WMTMQR: From a TMQ Column That's Hot Off the Presses

Yeah so I skipped the TMQ from two weeks ago. It wasn't anything special anyways. Certainly not as pathetic as this week's, which in addition to Gregg's regular dosage of mindless bullshit, irrational reasoning, and WRONG included not one but three photos of NFL cheerleaders. Look, I like T and A as much as the next guy. Specifically I am an A man. But Jesus Criminy on a pogo stick, Gregg. Tone it down. You're a fucking weirdo.

McNabb celebrated his deal by throwing three interceptions, one a pick-six, and posting a wretched 69.4 passer rating.

Considering the Redskins were down 14-0 before the opening kickoff and 70-0 at the end of the first quarter, it's not surprising that the Eagles were ready for McNabb to throw a shit ton of passes. He actually was on the verge of getting them back in the game a couple times with big plays. I'm not saying he's not washed up or that he deserved the money, but he didn't really have that horrible of a game when you consider the circumstances.

The situation was so messed up that even though the Redskins' cheerleaders danced throughout the first half in two-piece summer outfits -- despite a cool night and light rain -- 36 gorgeous scantily attired women dancing in the rain could not improve the home team's fortunes.

Yeah, see this is what I'm talking about. Is he a closeted homosexual and overcompensating for it? Is he trying to piss his wife off? Is he just a nerd who can't keep his excitement about good looking broads to himself? Your guess is as good as mine.

And Shanahan's game management! Trailing 42-14 in the second quarter, he had Washington punt on fourth-and-1. Punting on fourth-and-1 when down by four touchdowns!

FOR SHAME! PUNTING IS ALWAYS WRONG ALWAYS AND FOREVER EVEN WHEN IT'S THE FIRST HALF AND YOU'RE DOWN 28 AND IT'S FAR FROM TIME TO PANIC. There will be time for that later! (More on that later)

Hakeem Nicks started to run a slant, then inexplicably stopped in his tracks; Eli Manning threw the slant, Dallas corner Bryan McCann cut in front and returned the pick 101 yards for a touchdown, turning a close contest into what would become a Boys rout. The botched play was sour. So was the call -- can't anybody just run at the goal line in the NFL anymore?

If you watch any amount of football on any given weekend, you'd know the answer to that is "sometimes." I'm a Broncos fan, and at the end of last season I saw a stat that they were stopped for no gain or a loss of yardage when running the ball from the opponents' 1 yard line like 40 times last year. It was something like 2.5 times per game, pretty sad considering how rare it is to have a possession on the 1. For a single anecdote from this season, check out the Bears' possession at 10:37 here.

Scoring to pull within 23-17 with 2:10, Cincinnati onside kicked. Last month yours truly decried "an officiating problem that has been driving TMQ crazy for years. In a scramble for a loose ball, if any player takes possession for even an instant, with a knee down and in contact with an opponent, the play should end. But zebras don't officiate mad scrambles this way. They let the players fight for the ball, then award possession to whoever wins the Darwinian struggle. Often the fighting continues although all players involved have their knees down."

Who quotes themselves directly like that? And it should be so easy for the refs to know exactly when the play ends and blow their whistle right then as 10 players all converge on a loose ball at top speed! Why haven't they started doing that, since there's certainly no way it would ever lead to them fucking up the call and completely changing the course of a game.

That's exactly what happened on the Cincinnati onside kick.

I was watching this game. It's not what happened.

Pierre Garçon of Indianapolis fielded the kick, had control and went to both knees.

He never had control.

The whistle should have sounded -- down over. Instead, the zebras allowed players to fight and pull for the ball for a solid 15 seconds.

Because before the pile formed, no one had possession while down by contact.

Someone ripped the ball away from Garçon -- remember, he was down!

Without control.

-- and possession was awarded to Cincinnati.

Class Gregg- revisionist history used to prove an impractically stupid point. See also: EVERY BLITZ IN THE HISTORY OF ORGANIZED FOOTBALL HAS FAILED- HERE ARE TWO EXAMPLES.

Having the quarterback march around holding the ball, defense not realizing the ball has been snapped, is a longstanding youth league trick. In another variation of this action, the quarterback says loudly, "There's something wrong with the ball." The center hands the quarterback the ball, thus snapping; the offensive line goes Stonehenge; the quarterback walks toward the sideline as if to show the ball to an official, then sprints up the field for a touchdown. Though the snap and the Stonehenge line were kosher, TMQ thinks the middle-school play could be flagged. "No player shall act in an unsportsmanlike manner," says the National Federation of High Schools football rulebook which governs most high school and middle-school play. The NCAA and NFL have similar rules. Trying to trick the defense into allowing an uncontested touchdown doesn't sound particularly sporting, especially if it involves pretending to speak to the officials, since players are supposed to become passive when the officials are involved.

