Who'd a Thunk It?

Any NFL fan by now already knows that this year's Super Bowl appears to favor the AFC just a teeny, tiny bit. When Arizona, the unlikeliest of Super Bowl contestants we've seen in a long while, takes on Pittsburgh at Raymond James Stadium in the city of Tampa, FL on 1 February, most people will expect a massacre. As the old saying goes, you sell tickets with offense (Arizona), but win championships with defense (the Steelers).

Ah, but there is a reason why they still play the game. In a single-elimination tournament like the NFL playoffs, any team can have a good day and upset any other team, as we saw last year with the NY Giants beating the supposedly unbeatable NE Patriots. It was one of the mighty Football Outsiders (Aaron Schatz), writing a column for the venerable Worldwide Leader in Sports, who declared the G-men "...one of the worst teams to reach the Super Bowl" last January. I wonder if he'll do a follow-up article on the Cardinals this year?

After all, the Cardinals had one of the lowest win-loss records (9-7) of the teams that made the playoffs, were miserable playing in the Eastern time zone until they upset Carolina at home two Sundays ago, and really didn't start playing even respectable defense until the playoffs. They lost to perhaps the best team to not make the playoffs, those pesky Patriots, 47-7 in a laffer* in week 16 of the regular season. No one predicted Arizona, the number four seed, would be in the NFC Championship game, much less in the Super Bowl, when the playoffs started three weeks ago.

* Should that be written "laugher"? Because that doesn't look right either.

And yet, here they are. In the Super Bowl. With at least a shot at beating the Super Bowl champions from the 2005 season, a team that still has many of the same players, meaning they have veteran leadership that knows how to handle the media intensity leading up to the Big Event.

Franchises making their first-ever appearance in the Super Bowl have not done well throughout the history of the event, winning just six times against 17 losses. Only once did two Super Bowl virgins meet, and that was the 1982 matchup of the 49ers and the Bengals ('82 was when the Super Bowl was played, at the end of the '81 NFL season).

The sportscasters covering yesterday's playoff game mentioned a little bit of Super Bowl trivia: according to them (and this was an unsanctioned trivia question, so no graphics appeared to support it), only four franchises have never made it to the Super Bowl, now that Arizona has made it to the Big Event. They ticked off the Detroit Lions, the NO Saints, the Cleveland Browns, and the Houston Texans. However, I think they missed a fifth franchise, the Jacksonvile Jaguars. As near as I can tell, those are the only franchises in the modern NFL that have never competed in the Super Bowl.

I also learned today that the Super Bowl shares some history with such events as the Las Vegas Marathon, the Montreux Jazz Festival, the Consumer Electronics Show, the Smithsonian Kite Festival, and the Tour de Bretagne Cycliste in cycling. What do they all have in common? They were all started in 1967.

Just a little trivia for your Monday reading pleasure.

Random Thoughts for a Monday Morning

Thus far, I've resisted the temptation to run through a semi-organized list of random thoughts that flicker through my consciousness, attempting to keep each post centered on an easily discernable topic. Once I've progressed down this list, you'll see why.

• Over the weekend, I watched the original The Italian Job (1969) with Michael Caine in the lead role. I have seen the Marky Mark remake from 2003, but from what I remember, the similarities between the two movies begin and end with the bad/good guys using Minis to escape after a heist in Italy.
  
• The ending from the original Italian Job is one of the greatest WTF? moments in movie history, apparently. It's a good thing I didn't see the movie until very recently, because Caine only revealed in late 2008 the meaning behind the sudden end credits.
  
