in America which is sad considering his record. Anyways, this team went 10-6 in the Big East which was, statistically, stronger this year than last. Last year they were the 3rd ranked conference according to the RPI and got 8 teams in. This year, they were second and only got 6. They had more teams ranked at the end of the year this year too, but this does not just boil down to the strength of the Big East.

Syracuse has been knocked for not leaving the state of New York until the Big East started. However, they had a stronger pre-season schedule than Stanford, Indiana (I was shocked at this), Maryland, Illinois, Purdue, and Texas Tech, to name a few. All of these teams got in.

Illinois and Purdue finished with 9-7 records in their conferences, neither beating either of the top two teams, Ohio State and Wisconsin. As stated above, Syracuse was 10-6 and had wins over Georgetown (1) and Pittsburgh(1), the top two teams of the Big East. The Orange won a game in their conference tourney, unlike Stanford, Texas Tech and Maryland. They had 4 wins against teams that were ranked at the end of the year which is more than Illinois (1), Purdue(1), Indiana (3), Texas Tech(3), and Stanford(3). To me, if Indiana is a 7 seed, which I think they deserved, and those other 4 teams got into the tournament, then Syracuse is not worse than a 9.

Factor in that they finished the season 8-2 going into their conference tournament, including Georgetown's only loss in its last 16 games and I think you have to agree this was a slight. To me, this is the biggest error of omission in tournament history. But that is just my opinion, I could be wrong (Thank Dennis).

Now that i have griped a bit, let me again say how excited I am for this tournament. I don't know if there will be a George Mason this year, but there should be some absolutely amazing games. It should be lights out fun for the whole family. BTW, for those of you wondering what I see happening for my beloved Hoosiers, I see them beating Gonzaga and then getting crushed by UCLA. However, the last time I foresaw this big of a beating for them, they beat Duke and started their magical run to the final 4. Oh yeah, it was in Atlanta that year too.

Tyring To Set A New Pace(rs)

My buddy John-O and one of his blogging pals, Shane, have both posted excellent thoughts on the current state of Indiana's other pro sports team, the Pacers. You can read those here and here. These excellent posts inspired me to write my own. Having lived in Indy most of my life, and followed the Pacers the rest of it, I feel that it is time for me to also voice my opinion. Plus, I haven't been able to come up with much to write on lately with the NFL being over and all.

What got all this rolling was an article in which Jermaine O'Neal, a former NBA All-Star and the current face of the Pacers, stated that, essentially, either the Pacers contend immediately or he's out. The two posts touch on the leadership ability, or lack-there-of, of O'Neal, his on court talent, and what the Pacers should do going forward. I have a slightly different take.

I, to be honest, am not much of a fan of Jermain O'Neal anymore. When the Pacers first acquired him, I thought it was one of the more inspired acquisitions in the recent history of the team. Here was a kid that, though extremely raw at the time, had an unlimited ceiling. He could score, defend, block shots, he was a great athlete, enjoyed playing in the post, and was a good kid that just wanted the chance he wasn't getting in Portland. Well, he got his shot here, and made the most of it. He quickly emerged as a force in the Eastern conference. He started averaging near 20 points and 10 rebounds every season, and was a fixture on All-Star and All-NBA teams everywhere. Then something happened, and that all changed, as least on the surface. Reggie Miller retired.

As both John-O and Shane point out, Reggie was the unquestioned leader of the Pacers, even when he was not much more than a role player. Well, once he retired, that mantle fell to O'Neal, and while most #2's take this chance and run with it, J.O. did the opposite. He seemed to lose a lot of the desire, heart, and ultimately "game" that had made him a superstar. He began to struggle against lesser players. Seemed to shy away from the big shot. Even seemed to attempt to return to his role as option two giving the reigns to Ron Artest and later Stephen Jackson. In one short year, O'Neal had gone from one of the better power forwards in the league to maybe not the best player on his team.

I, honestly, was not all that surprised by this. I have not been a big O'Neal fan since the 2004 season. In '04 O'Neal had one of his better years statistically. He averaged 20 and 10, along with 3 blocks while shooting near 50% from the floor and near 75% from the foul line en route to finishing third in the MVP voting. The Pacers had the best record in the NBA at 61-21 and seemed poised to make another run to the NBA finals. Well, O'Neal came down with one nagging injury after another throughout the playoffs and was essentially not there in the Eastern Conference finals against Detroit, which the Pacers ultimately lost.

Now, I am not saying he wasn't hurt. I am sure he was. Playing in the post is a tough job. My point is this: great players play hurt when the season is on the line. The two guys that finished ahead of him in the MVP voting, Kevin Garnett and Tim Duncan also a post players, and they seemed to stay healthy enough to play. Garnett was even able to get his team to the Western Conference finals by his sheer will with one of the greatest single game 7's ever (36 pts, 21 rebs, 8 asts, and a game winning 3 at the buzzer).

J.O. however seemed to shy away from the pressure. He seemed to be almost looking for a reason to not have to put the team on his back. That Pacers team was far better than the Pistons, even with Rasheed Wallace. It just seemed that when a big play needed to be made, the Pacers' leader either couldn't, wouldn't, or didn't make it.

That was the last time the Pacers were a relevant team in terms of winning in the NBA. They have, unfortunately, been relevant for other reasons, and I think J.O. is involved here as well. The Pacers have, in the past 3 years been involved in numerous on and off the court scandals including the worst brawl in league history and multiple bar fights. To me, this speaks to the make up of the team.

Now, this is not a soap box for me or anything like that, but in the past, when guys like Reggie, Mark Jackson, Dale Davis, etc. were around, these things wouldn't have happened. So where is J.O. in all of this? First he is saying that if the Pacers trade Artest then maybe they should trade him too. Then he is backing Stephen Jackson and Jamaal Tinsley as good people, great teammates, and close friends.

The Pacers in the last few years have been a reincarnation of the Pat Riley Knicks, and this falls on the coaches and management too. Marginal on court performance, but plenty of off court stuff to write about. To me, this speaks to leadership, as John and Shane have said. O'Neal should've been out if front of all of this stating that this is not how professionals should act, and not giving excuses for his teammates. There should've been closed door meetings where J.O. was letting the rest of the team know that these kinds of things were unacceptable of a team that considers themselves contenders.

