Lazy Comments About Bill Simmons' Lazy NFL Picks Column
I get it, Bill Simmons isn't serious about anything he writes. He just says stuff for fun. He's like a kid out there! Well, double for me then.
Broncos (+2) over Niners
Afterthought: You could call this game the "What Coulda Been Wouldn't Have Been So Great Either" Bowl. Had the Broncos kept Jeff George 2.0, things wouldn't have been any different for them. Had the Niners given up on Alex Smith and traded for Donovan McNabb last spring, same thing. Both teams were screwed either way. So ... yeah.
More like the straw-man bowl!
But for serious, you can't say that the Broncos wouldn't possibly be better with Jay Cutler (and Brandon Marshal who goes unmentioned). I'd say though that the Broncos should've been much better seeing as how they got a first round pick for Cutler, but they promptly wasted it on Tim Tebow.
As for McNabb, he's an older QB who's not surrounded by a ton of talent on the Redskins. Who the hell knows whether the 49ers would be better with him? Donovan McNabb is still ranked 8 places higher than Alex Smith by Football Outsiders, so that might've been worth an extra win or two.
Prediction: You will be flipping channels in 2015, stumble across some Division III playoff game on ESPNU and say to yourself, "Wait a second, isn't that Josh McDaniels?"
Chan Fucking Gailey still coaches in the NFL. I don't think we're going to be rid of Josh McFuckFace that easily.
Dolphins (+1.5) over BENGALS
The reason: A dream matchup for me. The Bengals are wildly overvalued; the Dolphins are wildly undervalued. You get five gambling gifts per year like this one. Crap, I hope I didn't just jinx it.
Vegas automatically gives the home team 3 points. Therefore, what Vegas is saying with this is that it thinks Miami is 1.5 points better than the Bengals. That doesn't seem like an outrageous evaluation of a matchup between Football Outsider's 13th and 19th best teams.
That being said, BET THE HOUSE ON MIAMI! VEGAS IS PRACTICALLY BEGGING YOU TO TAKE THEIR MONEY!!
CHIEFS (-7.5) over Bills
Prediction: In this year's NFL preview, I created the word "creeper" for teams that jump at least five wins and earn themselves a first-round bye. It's happened every year since the NFL went to four-team divisions in 2003. Well, I couldn't figure out this year's creeper before reluctantly settling on ... (gulp) ... San Francisco. Just because of its division. Did I have the right logic and the wrong team? The Chiefs have one of the creamiest-puff schedules in years. Maybe they don't seem like a 12-4 or 13-3 team, but again, EVERY season since 2003 has had a creeper. And they're the only candidate unless you think the Jets or Steelers can go 14-2.
Yes, what a shock that would be if the #1/#2 team (Steelers) according to Football Outsiders and every (bullshit) Power Ranking went 14-2 and won their division. I wouldn't be surprised if the Steelers went 15-1, despite the obvious attempts by the NFL to turn everyone against the Steelers. By gosh, we might have TWO creepers this year!
Afterthought: I liked Terry Bradshaw's quote about Dallas last Sunday: "The world is full of talented unsuccessful people." Every time he has a lucid moment on television, shouldn't the show be stopped as balloons are dropped from the ceiling?
Pot-kettle, people in glass houses, etc.
Afterthought: I couldn't be more excited that the Patriots have returned to the days of spreading it around, breaking out the bend-but-don't-break defense, having guys I've never heard of make huge plays, getting lucky breaks, coming up with huge halftime adjustments, making overly aggressive coaching decisions that somehow work out (note: I hated the fourth-and-1 call in San Diego, not that they did it, but because they ran such a crappy play when they hadn't been running the ball well all game, and yet, it worked out), and pulling out close games that make me feel sick afterwards.
Ha, yeah, that must be way better than when they had Randy Moss in 2007 and were blowing teams out en-route to being 2 minutes away from 19-0.
Afterthought: The Raiders went 29-83 from 2003-2009. Somehow, my Patriots have their No. 1 pick during the one year they'll probably finish 8-8. This makes me angry. Really, really angry.
Oh no! There'll only be 35 future Pro Bowlers left on the board!
Steelers (PK) over SAINTS
The Reason: Playoff game rules in effect because of the situation -- Halloween night,
I just really like the image of crotchety Dan Rooney giving his players a pre-game speech like "We're the Pittsburgh Steelers, we don't lose on fucking Halloween!" Oh also, I forgot to mention that Rooney would be wearing a Captain Jack Sparrow costume. Oops, that might've made that non-joke funny if I'd mentioned it at the beginning.
NBC,
"We don't lose on nights when NBC couldn't cram in Jay Leno, a reality show, or the horrible Outsourced that in no way should be on TV instead of the awesome Parks and Recreation.*
*I really like the show that was created by Ken Tremendous who created the blog we stole our idea from. META!
the last two Super Bowl champs
"We don't lose in games that are no more or less meaningful than any other game!"
And also, there's this e-mail from Tom in New Orleans ...