• The movie does have a good soundtrack, courtesy of Quincy Jones. And the "Self-Preservation Society" tune towards the end is very catchy, if a complete non-sequitur in the movie.
• The original has to be considered a comedy, and that the writers and actors played every scene for laughs, or else it doesn't make any sense. And, boy, have our opinions of what is or isn't funny changed since the late Sixties!
• The original Italian Job received a G - General Audiences rating from the Motion Picture Association of America (MPAA), and I know that the ratings system has changed over the years, but wow! When women were prancing about in their underwear, I couldn't believe it! G -- it's not just for Disney any more!
• My wife and I have been watching a TON of period costume dramas lately, including such fare as The Other Boleyn Girl (2008), Becoming Jane (2007), Lady Jane (the 1986 movie with Helena Bonham Carter and Cary Elwes), A Room With a View (1985), and the latest, Tess of the D'Urbervilles (2008), a Masterpiece Contemporary production from England. As kids, we used to groan and leave the room whenever our parents would turn on Masterpiece Theater on PBS. My tastes must be changing.
• Oh, and whether the mores of the time were captured in historical fiction like The Other Boleyn Girl, or just reflected by the fiction of the time like Tess, aren't we all better off now that women are no longer treated as Chattel? It's a bit scary to think that we are not that far removed from the time when a woman had no say in her marriage, when daughters were treated as pawns to be used to advance a family's social standing, and when a woman who was raped was blamed for losing her womanly "virtue."
• Going along with the movies mentioned above, we also saw The Magdalene Sisters (2002), in which young women in 1960s Ireland were subjected to dehumanizing cruelty if the Catholic nuns considered them to be "fallen women." Not that far removed at all, are we?
• And despite the fact that women received the unfettered right to vote (the 19th Amendment, in 1920) long before African-Americans did (the 24th Amendment, in 1962, which combined with the Voting Rights Act of 1965 eliminated the last blockages imposed after the passage of the 15th Amendment in 1870), isn't it interesting that the 1960s and '70s shared the upheaval of both the Civil Rights movement and the sexual revolution?
• In many parts of the world, girls are still prevented from receiving an education. They are instead sold into sexual slavery in places like Thailand, and their wages get sent back to provide a living for their family. Several not-for-profits exist to prevent or stop this human trafficking; the one I like, because it was founded by two USAFA grads, is the Somaly Mam Foundation.
• Think about it, and get involved.
  
• Boy, the statistic of home field advantage enjoyed during the Divisional playoff round (where home teams were winning 76% of the time) was turned upside-down this weekend, wasn't it?! Exactly upside-down: home teams were 1-3 this weekend.
• Who would have predicted Arizona (the number four seed, the lowest ranked Division winner, 9-7 on the season by virtue of going 6-0 within their Division, 0-5 playing in the Eastern time zone during the regular season) would be hosting the NFC Championship game next weekend? I thought Carolina was the closest thing to a cold, hard, lead pipe lock (with all due apologies to Mike & Mike in the Mornings) left in the NFL playoffs.
• Hey, that's why they play the games.
• So, we're left with a formerly 9-6-1 Philly team that advanced into the playoffs by virtue of that one tie with Cincinnati (and at the time, all the talking heads described it as a loss for the Eagles, since it was against the cover-your-eyes-awful Bungles) going up against a Cardinals team that previously hadn't won a playoff game since the Truman administration. No, no one saw that coming.
• It's also interesting to note that Joe Flacco became the first rookie QB in NFL history to win two playoff games. Ever.
  
• Now that the Giants have been knocked off, at home, by the Eagles, the Super Bowl favorite has to shift to the Steelers **shudder** who at least proved they still know how to win at home after a bye week.
• Think the NFL head office and the NBC ad execs are shaking at the prospects of a Pittsburgh or Baltimore vs. Arizona or Philly Super Bowl? Nah, this is the Super Bowl we're talking about, not the World Series or NBA finals. The ratings are contestant-proof.
• In cycling news, Lance Armstrong is getting ready to compete for the first time in the Tour Down Under (20-25 Jan 09). He says he is back in competitive cycling again just to help raise awareness for his cancer-fighting foundation, but it will be interesting to see what happens once his famously competitive juices start flowing again.
• Sorry, I probably shouldn't put Lance Armstrong and "competitive juices" so closely together in one paragraph. I would venture that no single athlete has been more suspected of using performance-enhancing drugs while simultaneously passing every single drug screening test administered to him in all his years of competition. The man has successfully passed over what? 175? 200? drug tests without a single positive or false positive. There's something to be said for that. You still cannot prove a negative.
  