Did he do any of this? No. In fact, more times than not, it was other players who were saying anything at all. J.O. was relatively mute on the whole thing. Do you think for a second that Jordan, Bird, Magic, Worthy, etc. would've stayed quite about these incidents, even if the accused players were their friends? Absolutely not.

Now, John-O and Shane both refer to J.O. as a great player, but a bad leader. I think most, smart people would agree with them. I, however, disagree. I think he is a good/very good player and a bad leader. I think he was, at one time, a great player, but that died in 2004. Now, he is not much more, in my opinion, than a weighty salary keeping this team just good enough to lose in the first round of the playoffs every year. Is this good enough Indy? Are you content with getting to, and then losing in, the playoffs every year? I would hope not. If you are then you all should've eased up on Peyton a few years ago.

I completely agree with John-O and Shane's assertions that it might be time for a change. I would've also liked to have seen it earlier in the year. As John-O states, why not put your name in the Greg Oden hat and see what happens. As they both mention, the Pacers currently have a great piece to build around in Danny Granger, who is one of the more unknown yet talented guys in the league (just think Josh Howard but as a better athlete). Even if they didn't get Oden, to me, there is a greater upside in starting the re-building now, and trading O'Neal now to get something for him.

There are 8-10 teams that are much closer to winning a title than the Pacers that would love a solid big man who can score and defend. Look at Chris Webber to the Pistons. He was a guy that was past his best years, but still a very good player and he has turned them into a real force in the East. This is exactly what O'Neal could do. Go somewhere an be option 2,3, or even 4 and make a good team very good or even great.

This, in all of our opinions I think, is the best move for all involved. The trade deadline is right around the corner and the Pacers are currently toiling around in the East's 5th playoff spot. Will Donnie and the boys throw away another first round exit to start the re-building? I doubt it, unfortunately. But, as a guy who would love to see both of his home town teams be great again, I would love to see it.

Jeff Garcia?!?!? Really?!?!?!

OK, I touched on it a few posts ago, but now it appears that the possibility of Jeff Garcia to the Bears is, at worst, a 50-50 shot. At first I was mortified by this. My first thought was that it would be the crazy, over-the-top people that only listen to the guys on Around the Horn that thought this was a smart move. However, after I let the thought sink in a bit, and after a chat with a good friend of mine, I may be willing to change my stance on this. At least I am not quite as opposed to it as I was yesterday.

The easiest way to discuss this is essentially by starting with the statements my friend made. I will then state my response, with some more verbiage added of coarse. This may seem rambled, but it will ultimately make sense.

The first issue dealt with the age. Obviously Rex is a lot younger than Jeff Garcia. My buddy stated that he would rather go with the young guy than the old guy, all things being equal. Now, for 25 of the 32 teams in the league, I would totally agree. I always hate it when I see the Minnesota Vikings, the Washington Redskins, etc. go with the Brad Johnsons or Mark Brunnells of the world.

My view of this changes if you are one of the 6 or 7 teams that can conceivably contend for a title. If that is the case, I think that you have to have a different frame of mind. I don't think you can necessarily wait around for a young guy to "get it" because the window of time that you can win a Super Bowl is so small. Do you miss out on your shot at a title, or do you go out and get the veteran for a shot to win now. My contention was that I don't want to waste this team by waiting for Rex to flip the switch. He really did not get any better, decision wise, through out the season. He is so physically talented that he is going to make plays, but, even in the playoff games, he continually made mistake after mistake.

You look at the divisional game against Seattle. Rex's first pass was a deep post route to Rasheed Davis. This ball should've been intercepted. The ball went directly through Jordan Babinoux's hands, hitting both of them on the way. I think the Bears saw this and instantly started to tighten the reigns on Rex. He was allowed to make very few plays the rest of the game.

In the NFC title game, against New Orleans, Rex was again not allowed to go down the field very much, especially early. Now, obviously the weather had a little to do with this, but I think this was by design. On the one drive that Rex supporters will bring up, the touchdown was a bit mis-leading. This ball was just hing up in the air, for anyone to get. It just so happened that the defensive back, Fred Thomas, was one of the worst corners in the league this year. He turned one way, then back the other and still had a shot for an easy pick, that he of coarse missed. The ball then fell into Bernard Berrian's hands for the score.

Finally, in the Super Bowl, the two INT's Rex threw late in the game were just inexcusable. The first was just thrown up, without looking to see where his receiver was. The second came out of his hand wrong, due to the weather. The problem with this excuse was that the weather did not hinder Peyton Manning at all.

Now, do young quarterbacks make mistakes? Of coarse. However, most of them would have showed some signs of improvement. Maybe they play a little shaky early, but by the end of the year, they have at least cut down on the mistakes. Rex seemed to have learned nothing. He was doing the same things in January that he was in November.

Jeff Gracia is a veteran guy, who for the large part of his career, has made few mistakes, and headed some very productive offenses. Did he have his problems in Cleveland and Detroit? Yes, but I would ask how much of that was due to the lack of talent around him. Has anyone, in the recent past, won in either of those cities? The answer is, or coarse, no. Now, was Jeff great on these teams? Not at all. However, with talent around him, this guy has been successful.

What Jeff Garcia is is a savvy, veteran quarterback who completely turned the season around for the Eagles last year. He makes very few mistakes. He is, even at this age, dramatically more mobile than Grossman. He has larger hands than Rex, which should help on the super tricky center-QB exchange thing. He has a strong enough arm to make an offense work. He can read defenses. Is he a long term fix? Absolutely not. He may only work for a year or two. However, isn't it worth the "rental" of a veteran if it works?

Now, another thing we discussed was what if he makes the same mistakes Rex does? Well, I would contend then that you are no worse off. The rest of this team was good enough to win their division and make the Super Bowl, with minimal, NEEDED, contribution from Rex. He had some great games early, but they were in 20 point blow outs. In close game, did he make any of the key plays? I would contend no.

I would contend that you owe it to yourselves, to your players, and to your fans to try to fix issues with your team. Is Rex an issue with this team? Most definitely. Can he fix it? Maybe. My thing is that he showed little to no improvement. He's the same guy today that he was at Florida. He is exceptionally talented. He makes throws that only 3 or 4 other guys could. The problem is that he makes mistakes that some college kids wouldn't be making.