Ludicrous. Given that perspective, here are some other things Gregg might find unsporting:
-End arounds
-HB passes
-The triple option (too deceptive!)
-Passing to a WR who is taller than the DB covering him
-Running away from a player who is slower than you while you are in possession of the ball
-Blocking

Instead Chiefs coaches called a pass; Matt Cassel ran backward all the way to the 19, where he was hit and fumbled; Denver's Jason Hunter took the fumble the length of the field for a touchdown and a 35-0 Denver lead that effectively ended the contest. Never panic in the first half; there will be plenty of time for that later!

Unless you're the Redskins on Monday Night Football and it's 42-14. When you're facing THAT particular 28 point deficit, you definitely panic and go for it on 4th down in your own territory.

TMQ in the News: Wednesday, I will be moderator for the Washington launch of the United Nations Human Development Report, one of the world's key documents.

I'M A GOOD PERSON! NOTICE THIS!

This year's report has a hopeful tone -- it shows that in most cases, poor nations are making decent progress. The report summary is here and the event announcement is here. I became interested in developing world advancement rates when researching

I'M SMART!

my 2003 book, "The Progress Paradox,"

BUY MY BOOK!

and have since done what I can to draw attention to the subject, including, in most recent years, helping the report launch.

I AM SUCH A GOOD PERSON! AND NOT AT ALL SELF-RIGHTEOUS!

Steelers, Patriots Meet in Arena League Action: New England got steamrolled in Cleveland, then went to Pittsburgh and steamrolled the Steelers. This must prove that on any given Sunday --

Any team can win in the NATIONAL FOOTBALL LEAGUE. Jaworski'd. You know, last year I watched MNF almost every week and of course it pretty much drove me batty. Listening to Jaws, Chuckie, and that dumbfuck Tirico will do that to you. Because of my schedule this fall, I've probably only seen a grand total of 30 minutes of MNF. And I gotta say I feel just fine about that.

But a Steelers-Patriots contest in which both teams opened in the shotgun spread, and stayed shotgun spread for most of the game, was a little too postmodern for my taste.

For all your high mindedness and pretension, I'm 95% sure you're not using "postmodern" correctly there.

Trailing 10-0, the Steelers reached third-and-goal at the New England 4, threw an incompletion and kicked a field goal. Wouldn't a couple rushes have yield six points?

Maybe. Maybe not. Wouldn't a pass from an all-pro QB to a talented receiving corps have yielded six points? Wouldn't kicking on third down have been the smarter move, in case the snap got botched? Wouldn't it be great if no one started Christmas shopping until December 22nd?

Then, New England leading 29-18 with four minutes remaining and facing third-and-5, Pittsburgh blitzed seven men, and I don't even need to tell you who won the game.

Shockingly, despite trailing by 11 and not having the ball with 5 minutes left, the Steelers went on to lose. That could have been avoided, however, if they hadn't blitzed on that play. Blitzing fails every time and is a bad idea no matter what. Just ask the 2005 and 2008 Steelers.

Phillips has a low-key coaching style -- he draws up game plans but relies on players to be professionals and prepare themselves physically and psychologically. This approach worked when he was head coach of the Broncos and Bills,

To the tune of two playoff appearances and zero playoff wins in five seasons.

Was the final score poor sportsmanship? Normally the gauge of sportsmanship in football is whether a team with a big lead stops passing in the second half. Wisconsin runs the ball so well that to hold down the score, the Badgers should switch to passing. Wisconsin starters left the game early, and Wisconsin tactics in the second half were bland. The missing sportsmanship touch was that, leading 62-13 at the start of the final stanza, Wisconsin kicked extra points on its three fourth-quarter touchdowns. The Badgers should have knelt on the PATs.

Nothing screams "we care!" like forgoing that extra point. A true indication of class. Why be penny wise and pound foolish? If you're going to kneel on PAT attempts, might as well spend your possessions kneeling three times and punting.

In San Francisco, They Know About Sweet-n-Sour: San Francisco looked finished with Les Mouflons leading 17-13 with 2:30 remaining and the Forty-Niners facing third-and-32 in their territory. Troy Smith threw to Frank Gore in the left flat for 14 yards, then on fourth-and-18 threw the same play again in the left flat to Gore for 23 yards, then threw to Michael Crabtree for the touchdown.

