I have literally (LITERALLY literally!) been waiting 32 months to write this post

[In the words of Bart Scott, this post goes out TO ALL THE NONBELIEVERS. Yeah, FireJay may have seen much better days, but we're not dead yet. We're just slowly bleeding out. And we'll stop breathing only when we're good and ready.]

Give Bill Simmons credit where credit is due: he knows a lot about whether or not he is acquaintances with Jimmy Kimmel. He also sometimes occasionally bumblefucks his way into some half decent NBA analysis. In February of 2009, he wrote an article about how (and to what extent) the NBA's revenue system was broken and what fans could expect when the then-current collective bargaining agreement expired in the summer of 2011. He was right in a lot of ways; the CBA was awful for the owners, the owners were pretty awful at managing their finances regardless of the content of that CBA, and trouble was brewing.

Had he left his analysis there I wouldn't be writing this. But I remember reading his article and chuckling at some of his dire predictions regarding how things would shakeout in the aftermath of the impending lockout. I said to myself, "Assuming I don't die in a tragic sex accident between now and the fall of 2011, I'm going to rip this apart one day." And sure enough, I managed to completely avoid any and all sexual activity between then and now. Women don't dig basements I guess. Anyways, let's take a trip back to February of 2009 and look at Bill's analysis of "The No Benjamins Association." See, the problem wasn't Bill's premise- it was the comical hyperbole and scare tactics he used to try to support it. I usually don't link to Simmons (or anyone, really) but since this article is so old I'll buck the trend this one time.

I skipped my annual NBA All-Star Weekend column because I was frantically trying to finish my book. At least that's how I rationalized it. I need to finish this book. I have a deadline. I can't afford to spend that writing time on anything else. But after reflecting for a few days, I came to a sobering conclusion: The book was a convenient excuse. I could have found time to pump out that column. I just didn't want to hand it in.

See, it wouldn't have been a typical All-Star Weekend account for me. It would have been about money. You might remember me writing that the NBA was the No Balls Association two years ago.

Man, did I enjoy that column.

Now it's the No Benjamins Association. Nobody is rolling in Benjamins anymore. Everyone is scared. Money hangs over everything.

Funny twist- the theme of his whole article then was about how the NBA was triple fucked because of money, money, money. And then this week one of Bill's hand picked Grantland writers released a piece about how the lockout was never about money; it was purely about power. I will not set myself on fire while telling you stories about my kids and trips to Vegas with my friends.

[Ten paragraphs about how the league is financially screwed combined with anecdotes about how ZANY Celtics fans are when they visit other teams' arenas omitted.]

Yet declining attendance isn't even one of the league's four biggest problems right now. I would rank the top four like this:

1) Len Bias- still dead

2) Zombie Sonics! Or something!

3) Kobe won finals MVP after being the best player on the team that won the finals BUT OHMIGOD HE SHOT POORLY FROM THE FIELD IN GAME 7

4) Milwaukee's owner won't return my calls- doesn't he know that 200 of their fans who also like me signed an internet petition to make me GM?

1. The 2011 Lockout That Hasn't Happened Yet

Someone In The Know told me that 20 of the 30 NBA teams will lose money this season … and we haven't even come close to hitting rock bottom yet. Just wait until next season.

Yeah, just wait!

Which brings us to the Lockout That Hasn't Happened Yet. Unless the players' association agrees to major concessions by the summer of 2011 -- highly doubtful because that would involve applying common sense -- the owners will happily lock out players as soon as the current CBA expires, then play the same devious waiting game from the summer of 1998.

A waiting game that lasted SEVERAL MONTHS before a new agreement was reached and a shortened season with full playoffs happened. How strange that the exact same thing is going to happen this time around. But fuck being reasonable about that possibility; it's more fun to act like there's some kind of chance the league was going to miss multiple seasons (see below). Look, I'm not trying to play "nah nah toldja so" with Bill here. I probably should have posted about this article when I originally read it. But he's just so... Simmonsy. He can't just make a point; he has to try to pound his nail into the wall with a sledgehammer. And in doing so he butchers the point and wrecks his credibility.

David Stern will grow another scruffy beard. The owners will plant their feet in the sand, grab the tug-of-war rope and dig in. Only this time, they KNOW they will win. See, we learned a dirty little secret in the last lockout: An inordinate number of NBA players live paycheck to paycheck. Yes, even the guys making eight figures a year. You can play high-stakes poker with them … and you will win.

Quick tangent: You're asking yourself, "Wait, how can a dude making $8-10 million a year live paycheck to paycheck?" Easy. First,

And you can sort of imagine what it would sound like when a white guy from Boston paints a picture of how NBA players could be living like this. NOT DAVID LEE THOUGH! HE'S CAREFUL AND JUDICIOUS WITH HIS FINANCES!

Team Stern and the owners know this better than anyone. They will pick the next fight, and again, they will win. When the players' union waves a white flag and the lockout finally ends (2012? 2013?),

BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

I was actually scared for a couple weeks there that the lockout could potentially wipe out this season. I don't think the odds were ever over 25%, but I was sweating a little. To pretend that it might not have ended until 2013, though, is pure lunacy.

I predict a raise of the individual salary max (to $24-25 million), a softer salary cap, a restriction on long-term contracts (can't be more than three years unless you're re-signing your own star), the elimination of opt-out clauses and the midlevel exemption, and the rookie age limit rising to 20. That's seven predictions in all … and I bet I'll end up nailing six.

Simmons predicting his own predictions will be right: least surprising thing in the history of sportswriting things. Let's see how he did.

I predict a raise of the individual salary max (to $24-25 million),

Actually sort of got this one right, in the sense that teams can now spend a larger portion of their cap figure on one guy. 1 for 1.

a softer salary cap,

Cue up the Price is Right losing horn. The cap's softness remains unchanged while the luxury tax got more punitive. 1 for 2.

a restriction on long-term contracts (can't be more than three years unless you're re-signing your own star),

He counts this as two separate predictions and he got one; teams can go five years to bring their own guys back and four if they're bringing in a new guy. That's a cut back from where things were last CBA, but not as drastic as he predicted. 2 for 4.

the elimination of opt-out clauses and the midlevel exemption,

Wrong on both counts. 2 for 6.

and the rookie age limit rising to 20.

As far as my research shows, this wasn't even discussed as part of this negotiation. Not to say the owners wouldn't prefer it to exist, but still. 2 for 7.

That's seven predictions in all … and I bet I'll end up nailing six.

Insert joke about Bill's NFL gambling skills here.

Will the league survive a yearlong disappearance?

Sure, but that's the wrong question. How about "How likely is it that the league and the players look at what happened to the NHL after its yearlong lockout last decade and say 'Fuck it, that looks like a great idea.'"

What about two years?

Again, I'm guffawing.

We're less than 29 months from starting to find out. If you think it's a good idea to disappear for even six months in shaky economic times, ask any Writers Guild member how that turns out.

The NBA lockout is like an apple, and the writers' strike is like an orange. Hope you see what I did there.

These wealthy or used-to-be-wealthy owners don't want to keep losing money just to feed their ego by continuing to own a basketball team. They will make other arrangements, the same way they would arrange to sell their favorite yacht because they didn't feel like splurging on gasoline anymore. These guys don't want to fix the system; they want to reinvent it.

No, they didn't. All they wanted was a bigger slice of the cash pie. And they got it. Most of the framework around that pie ended up more or less unchanged, to the surprise of no one with a brain. Gotta admit that sensationalism is more fun though. Moving ahead to a slightly less absurd but still pretty stupid segment of the same article.

4. The dawning of NBA Franchise Hot Potato.
Ohhhhhhhh, it's coming.

I became obsessed with this topic over All-Star Weekend and solicited input from as many people in the know as I could. Franchise Hot Potato hinges on five factors in all, although only three need to be in play.

The most Simmonsy of all Simmonsisms: there are X and only X factors that determine how the universe works. Here, let me list them for you. 1) Something about girls who are "stripper hot." 2) 80s movies! Etc.

