Filed under: 1 | Tags: Football, New England Patriots, nfl, Washington Redskins, week 8 predictions
The profile for this week is the Patriots v. Redskins. Actually a very unique matchup. The Patriots offense has been transformed this year into a revisit of the Rams of 1998 it seems. The Redskins have morphed into a classic Joe Gibbs team, tough, physical running game and a swarming defense.
The key to beating the Patriots is to make them one dimensional. But not if that dimension is passing. The Cowboy’s strategy was to stop the run and make Brady beat the. I am not sure why this seemed like such a s good idea, and 48 points later, it wasn’t. The Redskins have to make the Patriots run the ball. Arguably the best advantage Washington has is their front 7. They have speed at the corners and two very physical and fast safeties. Expect to see allot of two and three deep zone coverages. Essentially everyone playing back and not allowing Patriot receivers to get behind them. The safeties are physical enough to punish anyone catching the ball in the intermediate to deep middle, the area two and three deep zones are vulnerable to. In addition, the Patriots starting tight end is out, Ben Watson. Washington needs to take away the deep big play and try to make this a short game between the tackles. Trying to make the Patriots run and put the responsibility on the front 7 to contain Laurence Maroney. A much better option than watching Randy Moss and Co. running deep downfield.
The Washington offense can help by shortening the game. Long sustained drives, of which they are more than capable against a Patriots run defense that has been less than stellar. Using long drives can limit the number of possessions a team has. Typically, an NFL team has between 12 and 14 offensive possessions. Long, time consuming drives by an opposing offense can take that number down to 8 or so. Less possessions means less opportunity to score. The same strategy New England used against the Rams in 2001. And the Giants against the Bills in 1991.
For the Patriots it is a bit simpler. Try to dictate on offense and take advantage of the speed of Washington. I expect quite a few screen passes, misdirection, and short out and slant patterns in the five yard range. Less explosive but longer drives of 8-10 plays.
On defense it is all up to the front 7. Washington can run and complete the short out. New England is going to be challenged to take this away. They are typically not a press coverage team, more of a bend not break defense. This is a real test this week for the front 7 of New England against Clinton Portis and Chris Cooley, who are really the main weapons.
Overall I think this is a closer game than many expect. I really do expect Washington will shorten the game, and New England will take the short patterns the Redskins will give them. Portis should have an 80+ yard day and probably a touchdown, the same for Cooley. I don’t think Brady will hit 300 yards or 3 touchdowns, more like 235 and 2. Maroney will do more this week, I would say 70 yards for him but possibly over 100 for Faulk with allot of screen and swing passes. Probably a touchdown too. Final score should be in the 31-17 area for New England. Certainly under the point spread and one of those games that will feel closer than the score shows, and very very physical. This could become a contest between Sean Taylor and Rodney Harrison on who gets the best highlight film hit across the middle. Very fun to watch!
Filed under: 1 | Tags: Denver Broncos, nfl, nfl matchup, Pittsburgh Steelers
This week’s focus will be on the Pittsburgh / Denver game. Two teams coming of bye weeks so with the coaching staffs these teams have, I expect they will both be prepared. One wildcard is the weather, 4 inches of snow fell this morning in Denver, making for some very interesting playing conditions. This actually bodes very well for Pittsburgh.
The key matchup here, as it is most games, is on the line of scrimmage. Pittsburgh’s very effective and well coached offensive line against the injured and smallish Denver line. Denver has not shown they can stop the run against anyone this year. Statistically it looks like Denver can play the pass, and on paper that is true given their great corners starting with Champ Bailey. In reality however, as was shown in their last game against San Diego, why pass when you can just had it off and average 5 yards a carry? Statistically it will always look like Denver has a good pass defense, but in reality no one will bother to pass much against them.
I expect you will see allot of Najeh Davenport and Willie Parker just right up the middle. No real reason not to. Denver will try to bring the safeties up closer to the line of scrimmage in order to get more man power against the run. As a result, because Denver has excellent corners, expect tight end Heath Miller to have a big game. He is a tough matchup to begin with but will get allot of single coverage against Denver’s small but fast linebackers or against one of the safeties like John Lynch. Both Denver safeties are much better against the run than in coverage. Miller should get 8 or so catches today in that 10-15 yard range in the seam against the zone.