BEWARE THE CRABTREE CURSE! Adding talented players to your team makes it worse, not better!

[Referring to the Raiders and their patchwork roster] This is a team after TMQ's heart -- castoffs and who-dats.

Remember that time he suggested that NBA teams stop using their first round picks because every year, some of them don't work out? Yes, I agree with you, that is one of the dumbest things ever written about sports.

Jacksonville Becomes the Dillon Panthers of the NFL: Jacksonville has now won games on a final-snap 59-yard field goal and a final-snap 50-yard Hail Mary. You have to feel for Texans defender Glover Quin, who tried to knock the pass to the ground -- exactly what defenders should do to a Hail Mary -- only to see it carom to Jax's Mike Thomas for the winning six.

Hat tip to Jack M: if only Quin had selfishly gone for a stat-padding interception, the game might have headed to OT.

BCS note: Can sportscasters and sportswriters please stop referring to the USA Today and Harris polls as the "human" polls? No other species gets a vote -- the BCS is obviously worried the Klingons would like TCU more than Auburn.

Does he know how the BCS works? He knows that there are computer rankings (admittedly not really true "polls," but still) involved, right?

Stop Me Before I Blitz Again!: City of Tampa leading Carolina 24-16 with 4:40 remaining, the Bucs faced third-and-15 in their own territory. Play straight defense here and a stop is statistically likely ... It's a mega-blitz! Tampa converts and scores the game-icing touchdown on the possession.

Shame on Carolina for anticipating a long-developing pass play and trying to force a sack or turnover. There's got to be some kind of weird childhood incident behind his hatred of blitzing. I don't want to speculate any further than that.

Bonus Obscure College Score of the Week: Bowdoin 26, Colby 21. OK, these schools are not obscure,

Snob alert. I am barely aware of Bowdoin's existence and couldn't begin to tell you where it is- and I had no fucking idea Colby was a school or where it is.

but I make an exception because this was the final college football game for my son Grant, Bowdoin's left tackle. Plus you gotta love a contest that pits the Polar Bears against the Mules. Leading 26-21, Bowdoin took possession on its 1-yard line with 9:17 remaining and staged a 14-play clock-killer drive, closing out the game. Twelve of the snaps were rushes, allowing Grant and his fellow offensive linemen a moment in the sun as the season concluded. Grant's best two college games were

Too long; didn't read. It's funny- Gregg and Simmons hate each other and are usually polar opposites in terms of writing content and style, yet they both hold the incorrect assumption that I give one quarter of one percent of a shit about their kids. Just write about the NFL, jackass. No one cares about your family. Or your book.

MMTMQR: Yeah, I Started Reading TMQ Again

Why? Because I needed to find out whether or not that new "The Event" show that NBC is cramming down my throat is scientifically accurate or not. (SPOILER ALERT: Gregg did not address that topic this week.) (OTHER SPOILER ALERT: He also didn't identify the Wacky Wine of the Week. Fingers crossed that that item returns later this fall.)

Not only is Oregon scoring 54 points per game; the Ducks are snapping the ball and scoring so fast the whole thing goes by in a blur. "What did I just see?" both defensive coordinators and spectators must be asking themselves.

Literally. Except when they don't need to ask rhetorical questions and are able to discern that they're just watching a really talented offensive FOOTBALL team.

Call it the blur offense.

No. It's a no huddle offense that goes faster than most no huddle offenses.

Does this mean the Ducks have discovered a fundamentally new way to play football?

In case you couldn't figure out the already comically obvious answer, Gregg fills you in a few sentences later: NO. Unfortunately for Gregg, he answers "no" for the wrong reason; by identifying an offense that was fundamentally new 50 years ago and then eventually faded out. Did you know there used to be an offense called the "wishbone?" And that it was awesome at first, and used by lots of teams, but now barely exists? True story. The problem, of course, is that the wishbone was fundamentally new at one point. When you take the no huddle and shave five seconds off the amount of time that elapses between plays, you're still running the no huddle. Strange but true. Why am I still writing about this? No clue.

Fantastic offense hardly ensures a BCS bowl win for the Ducks. Oklahoma set the NCAA scoring record at 58 points per game in 2008, using a variation on the high school-style Franklin spread. The Sooners went on to lose to Florida in the BCS title game.