Now, yes, I know Rex won 15 games this season. But I would ask all you Bears fans: does that matter at all right now? He was one of the main reasons for the loss in Super Bowl XLI. Had he improved late in the year, the play calling might not have been so conservative. If he could've made another play or two, maybe the defense is more rested and would've played better. Maybe not. All I am saying is that he was more of a hindrance than a help in that game.

Ultimately, am I saying we should move on this and try to get Garcia? Not necessarily. What I am saying is that I am not totally against this anymore. Rex has given me no reason to think that next year will be any better, and I do not want to see this team get broken up a few years down the road with nothing more than a Super Bowl loss and a few division titles to show for it. I want a title and if Jeff Garcia gives the Bears a better shot at it, then I am all for it.

Let's Talk Some College Hoops

OK, I am in a college basketball mood, but don't really have anything specific to talk about so I think I'll toss out some random thoughts, and some mid-season predicitons. I am rarely right with these things, but they are fun, so let's get to it.

Lets go with the biggie right out of the box. If I were going to pick a final 4 right now, this is how it would go:
1. Florida - I do not know how anyone can not pencil these guys into the final four. Not only are they the defending champs but they are currently number 1, they returned all five starters from last years championship team, they are dominating the SEC, and they seem to have a bit of a chip on their shoulders. My guess is that they are a little pissed that so many people picked North Carolina or Ohio State in their pre-season polls. I know how difficult it is to repeat, but a big part of that is that it is so rare that teams return much of their team, let alone the entire starting line-up. The nice thing about this team is that they are taking their frustrations out on their opponents. They killed a Tennessee team that beat them twice last year. They beat Ohio State and Greg Oden by 20 points, and they haven't lost since a close game in Lawrence, Kansas against the Jay Hawks. All in all, I think the Gators are the best team in the country, and they are my pick at this point.
2. North Carolina - This team is sick talented. They were awesome last year and they only lost one real contributor, David Noel. Then, they bring in the best recruiting class this side of Columbus, and here is the crazy thing, the vets and the rooks are playing well together. Tyler Hansbrough is still the team leader, but he has a lot of help. Senior wing Reyshawn Terry seems to be adjusting well to his new role as instant offense and leadership off the bench after finishing second on the team in scoring last year. An extremely talented trio of freshmen, Brandon Wright, Ty Lawson, and Wayne Ellington have played as advertised so far, and continue to get better every week. This team still runs up and down the floor, and coach Roy Williams seems to have them all buying into his defensive scheme. They are deep, talented, and should be very hard to beat come March.
3. Wisconsin - This team boasts the probable player of the year in Alando Tucker, a rotation of 4 players 6-10 or taller, and one of the best pure shooters in the conference in Chris Rock look alike Kammron Taylor. They play stifling defense, led by Big 10 defensive player of the year candidate Marcus Landry, and their flex offense is run as precisely as a Peyton Manning 80 yard touchdown drive. This team may not be as talented as many other but they are experienced, big, deep, and led by a senior who is determined to remind people that there is some good basketball played in the upper Mid-West.
4. Ohio State - Now, I will admit here that this is somewhat of a biased opinion from a transplanted Big 10 guy. Also, I haven't seen enough of UCLA to really know what they are. However, I do feel that Ohio State is one of the 4-5 best teams in the country, and should be even better in a month. Greg Oden seems to finally be growing into the gigantic expectations people had of him before the season. Also, veteran shooters Ron Lewis and Jamar Butler seem to be settling into the idea of having so much more talent around them than in years past. Freshmen phenoms Mike Conley, Jr. and Daequan Cook have been as good as advertised and the Buckeye bench is deep, talented, and adept on both ends of the floor. Coach Thad Mota likes to play an up tempo style that is fueled by their defense. With Oden inside blocking shots, and Conley causing havoc on the perimeter, they are very hard to score against.

Some other teams to keep an eye on are Texas A&M, Kansas, UCLA, Indiana, Southern Illinois and Marquette.

My mid-season All American team would be
G - Acie Law, Jr., Texas A&M - should be Big 12 player of the year, but it will probably be Kevin Durant. Law is leading the Aggies in scoring, is their best defender, and hits the big shots when they need to be hit.
G - AJ Graves, Butler - there is no way he'll be here nationally, but this is my blog, so I'll put him here. he's not the sexy pick, but all he has done is beat Indiana, Gonzaga and Tennessee on the way to the Pre-Season NIT title and MVP award. He's the leading scorer on one of the best stories in the country (ranked in the top 10 nationally when they were picked 6th in their conference).
F - Kevin Durant, Texas - what this freshman is doing is nothing short of ridiculous. He is averging 25 and 12 over all and a remarkable 31 and 13 in the Big 12. The only problem with Durant is that he doesn't seem to really be making his team much better. They are still losing many of these games when he has great numbers. Still an amazing talent though.
F - Alando Tucker, Wisconsin - He should win the national POY award, and probably will. He is a senior who is playing his best basketball this year. He is second in the Big 10 in scoring and leads his team in steals, rebounds and blocks while being the guy that other teams scheme against. Also, plays his best in their biggest games.
C - Tyler Hansborough, North Carolina - it wouldn't surprise me if Greg Oden is here when it is all said and done, and that isn't necessarily wrong, but I give the edge to Tyler. He is leading his team scoring and rebounding while taking about 6 fewer shots this year than last with the influx of young talent on the Heels. Also, like Tucker, seems to play his best when it matters the most.


We can't talk only about the great in this little blog. There are many teams out there that are not living up to their pre-season billing. Ironically, three of the bigger disappointments come from the SEC. They are LSU, Alabama, and Tennessee. LSU and Alabama were both pre-season top 10 while Tennessee was also ranked early on. Duke has also been a disappointment to many, but not me. I think they were ranked on their name, not on their actual roster. This team lost so much from last year that it is no real shock that they are struggling. What is a shock, although it probably shouldn't be, is that they are still ranked so high. Arizona, Michigan State, Gonzaga, Syracuse, and UConn are also teams that were ranked in the top 15 in the pre-season and currently find themselves on the outside looking in of the polls. Many of these teams will still make the dance, and their talent levels mean that they are still going to be tough outs, but people might have believed the hype a little too much early on.