• Now that Armstrong has been reunited with Johann Bruyneel, the team manager for all of Lance's Tour de France-winning teams, it will be interesting to see what they do together. For one thing, Bruyneel's current team, Astana, was blocked from racing in leTour in 2008 due to doping suspicions surrounding the team. Will they even be allowed to race in France this year?
• One more thing on Armstrong: he is an expectant father! Again! And the news story says this baby was conceived naturally. Hmmm... apparently we can still refer to Lance as "ol' one nut Armstrong."
• I've always wondered if perhaps Armstrong receives injections for the medical purposes of replacing lost testosterone, but never have seen any mention of anything at all along those lines. Does a man who has lost a testicle for whatever reason have hormonal imbalances in his body? WebMD appears to be mostly silent on this topic.
• My wife and I also had a "The Big Bang Theory" (CBS sitcom) marathon on Friday and Saturday. That shows just how exciting married life with children can be, I guess. We had to get the DVDs from Netflix, since the show normally is on during the time we are busy with the 3B routine with the kids. Oh, and CBS doesn't make full episodes of its shows available on its website, unlike ABC and NBC. I wonder why not?
  
• Being able to watch the majority of a full season of a sitcom in just two nights is pretty cool, though. It provides more continuity, and certainly more instant gratification, than waiting for a show to come on once a week. We loved it!
• Oh, and "The Big Bang Theory" is a fun show! I'm a geek, I admit.
  
• After one episode, when two Chinese kids were shown in their room with the lights flickering (the lights were being controlled remotely by the nerds in the show; you have to have seen it), I just HAD to go online and find out what comic or superhero logo one of the kids was wearing. It was a red shirt, with a red spike in the middle of a yellow circle with two squared-off "wings" on either side. How on earth can a person search for a nameless logo online? My first guess was a Flash Gordon logo from the mid-'80s movie of the same name. Bzzzzt! Incorrect answer. I googled for the words "big bang theory red yellow logo t-shirt" and came up with this as the second hit.
• Ain't the Internet great?!
  
• Like I said, I'm a geek. But "The Greatest American Hero" was way ahead of its time. I have to think its variation of post-modern ironic humor would go over much better these days.
• I did have a dream last night where I was on the Moon, and discovered a race of big, rock people, much like what was featured in Galaxy Quest (1999). Yeah, I'm a geek. I remember thinking, "Why hasn't anyone discovered this before?" and coming to the conclusion that there are vast swaths of territory on the Moon we haven't explored. There's a thought for you.

That's it! That's the list. That will do it for this Monday.

The Wacky, Wooly, Wildcard Weekend

What to make of the NFL Wildcard games this weekend? None of the favored teams everyone predicted to win actually won. Not that I pay much, if any, attention to the betting lines, mind you. I also didn't watch the talking heads on ESPN to see what they thought and which teams they predicted as this weekend's winners. I'm talking about my own estimations of the NFL teams playing this weekend, which regularly is one of the most unpredictable weekends of the NFL season.

In the AFC games, yesterday saw an 8-8 San Diego team taking on the 12-4 Indy Colts. Sure, both teams had been on a winning streak lately (the Chargers won their last four games just to make the playoffs, and the Colts won nine in a row after a shaky start to their season), but very few people expected San Diego to win, even playing at home. LaDanian Tomlinson, their star RB, was hurt and sidelined for the majority of the game. Norv Turner, the coach, has not proved his mettle in previous playoff games. For all the promise of Philip Rivers, he simply cannot compare to Peyton Manning at QB. Manning proved this year that he can will his team to win, despite the declining skills of his favorite WR, Marvin Harrison, and the inability of the Colt's offensive line to open holes for the Colts runners.

And yet, the Chargers proved victorious, winning in OT behind the superb running of their diminuitive RB, Darren Sproles. At times, the ability of the 5'6" Sproles to hide behind his blockers and shoot through the smallest of gaps in the Colts defense evoked the running of 5'7" Jaquizz Rodgers of Oregon State, when he shredded the USC defense in September.

In the other AFC game, a surprising 11-5 Baltimore team, playing with a rookie QB and a rookie head coach, soundly defeated an even more surprising 11-5 Miami team. Miami, of course, went from 1-15 just a year ago to winning their Division this year, despite strong performances by New England, NY Jets, and a fast start by the Buffalo Bills. The Ravens do have an incredible defense, and perhaps they found a way to bottle up the Wildcat offense run by Miami this year. Despite the similar records, Baltimore was the wildcard team, forced to win on the road in Miami to advance. This must have been another upset, as home teams usually get 7 points just for the home field advantage.