Ah, as soon as they faced a team that gave Sam Bradford fewer than 15 seconds to make his reads and find an open receiver. Also: no one thinks that a team is guaranteed a BCS win because they score a lot of points. Thanks for blowing the lid off that theory though.

TMQ continues to believe the NFL is merely talking about concussion safety for show, hoping the issue will go away. Player behavior won't change until penalties are assessed, and there are few signs of officials taking neurological safety seriously. If more personal-foul flags were thrown for helmet hits, helmet hits would decline.

There are like five of those every game.

Yet the NFL won't do so little as enforce the chin-strap rule. Why? Because the NFL couldn't care less about concussion safety.

I'm with TMQ in feeling like way too many dudes are losing their helmets these days, and that it can't be happening because of faulty equipment every single time. On the other hand, the NFL doesn't care about concussion safety because it's not penalizing players whose chin straps break? This has what to do with concussions? I don't know of a case in the past few years where someone sustained a concussion after they lost their helmet. Feel free to fill me in if it's happened. I know of a case where someone got their head stomped on by a 350 pound pile of asshole named Albert Haynesworth when their helmet came off, but that's totally different.

The league is just pumping public-relations smoke, hoping public attention to the head-trauma issue will fade and business as usual will rule.

What incentive would they have to respond to the issue that way? Would it cost them money to really crack down on the issue? And thanks for the unnecessary hyphen between public and relations.

United States Congress -- over to you.

It's not like they have anything else to do!

Sweet 'N' Sour Performer: Tony Romo managed to throw for 406 yards, yet have a terrible game. Only the Cowboys can really pull that off.

Lots of teams/players can pull that off. Philip Rivers does it almost every week.

TMQ: Grammar Snob: The expression "healthy food" has become widespread, used where "healthful food" would be correct. Food can't be "healthy." Food, in most cases, is dead.

Dear TMQ: Grammar Snob: DIE. You are wrong. (See #3.) And there's nothing worse than someone who's wrong while trying to be smarter than everyone. A dumb person who says "Me and my brother went down to the fishin' hole" is wrong but not annoying. A person who says "Whom went to the fishin' hole?" because they're trying to sound smart is intolerable.

TMQ contends that at moments of stress, coaches should yell: "Don't panic, there will be plenty of time for that later."

Imagining Gregg running a team from the sidelines at any level above Pop Warner makes me laugh. How could anyone take the guy seriously? At least he'd make things exciting by going for every 4th down and constantly attempting onside kicks.

Trailing by the new economy score of 24-7, Denver reached fourth-and-3 on the Nevermores' 19 with 11:54 remaining. Josh "When Does the Frat Party Start?" McDaniels sent in the kicking unit, and TMQ wrote the words "game over" in his notebook. Down by 17 points on the road late against a power defense, taking a field goal on fourth-and-short doesn't cut it. True, Baltimore was likely to win no matter what McDaniels called on this down -- but going for it was Denver's sole hope at that point.

His next sentence basically says that going for it was the only The completed kick made it a two score game. A 4th down conversion and eventual TD would have made it a two score game. So, no. As usual: no, no, no, you're wrong.

Christmas Creep:

Yep. He's still at it.

I watched Atlanta drip-drip-drip its way to victory against Cleveland and tried to think of something flashy to say about the Falcons. I couldn't. But expect them to be a factor in the postseason.

DO THEY GO FOR IT ON 4TH DOWN ENOUGH? DON'T THEY HAVE ANY UNDRAFTED OR PREVIOUSLY CUT PLAYERS? AMERICA NEEDS TO KNOW.

Stop Me Before I Blitz -- Wait, It Worked! Oakland blitzed like mad against San Diego, including three consecutive snaps with seven-man blitzes on the final Chargers' possession. The result was 506 yards of offense surrendered but victory when three of Philip Rivers' final four passes, all hurried by the big-blitz, fell to the ground incomplete. So the blitz worked here -- but the odds say that if the Raiders continue big-blitzing, over the course of the season they will be sorry.

Unless it keeps succeeding and helping them win close games late in the 4th quarter. In that case they will not be sorry. Just like many teams that employ the blitz on a regular basis succeed every week. Kind of like the now 5-1 Jets.

Network Greenlights a Prequel to the Sequel of the "Nikita" Remake: Anyone can produce a television show that is mainly nonsense: As James Parker of The Atlantic has noted, to produce a TV show that consists entirely of nonsense is an art form. The latest variant of Nikita rises to the level of nothing but nonsense: There are no scenes that make sense.

Hyperbolic. This isn't Around the Horn we're talking about here. ZING!