Finally, I will leave you with how I think it will all play out, at least right now. I think that the four teams I mentioned above: Florida, UNC, Wisconsin, and Ohio State will meet in Atlanta. I think you will see a final match-up of Florida vs. Wisconsin and I think the Badgers will shock everyone and cut the nets down. I know earlier on I said that Florida was my pick, but again, I am a biased Big 10 homer, and I am a little drunk right now. But hey, I can dream, can't I?

OK, So Now What?

Well it's here. The time that as a Bears fan I have been trying to avoid for the last day and a half. The time when I play General Manager and bore you all with my thoughts on what happened, and where Chicago goes from here. Is anyone of any importance going to read this, or care what I have to say? NO. That being said, I'm still gonna do it, because that is the beauty of having my own blog.


OK, lets start with the obvious, and that is Rex. My thoughts on Rex are very similar to many, logical Bears fan's. He is a young quarterback. Yes, he was totally outplayed by Peyton, but really, shouldn't he have been? Is there anyone in the world that would say that they are at all close talent-wise? Of coarse not. Now, that being said, am I giving Rex a free pass on this? Absolutely not. I have been a staunch supporter of Rex. You can ask anyone who has had a conversation with me, and they will tell you that I am almost irritating in my defense of Rex. Well, now I am having to take a long look in the mirror and ask myself the important question. Can we win with Rex? Here is the answer: I don't know.

Physically, Rex is incredibly talented. He has as big an arm as anyone in the league and can make throws that only 3 or 4 other guys can make. Now, mentally, Rex is all over the map. He doesn't seem to understand the nuances of the position. I know he is young (he has now played essentially one full season) and there were signs of greatness. Still, I wonder. Anyone who follows sports knows that there is a window of time that teams can challenge for titles. That being said, do you want to hang your hopes on Rex's shoulders? Should he get better? Sure. Will he? Who knows.

Here is what I think will happen. First off, this team did go 15-4 and made the Super Bowl with Rex. Also, how many people thought the Bears would win this game? Not many, and they shouldn't have. In games like this, the quarterback is the most important position. It usually doesn't matter if you are better defensively and in special teams if the difference at quarterback is so large. That was the case here, although I am not so sure that the Bears D was better here, but that doesn't change that Peyton should've won this game.

Now, all that being said, Rex will go into next season as the starter, and he should. He has earned that. Now, after that, all bets are off. Will he keep his job? Who knows. Also, keep in mind that he is a free agent after next season. How much better does he need to play to next year to deserve an extension? Are there that many AVAILABLE quarterbacks out there that rational Bears fans would rather have than Rex? Oh yeah, and before you even inch towards me with Jeff Garcia, let me say this. All the "experts" totally wrote him off while he was stinking it up in Detroit and Cleveland. Why is he the answer now?

Now, if there was someone out there that was obviously better, fine make the move. People are going to call for Donovan McNabb. This makes a little sense since he is from Chicago and is very good when healthy, but he has had 1 healthy season in the past 5. Do you want to hang your hopes on a guys with this track record for injuries? I don't know. Is there someone out there in college that could step in and help now and could, realistically, be acquired? No.

So, this is what you have. Rex is the best option. He is better physically than Griese, Gracia, etc. and deserves the chance to learn and improve. Now, if there is minimal improvement next year, then I doubt you'll see him get an extension. It would not surprise me to see them spend a middle round pick on a QB in this draft to hedge their bets. Either way, Bears fans, we will have another year of Rex. Lets just wait and see what happens.

Now, a moment about the great, vaunted Bears defense. They were horrible. Our great linebackers were totally neutralized. The D-line was rarely able to create any kind of pressure. The secondary was shredded by Manning. They missed tackles. They where in the wrong places at the wrong times. They were flat our beat. There were multiple times that the Colts had a 3rd and 6 or more and every time, every time, the Colts got the first. And yes, they were on the field a lot, but that was partially due to their inability to get off the field. So, any discussion of BLAME must also include the defense.

I, myself, place most of the blame on the coaches, namely offensive coordinator Ron Turner. It was common knowledge that the best way for the Bears to win was for them to run the ball, control the clock, and minimize the plays Rex needed to make. Well, even with a 55 yard run in the first quarter, Thomas Jones had only 15 carries. 15 carries! In a deluge, the running game was almost totally forgotten. Then there was the plays called for Rex. Is it any surprise that he struggled when every pass play called for him early on was an underneath route? He was never given any chance to get into a rhythm. Now, if you are running the ball down they opponents throat, I have no problem with this. However, you are calling plays as though you need as much production from the passing game as from the running game. If that is the case, then LET HIM PLAY! If you don't give him a chance to succeed, you can't be shocked when he fails. Now, let me say, I love Ron Turner. I think he is a great coordinator, but he hamstrung his offense in this game, and it really, really hurt their chances to win.

OK, there they are. My thoughts on the game, who you blame, and what to do with Rex. Am I right? Who knows. They're my opinions. Feel free to agree or disagree. They are what they are. Ultimately, I don't think any of this mattered. I don't think there was anything the Bears could've done to walk off of that field with the trophy. Peyton was not going to be denied, no matter what Chicago did.

Scoot Out!

...And All Is Right With The World

Ah yes, it seems that, for at least one night, things worked out in the right way. I am speaking, of coarse, of the Super Bowl. As a Bears and Colts fan, I was in the enviable position of being able to sit back and truly enjoy this game. Looking back, however, I think I might have rather it been a Colts vs. anyone else game so I could have rooted to my full potential. In this current state, I was hoping for a good game for both teams, and ultimately a Colts victory. Either way, I knew that one of my teams would win, but I missed out on the sheer joy of winning when you could've lost. All in all though, I'll take 'em any way I can get 'em.

The game started out with a bang. Devin Hester, as he is prone to do, burned the Colts suspect return defense for the first opening kick return TD in Super Bowl history. You could actually see it happen. He made one cut, and then was through the first line. After that, it was a done deal. What did this mean, well, ultimately nothing. It turned out to mean exactly as much as the Ohio State touchdown on the opening kick of the college championship game (I wonder how many times both title games have started that way). Both teams started slowly offensively. Peyton threw a pick, which was on 3rd and 12 and really not much worse than a punt, and the Bears struggled to move the ball on their first possession.