Looking at the next 15 months only, the consensus of people in the know was that multiple NBA franchises (guesses ranged from three to eight) will move cities, get sold to new owners or throw themselves on the mercy of the league (meaning the NBA would effectively take over operations of that franchise, kinda like what happens in the MLS or WNBA).

The league took over the Hornets about 22 months after this writing but I'll give him that. Obviously no one moved cities; the Kings might next summer but it's a big might. As far as I know, there have been three ownership changes since February '09 (only one of which happened before June 2010): Bobcats, Warriors, and Nets. The Hawks deal fell through. So I guess the people on the lower end of his guessing spectrum were close to right. Still kind of absurd though. The alarmism in this piece is fucking silly. And it all comes to a head in the second to last paragraph:

So that's the climate for the No Benjamins Association right now: Murky, unpredictable and not so lucrative. And you wonder why I didn't want to write about All-Star Weekend. Looking at the big picture, the league won't struggle even 1/10th as much as the NHL in years to come -- of all the wildest predictions I heard in Phoenix, the craziest came from a connected executive

Named JackO, Hench, or something of the like.

who predicted that fifteen NHL teams would go under within the next two years (and was dead serious) --

/checks NHL website, laughs

and Major League Baseball is about to get creamed beyond belief.

Man, I wish someone had told Pujols and Fielder and Reyes about this before they hit free agency. Those guys aren't going to make any money this offseason! Also, I hope your standard for "beyond belief" is really low. MLB indeed saw a multiple point attendance drop from 2008 to 2009. And then: yeah.

Power Rankings are Whatever But....

Check this out:

Krukie gives the Power Rankings for the league, and shamelessly puts the Cleveland Indians as the third best team in baseball.

The Cleveland Indians.

Karl Ravech tries to put a nice little spin on it to make it not sound as awful as it is....

KR: You seem to do it really on what's going on as we speak, ESPN.com kind of looks at like the potential for these teams

JK: Yeah I don't look at potential. Potential just gets you fired, that's what I've been told by a bunch of managers. I'm not going to get fired because of this.

When the Indians are struggling to hit that 70 win mark in September due to awful pitching and utilizing 3-4 replacement level bats on an everyday basis, I beg of you, ESPN management, watch this video on repeat 60 times like I just did, and teach Mr. I'm-not-going-to-get-fired a little lesson about getting cocky about.....not getting fired.

Update: Ryan Dempster Was Wrong

I had almost forgotten about this:

Dempster LOL

Oh man. The playoffs-less offseason is a long and tiring thing, but at least I have lots of Cubs fans to hang out with lately!

Yo, DJ Gallo, You Are Totally Not Funny. And You Seem Kind of Stupid.

DJ Gallo gave AL and NL previews on espn.com. They're chalk full of bad jokes, etc.

Here's the National League one. I'm just going to skip from part to part.

Arizona Diamondbacks
With a young roster, standout pitching and solid defense, this is a team that is easy to root for -- especially because Arizona's anemic offense means that few, if any, Diamondbacks are on steroids.

ROFLZOMG! Hey DJ, Neifi Perez took PEDs. So did Ryan Franklin and Jim Parque and shitloads of other awful players in the last 10 years. "Bad" does not equal "steroid free." And there's a good chance the DBacks will have a decent offensive year.

Fun Fact: The Rockies set a franchise record last season with a 4.32 ERA. They also replaced their humidor with a Jacuzzi.

LAWLAWLAWLAWLAWL or they had the best pitching staff in the franchise's history. But no, I like your joke so much that I'm going to pretend that isn't true.

San Diego Padres
Like division rivals Arizona, Los Angeles and San Francisco, the Padres have difficulty scoring runs. But San Diego will still be competitive, thanks to a pitching staff led by Jake Peavy, who led the NL in wins, strikeouts and ERA last season. Peavy also led the Padres with 17 hits, a .233 batting average and seven RBIs.

I can picture DJ cracking himself up typing that last sentence.

Fun Fact: Khalil Greene … still white.

...

NL West predicted order of finish: Inverse to the number of team losses.

Does that sentence have a purpose? There's no information and an overused, stupid joke. Like I understand that these are joke previews, but this is just useless.

NL Central predicted order of finish: The first shall be first, and the last shall be last.


And again.

Oakland Athletics

Fun Fact: You can now purchase a copy of "Moneyball" for $5.99 on the bargain rack at Barnes and Noble.

Hah. What a crappy bargain book. No one should want to read it because the A's are bad now.

AL West predicted order of finish: Four-way tie.

Stop this.

AL Central predicted order of finish: Wouldn't you like to know.

I said knock it off already! Don't you want to at least attempt a joke here?

Fun Fact: Delmon Young has only 26 walks in 681 career plate appearances. He tends to throw his bat at every pitch. And also at many umpires.

Fantastic! Hey DJ, 2006 called, it wants its joke back.

AL East predicted order of finish: 1. Yankees; 2. Red Sox; 3. Blue Jays; 4. Rays; 6. Orioles.

But DJ, there's only 5 teams in the AL Ea----aaaahhhhhhhhh!!!! There's the funny! Right there! Orioles 6th! ZOMG! You should be helping Bob Saget write stand-up. Seriously.

If Bill Simmons Publishes Your Question In A Mailbag Column, You Are A Douche By Association, Pt. 1

Actually, based on these questions, most of these people were already douches on their own. But I digress. Let's get to the awfulness.

Back in mid-January, you might remember me writing a "Dr. Jack" breakdown of the undefeated Patriots and the '86 Celtics, trying to figure out which team was greater and leading to hundreds of "You better not have jinxed the season!" e-mails. When the Pats blew Super Bowl XLII three weeks later, more than a few Boston fans blamed me, like my column had the opposite effect of "The Secret" or something.

Can you really blame a writer for altering the outcome of a football game with a column? Of course not. It's patently ridiculous.

Can you really accept a writer who works for a national sports site's decision to devote 75% of his columns to teams from one city? Well, you don't have a choice. He's already tragically popular. It is still, however, patently offensive.

The truth is, I just picked the wrong Boston team for the breakdown -- instead of comparing the '08 Patriots to the '86 Celtics, I should have used the '08 Celtics. With the playoffs just three weeks away and KG, Pierce and the gang running on all cylinders like no Celtics team since Larry Bird's heyday, it now seems like the optimal time to break this baby down "Dr. Jack" style.

Without further ado ...

(Wait for it ...)

(Wait for it ...)

April Fools!

Somehow, that's even less funny that my own pathetic attempt at an over-the-top April Fool's post (see below). My joke was neither directly nor ironically funny. This is unfunny in both of those ways, and in dozens of others that I'm not even smart enough to understand or describe.

(Just give us a few seconds while we revive my dad.)

(All right, we're good.)

Oh! Wow! I just realized something. Fuck me, I'm ignorant- he portrayed that as a joke not because if he really did it it would torture/infuriate people like me, but because many Boston fans are fucking dunderheaded enough to believe that if he had done it it would jinx the 2008 Celtics. I gotcha. Wow. That is sad.

Hey, what about an April Fools' mailbag? Is that something you might be interested in?

Reference from "Entourage," circa 2006. How very relevant. At least his 80s shit is stuff that's managed to stick around in some capacity for 20+ years.

Q: Your stubborn insistence on writing basketball nonsense for months on end reminds me of when Pearl Jam made albums like "Binaural" to purposely drive fans away. The baseball season just started and have we been treated to an SG column about it? No! I'd even read a Red Sox column or a Tom Brady column just because it's not a basketball column. You do realize the baseball season started right?
-- Danny G., Kansas City, Mo.

Too bad Danny is now a douche by association for getting his question printed. Seems him and I share some similar thought patterns. No, I would not rather read about the Sawks or Tom Brady than basketball, but the general idea here is a good one.