So by Parker's standard, the latest Nikita is art. But like a lot of art, it's really bad. Five episodes have aired, and TMQ needs to get his points in before the cancellation.

First of all: THEY PORTRAY THE AMOUNT OF TIME IT TAKES TO TRAVEL LONG DISTANCES IN SPACE COMPLETELY INACCURATELY.

In the pilot, Nikita, this time played by Maggie Q, effortlessly beats into unconsciousness two huge men with guns -- Maggie Q might weigh 110 pounds -- and doesn't even muss her clothes.

No action movie or TV show featuring a female protagonist has ever stooped to such a level.

She breaks a dead-bolted hotel door with a single kick, shattering the hinges, then kicks a huge man, causing him to go flying backward and smash into a wall unconscious.

You're only making me want to actually check out the show.

One doubts even a martial-arts champion could do either thing.

1. Pretentious sentence. 2. Actually, some martial arts champions probably can do that. 3. It's just a fucking TV show. 4. Thanks for the unnecessary hyphen between martial and arts.

Nikita depicts its heroine killing bad guys by throwing knives. In one scene, a steak knife thrown into a huge bad guy's chest causes him to fall dead instantaneously. Even if a steak knife could be thrown into the center of the chest (unlikely -- the sternum is pretty strong), a person wouldn't just fall dead: he would struggle, try to clamp the wound and

You know the drill. This goes on for paragraphs. It's like he's holding a grudge or something. Did the producer of Nikita outbid him for opera tickets at a silent auction or something?

Can't physical reality at least be depicted accurately?

No one cares except you.

See you again later this week! I know our posting tally continues to slip- but I've decided that if I'm only going to do one per week or so, it might as well be a TMQR. I know you're all just thrilled about that idea.

FMTMQR: Easterbrook Is Actually Much Lamer Than Jack Gives Him Credit For

Looking back on Jack's post from a couple days ago, I realized something. Although he has correctly identified TMQ as a pretentious moron, I feel his post didn't quite do enough to also identify him (TMQ) as a clueless jackass. So here I am, with my longest post in a while, to rant and rave about that. As usual it is unfunny, because I am unfunny. Read at your own peril.

Since I started subjecting myself to his drivel last fall, I've identified what I call Gregg's "Three Pillars of Dumbassery." He constantly bitches and moans about these topics despite being (almost always) completely wrong in his analysis relating to them. If you've been reading the blog for a while, you'll recognize them. They are:

1) His "I Don't Understand Technology" pillar- In which he (embarrassingly) insists that clocks in sports which are accurate to hundreds or tenths of a second are totally pointless. This pillar has finally stopped appearing in his columns this season; I'd like to think that maybe someone sent him this video about Olympic timing doohickeys and it got him to realize how fucking dumb he was being.

2) His "Tragic Oversimplification by Insisting that Changing One Event in the Distant Past Will Automatically Change a Final Outcome" pillar- (catchy name, I know) In which he insists that when team A loses to to team B on a last second field goal, team A should have run up the middle for no gain instead of throwing an incomplete pass at some point ten minutes earlier in the fourth quarter. This would have kept the clock running at that time and subsequently it would have run out before team B could later kick the deciding field goal. Although this claim is pure lunacy 99% of the time he brings it up, I don't ever expect it to disappear because unlike pillar #1 it cannot be proven objectively wrong. Too bad. It's like trying to convince Jemele Hill that the Feds are not picking on Barry Bonds because he is black. I mean, it should be fucking obvious. But since you can't show her a cool internet video that 100% disproves it, she's going to cling to it. (While also claiming that she doesn't defend Bonds just because he's black.)

And that leads us to the topic at hand...

3) His "Coaches Don't Care About Winning or Losing, and Fans and Players Don't Care About Getting Shut Out" pillar. (I'm on fire with these names, aren't I.) This is perhaps the most patently wrong of the three. The basic idea is expressed in one of two ways- either A) pretty much anytime a coach calls for a punt when his team is trailing in the second half, he's a total pussy who has no idea how to win a game, or B) anytime a coach kicks a field goal when his team is being shut out and trailing by a huge margin in the 4th quarter it's a selfish move that he made purely to keep said shutout off his record. Rather than expand upon the ways in which these claims are usually fucking stupid, I'll just provide you with a pile of examples (only from subpoint B because Jack already covered A) from this week's column.

In other football news, over the years, Tuesday Morning Quarterback has grown accustomed to timid coaching decisions.