The Colts then got on the board 2 possessions later with a 57 yard bomb to Reggie Wayne, who was wide, WIDE open. The Bears chose to blitz, and Peyton evaded it, as he has all year. He then saw that corner Charles Tillman had turned Wayne loose on a go rout, as he is supposed to in the cover 2, assuming that their would be safety help deep. Unfortunately, safety Daniel Manning had bit on the play fake and moved in to cover Dallas Clark. By the time the ball got to Wayne, there was noone within 15 yards of him. He walked in for the score. At this point, there were 2 touchdowns, both on mistakes by the other team, and both by guys from the University of Miami on their return home. The rain then started to really fall, which may have caused Hunter Smith to bobble the hold on the extra point, keeping the Bears in the lead.

Later in the quarter, after a Joseph Addai fumbled hand off that Alex Brown almost took out of Peyton's hand, the Bears embarked on a 4 play, 62 yard touchdown drive. This drive was highlited by a 55 yard run by Thomas Jones on the first play and was capped by a Rex Grossman fast ball to Muhsin Mohammed in the end zone. Little did Bears fans know that this was basically the last thing they had to root for. The first quarter ended with the score 14-6, Bears, with a total of 3 turnovers, 4 busted plays, and one botched extra point try. Not exactly the way old Vince Lombardi drew it up.

From the start of the second quarter on, the Colts dominated all facets of the game. They could pass or run pretty much at will against a Bears D that seemed to have righted the ship against New Orleans. The Colts new and improved D lived up to its billing after the suspect first quarter and totally shut down the Bears offense, with the possible exception of Jones who finished with 100 yards (all be it in large part to the 55 yard run in the first).

The final 3 quarters looked like a clinic by the Colts offense. They mixed up their plays. Peyton seemed to always call the right play or formation, and the Bears seemed to have no idea what was coming. Had the Bears not come up with some key stops in the red zone, and Adam Vinatieri not missed a chip shot field goal (guess it's harder when the game isn't on the line) the half time score would've been much worse than the 16-14 that it was.

In the second half, things continued in the same vain. The game was ultimately decided in true Rex fashion as on back to back possessions he threw INT's, one for a TD. After that, the Bears were dead. Rex's final line - 20/28 for 165 yards, 1 TD, 2 INT's, 2 fumbled snaps (one lost to the Colts) and one trip by the terf (or grass in this case) monster. Not what Bears fans were hoping for.

Peyton was "workman-like" if not spectacular. He was 25/38 for 267, 1 TD, and 1 INT. Not his greatest game, but it was all that was needed. The real story was the running game. Dominic Rhodes had 113 yards on 21 carries and Addai added 77 on 19 carries. Addai also had 10 receptions for 66 yards. Combined the running backs accounted for 264 of the Colts 430 total yards. If there was a case for anyone other than Peyton to be the game's MVP, it would've been a co-MVP for these two.

Peyton, of coarse, won the MVP. I think this was as much due to him being Peyton as anything, but in the absence of a true break out star, I think they made the right decision. What I found most interesting was that Peyton seemed to never "freak out", even after the early INT. The Peyton of the past would've started pressing and made more mistakes. This Peyton, just like in the AFC title game, took what was there calmly, and seemed to know things would work out. That to me is the real sign of his improvement. He has always had the great stats, and was always the most cerebral QB in the league. However, that big brain seemed to get him into trouble in big games in the past. This season, from day one, he seemed to stop over-thinking things, and just play the game.

I really think one of the things that helped the Colts this year was the fact that they played so many close games. Even the ones they lost, like at Tennessee gave them valuable lessons on what to do and not do in close games. Last year they blew everyone out and I think that ultimately killed them against Pittsburgh. They didn't know how to play a close game, let alone come back in one. This year, they seemed to almost thrive on the adversity of a close game. Everyone seemed to pick their games up a notch late, when it mattered most.

I also think this Colts team was exactly that, a team. Yes they are still stars, on both sides of the ball, but this group seemed to genuinely care about each other. It was really about winning, not just putting up sick stats. I also think the adversity late in the season only solidified this "team" mantra going into the playoffs, making them all the more difficult for opponents.

All in all, I think the better team won this game. Honestly, I think Rex could've had a fine game and it would not have mattered. Before the 2 INT's, his QB rating was over 100 and his completion percentage for the game was a respectable 74%, and it still was obvious that the Colts were in control. This was about Peyton and the Colts, and nothing the Bears could do was going to change that.

No matter how it would've gone, Peyton would've made the plays necessary to win this game. It ultimately came down to the fact that he was not going to be denied. I think he knew that there was no guarantee of a return trip, so he had better take advantage of this chance while it was here. Now he can join the likes of Favre, Montana, Elway, Brady, Young, etc. as great QB's with rings and leave behind Kelly, Marino, and Esiason that so many "experts" thought he would forever be associated with.

I'm sure over the next few days we will start to see these same "experts" talk as though they always knew Peyton would get his championship, and that they were one of the few that already included him in the "winners club". They will also be quick to call out a return trip for Indy next year.

I would not be so quick here. As my buddy John so insightfully mentioned, the Colts are probably going to lose at least one of the duo of Cato June and Dwight Freeney, if not both. What does this do to a unit that is already a question mark? Also, where do the Colts use their draft picks this year? Do they finally realize that adding more offensive weapons is not the way to go? We'll have to wait and see. Does Tony Dungy retire now that he has his ring having said in the past that he didn't want to coach past the age of 50 (he's 51 by the way)? I honestly believe that there is a better shot of Chicago returning to the Super Bowl than Indy, and that is not even taking into account the strength of the AFC versus the NFC.

However, none of that matters right now, although I'm sure Bill Polian is already thinking about it. Right now, all that matters is that the quest is complete. Peyton, Dungy, Marvin, etc. have their ring. Indy has it's championship. And I have my first in 7 years, and yes, that does matter.

For The Glory Of Old IU

OK, I am going to take a few minutes from my usual ranting about football and touch on a subject that will no doubt dominate my blog as soon as that game on Feb. 4th comes and goes. That is the Indiana Hoosier basketball team. To me, the Hoosiers are one of the more surprising teams this season, and are going to be a very dangerous team come March.