SG: Fine, we'll make it an April Fools' mailbag with no basketball questions. (Frankly, any comparison of my hoops columns to "Binaural" is a wake-up call. I might never write about the NBA again.) Speaking of baseball, allow me one extended thought about the American League heading into the season. Why the American League and not both leagues? Because that's the league in which I watch 162 Red Sox games a year and throw myself into my AL-only fantasy keeper league. I know the American League to the degree that when Leo Nunez pitched two scoreless innings in Detroit on Monday, my reaction wasn't "Who the hell is Leo Nunez?" but "Why didn't we start Nunez over Ian Kennedy this week when he was one of my big sleepers and Kennedy isn't even starting until Saturday?" I am an AL junkie. And if it comes at the expense of following the National League, then so be it. I'm not going to apologize. There's only so much time in the day.

You know, that makes a ton of sense. I know plenty of football fans that only follow the AFC. Basketball fans who love submediocrity and accordingly only pay attention to the Eastern Conference. NASCAR fans who only know anything about even-numbered cars. I mean, with so many other sports being in full swing for much of the baseball season (particularly in July and August), who has time to learn a little bit about every team in both leagues? What a ridiculous idea. And it's not like baseball has certain stats like wins, batting average, and RBI that are really easy to look up and generally allow someone who knows the names of players who accrue them in large amounts to put up rough but decent analysis of said players/teams they play for. That's such a crazy concept. You might as well try to juggle electric eels while taking a shower.

Anyway, here's my big extended thought: We're headed for a potentially historic offensive season in the American League. Consider the following things ...

Shockingly, nearly every single point he makes in an effort to prove this idea ends up being wrong/anecdotal/unprovable/stupid/douche.

1. The quality of AL starting pitching has gone south

Why?

because of two trades (Johan Santana and Danny Haren),

OK, fair enough.

some injuries (John Lackey, Kelvim Escobar, Curt Schilling, Scott Kazmir, possibly Josh Beckett),

Lackey, Beckett, and Kazmir should all be 100% by mid-May, but I guess this point is about half right.

overprotective inning counts (Felix Hernandez, Clay Buchholz, Phil Hughes, Kennedy, Matt Garza and Francisco Liriano)

Hernandez, despite missing some starts, threw 190 last year. That means the M's will probably get him up around 210 this year. But yeah. Just because they don't let him throw 140 pitches a night (look at 33 year old Livan Hernandez and his 81 mph fastball to see how that works out), let's boldly claim that Hernandez is somehow contributing to AL pitching getting worse this year.

Buchholz, Hughes, Kennedy, Liriano, and Garza combined to throw 198 innings last year. Total. This year, if they stay healthy, they'll probably clear 650. Not that these guys are as good as Haren and Santana, but that 450 innings they throw might come somewhere close to being in the neighborhood of balancing out the departure of the two aces. Again, I'm not saying the kids are going to have sub-3.00 ERAs and strike out a guy an inning. But their expected emergence prevents the teams that own them from relying on crappy retreads like Jeff Weaver, who still doesn't have a job. They'll see a lot more action this year than last, and at least two or three of them are bound to turn in good seasons. And somehow, this makes AL pitching worse in 2008 than it was in 2007. That's like saying "I won the state lottery, but I didn't win the Powerball, so I'm actually getting poorer."

and the disappearance of reliable, "I know I'm getting 200-220 innings, 140-170 Ks, 13-17 wins and a solid ERA and WHIP out of him" guys

Any support for this assertion? Any way you can justify this at all? In 2007, 14 AL pitchers fit this profile. In 2006, 15 did. In 2000, 13. It's all pretty consistent over the course of the last 8 seasons. I'm forced to wonder, therefore, when the hell these types of pitchers started disappearing and how that's going to make 2008 any different than other recent seasons. Oh, yeah, I figured out why: Bill Simmons is pulling nonsense out of his tightly clenched sphincter in order to try and prove a nonsensical point.

Wait! He does offer some support!

(leading owners to overpay for the likes of Dice-K, Jeremy Bonderman, Rich Harden, A.J. Burnett and others in my draft last weekend).

Matsuzaka fits that profile you just listed, dummy. Burnett would've fit it had he stayed healthy. Bonderman fit it in 2006. Bill's fantasy league (imagine the level of dickbag in the room during that draft!)- the one and only true predictor of what to expect from athletes in real life.

2. Not only were Kenny Rogers and Tim Wakefield drafted in my keeper league, not only did the bidding war for Wake climb to $7, but my buddy Hench and I shared a fist pump after we landed him.

That's because you stupid cunts are Red Sox fans. That says absolutely nothing about the level of pitching in the league as a whole. Nothing. Less than nothing. Also- take note that this is another attempt at reinforcing a point about predicting the real life future based on what happened during a fantasy draft.

3. We can have up to 10 keepers, so our friend Mikey incredibly decided before the draft to keep Andy Sonnanstine at $8. Even more incredibly, nobody made fun of him or thought it was a bad move.

He stunk last year, but he was a rookie. He's got great minor league numbers. Maybe he puts it all together this year. Maybe he breaks out like Kazmir did in that ballpark during his first full year. Maybe that guy just wanted to focus more on drafting a lineup as opposed to a rotation. What real conclusion about the level of pitching in the AL in 2008, as compared to 2007, can we draw from this? The answer: go fuck yourself.

Along those same lines, Erik Bedard was shut down with a sore shoulder last season, gave up eight homers in spring training and went for $30 in our auction. Did I mention that pitching is thin in the American League this season?

Last year, Bedard was arguably the best pitcher in baseball from May 1 until he was shut down at the end of August. He rehabbed fully. And no one gives a fuck about how superstars play in spring training. Considering he'll be making half his starts in Seattle's big park, that guy who got him for $30 has pretty good odds of laughing hysterically all the way to the bank. Yes, you did mention that you think pitching is thin in the AL this season several times. And you have been completely wrong almost each and every one of those times.

4. The overall quality of middle relievers and set-up guys is even more (pick an adjective: disturbing, appalling, grisly, macabre, comical) than usual. I mean, back in June 2005, if you had asked me to choose between one of two predictions -- "In 2008, Alan Embree and Keith Foulke would still be the lefty-righty set-up combo for an AL team" or "In 2008, Kevin Federline will have five Grammys, an Oscar nomination and his own late-night talk show" -- I would have gone with K-Fed in a kajillasecond.

Durrrr... Those guys were hurt three years ago. Therefore, there's no way they could possibly be effective now. This is the kind of thought process that runs corporations into the ground, wastes billions of tax dollars every year, and allow Billy Beane to win 90+ games a season with payrolls in the mid eight figures. I'm not even going to name any awesome AL setup guys. Suffice it to say: there are a lot of them. In some cases, several on the same team!

5. Todd Jones, Troy Percival, Huston Street, Joe Borowski, George Sherrill and C.J. Wilson make up 40 percent of the league's closers. Would you ask any of those six guys to help you fix a flat tire, much less save a baseball game? I didn't think so.

Not trying to pat myself on the back here, but I've fixed a flat tire on my own. So I wouldn't need help from a MLB player in the extremely unlikely scenario that one of them would be passing by while I was fixing another one. Anyways, Street, Percival, Sherrill, and Wilson were all pretty much lights out last year. But Bill just saw Street blow a save to the Sawks in Tokyo, Percival pitched in the NL last year, and he's never heard of Sherrill and Wilson (despite being an AL junkie), so they go straight to the "suck" box. Jones and Borowski are definitely shaky. But you know what? Someone stop me before I start shouting like Adam Sandler... THEY WERE ALREADY FUCKING CLOSERS LAST YEAR. SO HOW THE FUCK IS THE FACT THAT THEY'RE NOT VERY GOOD GOING TO MAKE 2008 THAT MUCH MORE OF AN OFFENSIVELY FRIENDLY YEAR THAN 2007, YOU FUCKING HARD-ON?

Sorry.