This is the underlying premise of pillar #3- coaches, who remain employed by making their team look as good as possible (sometimes by trying to win, other times by reducing a margin of defeat when a win is unattainable) don't actually make decisions they think will make their team look as good as possible. No. They make decisions for some... other... selfish reason. Yeah! Selfish. That's a good word to accuse people with. And these accusations make sense when you think about them, as long as shortly before doing so you spent a good ten minutes huffing model airplane glue.

Trailing Chicago 48-31 with nine minutes remaining, Minnesota faced fourth-and-3 on the Bears' 5, and kicked a field goal.

So they were losing by three scores before the field goal... considered the likelihood of a relatively difficult conversion (getting three yards against a scrunched up goal line defense)... and instead did something with a high probability of success that reduced their deficit to two scores. What a bunch of pussies. Brad Childress, you should be embarrassed.

Needless to say, the Vikings went on to lose.

Needless to say, a team trailing by 14 with nine minutes left in a game almost always loses no matter what they do.

Forget the 17-point margin;

Actually, no. Look at the 17 point margin. Then consider the potential benefit of doing something easy that will reduce the margin to 14. Then consider the potential cost of going for the first down and failing to convert.

the hour was late and the Vikings were within view of paydirt. To have hope of winning, they needed a touchdown.

To have hope of winning, they needed to get the margin to two scores. To have better hope of winning, they needed to get the margin to ten. Weigh the costs and benefits. (Now, I'm also not saying the situation is totally obvious. I'm not saying I'm 100% sure the Vikings made the right decision. I'm saying you can't even come close to telling me they made the wrong one. I'm not hearing it.)

Trailing Houston 21-0, Detroit kicked a field goal.

Less defensible, as this keeps the margin at three scores. However, it happened in the 2nd quarter. It was probably a little early to worry about that kind of thing. It was also a 54 yard field goal, attempted on 4th and 10. The odds of converting a 4th and 10, and finishing the drive with a TD (rather than just ending up with a closer field goal that took longer to attain) are, NEEDLESS TO SAY, low.

Needless to say, the Lions went on to lose.

Needless to say, most teams that are bad enough to fall behind by 21 in a little more than a quarter are probably going to lose a lot of their games regardless of how many 4th and 10s they attempt.

Trailing Texas 35-0, Missouri kicked a field goal.

For what it's worth, that got their deficit from five scores to four. It also happened on the last play of the 2nd quarter, when Missouri was 16 yards away from the end zone. This is an even less likely conversion than Detriot's 4th and 10. Additionally, at some point when you're getting run up and down the field and have no points, you just kind of want to get on the board. I would be more critical of this if Missouri kicked a field goal when losing 56-21. Slightly.

Needless to say, the Tigers went on to lose.

Needless to say, a team trailing by 35 late in the first half is probably going to lose.

Fraidy-cat coaching decisions like these are intended to deflect criticism away from the coach.

Wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong, and..... wrong.

In the first example, the decision was intended to bring the margin from three scores to two. If you can't understand that, you should definitely not be paid to write an NFL column for the largest sports website in America. It worked, and in fact, Minnesota ended up scoring again and getting the ball deep in their own territory trailing by 7 with a minute left. A touchdown there was very unlikely, but it would have sent the game to overtime. Granted, a field goal was less unlikely, and would have sent the game to OT had they successfully converted the 4th and 3. However, if they blew the 4th and 3, the game would have been over right then and there. Again, it's not an obvious decision.

The second and third examples also have nothing to do with deflecting blame. They have to do with taking a decent shot at 3 points instead of taking a very long shot at 7. Gregg's brainlessness in these cases is also manifested in his inability to think about the psychological impact of a huge shutout on people other than the coach. Do you think players like being shut out? Do you think fans like seeing their team get shut out? It's unquantifiable, of course. But I would bet good money that Missouri's players went into the locker room feeling a reasonable amount better about themselves just for the sake of not having a "0" next to their name on the scoreboard. Perhaps this was even the spark that led them to score 28 points in the second half and make the blowout slightly less horrific. (Oh, and they didn't lose 35-31. That would ruin my point if it were the case. Texas scored an extra three TDs themselves in the second half, making the final score 56-31.) Thinking that coaches will do anything other than what is most likely to enable them to keep their jobs (either by winning, or making their institution look less bad in losing) is fucking dumb.

Maybe they make a modicum of sense in college, where margin of victory counts in the polls -- as Missouri's ridiculous field goal boomed, coach Gary Pinkel seemed to fear being blanked and his team dropping out of the Top 25 altogether.