This is the first season of the Kelvin Sampson era. Many times, when a new coach comes in, there is a transition season or two. Many times, the coach struggles to win with the guys that the previous coach has brought in. That being the case, I was going into this season not really expecting much of anything. I was hoping we would make the tournament. A 20 win season would be great. All in all, my expectations for this year were quite low. This team has been more than I could've ever hoped for. A 20 win season and a trip to the dance seem to be all but locks. Now, the only question is how far will they go in March?

They are currently 14-5 overall, and 4-2 in the Big 10. They entered this week ranked 24th in the country, which marked the first time they were in either of the top 25 polls. They also have the third best record in conference.

Their 5 losses are all on the road, and are all to teams that are either ranked, or will be in the tournament come March (Butler in Indianapolis, @ Duke, @ Kentucky, @ Ohio State, and @ Illinois). Also keep in mind that these 5 losses are by a total of 28 points. They have a solid road win in Connecticut and have beaten probable tournament teams Michigan State, Southern Illinois, and Purdue at home. So far, they are doing what they are supposed to do. They are winning at home, usually easily, and they are playing very tough on the road.

The really scary thing is that this team is still learning how to play with each other. Also, Sampson is still figuring out his rotation. They are third in the conference in scoring. Forth in scoring defense. They are third in field goal %, second in free throw %, and tied for forth in 3 pt. field gaol %. As the team gels throughout the rest of the season, they will only get better and better.

Sampson seems to be leaning towards a starting five of DJ White, Rod Wilmont, Earl Calloway, Armon Bassett, and Lance Stemler. He then has AJ Ratliff, Joey Shaw, Mike White, Errek Suhr, and Xavier Keeling coming off the bench. The team has scorers at every position in the starting rotation and their bench players can fill it up as well. The key to this team however is Sampson 's staple, and that is defense.

You watch this team play and they make it so hard for the other team to score. They all hustle, they rotate well, and they really seem to enjoy playing defense. That is the key in my opinion. For a team to really be a great defensive team, they need to enjoy playing on that side of the ball. Rod Wilmont has an outside shot at being the conference defensive player of the year. DJ White is in the top five in rebounding and blocks, and the team is in the top 3 in steals and blocks. What does this mean? It means that come March, teams they play against are going to have to play a great game to advance against the Hoosiers.

Next year, they will lose Suhr, Calloway, and Wilmont to graduation and could lose DJ White to the NBA. However, they have a top 5 class coming in highlighted by Eric Gordon, one of the top two players coming into the NCAA's next year. What does this mean? It means that the program has already turned the corner. We will make the Sweet 16 this year I believe, at least, and we will be a top 10 pre-season team next year. If someone had told me before this season that the transition would be this quick, I would've laughed. However, it appears that it is going to be this quick, and all of Hoosier nation can just sit back and enjoy the ride.

The Real Monster Of The Current Midway

Many people, myself included, were calling this years Bears defenses one of the best in recent memory, if not ever, earlier this season. They were killing people. They were causing turnovers. They were stopping the run. They were stopping the pass. They were pressuring the quarterback. They were keeping opponents out of the end zone. They were dominant. They were everything the Ravens were at the end of the season. Then, in week 6, things started to go down hill.

They started with an injury to Pro Bowl safety Mike Brown. Now, Colts fans will completely understand how important Brown was to the Bears defense since he is everything that Bob Sanders is to the Indy defense. Brown is that guy that does everything well. He is a big hitter. He can play the run. He is good/great in coverage. He makes big plays, and most importantly, he understands where he is supposed to be at all times. That is why these types of guys, and Ed Reed is in this group as well, are always around the ball. They are great athletes, but more than that, they understand their job and their responsibilities. Well, even with an important player like Mike Brown injured and out for the season, the Bears were no more than a step behind where they were prior to his injury.

Then, their defense took another shot, and it changed everything, almost over night. In the December 3rd game against the Minnesota Vikings, Bears defensive tackle Tommie Harris went down with what was thought to be nothing more than a twisted ankle. He went out for a few plays, even a series or two, then he came back, for one play. After that play, he was on his back again and had to be helped to the bench. He was out for the year after that. Not with the ankle, but with a sever hamstring injury that was not noticed until after the fact. From this point on, the once dominant Bears defense was giving up points like teams in the bottom half of the league.

They gave up 31 to Tampa, they gave up 26 to Green Bay. They struggled against the run. They had to blitz more which hurt their coverage ability. They still got turnovers, but not in the high numbers they had been. All in all, they looked like a totally different defense, and this was all due to Tommie Harris.

How is this one guy this important? How is he more important than the Bear's Pro Bowl linebackers Brian Urlacher and Lance Briggs. How is he more important that great corners Charles Tillman and Nathan Vasher (who both were also banged up late by the way). He is more important because he is the guy that really makes Lovie Smith's cover 2 work.

My buddy John talked about his concerns on the cover 2 in a blog on his site here. He talks about his concerns in respect to the cover 2 that the Colts run, and I think he was dead on. What made the Bears' version of this defense so much better than the Colts' is Tommie Harris. What does he do that makes them so much better than Indy? Well, I am glad you asked.

First off, he is a great pass rushing tackle, just ask Matt Hasselbeck. He is constantly getting pressure on the quarterback. He is often double teamed or schemed against, and he still constantly gets into the backfield. This is not only important for his stats, but also makes the other Bear defensive linemen worlds better. Why? Because the other team has to do so much to stop Harris, that the Alex Browns and Adewale Ogunleyes of the world can walk to the quarterback. This means that they create a great deal of pressure with out having to blitz and bring extra people. They can leave the other 7 guys on the defense back in coverage. This is one of the reasons they caused so many turnovers earlier in the year. The other 7 guys could fly around to the ball and get INT's or rip the ball away from offensive players. This allows the cover 2 to really operate how it should.

The second thing that Harris does that makes the Bears' defense work is he is great against the run. Not only is he the best DT pass rusher since a young Warren Sapp, but he is as good as Gilbert Brown was against the run for the Green Bay Packer Super Bowl teams. He sheds blockers and always seems to be the first guy to hit the ball carrier. This slows the ball carrier up and allows Urlacher, Briggs, Hillenmeyer, etc. to get to the ball before he can get positive yards.