6. In our auction, Hench and I paid $14 for Percival. And you know what? We'd do it again.

You probably overpaid, but the guy struck out 36 guys in 40 innings last year. His WHIP was 0.85. He's definitely an injury risk, but if he stays healthy he should be effective. In fact, his re-emergence after semi-retirement and subsequent move from the NL to the AL is a factor that will make AL pitching better in 2008 than it was last year. See how that works? When good players come into the league, it changes how things work.

7. Four of the top five teams have noticeable pitching holes: Detroit (bullpen), Boston (starting rotation, middle relief), Anaheim (ditto), New York (double ditto). Only Cleveland seems to be relatively well-rounded, and that's the same team that relies on Borowski to close games.

Unlike last year, when all of those teams were 100% rock solid when it came to pitching. Totally flawless. Just like the Titanic. (Too soon?) Also: what a fantastic example of anecdotal bullshit.

8. The AL has three monster lineups (New York, Boston and Detroit), two other very good lineups (Cleveland and Anaheim) and one lineup with a chance to become very good (Tampa Bay),

Again, unlike last year, when all of those lineups were full of beer league softball players and anemic children.

as well as an inordinate amount of good hitters who seem like they're poised for a gargantuan year either because it's a contract year, they worked out all winter, they're coming back from an off-season and/or they're ready to make the proverbial leap: Manny Ramirez, Bobby Abreu, Miguel Cabrera, Grady Sizemore, Billy Butler, Delmon Young, Carl Crawford, Alex Gordon, Vernon Wells, Nick Markakis, Josh Hamilton, Robbie Cano, B.J. Upton, Justin Morneau, Howie Kendrick, Travis Hafner ... for God's sake, the list doesn't end, and if the first three guys on that list have career years, their three offenses are going to be insanely, abnormally good.

Well, there's a couple things that are good to know. 1) This year, the AL has some veteran players who are in contract years, and some other good young players who will probably be better than they were last year. 2) If 36 year old Manny (BEING MANNY!) Ramirez or 34 year old Bobby (BEING ON THE DOWNSIDE OF HIS CAREER!) Abreu have ridiculously great seasons, the Red Sox and Yankees will have good offenses.

Let's pick through that list and find the actual candidates to make the AL better in 2008 than it was in 2007- Cabrera, for coming over from the NL; Sizemore, maybe; Gordon; Wells, to rebound; Hamilton, if he doesn't wear down; and Hafner, to rebound. The rest of the names on that list aren't real likely to be a whole lot better this year than last. Cano? Morneau? Markakis? Who the fuck do you expect them to become? I'm not saying they stink, I'm saying they're not going to break out any more than they already have.

So that's my prediction for the American League: We're in for a summer of football scores and eye-popping offensive numbers along the lines of what happened in '77, '87, '93 and the prime of the steroid era.

After all that bullshit, let's review the solid and salient points Bill made in attempting to prove that hypothesis:

Haren and Santana gone, Cabrera added. A few guys who were good last year hurt for a month or so. Kelvim Escobar and Curt Schilling hurt all season.

The end. And that gets us to an offensive explosion. Just... wow. "But... but... but! There are some young guys trying to break out! And Todd Jones and Joe Borowski are cl-" SHUT UP. NONE OF THAT MEANS ANYTHING.

Christ, this is exhausting. There's a lot of great stuff left to cover (including more thinly veiled racism from Bill) but I've gotta turn in. Tomorrow night I'll pick up where I left off. Now, to just tie up all the loose ends by going up to the top of the page and putting "Pt. 1" at the end of the title. Awesome. I am soooo awesome.

It's Almost Baseball Season!

So a friend mailed me a copy of Lindy's baseball preview. I've been reading it this morning. It's a terrible magazine. For every player, there's a little section where they fill you in on each player's "Significant Stats/Injuries". Here are a few of their SIGNIFICANT stats:

David Eckstein, SS, Blue Jays
Was successful on all eight steal attempts against righthanders.

Seriously?

Frank Thomas, DH, Blue Jays
Takes umbrage at every called strike on the inner part of the plate.

The Lindy's staff members must have been taking SAT classes - the only place in the world where anyone actually uses the word "umbrage".

Aaron Cook, RHP, Rockies
Tied for fourth in the NL with two complete games!

Tied with seven other guys!

Brad Hawpe, RF, Rockies
Had a streak of at least 26 games with at least one strikeout!

Next on ESPN: the HawpeWatch... CAN HE DO IT? We'll cut live to EVERY HAWPE AT BAT to see if he can break the ALL TIME RECORD.... which I am too lazy to look up.

Matt Lindstrom, RHP, Marlins
Spent time sleeping on the floor, then on a piece of plywood and egg crates to help his sore back, but still finished second on the staff with 71 appearances!

US Egg stock is up 4 points on this news. Marlins fans surge to the ballpark to see their new eggstraordinary closer-in-the-making!

Yovani Gallardo, RHP, Brewers
Became the third Brewers pitcher to hit multiple HRs in a season.

Sounds to me like he has his epitaph already written.

Moises Alou, LF, Mets
Can't throw.

Shit. He plays in the wrong league, I guess.

Jamie Moyer, LHP, Phillies
Has 230 career victories, 59th all-time.

Next on ESPN: MoyerWatch. Jamie is on pace to pass the immortal Frank Tanana by May 13th!

Alex Rodriguez, 3B, Yankees
Became the first player since Roger Maris in 1961 to lead MLB in HRs, RBI and runs. Has a .159 BA in the playoffs over the past three years.

He sucks!

Kyle Farnsworth, RHP, Yankees
Easy to follow.

Next time you're driving to Yankee Stadium and you don't know how to get there, make sure you get behind Farnsworth. He's easy to follow.

Brad Ausmus, C, Astros
Had three 3Bs, matching his combined total from the three previous season.

Forecast: Brad Ausmus has a breakout 2008 where he hits SIX triples.

Paul Lo Duca, C, Nationals
Caught Tom Glavine's 300th career victory.

Wow.

Jermaine Dye, OF, White Sox
Thinks along with the pitcher.

This seems dangerous to me. Suppose he comes up in a crucial situation and Fausto Carmona is thinking about the hookers in his hotel room after the game. Poor Jermaine might get distracted. Hmm. Perhaps this explains Dye's shitty 2007. Pitchers caught on to this and deliberately thought about hot girls.

Strangely, Jermaine Dye has a 1.500 OPS against Kris Benson. Hmph. Go figure. I hate stats. Always disproving my theories.

Brendan Harris, 2B, Twins
Tends to grow on you.

Brendan Harris is like athlete's foot. Or a chia pet.

29 more days till the Reds kick it off against the D-Backs. Get excited!

WMTMQR: Oh, The Irony

I had been stretching to find material for a post tonight. Clark Judge of CBSSportsline wrote a real piece of crap about five NFL teams he boldly suggests will make a run at the playoffs in 2008 after not finishing 2007 with a winning record. All of them were 8-8 or 7-9 last year, and have plenty of talent on their rosters. Yawn. And Jemele Hill checked in with her usual piece of garbage minus the race card. But neither of those pieces really warranted a full breakdown.

So imagine my elation when I stumbled upon the final TMQ column of the year. I'll say this much- you can't fault Easterbrook for not having any balls. This is a guy who regularly serves up some of the worst football analysis you'll ever read, and yet here he is, devoting an entire column to the perceived missteps of his colleagues. There is so much wrong here, I can't even begin to cover it all right now. I might pick up wherever I leave off for a separate post tomorrow, but here's a sampling that should have you shaking your head in anger for the time being.

How hard it is to defend the predictors Easterbrook names (many of which are regular punching bags here at FireJay), I cannot fully put into words. But this guy is such a pompous douche that I have to go through with the post anyways. That's life I guess. You spend 99% of it talking about how much [X] sucks, and then in the end, it turns out that [X] really isn't that bad when you compare it to what an asshole [Y] is.

Peter King predicted, "It'll be stunning if the Chargers can dig their way out of this horrible web of mismanagement to finally be a playoff factor next season."

They were 5-5 at one point. I'd have to say that their ensuing 8 game win streak (including a win over Indy in the RCA Dome in the divisional round) was indeed "stunning."