That's not what he was thinking, and they would not have completely dropped from the polls even if the final score had been 56-0. I promise on both counts.

(It was irrelevant that it was the last play of the first half; Missouri was on the Texas 16 and should have tried for a touchdown.)

Wrong, as already explained.

But margin of victory is meaningless in the NFL. When NFL coaches make decisions intended to keep the final score respectable,

Or in Childress and the Vikings' case, to get their team within two scores with 9 minutes left...

or avoid a shutout, while giving up any hope however small of victory,

Contrary to what Gregg thinks, kicking a field goal with 8 minutes left in the 2nd quarter when you're down 21 does not automatically cause you to forfeit the game.

it isn't just bad tactics.

Here's when it would be bad tactics: if the Vikings had been losing by 21 when they kicked that field goal with 9 minutes left. THAT'S bad tactics.

It is unprofessional -- the coach is placing his own résumé and career prospects ahead of the team.

Yes, I'm sure the team would rather take unnecessary risks (example #1) or attempt crazy 4th down conversions when points are available (examples 2 and 3). That selfish coach! Always thinking of only himself!

That's why Herm "I Honor My Contract When I'm in the Mood" Edwards' decision against Tennessee on Sunday ranks among the worst in the annals of sports.

Easy on the hyperbole, Joe Buck.

Undefeated Tennessee led 27-0 with five minutes remaining; Kansas City had fourth-and-goal on the Titans' 8; rather than try for a touchdown and maintain some tiny hope of a comeback, or at least salvage the Chiefs' dignity, Edwards sent in the field goal unit.

Let's see... 27 points = 4 scores... 24 points = 3 scores... 4th and 8 from the 8 is a very unlikely conversion, especially against a defense like Tennessee's... yeah, this seems familiar. I'm getting dumbass deja vu.

Herm wasn't even trying to protect his team's interest; instead he was protecting his own by keeping a shutout off his résumé.

There are two angles to take here, I'm not sure which is more apporpriate.

1) HE WAS REDUCING THE MARGIN FROM 4 SCORES TO 3, YOU DUMB TWAT
2) MAYBE THE FANS AND PLAYERS ALSO DIDN'T WANT TO GET SHUT OUT

I think I'll go with "both."

Moving on to a handful of other stupid jackass nuggets from the column:

Stat of the Week No. 4: Stretching back to last season, Dallas, picked by many touts including the consensus of ESPN.com experts to win the Super Bowl, has lost five of its past nine games.

How dare those pundits pick them to win this year's Super Bowl after they lost their last two games in 2007! What a bunch of lummoxes.

And I Don't Even Drink Gin: Several British readers including Holly Abbington of Whetstone, England, noted that a week ago, Tuesday Morning Quarterback was No. 2 on the list of "favorite things" -- excuse me, "favourite things" -- being perused on the Web by readers of London's Guardian newspaper.

A joke about how both British people (stereotypically) as well as TMQ are pretentious goes here.

The Real Way Many Kids Reach College: Here's a spoiler that matters to public policy -- a subplot of the current season of "Friday Night Lights" has Brian "Smash" Williams, graduated from Dillon High but without an athletic scholarship owing to an injury, rehabbing his knee and trying to get an offer from a college. Reader Robert Matranga of Orange, Calif., writes, "The show is giving the implication that a football scholarship is his only ticket to college -- that without it, college is unreachable. Smash's family cannot afford the tuition to Texas A&M, where he hopes to go -- but what about an academic or need-based scholarship? The show's implication that athletic scholarship is the only way Brian can attain college feeds the already poor awareness of federal aid in the form of Pell grants and subsidized loans, plus the need-based aid offered by many colleges directly."

This is an important point. The deck is stacked against African-American males in many respects; one of the few places where the deck is stacked in favor of African-American males is college admission. Most colleges and universities want to increase the black male population in their student bodies, and are generous with financial aid for African-American males who earned good grades. Black teens in fiction are often depicted as seeking athletic scholarships rather than regular need-based and academic scholarship opportunities -- though far more kids of all races attend college on regular need-based aid than on NCAA letters.

Not to say that all of this isn't correct... but boy, doesn't that sound like a thrilling storyline for a prime time drama? Smash Williams desperately wants to earn a football scholarship to Texas A&M! But, you know, if he doesn't get it, he can always just get an academic one too. BUT WHICH WILL IT BE? Tune in to find out.