Denver’s offense has a similar challenge. Pittsburgh plays a tough, physical game up front with large lineman and very physical linebackers. Denver’s line is a typical west coast offense style line, smallish but very quick. They utilize allot of trap blocks and pulling in order to get the angle to block the defense. The question is can they move the Pittsburgh line? I don’t think so. I really think at this point that Pittsburgh will control both sides of the line of scrimmage. For Denver this means that Travis Henry and Selvin Young will generally be neutralized, putting the pressure on Jay Cutler to produce.
Pittsburgh has decent corners but an excellent safety in Polamaau. They won’t allow themselves to get beaten deep by any of the Denver wideouts. Javon Walker et al. Selvin Young is pretty good out of the backfield on swing passes and wheelroutes, so this good lead to a decent day statistically for Cutler. Pittsburgh will give him that intermediate zone especially on the outside. Expect allot of slants, 5-8 yard outs and swing passes. Even the odd screen to Young. Cutler will have a deceiving day with a good completion percentage and decent yardage but most likely at least one pick and maybe one touchdown.
From the Pittsburgh percentage, the running backs should have a great day, probably both Davenport and Parker with 80+ yards. Most likely two touchdowns between them. Roethlisberger probably won’t be called on to do much. I would expect something along the lines of 125 yards and a touchdown to Miller. Not much more, there is really no need…
This should be an old school, mud and snow grind it out game. Think about a modern day Big 10 matchup. Pittsburgh will pull it out 24-10.
Filed under: 1 | Tags: Dallas Cowboys, fan behavior, Green Bay Packers, New England Patriots, nfl, NFL Fans
Ok, I have spent allot of time trying to pick fantasy sleepers etc. This week we will replace that with a more in depth look at a given matchup…
After traveling to the middle of the country this week, I wanted to touch on fandom a little bit. I heard allot of trash talk by hte Dallas Cowboys before and after getting beaten by the Patriots. even more trash talk from their fans! Calling Patriots fans bandwagon fans, not true fans like Cowboy fans etc.
(By the way, how/why do you trash talk a team you just lost to by 21? Don’t get it…)
I would argue with Cowboy fans on the true nature of fandom. It is true that the Patriots did not draw huge crowds in down years, especially in the early 1990s, the early 1980s, and the early 1970s. Each of these periods was followed by a year of success. The 1996 SuperBowl appearance, the 1986 SuperBowl appearance, the 1978 Should have gone to the SuperBowl not the Raiders appearance (Sugar Bear Hamilton was NOT offsides). But this is different. History proves that you need a multi year sustained period of success to build a loyal fan base. This is why I think the Patriots have finally built a very loyal fan base to build off of.
Let’s look at other highly successful teams during a period of time. The 49ers? Does anyone remember the early 1970s and the 1960s in general? They didn’t draw flies to games, the 1980s with Joe Montana and 4 SuperBowls built their loyal fan base. Only after many years of poor performances has it degraded. The Steelers of the 1970s? Great team, but they had no or very little loyal following prior to that period of success. The Giants and Redskins of the 1980s and early 90s are a little different. Their fan base grew back in the 1950s and even 1940s with Championships there, just like the Packers of the 1960s. They set up Cheesehead Nation for years to come.
Let’s talk a bit about the Cowboys, after all the talk they had last week. Roger Staubach brought a championship to Dallas in the mid 70s, a great leader and great player. The 1960s were pretty good to the Cowboys with the likes of Mike Ditka et. al. winning in the late 1960s. Before that there really was no loyal fan base. Part of it may coincide with the growth of Dallas as a city and the identity of the team with that growth, but you had a hard time trying to find a Cowboy fan in the 1980s really until Troy Aikman came around. After Troy, you were also hard pressed to find a fan. All a Cowboy fan seems to need is just a little success or a short run by their team and all of a sudden it’s the glory years all over again. Like many die hard fans, once they get a little hope, they don’t listen to reason. Try to get one of these guys to talk Cowboy football when they are 2 and 4, like most of the 1990s. It turns into a discussion of past teams and past glories.