Over in the NFC, everyone had written off the Arizona Cardinals as DOA in the playoffs. At 9-7, they won a very weak NFC West Division despite being 2-3 in their last five games. They looked terrible on the road, going 3-5 on the season, yet they were 6-0 within their own Division. And yet, playing at home against an 11-5 Atlanta Falcons team that had been on a three-game winning streak, the Cardinals won fairly easily. They never seemed to be really threatened in their 30-24 victory, despite Atlanta's superior running game.

In the other NFC game today between the Eagles and Vikings, the Eagles at 9-6-1 once again used their crushing, ball-hawking (and TD-scoring!) defense to win 26-14 on the road. The Vikings were 10-6 going into this game, although they had to win their final game of the season in order to clinch a playoff spot and their Division. At one point, when the Vikings' QB, Tavaris Jackson, had one completion for his previous 11 attempts, it certainly seemed as though the Vikes' coach should have switched for another QB. Perhaps Gus Frerotte was still hurt, and perhaps the Vikes really had no better option than Jackson.

What we saw this weekend were mirrors in both Conferences: one home team (Division winner) with a weaker record beat a wildcard team with a stronger record, and one wildcard team beat the home team when the records were the same or very similar. The upsets, both at home and on the road, came when the presumably weaker NFC and AFC West Division-winners actually pulled out strong games against the favored wildcard teams, and when the other wildcard teams pulled off their upsets against Division winners.

Not being able to predict which teams were going to win this weekend causes much consternation for fantasy football players like me. Many of the playoff FFB-variety games involve picking one lineup of players for the entirety of the playoffs, so any time a player's real team loses, it knocks another person out of your fantasy lineup. Or, if you're like me, the Colts' loss knocked three players out of my lineup. In the NFL.com Playoff Challenge game I'm in currently, I do get a maximum of eight lineup changes I can make before the Super Bowl to remain competitive, but having to make six changes after the wildcard weekend (I also had several Falcons and Dolphins on my squad) pretty much dooms me to also-run status.

That remains the beauty of the NFL today, however. Parity means that virtually any team can beat any other team on any given Sunday. A team can rise from 1-15 to Division champ status in one season, even if that team can't win its playoff game. The Cardinals can actually win a playoff game for the first time in a generation. Anything seems possible at this point.

However, after the unpredictability of the wildcard weekend, the Division winners tend to assert themselves in the remaining games. Statistically speaking, wildcard matchups are the equivalent of a coin flip, with home teams winning only about 50% of the time. However, in the next round of the playoffs, home teams win about 70% of the time or better.* Arizona has to travel to Carolina, and the Eagles will travel to play the Giants. Expect the home teams to win both of those contests. Baltimore will travel to Tennessee, and San Diego has to play the Steelers in Pittsburgh, so both home teams have to be favored in those games, too. You can bet that my fantasy lineup will be modified to reflect the strengths of the Giants and the Titans, teams who have the best chance of making it to the Super Bowl. I really thought the Colts could perform a similar feat as the G-men did last year, winning the Super Bowl via the wildcard route, but they fell flat against San Diego.

* Update: TMQ on ESPN posted the win-loss record of home teams in the Divisional playoff round. It's 55-17 for home teams since the current playoff format was adopted in 1990, good for a 76.4% winning percentage, which is about as sure a thing as you can get in the NFL these days.

It's honestly hard to say which teams will make it all the way to the Super Bowl. Each team has its own weaknesses and strengths, and predicting which team will win it all is anyone's guess. Again, that's the beauty of the NFL playoffs. That's why they play the games, so the winner can be decided on the field.

Win or go home, as they say.

A Letter to Roger Goodell

Dear Roger,

I saw this news item just yesterday, so I missed the original announcement from the NFL. Apparently, people in your office are disappointed in the lackluster TV ratings for the NFL Pro Bowl, which is played annually in Hawaii the week after the Super Bowl. The Super Bowl, of course, regularly pulls some of the highest ratings in the United States (90+ million people watched last year's tilt between the NY Giants and the NE Patriots in the US alone), plus perhaps the largest worldwide audience for a live event. National news media covers the Super Bowl in great detail, and the ads for the Super Bowl are projected to sell for $3 Million for a 30-second spot this year.