Without a good run stuffer, the cover 2 becomes little more than a line of police tape across the line of scrimmage. Look at the Colts' defense throughout the regular season. Look at the Bears' defense in the games after Harris got hurt. A bad run defense is due to a lack of run stoppers. Now, before you start jumping up and down about the reformed Colts' defense let me tell you that this helps prove my point. Yes, Bob Sanders helps, but what has really changed the run defense is the improved play of Anthony "Booger" McFarlane. He is playing like an All Pro in the playoffs. He's blowing up running plays before they get started. He's in the backfield on almost every play it seems. He is making the tackles that he was missing earlier in the year.

I know that the DT is not a "sexy" position, and that it is much more exciting to say that a safety or linebacker is the reason for a great defense, but it is the DT. This is why I think that the Colts' defense is going to be leaps and bounds better next year (assuming McFarlane continues to get better, like he should). With a quality run stuffer, the rest of the defense can do what they are supposed to. Fly to the ball, cause turnovers, and keep teams out of the end zone. "Well why was their defense so much better last year without McFarlane?" Two words, COREY SIMON. He was a great run stuffer early in his career with Philly and when he was at Florida State. An average pass rusher, but great against the run, and this is what the Colts needed last year. This type of player rarely fits into the dictionary definition of the cover 2 (speed, speed, speed). However it is vital for the defense to be successful. That is what makes Tommie Harris so great. He is both. He is fast, a great pass rusher, and is great against the run. I promise you, had he not gotten hurt, all those "experts" wouldn't be looking so foolish right now for picking the Saints. Everyone with a brain would've picked the Bears, and their dominant defense.

Career Maker

What a game Peyton Manning had, or at least what a half plus one drive. There was so much pressure on him you could almost feel the frustration he had after the Patriots recovered the fumble in the end zone. This was a play that the defense should make. More importantly, this was a play that the Patriots would make. Peyton knew that he might need a little but of luck to get the monkey off his back here, and this was one of those plays. Then he throws the pick six to Assante Samuel and it seemed like it was over. Then, it seemed he relaxed. I think the pressure actually lifted a bit. He was supposed to do this. He was supposed to choke, at least according to his detractors. Then he took complete control of the game. He takes the ball, makes all the plays he needs to, and watches his defense seal the deal for him. He finally gets to enjoy the post game celebration. He gets to be the one to thank people. Gets to be the one to do the interview out on the field while holding the trophy. It is about time.

Now I see that many people are taking away from his game. I just watched the 1st and 10 program on ESPN and they went with the "Brady lost the game, not Peyton won it" approach. To me this is not only wrong, but it is a back handed slap at Peyton. Why is it that when the "experts" get things wrong they have to give excuses, basically saying that they were right, they just got unlucky. There are "experts" out there giving more credit to the coaches, other players, the defense, etc. It almost seems that people want Peyton to be that lovable loser guy, and now that he has won this game, they want to make sure that he stays that way. To me, this was the game that will forever prove that Peyton is one of the 4 best quarter backs ever. Now, bare with me as I attempt to prove to you why this win was due to Peyton's brilliance, with some help when he needed it.

My best friend John, who is extremely knowledgeable about the Colts, has the opinion that the player of the game was Dallas Clark. I disagree, but to me if it wasn't Peyton, it is Clark. Here is why I disagree. Clark had 6 catches for 137 yards, a great game. However, to me there are 2 issues with him being the player of the game. First off, he dropped an easy touchdown at the end of the first half. Now, I know that the DB had his hands between Clark's hands and his body, but Dallas missed the ball himself. The ball hit him squarely in both hands, and bounced off. Clark will tell you that this was a drop by him.

The other reason is that on 3 of his receptions for 86 of his yards, Peyton actually made the play, or put the ball in the exact spot it had to be. Lets look at those. The first one was earlier in the drive at the end of the first half. it was a very similar play to the 3rd and 6 reception at the end of the Ravens game. Clark was blanketed. He had no more than a half step on his defender. The window to put the ball was almost impossibly small, yet Peyton puts the ball exactly where it has to be so only Dallas can make the catch, at full speed mind you. Now, I tip my hat to Dallas for making the catch, but if Peyton puts that ball anywhere else, it's batted down, or just incomplete. Noone else in the NFL, and that includes Brady, could have made that pass.

The next play was a huge play for 52 yards to Clark down the middle. This play, however, was made by Peyton before he even threw the ball. Clark was wide, wide open on this play and that is because the Patriots brought almost everyone on a blitz. Peyton, supposedly an immobile pocket passer, avoided 2 Patriots, moved up in the pocket and threw a strike, as he was drilled from his right. Clark should catch this ball. He was open by 5 yards and Peyton, even with getting hit, put the ball right on his hands, in stride. Dallas barely had to even lean to catch the ball. He wasn't even touched for 50 yards.

The final play was on a field goal drive early in the 4th quarter. Clark had come open on a deep slant headed towards the side line and Peyton hit him, once again in stride right on the hands, for 23 yards. Not only this, but he put it in a spot where Dallas could only catch it, and would still be able to keep his feet in bounds. Again, there are very few quarterbacks that can make this pass, and Peyton makes it consistently.

On another similar play, on the final game winning drive, Peyton hit Brian Fletcher, again after evading a blitz, for a key 32 yards. Keep in mind, Fletcher was only out there because Ben Utecht was hurt, so there is even more pressure on Peyton to put the ball perfectly on his hands, since he is not completely into the game yet. Again, only a handful of guys could make this play.

Then, the final play I will discuss was the two point conversion. The throw was nothing short of perfect. It was so perfect, it might have even been a little bit lucky. The Colts surprise NE by lining both Harrison and Wayne up on the right side. At the snap, the safety shifts over to help. Peyton takes 4 steps, then throws the ball to a spot. The spot just happens to be the only hole in between two defenders. Now, obviously Harrison made a great play on the ball, turned his body around and made the catch, but it was Payton who put this ball in the tiny hole so Harrison could make the play.

The Patriots came into this game wanting to do two things. They wanted to pressure Peyton, and they wanted to take Harrison and Wayne out of the equation. They did both of these, yet Peyton still had 349 yards passing. He constantly had Patriots at his feet, or hitting him, and yet still made the plays when he had to. As for Harrison and Wayne, they were non factors. This was partly due to great defense by the Patriots led by one of the more under-rated guys in football in Samuel. However, neither guy took advantage of the opportunities they had.