The truth is you can argue that no team, NFL or otherwise really has a truly loyal fan base until they get a sustained period of success. Multiple years of success create that identity with a given team. Ever see a truly die hard and loyal Colts fan after they moved to Indianapolis BEFORE Peyton Manning? Weren’t any.
A loyal fan is a fan no matter what the record is, probably no more than 20-30% of the overall fan base in reality. The rest get excited ( and talk trash) once the team wins a bit. Kind of like the obnoxious Cowboy fans I ran into in Denver while traveling this week, very weak….
What an interesting season so far. Who would have thought Green Bay would be undefeated? Or St. Louis completely decimated by industry. Looks like Houston is much imropoved, a possible sleeper in the AFC South. Tampa Bay is showing signs of life all of a sudden, and when will the Cowboys actually play someone with any talent at all? The teams they beat so far have a combined record of 3-13….
On to this weeks’ picks….
Week 5 fantasy sleepers…
Ron Dayne RB HOU - With Ahman Green hurt, and facing a very suspect running defense, expect Dayne to get allot of touches and probably at least one short yardage touchdown. Something like 75 yards rushing and a TD with no Zach Thomas to stop him…
Dwayne Bowe WR KAN - JAC’s defense is pretty good, but Bowe has really come out of no where as the go to guy after Gonzalez. Bowe is just too tall and strong to stop in hte red zone or in mid length patterns.
Thomas Jones RB NYJ - Against a more than suspect defensive line of the Giants, this might be the week Thomas Jones FINALLY breaks out and does something that would have warrented the high pick he was in most leagues….
Jason Campbell QB WAS - It just looks like a shootout with a surprising DET offense. Campbell has the weapons against a bad DET defense to put up good numbers this week.
Marshawn Lynch RB BUF - Yeah I know he has been disappointing this year. Allot of people picked him to be much more consistent than he is. But I really am not sold on the Cowboys run D, they haven’t played anyone yet and Buffalo will try to really establish the run this week to protect their rookie QB…
Players to Avoid…
Shaun Alexander RB SEA - With a broken wrist in a cast, I really don’t see him doing much against a physical PIT D even if Polamauu doens’t play.
Pick a CHI QB - Doens’t matter who it is, really. They have not proven they can execute even a simple running play and GB has a turnover happy and surprisingly physical D.
Jamal Lewis RB CLE - I have been accused of picking on him every week. But he was picked pretty high in most leagues and really only has had ONE good week so far. Does anyone really feel a breakout game for him against the NE D?
Tony Gonzalez TE KC - JAC has a very physical D, and maybe the best thing they do is take away the TE. Unless Bowe has a big game to open up the middle of the field, it will be difficult for Gonzalez to break free of the JAC linebackers, who are big and can run.
San Diego D - Tough matchup for them this week. Travis Henry is looking to put up a big performance before he ends up being suspended for the year (or to impress his 9 kids, not sure which), Marshall and that receiving crew are big, physical and can get downfield. So far SD’s big weakness has been defending the pass. And has ANYONE seen “Lights Out” Merriman ANYWHERE? Did he forget to pay the light bill or was Wade Philips possibly just really really good at calling defenses that put him in a position to make plays?
So much for this week. I really think DAL will actually be tested, this is not a good matchup for their D…
Ok, how many times have we heard or seen a professional sports team hold a city hostage for a new stadium? We have all heard it, “Build us a new stadium or we’ll move”. This usually ends up in a vote for some sort of public money to be spent, existing or potential season ticket holders to have to pay something to reserve a seat (remember PSL’s?). And in general a ton of animosity, a public battle, and either a new stadium that will only be good for about 15 years (on a 30-year mortgage or lease) or the team moves, and then EVERYBODY loses. So what is the big deal anyway? Is it all about teams’ greed? Who makes money on this deal anyway? Let’s dive in!
The economics of the NFL are alot more stable than that of other sports. Revenue sharing, salary cap, etc. have made the teams equal both on and off the field, although some are more profitable than others. New stadiums are driven by this need for more profitability. Payrolls are a fixed cost in the NFL, so to make more money, it needs to come from other places. More seats, more luxury boxes (at a few 100k a pop per year!), concessions, parking, etc. – all with the minimum investment possible. Simple business rules. THAT’S why they cry for public money. The less a team actually has to spend, the more profitable it is in the short term, although not in the long term. Well, what the heck does that mean?