Ron Borges, then of The Boston Globe, predicted that Jeff Garcia, Patrick Kerney and Leonard Davis were "free agents to avoid." All made the Pro Bowl.

We'll see how much Dallas/Seattle enjoys paying Davis's/Kerney's contract in 2012 when he's 34/35 years old. I know, the teams can always just cut them. But good chunks of those contracts are guaranteed. By this logic, the contract the Giants gave Barry Zito in 2006 would have been a great idea had he won 16 games in 2007. Oh, and Jeff Garcia apparently looks and smells like a rat.

"JT the Brick" of MSNBC predicted, "The Oakland Raiders are back. They are drastically improved."

They won two more games than they did in 2006. Their point differential improved by 50. Six of their losses were by a touchdown or less (compared to four in 2006). Only three were by more than two touchdowns (compared to six). Do they still suck? Yes. Did they suck a whole lot less? Even as someone who fucking detests the Raiders, I have to say yes. To be fair, "JT the Brick" is still a shitheaded nickname.

Brick also predicted that, in early 2008, Bill Parcells would become coach of the Giants or Chargers; neither team changed coaches, and Parcells went to the front office of the Dolphins.

Take that, JT. Idiot. You were only able to predict that Parcells would return to a prominent role with a team, and almost the exact time he would do so. Way to dick up exactly which team and role it would be.

Andrew Perloff said Jay Cutler will "lead the Broncos back to the playoffs."

The Broncos' struggles had nothing to do with Cutler, who had a very good year (88.1 QB rating). Maybe being ranked 30th against the run and 28th in scoring defense were slightly larger factors in their struggles.

Then there were the Jake Plummer predictions. ESPN.com's Jeremy Green speculated, "If Plummer ends up in Houston, he might have to sit behind David Carr." Plummer did not come back, and Carr wasn't in Houston either.

That prediction is not incorrect at all; it couldn't be much less incorrect. That's a quadruple negative.

Then there were the Rex Grossman predictions. "There is no question the Bears are committed to Grossman as their starting quarterback next season," Pompei of Sporting News predicted. The Bears benched Grossman twice, starting three different quarterbacks.

Grossman started the season as QB. After he was benched, they gave him another chance. Sounds like at least some level of horribly misguided commitment to me.

Gene Wojciechowski of ESPN.com predicted, "Grossman will be fine. No way does he throw another 20 interceptions." Grossman threw only seven interceptions -- because most of the time, he was benched.

He was obviously not "fine" overall, but if you project his totals out to a full season, he'd have thrown about 15 picks. Just saying.

Vic Carucci of NFL.com predicted the Super Bowl would pair the Patriots and Eagles; Philadelphia did not make the playoffs.

Nice one, Miss Cleo. Way to only pick one of the two Super Bowl teams before the season started.

The Boston Globe ran five sets of Super Bowl predictions, none of them mentioning the Giants.

Every other newspaper in the world totally saw the whole Giants thing coming. Where were the Globe's writers when we all agreed it was inevitable? Shooting up HGH with Rodney Harrison? Losers.

Dan Shaughnessy of the Globe predicted San Diego over New England in the AFC Championship Game.

How preposterous! There was no way that could have happened at all. It's not like San Diego had more scoring drives than New England, while being without their two biggest offensive weapons due to injury and playing a QB with a shredded knee.

USA Today offered eight dueling Super Bowl predictions, none of them involving the Giants.

Hey USA Today (and the Boston Globe), if your hand is bigger than your face, it means you've got a tiny penis. *Slap* I can't believe you fell for that!

None of ESPN television's "Sunday Countdown" crew -- Chris Berman, Tom Jackson, Chris Mortensen, Keyshawn Johnson, Mike Ditka or Emmitt Smith -- predicted the Giants would reach the Super Bowl.

Hey guys, there's a dickfor on the ceiling. (pause) Well I don't know, maybe you should ask your sister! Everyone get a load of these people who didn't think the Giants would make the Super Bowl. Can you believe they didn't see that coming? Talk about obvious.

Of the 22 predicted Super Bowl participants, 12 failed to make postseason, and no Pro Football Weekly analyst predicted the Giants would reach the Super Bowl.

Might as well ask them to try to bite their own ears!

ESPN The Magazine ("Published on Earth, the Planet") predicted a Super Bowl of Chargers over Cowboys.

Not even close! (Actually, somewhat close.)

None of the four dueling Super Bowl predictions inside The Mag mentioned the Giants.

OK, I'm running out of jokes to play on stupid people. Maybe gluing a quarter to the ground and seeing if they try really hard to pick it up?

Then there was the astonishing ESPN.com meta-forecast. Your faithful servants at ESPN.com offered no fewer than 16 dueling complete NFL forecasts for division winners, wild-card teams, Coach of the Year, MVPs and the like. And along the lines of the dog that didn't bark, if you check the link to the meta-forecast, what team name don't you see?

This is getting ridiculous. Other things Gregg Easterbrook wants to point out weren't predicted correctly by pundits:

George Mason in 2006 Final Four
Cardinals win 2006 World Series
Warriors knock of Mavericks in 2007 NBA playoffs
US 1980 Olympic hockey teams beats USSR
Appalachian St. beats Michigan

Honestly, the odds of the Giants winning 3 straight road playoff games weren't that much worse than any of those events happening. And I know Pittsburgh did exactly that just two years ago, but history still says its nearly impossible.

Trust Him, He Used to Run the Economy: In February 2004, Alan Greenspan, then chairman of the Federal Reserve, praised adjustable-rate and interest-only mortgages, the gimmick loans that triggered the 2007 default wave. In October 2004, Greenspan said a sudden drop in housing values was "most unlikely."

I hate to play this card, but honestly... hey asshole, let's see you do a better job of managing one of the world's largest economies. Greenspan couldn't have been more wrong, but his words were molded by the politics of reelection. I'm going to go out on a limb and say he's probably a pretty intelligent guy when his behavior isn't being dictated by the selfish powers that be.

Sports Illustrated forecast a Rose Bowl of Michigan versus Rutgers; neither made the BCS. The magazine forecast Ohio State would not make the BCS; it made the national title game.

Rutgers? That's bad. Michigan? They came within a decent offensive showing against OSU of making that happen. OSU themselves? Well, they probably deserved to be in the BCS... probably. Maybe. They certainly didn't deserve to be in the title game. And if they played Missouri 10 times on a neutral field, who do you think wins 6? I say it's a tough call. Of course, Hawaii apparently didn't deserve to be in the BCS either.

Bad College Predictions No. 2: "West Virginia is certain to win, and they will play in the BCS championship:" Doug Flutie on ABC, a few hours before No. 2 West Virginia lost to 4-7 Pittsburgh, forfeiting its shot at the BCS title.

Way to not see that coming, Elf-man.

Note: After West Virginia kept its first team on the field and kept throwing deep despite a 31-point, late-third-quarter lead against woeful Syracuse, reader Peggy McMahon of Rockport, Maine, e-mailed me to predict the football gods would exact vengeance on the Mountaineers. And yea, verily, it came to pass.

Hmm. Those Gods must've missed LSU throwing the ball deep numerous times during the second half of a 58-10 win over Louisiana Tech on November 10th. Unless you count their loss to Arkansas as "revenge," which you probably shouldn't, considering it didn't keep them out of the SEC or BCS title games.

Profootballtalk.com forecast the Giants to finish last in the NFC East. Paul Zimmerman of Sports Illustrated forecast the Giants to finish 6-10. The New York Times predicted the Giants would "take a step backward" in 2007. Eric Allen of ESPN foretold, "The Giants are a team that could disappoint." Don Pierson, whose MSNBC column is called "Ask the NFL Expert," forecast Jersey/A to finish last and added, "The Giants are having a hard time convincing anyone they are on the way up."