Scouts Notes: Going into the Oakland game, Brett Favre -- who TMQ contends at this point should legally change his name to "Brett Favre Brett Favre Brett Favre"

TMQ is so unfunny he managed to screw up a joke about Brett Favre's self promotion and overexposure. This is like screwing up a Monica Lewinsky joke in early 1998.

-- had thrown eight of his 13 touchdown passes while already in the red zone. Since Jersey/B's coaches were criticized early in the season for not letting Favre throw near the goal line, they are having him throw near the goal line constantly now. Sunday, with the Jets and Raiders tied 3-3, Favre threw from the Oakland 8-yard line and the hosts were ready, intercepting the pass.

Conveniently omitted from this anecdote is the fact that the interception was thrown on 3rd and goal from the 8. Wow, you mean the Packers didn't call a run from that down and distance? Oh, and the Jets had also just called running plays on 1st and goal from the 6 and 2nd and goal from the 3. So basically... this proves ABSOLUTELY FUCKING NOTHING about the tendencies of the Jets' coaching staff.

Opponents: Expect Favre to throw near the goal line, because Jersey/B's coaches want to avoid further criticism for not letting him throw there.

Also: be ready for most quarterbacks on most teams to throw near the goal line on 3rd and 8, because running on that play would probably be a fucking stupid idea unless it was a well-designed draw or something.

Did Lions Tip the Cowboys? Dallas traded first-, third- and sixth-round draft selections to Detroit for Roy Williams and a seventh-round pick. The seventh-round throw-in is so trivial, it seems like a gratuity: "Here you are my good man, here's your highly paid perpetually complaining wide receiver, and I've thrown in a little something extra for your trouble."

OK, I have to toe a very fine line here. Don't get me wrong- Detroit ripped off Dallas. That's a huge price to pay for any non-QB. That said- Williams is pretty talented. He may be overpaid (Dallas can afford it) and a complainer (likely to subside if he's playing for a winner), but it's not like he sucks or something.

And just a thought: Dallas is foundering, so the solution is to raid the roster of the Detroit Lions?

What? You mean bad teams sometimes have good players? What are you, fucking nuts? Here's a thought for you from last July, Milwaukee Brewers- you're foundering, and the solution is to raid the roster of the Cleveland Indians? Ha! Like that will get you to the playoffs.

The Real Reason for Pass-Wacky High School Offenses -- Summer Practice Rules: Here is last week's New York Times front-page take on the A-11 offense (Page 2 had the story earlier this year. Describing the basic A-11 trick of making all 11 players appear eligible just before the snap, the Times continued, "The difficult task for a team defending against the A-11 is to quickly and accurately figure out who those five eligible receivers are." Wait -- this should be easy, it's whoever goes downfield!

You don't... really... uh... understand how football works, do you? (Note: there's a chance this was a joke and I'm the one that looks like an idiot by trying to make fun of it. If you read it in the full context of the item, you can't really tell. But since we're dealing with TMQ, I decided to not give him the benefit of the doubt. Probably works better this way. And if reader Erik wants to email me and argue that my assessment is incorrect, I hope he sends it to the correct address.)

Happy Hour in Hell's Sports Bar: Hell's sports bar has 28 wide-screen plasma TVs, and now gets DirecTV! But certain blackout rules may apply. On Sunday in the early slot, the TVs in Hell's Sports Bar showed nothing but Ravens at Dolphins and Cowboys at Rams, and the far more attractive Chargers at Bills pairing was not offered. (Wait -- this is what actually happened in the Washington, D.C., television viewing area.)

Well, Chargers/Bills is an all-AFC pairing. That means CBS has the rights and the fact that Rams/Cowboys was on FOX is irrelevant. Ravens/Dolphins is an all AFC pairing too. And Baltimore is 50 miles from DC, meaning there are probably a lot of Baltimore fans in the DC area. This shouldn't be too hard to figure out.

For the highlight program, all 28 screens in Hell's Sports Bar showed nothing but, over and over, winless Detroit kicking a field goal when down 21-0.

On 4th and 10 from their own 37 with 8 minutes left in the 2nd quarter, you fucking... useless... what's the noun I'm looking for... oh yeah. Zilcheroo. Man, if Gregg Easterbrook were here right now, I would FWAP him right across the face. Are we important enough to be self-referential like that? I hope so. I mean, not because I want us to be important. Just because I want to make that reference and have most of our readers get it. And possibly crack a little tiny smile. Or who knows, maybe even get a smidgen of a chuckle out of it. Heh. Heh.

OK, I'm done.