Team X is making $10 million a year (I know, but let’s use simple numbers, hmmm?). Well, other teams in newer stadiums are making three times that. And heck, they want to too! Adding seating helps, but that is actually a really small number. What they want are luxury boxes and concessions, naming rights, etc. Team X field is like most stadiums we all know, decent parking, alot of satellite lots the team doesn’t own, a few luxury boxes, and the team gets a share of concessions (food, T-shirts, assorted game day stuff – impulse buys that end up in a corner somewhere, you know…crap). This is where the team can improve; what if in a new stadium the team owns the parking, the concessions, sells the naming rights, etc., there is a chance for BIG dollars here. If a team were to take over what I just mentioned and say triple the number of luxury boxes, a team can quite literally go from our fictitious $10 million to $50 in a one year leap. Not bad! The more public money a team gets to fund this project, the less it has to spend and the more profitable it becomes quickly. But in this case a team most likely will lease the field from the municipality and therefore have an overhead cost they have to pay over time. Not bad though!
How about plan B: private financing. The team and investors put together funds to build a stadium. Share revenues from everything that goes with the stadium and now has no lease. The do have a mortgage however depending on what they needed to raise but a kick-ass credit rating!! This can lead the more available private funds in the future. And since there was no threat to leave, no public backlash over new taxes to pay for the stadium (anyone listening in Denver and Cleveland?). Also, destiny control. They can do whatever they want. Case in point: Coca Cola is an official NFL sponsor – what do you get in Gillette Stadium in Massachusetts? Pepsi. Hey, they own the stadium, they can have whatever sponsors they want. AND still get the sponsor money from the NFL. Pretty cool, isn’t it? So that’s the team perspective; what about the city or state?
There are some very good reasons for a city to get behind a project like this. Given there are risks of public support, or lack there of, backlash against elected officials, etc. I love case studies, so let’s look at one: Cleveland.
I remember growing up in Boston, making fun of Cleveland as a city. We all did. I think everyone I knew in the US made fun of Cleveland. My friends in EUROPE made fun of Cleveland. Downtown Cleveland was not a great place. You went to a game and then got the heck out. This has no bearing on how great the Cleveland fans were, and are, because they are great fans. But the area of the football stadium made you want to spray Lysol on yourself after you left. That was then, this is now. Have you been lately? Jacobs field was built. The Rock and Roll Hall of Fame was built. The new NFL stadium was built. Downtown Cleveland is pretty cool now. Great restaurants, hotels, bars, clubs, great stuff. A HUGE improvement! All because of the addition of stadiums. Well, what did this actually do? Tourism is nice, but seasonal – you can’t count on it. To make money in any area you have to draw more local people to that area. Essentially, get the middle class folks in the suburbs to WANT to spend their entertainment dollars in the city. Change their spending patterns. Change their minds! Give them a reason to spend money in a region and the region will get built up. Cleveland is a great example. Public money was spent, yes, but it improved the economic viability of the area. THAT is money well spent. But you have to have a plan and a reason for it to work. Not just “I want a new stadium”; it has to fit in the vision and the urban development plan of the city.
Both ways do work. Owning their own stadium is the best for a team in the long run, but raising private money, usually $700-$800 million is NOT easy. Public money works, but only if there is a goal and a plan. I really do hate it when teams make demands for a new place to play. I still remember the Patriots playing in Fenway Park and Harvard Stadium because they could not get a stadium built because of a lack of public support and politics. And look now – they built their own and are better off for it! The next time your local team, NFL or otherwise, starts making noise about a new stadium, think about it from the points of view of both sides. Would you be willing to pay a little extra sales tax to rejuvenate your city, or can the team do it alone? It is when both sides cannot get their goals together, or at least equal, that a team ends up moving. It is NEVER just politics – politics is just the universal scapegoat. Check out the research of Dr. Rosentraub at Cleveland State University for exruciating detail on why teams move.