Wayne tripped twice, by himself, including one in the end zone. He also dropped 2 balls that hit him in the hands, including a play on a third and long that would have been good enough for a first down. he had his defender on his back, and the ball hit him in both hands. He just missed it.

Then there is Marvin Harrison. For my money, the best receiver not named Rice in the history of the league. However, he drops a ball on the goal line on a deep post route. I know Samuel was there, but this is a ball that Harrison catches. Then there was a third and huge, in the first half, on the drive after the pick six, deep in their own territory that hits Marvin, deep down the field, right in the hands. What happens? The ball bounces off his hands then hits him in the head. Now, again, Samuel was there with him, but this is a Hall of Fame player that needs to make this play in these games.

With his two biggest weapons taken away, Peyton had to work that much harder to make plays. Also, lets not forget that they had to come back from an 18 point lead. Also, one of the reasons Peyton didn't have as many TD's as he might usually have is that the Colts ran the ball very well inside the 5. There were 3 TD runs (well, we'll count the fumble recovery by Saturday as a run since that is how it started), one by Peyton, in the second half. Peyton leads the league every year in TD passes inside the five, but if your running game gets into the end zone, then there is not real need to pass.

All things considered, Peyton played maybe the best game of his career, and it was in the most important game of his career. There was all the pressure in the world on him going into this game. He had his two biggest weapons taken away from him. He had a huge hole dug quickly, as much done by him as anyone else. With all this taken into account, he stepped up when he had too, made the plays that needed to be made, and won the game. This is a defining moment in his career. Now, lets hope that he has many more defining moments in the years to come.

Scott's Day Of Redemption

Well, now I am totally confused. How do you react when your teams win? You have to understand, most of the teams that I like are great in the regular season, and then completely disappear in their post seasons. Florida State had 14 straight years finishing in the top 4 but only won 2, count 'em, 2 National Titles. The Hoosiers were/are one of the best programs in College Basketball, but haven't won a title since 1987. The Cubs need no explanation. The Colts and Bears have been good for at least a few if not all of the last 5 years, yet had never won the big one. Well now, not only did the Bears beat the Saints, but then the Colts went out and vanquished their own personal demon, Tom Brady. I just don't know how to respond. I am very good at moving on. The line "Well, we should be good next year" is so etched into my mind that I've been saying it all night, even though both teams won. I actually had to call a friend of mine that is a Duke fan and ask her how to act in these situations. Well, now I get the best gig in the country. I get to sit back and watch the Super Bowl and know that no matter who wins, I will be happy. If I had to pick one of the two to put my support behind, it would be the Bears, but I will be rooting almost as hard for Peyton and the Colts. Now, what were my thoughts on the games? Well, I'm glad you asked. Here we go......

1. Lets go with the Bears game first, since they were the first game. I think I can count on one hand the number of "experts" that I saw pick the Bears in this game. Well, the pride of this team showed today as they totally dismantled the NFL's best offense (statistically that is). They won the rushing battle 196-56 (the experts said this would favor Deuce and the Saints). They had no turn overs and no sacks allowed while they turned the Saints over 4 times and had 3 sacks of Drew Brees. The Bears even dominated in penalties with only 1 for 5 yards compared to 7 for 47 yards. Lets look at this. 0 TO's, 0 sacks allowed, and 1 penalty for 5 yards. That is ridiculous. The only area they were beat in was the passing yards (319-144) but this is to be expected since they had a lead the entire game.

This game was total dominance, and there is no other word for it. There was a moment where the Saints had taken the momentum. They were driving with a chance to take the lead, but then the Bears defense stood up, shut the drive down, and forced a long field goal attempt that was very, very short. The Bears then pin them deep on their next possession, and Drew Brees opens up the flood gates with an intentional grounding in the end zone, which is a safety. The game was over at this moment. The Saints were never in it the rest of the game.

Now, as for the Bears, they did what they needed to. They dominated on the ground, and Rex made the plays when he needed to, including a 5-5 for 77 yards and a TD drive. As a Bears fan, this was what I was hoping for. This was what the team looked like earlier in the year. This team has more talent than any other team left going into this weekend on defense, and it is time that people realize it. Now, onto the Colts.

2. Man, where do I start here. I must say, I left the place I was watching the game before the drive to end the first half. I was thinking, this is it. Yet once again, Brady and Belichick have figured Peyton out and the Colts will once again go home with their heads hanging. Then the second half started. The Colts dominated time of possession in the second half and, with the exception of 2 drives, scored every time they touched the ball. They did everything they had to to win, and they did it with the pressure on. People need to shut up about Peyton now. There was no one else playing this weekend, with the exception of Rex Grossman (and he wasn't really close), that had this much pressure on him. He started slow, but when it mattered, he made every play he needed to. I was so impressed with him in the forth quarter.

Then there was the defense. The D didn't shut down the Patriots as they had the Chiefs and Ravens, but they held the Patriots when they had to. The Pats had 4 possessions late in the forth quarter where a TD probably ends the game, and they could only muster 3 field goals, including a drive after their defense stopped the Colts. All they needed to do was get one first down. The Colts would've been out of TO's and the two minute warning would've been the only other way to stop the clock. With all this going on, the defense stands up and, led by inch for inch the best defensive player in football Bob Sanders, gets the stop they need. Then the story of Peyton Manning and the Patriots gets it's final chapter.

With 2:17 left on the clock and down by 3, Peyton and the offense take the field with all the pressure in the world squarely on their shoulders. What do they do? In 1:17 they drive 80 yards and take the lead. Peyton looked cool, calm, and dare I say it Brady-esque on this final drive. He showed everyone that said "Oh Peyton can't win the big one" that they really no nothing about sports. I am so happy for him and Tony Dungy. They deserve this.


Those are my thoughts on what was one of the best single days of sports in my life time. I hope that the Super Bowl is as good a game as I think it will be. Either way though, I am going to be sitting in my Lazy Boy, leaning back with a big grin on my face as I watch my teams battle it out for my first team championship since Florida State won in 1999. Oh , and if you were wondering, yes, this day will be all about me. Anyone who knows me and knows what I've been through with my teams would agree with me.