So, it is understandable that staffers are concerned about the general disdain for the Pro Bowl. No one pays much attention to the game, and certainly no one much cares who plays in the game after the public votes for its favorite players and the sportswriters have had their turn discussing who should have been named to the NFC and AFC Pro Bowl teams. Every year, deserving players get overlooked for other players with higher marquee factor, and that will never change.

Ah, but how do you address the fact that no one wants to watch a meaningless all-star game that happens after the season finishes with the biggest one-day spectacle in all of sports?! MLB has similar issues with its all-star game, except baseball plays its game in the middle of its season. Bud Selig, your counterpart, decided he could spice things up a bit by giving home-field advantage in the World Series to the League that wins the "Summer Classic" every year. And every year since that decision, the American League has won the all-star game. Putting home field advantage at stake has not noticeably improved the ratings for the MLB all-star game, and it has only marginally affected the outcome of the World Series.

Given that the NFL will never move its Pro Bowl to the middle of the NFL season, what was your alternative? I have to say, moving the Pro Bowl to that Sunday in between the AFC and NFC Championship games and Super Sunday is a terrible idea. Why? Two words: Robert Freaking Edwards the Third.

Please forgive me if you are unaware of Mr. Edwards. He didn't play long in the NFL, although he had a very good rookie season playing for the Patriots in 1998. That year, he played in 16 games, started 15 games, ran the ball 291 times, rushed for 1,115 yds and nine TDs, and added another 35 catches for 331 YDs and three TDs. He was a monster in fantasy football terms, although I had another rookie on my fantasy team that year, Fred Taylor of the Jacksonville Jaguars. For comparison, Mr. Taylor played in 15 games, started 12 of them (after a season-ending injury to James Stewart), ran the ball 264 times, rushed for 1,223 YDs and 14 TDs, and added 44 catches for 421 YDs and three TDs. Until 2008, you would be hard-pressed to find another pair of rookie RBs who had such a big (Ginormous!) impact on the game of pro football.

Mr. Goodell, you might be asking yourself why this is relevant to your decision to play the Pro Bowl on the Sunday leading up to the Super Bowl. Let me give you another set of numbers for illustration. After their rookie seasons, Mr. Taylor and Mr. Edwards had vastly divergent NFL careers. Mr. Taylor, or "Fragile Fred" as he is known in fantasy circles, has had an up-and-down career, always productive when he's on the field, but hardly able to remain on it for a full season. He played 10 games in 1999, 13 in 2000, two games in 2001, two full seasons in 2002-3, 14 games in 2004, 11 in 2005, 15 games each in 2006-7, and 13 games in 2008. Still, he has 11,271 career rushing YDs, 62 career TDs, a very strong 4.6 YDs per carry average, 2,361 career receiving YDs, and eight career receiving TDs. Those might not be Hall of Fame numbers, but how many young men are able to play 11 seasons in the NFL, period?

Mr. Edwards certainly did not. After his sterling rookie season, Mr. Edwards played only one more abbreviated season, for the Miami Dolphins in 2002. He ended his career with only 311 attempts, 1,222 career rushing YDs, 10 career rushing TDs, a 3.9 YDs per carry average, 457 career receiving YDs, and only four receiving TDs.

So, the question remains: how or why was "Fragile Fred" able to remain in the NFL for so much longer than Robert Edwards III? After that 1998 season, Mr. Edwards was named to the Pro Bowl while Mr. Taylor was not*. Back in the day, the Pro Bowlers used to play several events in addition to the Pro Bowl game itself. One of those events was a sand football game for the rookie all-stars, and it was two-hand touch, I think. Great fun, right? It was fun for all involved until Mr. Edwards fell and twisted his knee during that sand football game. He was never the same since.

* Taylor was named to the AFC Pro Bowl squad after the 2007 season, so he does have the same number of Pro Bowl appearances as does Edwards.

I ask you, Mr. Goodell, this simple question: what will the NFL do, either in 2010 or whenever it happens, the first time a player from one of the two Super Bowl contestants gets injured during the meaningless Pro Bowl game? You cannot deny that such a possibility exists, and you cannot deny that such an injury would alter the competitive balance of the most important game of the NFL season. Would Super Bowl-bound teams place playing restrictions on their marquee players named to the Pro Bowl, further limiting the value of that all-star game? Would any team really accept the distraction from their game plan preparations in the week leading up to the Super Bowl, even if no one gets hurt? Would you place all the players in protective bubble-wrap uniforms to prevent injuries?