Bill Williamson, on MSNBC at the start of the season: Jersey/A "cannot go to the Super Bowl. The Giants have to just hope their quarterback progresses and there isn't a mutiny of the coaching staff. The Super Bowl is too much to ask for."

Dude, stop. You're fucking killing me.

Gregg Easterbrook, Tuesday Morning Quarterback: "I am not sold on the Giants." Spoken on "The Max Kellerman Show," November 2007.

Oh. Well alright then.

Did Your Favorite College Football Team Suck In 2007? Bruce Feldman Is Here To Help

First, some housecleaning stuff.

Please disregard that BallHype ranking meter in the left toolbar. It's a lying piece of shit. It should say "1," or maybe "-0" if that counts as being even more awesome. Yesterday was our biggest direct traffic day ever. Welcome, new people. Take a look around in the archives and waste an hour or two of your life. (Assuming you really are new people, and not old people using multiple computers during the same day just to fuck with me. What a prank that would be! Hoo hoo!)

Also, feel free to email shitty articles you guys find to the address above. We definitely welcome tips. Lazy as I am, sometimes I don't see these things on my own. I could use an assist every now and then. That email account is depressing to check. Pretty much all it gets right now is 1) very rarely, a complimentary email that is probably just some wiseass being sarcastic 2) slightly less rarely, some legitimate hate mail, which I enjoy because at least it's honest and 3) invitations from the king of Sierra Leone/Uganda/Nigeria to help him move money into the USA. I'd very much like for the account to be more useful than that. So please, drop us a line and tell us if you saw something that insulted your intelligence or sense of humor.

Moving on.

ESPN the Magazine's Bruce Feldman is a positive-thinking kind of guy. He's the kind of guy you'd hate to be caught in a collapsed mine tunnel with. He'd annoy the shit out of you with his optimism. How do I know? Because I just read what he has to say about the 2008 chances for several college football teams who ended 2007 somewhere between "they were a disappointment" bad and "alums are burning their diplomas in response to this performance" awful.

Pittsburgh

I think the Panthers' patience with Dave Wannstedt will pay off with a return to the Top 25 next season and maybe even a Big East title.

This is so blindly optimistic, I don't even know how to address it. Let's briefly review Wanny's coaching career W-L numbers.

1993-1998, Chicago Bears: 41-57
2000-2004, Miami Dolphins: 44-27 (good), 1 playoff win (bad)
NFL total: 86-84

2005, Pitt: 5-6
2006, Pitt: 6-6, no bowl
2007, Pitt: 5-7
Total so far with Pitt: 16-19

Career total: 102-103

It's especially worth noting that the Pitt team he inherited was fresh off a 2004 Big East championship and subsequent BCS appearance. It's not like he was trying to pick up the pieces of a shattered program. So someone please clarify for me- which part, exactly, of that career record (not to mention recent record) indicates this is a guy that's going to suddenly lead a 5-7 team past West Virginia, an improving South Florida team, an improving UConn team, a slightly above mediocre Rutgers team, a not half bad Cincinnati team, and a decent Louisville team? Really? Wanny is going to suddenly leapfrog all six of them next year? Man, I know the purpose of the column was to inspire hope in fans of some downtrodden programs, but that line really stands out as an unmitigated disaster. Here's a realistic goal for Pitt: go 7-5, don't get blown out at home, and get to a bowl. If no one gets injured and all their recruits pan out extremely well, I think they can do it. Let's leave a conference title to 2010 and a different coach.

Ole Miss

The schedule also sets up nicely since the toughest of the first four games -- and the lone road trip -- is to Wake Forest.

This is obviously not as ridiculous as the Pitt comment, but it's still worth noting. First of all, Wake will probably crush them. Second, two of these other "easy" first four games are against Memphis and Vandy, neither of which are even close to sure things. They squeaked past Memphis by two in 2007, and Vandy topped them by 14. So it's entirely possible the Rebels could open 1-3, and then have a full slate of SEC games left on the schedule including trips to Florida, Alabama, Arkansas, and LSU. Being Ole Miss and saying "Hey, three of our first four games are winnable, probably!" is like being way out of shape and saying "Hey, miles one through six of this marathon follow a gentle downhill slope! Maybe I can finish in under four hours!" In other words: don't hold your breath for a bowl berth. Maybe you'll improve on your 3-9 record from 2007... maybe not. On the positive side, if conventional wisdom among guys who went to college in the Midwest holds true, your campus is crawling with incredibly hot girls. So you've got that going for you. Cherish it.

Washington

The Huskies won't have any established targets, but Willingham is bringing in an impressive class of receivers. He's even snatched blue-chipper Chris Polk away from USC.

That's great. Good for him. But much as I love him (see any of my comments on any of FireJay's Notre Dame-related posts... it's pretty obvious I hate Charlie Weis and am still an adamant Ty supporter) here's the thing about Willingham. Just like Wannstedt, it's pretty clear at this point that he doesn't know his asshole from his elbow when it comes to coaching.

Stanford, 1995-2001: 44-36
Notre Dame, 2002-2004: 21-15 (but oh, what a 2002!)
Washington, 2005-2007: 11-25
Total: 76-76

I take it back; he knows his asshole from his elbow... but barely. He can point to where each of them are on his own body, maybe, but I wouldn't trust him to pick them out of an imaginary police lineup that consists entirely of giant body parts. He's 6-20 in the Pac-10 in three years with UW. The odds of him bucking this trend and winning more than a handful conference games in 2008? Probably about the same as the odds of me moving out of my parents' basement in the next five years. Don't hold your breath. And bring me some Sun Chips next time you come down here. The sour cream and onion kind if you can find them.

Louisiana Tech

Derek Dooley has really upgraded the talent level quite a bit. Not only did Dooley land one of the nation's top juco pass-rushers in Kwame Jordan, but he also has a batch of former SEC talent set to take the field. Former Auburn QB Steve Ensminger will battle Michael Moseley for the vacant quarterback job. On defense, Jordan will be joined by one-time Tennessee recruit Rolando Melancon, a cat-quick 270-pound defensive tackle, and Zach Schreiber, a hard-hitting former Alabama linebacker. The secondary returns safety Antonio Baker, the team's best defender.

Pretty vanilla review there. So apparently they've got a couple transfers coming in, and a good safety coming back! Great. They also don't seem to have a QB. Last year they scored victories over Central Arkansas, New Mexico State, Utah State, Idaho, and San Jose State. They also lost by a combined 167 points to their other seven opponents. To be fair, that's a list that includes six teams that played in a bowl... oh, and also Ole Miss! Oops. LT got dumptrucked by the Rebels, 24-0. Based on that alone I'm going to go ahead and say they have a loooooong way to go to respectability. Like, the kind looooooong way that isn't covered by adding a few transfers and a juco guy. But I guess anything can happen in the "wacky" WAC!

Give me a pound for that joke. Blow it up. Someone. Anyone?

Nebraska

Pelini's expertise is defense, and he has his work cut out for him with a unit that surrendered 40 or more points six times in 2007. Four years ago, when Pelini worked as Nebraska's defensive coordinator, the Cornhuskers tied a school record by forcing 47 turnovers and ranked second nationally in takeaways. That was 36 more turnovers than the team generated this fall.

Pelini's obviously a smart guy. I'm sure there are some schematic changes he can make that will instantly help the Huskers in 2008. But when you're giving up 40 to Ball State, 76 to Kansas, and 65 to Colorado, it's pretty obvious there's a talent problem that's not going to be fixed in one year. Nebraska was 5-7 in 2007. Their 2008 schedule is a joke (they avoid Texas and Oklahoma in the conference, and are really pulling out all the stops by scheduling Western Michigan, San Jose State, and New Mexico State out of conference) so I wouldn't be surprised if they get back to 6 or 7 wins in 2008. But that's kind of like going from writing like Jemele Hill to writing like Bill Simmons and wanting a cookie and a sticker for showing such significant improvement. Whoop-de-shit. You're still a disaster. SMACK.

Minnesota

The Gophers weren't that far from winning a few more games, considering they lost six games by a total of 23 points.