"I remember when football was fun. You could tailgate, walk into the Dome with Bloody Mary in hand, and make comments like 'that Marshall Faulk sure is good' all the while having a great time while your team pissed away game after game. You never told me that winning the Super Bowl would ruin everything." Actually, I did. With this column.
If your biggest complaint about New Orleans is that your team won the Super Bowl and their stadium is the one place in the city you can't open carry alcohol, then your New Orleans lifestyle is pretty damn peachy. So get fucked, Tom.
Also, anyone who complains about their teams winning championships is a hipster and therefore and asshole. Thus, by transitive properties, we can infer that Simmons is an asshole.
Fin.
15 comments:
Not to mention that if the Patriots had gotten a top 10 pick from the Raiders they just would have traded down to the 2nd round. When's the last time the Patriots picked in the top 10? They've traded out of the top 10 at least twice in the last 10 years iirc
Josh McFuckFace indeed.
One thing I have to disagree with right now, though. Kyle Orton is better than Jay Cutler. Physically, of course, Cutler is superior. Mentally, however, Cutler is a loser. He's never won. Ever. But he's been told how he's going to so great some day by so many people for so long that he's in a whole different universe than Orton. Or you and me and everyone else who's not Jay Cutler for that matter.
Orton was happy with a 1 year contract extension and then proceeded to go out and have an excellent season except for one game. Cutler and McFuckFace are both fuck faces.
What has Orton won? He tanked it in the second half of last season, is 2-5 right now, and never won a goddamned thing in Chicago.
But...but...he "just wins!!!!"
To quote South Park on Cutler: "I mean, you kind of suck, but my dad says you might be good someday."
Cutler is like the Eric Lindros of the NFL.
Eric Lindros is a hall of famer and I won't have you jamokes talking shit about him like that.
Orton had a winning record as a starter every year in college and up to this season, every year in the NFL, too. I assumed when Elliot said "Ever." he was referencing the fact that Jay Cutler never had a winning season in the NFL or college, either. Considering his college was Vanderbilt it's not like it was his fault, but that was my understanding of the point being made.
Of course, Purdue never actually won anything of note, nor did the Bears under Orton. Orton has never made the playoffs as a starting QB and probably never will. I'd say in terms of what they've accomplished at this point, you'd be hard-pressed to argue that Orton is a better or even more effective QB than Cutler (Hell, Orton's numbers as a Bronco are pretty much the same as Cutler's as a Bronco and Cutler's numbers as a Bear are pretty much the same as Orton's numbers as a Bear). But then again, it must not be that hard because people make that argument every day it seems.
The Bears went 10-5 with Orton as a QB his rookie season, then benched him for the returning Rex Grossman going into the playoffs. I know he didn't play in the playoffs proper but it's rather disingenuous to act like Orton wasn't the QB for a playoff team when he started and played virtually every snap in 15 of that team's 16 games. I also think if your team clinches the playoff berth at a point when you've been the only quarterback for your team, then you can say you "made" the playoffs, even if you don't play in them. Kinda like how players get championship rings even when they don't appear in the postseason(or in Bengie Molina's case, when you played for the opponents).
I don't personally care who's the better quarterback because I've never liked either, I'm only posting all this because you've been obscuring the original point, which had nothing to do with numbers or even skill. It seemed to me that the first guy was saying Orton is better only because Cutler has no experience on winning teams, not winning games "of note" but winning games, period. I don't really agree with the logic, but hey, if you got two sucky quarterbacks but one knows enough to win and the other knows enough to lose, why is it a surprise which one people prefer?
Just look at their stats. They're both losers, but who would you rather have on paper right now? If they're both fairly terrible, but one of them constantly throws interceptions and pouts on the sideline, and the other is workmanlike though ineffectual, I'd take choice B.
But yes, Orton has won only slightly more in his career than Cutler. But only one of them acts like they're the fucking center of the god damn universe.
And thank you, favorite sun, it might not have been the greatest point ever, but my points is that Cutler has never had a winning season at any level of football. Maybe he won a pee-wee championship, but after that... zilch.
It's worth pointing out that the Bears line for Orton was significantly better than the line the Bears have fielded the last two seasons.
Or maybe it's not, because apparently it was Cutler's fault when he lost at traditional SEC powerhouse Vanderbilt.
Yeah because Orton is behind the greatest offensive line in history with three rookies and an injured, ineffective Ryan Clady.
OTOH, Cutler had arguably one of the best pass-blocking offensive lines in the past few years during his 2007-2008 seasons in Denver. McDaniels chose to tear it to shreds when he got the job. Didn't make a lick of difference since Jay is a gunslinger and not a smart QB.
One thing I'll say is that Orton's receiving corps is much better than Cutler's is this year. Some of his INTs are no doubt due to receivers running shitty routes, but you still have to agree that, on paper at least, Orton is better than Cutler this year.
I definitely think we can both agree that both qbs have strengths and weaknesses and that cutler is a loudmouthed pissant who has yet to cash any checks his ass has written
AGREED
Hey! Knowing your information about NFL Picks I am so happy and try it in future..
Post a Comment