These are questions that you, Mr. Goodell, need to answer satisfactorily before the 2010 Pro Bowl and Super Bowl. I know you are disappointed that regular fans like myself consider the Pro Bowl to be meaningless. I'm sorry, but it is. It doesn't matter in the standings, and it only serves as a nice benefit for those players lucky enough to be named to the squads. A free trip to Hawaii is always a nice benefit, and now the NFL players won't even get that benefit.

Way to go, Mr. Goodell. May I call you Roger? You need to rethink this policy, Roger. Your office won't be able to survive the public outcry or insurance maelstrom should a star QB from a Super Bowl team get hurt in a meaningless game. Pro football is a violent sport. I'm sure you've noticed. It's only a matter of time before disaster strikes, and you need to have a darn good idea of how you plan to respond before it does.

Sincerely,
A Fan

The Year-Round Sports Cycle

Does anyone else think it's just a little strange to have hockey players reporting for camp on 16 September? The AP article points out just how short the off-season is for hockey players, and they are just one example of this trend all throughout the '90s and '00s towards longer seasons, more teams, more playoffs, and more games. Which, of course, means more ticket sales, more concession sales, more memorabilia sales, and more chances to win in the postseason.

We even have the current NFL Commish, Roger Goodell, pontificating on an expansion of the NFL schedule from the current 17 weeks (16 games plus a bye for every team) to something like 17 or 18 regular-season games for each team. Goodell, ostensibly, would shorten the pre-season games and replace those "meaningless" games with ones that count in the standings. The owners were already charging regular-season ticket prices for fans to watch backups and players with little hope of making the 54-man roster play their guts out, so I'm not entirely sure what the NFL would gain other than getting more TV revenues from the deal. Which is why the earliest they would make this change would be 2010, when they can renegotiate with the TV networks for the entire package of games.

On the one hand, I enjoy seeing the wildcard in both football and baseball, because more teams alive in pennant races in September means better quality of play on the field. In the NFL, having two teams per Conference able to win a wild card berth means that even week 17 games mean a lot to teams on the bubble. Just ask the Titans and Browns players last year. The Titans were fortunate to play against a Colts team that already locked up its best possible playoff situation, and so was resting key personnel like Peyton Manning, etc., but when the Titans won that game, it knocked Cleveland out of the wildcard.

However, more than just viewer fatigue (which is still pretty darn significant; how many people can say they are excited about watching NHL hockey right now?), there are real issues with how far the sports leagues are pushing their schedules. Players have higher likelihoods of getting hurt, the quality of talent has been diluted through expansion, and increased playoff eligibility makes regular-season games less meaningful. Let's be honest: after four weeks of pre-season NFL, the actual week 1 results were crazy for established players like Tom Brady, Peyton Manning, LaDainian Tomlinson, and a host of others.*

*Re-reading that line, it sounds like I would be in favor of Roger's plan to replace meaningless pre-season games with regular-season ones. I don't object to four pre-season games at all, although when they used to play five, that was too much. What I have a problem with is this current practice of not playing NFL stars in pre-season. Yes, the risk of injury is always out there. Yes, that risk actually tends to go up if guys aren't playing at full speed. There might not be a good solution to the problem of star players getting hurt, either in pre-season or regular-season games. It's a violent game, have you noticed?

Just the news cycle alone is almost too much to bear for an average fan. The NFL already operates pretty much around the calendar year, with the April draft, spring and summer minicamps, other training activities (the sometimes dreaded OTAs), and competition committee meetings all generating significant news in addition to the July-February training camp-Super Bowl schedule. Baseball has its Winter Meetings in addition to a spring training to World Series schedule that stretches from late February (pitchers and catchers report) to now potential game 7 finishes in November. I've always thought it was funny that winter sports like basketball and hockey were still having playoff games in June.

Enough is enough already!! Fatigue has set in. I already tune out most regular-season games, and especially in hockey and basketball. Even if you're a fan of a specific team, unless you have tickets to see that team in person, there's not much reason to watch baseball games in April-July. Many regular-season NFL games are snooze-fests, at least through the first half, until the defensive players get tired in the 3rd and 4th quarters. In golf, only the four majors are really all that interesting. I could care less about the FedEx Cup, but I will probably tune in to this weekend's Ryder Cup, if able.