Here are those six:

Wisconsin, by 7 (a respectable loss)
Iowa by 5 (presentable)
Florida Atlantic by 3 (well, FAU did go to a bowl)
Bowling Green by 1 (they did too)
Northwestern by 1 (oh God)
North Dakota State by 6 (THAT'S NOT A DIVISION I-A TEAM)

So yeah, there's nowhere to go but up from here. Maybe in 2008 Minny can get its shit together and not lose to Northwestern and a I-AA team. Reverse two of those other four close losses, add in their one win from 2007, and suddenly they're at 5 wins. Strike up the band! Play the fight song! Quick, impromptu pep rally! It's almost hockey season! Go Gophers! Sigh. Where have you gone, Lawrence Maroney and Marion Barber III? Being the worst team in the Big 10 is like being the crappiest show on CBS. Not only do you suck, but so does the organization you belong to. (Any of you Big 10 defenders out there who are offended by that, please justify your 3-5 bowl record. The Big 12 went 5-3. The Big East was 3-2. The Pac 10 was 4-2. And the SEC was 7-2. The ACC, who's hyped by no one, was 2-6. So, congratulations, you weren't the worst power six conference in the bowl season. I'm still making fun of you.) Being the worst character on that show? That's like being Minnesota kicker Jason Giannini, who missed 3 of his 4 FG attempts last year.

Now, let me clarify- this is not to say that none of these teams mentioned by Feldman (plus Notre Dame, Miami, North Carolina, and Marshall) will have an unexpectedly great 2008. Odds are at least a couple of them will right the ship and turn in a season that comes close to expectations. But Feldman's reasoning in most of their cases is shoddy at best. It's almost puff piece-esque.

I think the better move for fans of these teams (as I happen to be) is to assume 2008 will be even worse than 2007. That way, in order to be a pleasant surprise, your team only has to match last year's victory total. Lower expectations equals better results; it's the way I live my life. Ahhhhhhhhh, mediocrity. How I hope to achieve you one day.

Why Bother Supporting Your Claims With Evidence or Explanations? That Takes Too Much Time

CNNSI.com's Stewart Mandel is mad about this year's BCS bowl matchups. He's sure they're all going to suck. I strongly disagree, as I think every game except USC/Illinois will be close and entertaining. (See below for some probably-going-to-blow-up-in-my-face predictions vabout them.) But that's not why I'm writing this. I'm writing it because Stewart flagrantly violates arguably the most basic rule of analytical writing. I'm pretty sure I learned it in 4th or 5th grade: if you're going to write about your opinion, you have to say why you hold that opinion. See, that's the format. First you make a point. Then you give some kind of evidence that justifies that point. Mandel gets lost somewhere between those two steps, and the result really pisses me off.

Meanwhile, you'd be hard-pressed to find too many fans who would describe this year's other BCS matchups (besides the title game) as "compelling."

Virginia Tech, No. 3 in the final BCS standings, is playing Kansas, the No. 2 team in the Big 12 North. No. 4 Oklahoma's reward for beating the No. 1 team in the country Saturday night (Missouri) is to face a West Virginia team that lost to 4-7 Pittsburgh the same night. No. 5 Georgia went from an anticipated title date with Ohio State in New Orleans to the undercard a week earlier against Hawaii. And do you think USC's Carroll, whose teams have made mincemeat out of their previous Big Ten Rose Bowl foes, is losing much sleep over those Illinois game tapes?

Little to no analysis is given as to why these games supposedly won't be good. Apparently because Kansas lost to Missouri they are terrible. Meanwhile VaTech's disastrous performance against LSU is conveniently ignored. Sure, it was like three months ago. It was also by 41 points! Forty fucking one! West Virginia lost to 5-7 Pitt, so they're ostensibly unworthy of lining up against Oklahoma. Sure, OU lost to 6-6 Colorado. But that's totally different. Georgia/Hawaii is going to suck, uh... because... Georgia thought they were going to play in the title game, and now they're not. (Nevermind that just like Kansas is the #2 team in the Big 12 North, Georgia is the #2 team in the SEC East.) The USC/Illinois matchup, well yeah, he's got me there. Probably will be a blowout. Still, that's three cheap shots taken at three BCS games with absolutely no justification. None.

But wait, there's more. Mandel then has the nerve to conclude his diatribe with this completely outrageous endorsement of the "plus one" quasi-playoff plan. (I have no problem with the "plus one," I just have a problem with this shitty, unexplained logic.)

Imagine, if you will, the potential bowl lineup if such a format existed. Right now, rather than lamenting the colossal letdown of this upcoming postseason, we'd be salivating over, say, an Ohio State-Oklahoma Fiesta Bowl and an LSU-Virginia Tech rematch in the Sugar Bowl -- with the added excitement of knowing two of those teams would meet each other the following week.

Oh, OK. Ohio State-Oklahoma, unlike West Virginia-Oklahoma, would be making us "salivate." Because apparently to him, it's abundantly clear that OSU is way better than WVU. Or they match up more salivation-inducingly with Oklahoma. Or something. How are are we supposed to know if he can't take the time to explain? Same for LSU-VaTech. Earlier in the article he described the OSU-LSU championship game matchup in this fashion:

Whichever team, Ohio State or LSU, wins the Jan. 7 title game, there will be a significant faction of the public that questions its legitimacy.

Now, we just add two more two loss teams and one more game and everyone should magically feel 100% better about the legitimacy of whoever ends up being crowned champion. Sounds totally reasonable. Not only that, but the matchups suddenly go from being boring to "thrill a minute," "plan your evening around this," "be careful not to shit your pants" exciting. Huh.

Is all this crap self-evident, and I'm the stupid one for not being able to see it? Or is Stewart Mandel just full of crap, and trying to make an argument for the plus one game without utilizing any logic or support whatsoever?

Oh, and before you accuse me of hypocrisy because I'm ripping Stewart for not explaining himself while failing to provide my own explanation for thinking the actual BCS games this year will be exciting: (Obviously these are outrageously simple at best but at least it's better than what Mandel does)

USC/Illinois: Yawn. Stanford over USC gets more ridiculous every time I think about it. Illinois beat Ohio State because no one could tackle Juice Williams. USC won't have the same problem.

LSU/Ohio State: Stewart never says this game won't be exciting, just that it won't definitively settle all debates about who should be #1, so I don't think I need to say much. LSU's loss to Arkansas exposed some of their weaknesses, but Beanie Wells is hardly Darren McFadden. They're clearly going to be the underdogs, but OSU's defense is pretty awesome. Should keep things interesting.

Georgia/Hawaii: This is exciting on the surface because just like last year's Fiesta Bowl, it's a high scoring WAC team matching up against a traditional powerhouse. So I'm excited about that (as anyone should be, at least on some minimal level) no matter how imbalanced the matchups on the field look. In any case, Georgia is probably going to win, but I'm not sold at all on Mathew Stafford. He misses a lot of open guys. Colt Brennan is the shit and he showed it against Boise State. Knowshon Moreno and Thomas Brown should rack up big yards, but the game will be played indoors and on fieldturf so the Warriors will be moving the ball as well. If Brennan has time to throw Hawaii's going to put up at least 35. Can Georgia match?

Kansas/Virigina Tech: Obviously, Kansas is really going to struggle to score much. Fortunately they have a very underrated defense that's going to hold VaTech's offense in check as well. Kansas CB Aqib Talib is a bad man and future NFL starter. I've seen four Hokie games this year and they don't seem to have much at the offensive skill positions. Tyrod Taylor gets a lot of snaps considering he sucks. Brandon Ore crumples as soon as he gets touched half the time. If Kansas makes too many mistakes early, it could get out of hand, but I think Todd Reising is capable enough of not coughing up the ball that it should be interesting well into the second half.