I know we'll never go back to the old days where players couldn't afford to live for a year on what salary they made playing their games, and so they had off-season jobs selling insurance or real estate. There's too much money to be had by selling more tickets and putting more games on TV, even if dozens of new cable channels have to be created to display that content. I just exercise my right as an American to not watch regular-season games until the playoffs are looming and every game becomes more meaningful than the last.

I do worry about the dilution of records, however. More regular-season NFL games means more games that count in the record books, which means more chances to break the single season passing, rushing, receiving, etc. records. We all know what happened to Roger Maris when he passed Babe Ruth's seemingly unbreakable HR record on the last day of the season... after Maris was given 8 more games than it took Ruth to set the record. If the NFL extends the regular season, it will make it all that much more impossible for any future team to tie the 1972 Dolphins as the only team with a perfect record in the Super Bowl era. It sounds like Goodell is OK with that.

Super Bowl Loser Curse Strikes Again

OK, by now, most people will have heard that Tom Brady appears to be lost for the season due to an ACL injury he sustained in week 1 against KC.  My condolences go out to Tom and his team, since no one likes to see a player get hurt, especially not one of Tom Brady's stature.  Yes, Tom was the first QB picked in most fantasy leagues this fall.  Yes, the Patsies were primed for another run at the Super Bowl and greatness.  Yes, numerous columnists wrote this summer how no one should expect the Patsies to fall victim to the Super Bowl loser curse.

Wait, what's that you say?  There's another curse on top of the Billy Goat curse, the SI cover jinx curse, and the Madden cover curse?*

* We will, of course, be holding our breath this entire season for Brett Favre, this year's EA Sports Madden NFL 2009 cover boy. 

Yes, yes there is.  Going back at least to the 2000 season, when the Titans lost to the Rams in the Super Bowl and then had a big drop-off the next season, every Super Bowl loser has had a tough time bouncing back from the loss.  The '01 Giants had several rough years before finally climbing back into prominence through the wildcard last year.  The '02 Rams have been shells of their former selves for the past five years and will probably continue that skid this year.  The '03 Raiders have, well, been the Raiders for the past four years.  The '04 Panthers have done OK, but have struggled to make it back to the playoffs.  The '05 Eagles also struggled in the year following their Super Bowl run.  The '06 Seahawks continue to win their Division, but how hard is that, really?  The '07 Bears completely fell apart on defense last year and notably cut or allowed to depart via free agency their top QB, RB, and WR from last year.  

Now, much of what people love about the NFL is its parity.  When a team like the Browns can bounce from 4-12 one season to a stunning 10-6 the next, really, anything can happen from season to season.  One good player from the April draft can add to a key free agent signing and a new coach...  ...and take the Saints from 3-13 in 2005 to 10-6 in 2006.  One lucky bounce, one fumble recovery, or one onside kick recovery can get an entire team of players believing in themselves and change the entire season.  That's the beauty of the NFL.

On the flip side, players do get hurt.  They get older, slightly slower, and lose a step.  Again, key players can depart via free agency, and it becomes harder and harder to field a competitive team year after year.  Gone are the days of the Broncos, Vikings, and Bills being able to get scramble back up to the peak of the NFL season, the Super Bowl, after each crushing defeat the previous year.  The difference from other Super Bowl losers is that the Patriots have shown they know how to refresh their roster and keep finding talented players that no one else wants (Corey Dillon, anyone?).  They've been to the Super Bowl four times this decade, and last year was their first loss in those four trips. 

What remains to be seen is how well Matt Cassel will perform this year.  Yes, he was able to connect with Randy Moss and guide the Patsies to a week 1 defeat of the Chiefs.  Randy Moss will become his new bestest friend, I think.  There is still a ton of talent on the New England roster.  They still sit atop the AFC East, but with the aforementioned Favre now competing in their Division, the road to the Super Bowl becomes much, much harder than it was before, no disrespect intended towards Chad Pennington.  As noted above, Farve is competing against his own curse, so it should be interesting to see which curse strikes hardest this season. 

Any votes for the Billy Goat curse?