West Virginia/Oklahoma: Since they seem to be on national TV every single weekend, I've seen WV absolutely embarrass several teams this year. Sure, they haven't played a team like Oklahoma, but as long as Pat White is healthy their offense can move the ball on anyone. Oklahoma is, of course, dangerously good in their own right. Stupid Bob Stoops. Stop looking so smug already. I can't explain WV's meltdown against Pitt other than to say it was a rivalry game, Pitt got up for it, and Westy choked. But like I already mentioned, I also watched Oklahoma absolutely shit the bed against Colorado in October. Bad games happen. If Westy doesn't have a hangover from the Pitt disaster (which is likely given that they have a month to forget about it) they're more than capable of beating the Sooners. Will they? Probably not. But it's going to be a good game as long as White doesn't get knocked out.

I will probably look back on this and laugh at myself 6 weeks from now, after LSU blows out OSU, Georgia blows out Hawaii, Oklahoma blows out West Virginia, VaTech beats Kansas like 4-0, and Illinois/USC turns into a triple OT thriller. Sigh. Such is the wonderful world of sports predictions. That's why we here at FireJay like to stay away from anything that resembles original ideas and instead spend all our time hating. I'm really going out on a limb here, I hope it doesn't come back to bite me too hard. Remember, all I'm claiming is that these games will be interesting and fun. That shouldn't be too much to ask for.

gene wojciechowski made 100 predictions in an article about the upcoming NFL season published last week

let's see how many of them are already wrong, or are almost certainly going to be wrong! i know i pick on gene an awful lot these days, but i can't help myself. espn constantly puts up links to columns like this one on their front page. if they're going to keep repping him like that, i'm going to keep complaining about him and his bad jokes/analysis. it's just what i do because i am basically an angry old man at age 23.

this is going to end up being pretty long, but don't let that deter you from reading it. there's no boring overarching concept you need to follow. just a bunch of small, unrelated, pithy bullet points. let's dive right in:

-If Donovan McNabb's surgically repaired right knee holds up, the Philadelphia Eagles will be the last remaining undefeated team.

oops! just for the record and to eliminate gene's no-injury condition, mcnabb took every snap at QB for the eagles in sunday's loss to the packers. the only way gene could have been more wrong here is if the league had switched the scheduling of that game with the saints vs. colts contest so the eagles could have lost on thursday night.

-I still think the Dallas Cowboys could have done better than Wade Phillips as their new head coach. That said, Phillips will do what Bill Parcells couldn't do with the Cowboys' 3-4 alignment: tweak it enough so Dallas finishes higher than 13th in total defense.

i have no problem with that first sentence. gene is spot-on there. as for the second sentence? well, after surrendering 438 yards to a giants team that was so-so on offense in 2006 (and didn't add any major pieces while also losing tiki barber), america's team is already firmly planted in the bottom 5. mwah mwah. i know it's a long season but things aren't looking good, particularly in the secondary.

-Everybody keeps saying Rex Grossman is the key to the Chicago Bears' season. Nuh, uh. Grossman will be fine. No way does he throw another 20 interceptions or slop around with a 54.6 percent completion rate. Nope, the guy who absolutely has to deliver the goods is running back Cedric Benson.

this is fine. grossman looked servicable against a tough san diego D on sunday, and i think it's very fair to say benson is key to chicago's success now that thomas jones is gone. so why am i copy/pasting this? because the next item on gene's list says:

-He will.

42 yards on 19 carries and a fumble. again, san diego is tough on D. and it's just one game. but... let's just say that based on almost everything benson has done since coming into the league, gene is already well on his way to being wrong. unless "deliver the goods" now means "be kind of capable and maybe end up with 1,000 yards."

-What do quarterbacks JaMarcus Russell and Michael Vick have in common? They both won't play in 2007.

thanks for the bold prediction about vick, there, gene. as for russell? well, he just signed his deal. and the raiders just got beat at home by the lions. by 15. and their top 2 QBs are josh mccown and dante culpepper. if anyone in their front office has half a brain, is there any reason whatsoever why russell won't at least be seeing a handful of snaps per game by november? if i were to ask this question of gene, his answer would probably be "but mike vick got in trouble for dogfighting."

-This will be the year new Denver Broncos running back Travis Henry scores more on the field than off it. For the first time in four seasons, he'll finally have more touchdowns (let's say, 12-14) than kids (9).

there's nothing crazy about that prediction. i'm just counting it as wrong because the joke kind of sucks. but can gene do worse? you'd better believe it.

-If sentenced to prison, Michael Vick will not be allowed to order Direct TV's NFL Sunday Ticket package.

i don't even think carson daly would allow himself to be caught telling that.

-Titans running back LenDale White can't screw it up two years in a row, can he? Nope. He'll get his act together. If he doesn't, you won't remember the Titans this year.

wojciechowski must've hired gene shalit to write that one. wojo's way too "dumb & dumber" to come up with something that tepidly clever.

-Another Chicago Bear will do something stupid at 3 a.m. (park his Ferrari on top of the Sears Tower ... try a swim move on a cop ... attempt to buy North Korean nuclear launch codes), and yet head coach Lovie Smith will bristle when reporters ask him if alcohol was involved.

apparently cars on top of buildings (what?), attempting to avoid arrest, and buying missile launch codes are now comedic situations. is anyone from england reading this? did gene get these ideas from you guys? not that i'm knocking british comedy, i'm just saying sometimes it's a little... weird... and maybe gene tried to work a perversion of something you guys came up with into his column. looking for answers, that's all.

-You will do very well in your fantasy league if you stole one of these three players in the later rounds: Chargers WR Vincent Jackson, Patriots WR Wes Welker, or Redskins QB Jason Campbell.

you will do very well in your fantasy league if you drafted a solid team top-to-bottom and manage to avoid injuries. none of those players will make or break your team. none of them. call me out if you disagree.

later, from the department of alarming self-contradiciton:

-If one AFC team is going to shock the world, it's going to be ... the Steelers. They could be 4-0 going into October. They also get their bye week just before they have to go to Denver and then Cincinnati. Granted, December won't be fun (Cincy, at New England, Jacksonville, at St. Louis, at Baltimore), but there's still enough talent on this team to cause Terrible Towel sales to jump.

very reasonable. i don't mind that analysis. gene should have quit while he was ahead, though. he wants to make a back up prediction as well. uh-oh.

-Runner-up: the Titans. VY makes the impossible possible.

this was item #55 on the list. about 4 inches up the page, this was item #61:

-And the Titans will still struggle to reach .500.

look, it's bad enough that this guy gets paid to write about sports. the least his employer can do is hire a decent editor to stop him from embarrassing himself. sheesh.

-Team with best chance to go winless: Falcons.

the falcons won 7 games last year. they lost vick but replaced him with joey harrington, who sucks but can at least stumble his way through a decent game from time to time. the raiders won 2 games last year. they lost randy moss, didn't really add anyone who can help in 2007, and play in a far tougher division and conference. am i missing something here?

-The AFC wild-card teams will be the Bengals and Jaguars.

-Last AFC team eliminated from playoff mix: Broncos.

official declaration: i (larry b) will personally eat 1 (one) hat (of my own choosing, options may include but are not limited to: baseball hats, ski hats, top hats, cowboy hats, oversized foam cowboy hats) if the jacksonville jaguars make the 2007 national football league playoffs and the denver broncos do not. i'm biased because i'm a broncos fan, but seriously: that's. not. happening. especially the denver part.

-If the Colts scuffle, it won't be because of rookie left tackle Tony Ugoh. I'd be more worried about the Colts' defense than Ugoh.

i think the word you were looking for there, gene, was "stumble." yes, if the colts "stumble," it will be for reason A and not reason B. was that it? you didn't want to use a synonym for fighting, but rather a synonym for having difficulty succeeding. right? i thought so. that's ok, you're only a professional journalist who is presumably fluent in the english language. don't worry about it.

-The best thing about the Raiders will be their unis. And Asomugha.

no explanation here for the asomugha inclusion. does gene think he'll have a particularly awesome season? or does he just like the word "asomugha" and the way it sounds when you say it with a mouth full of saltines? who knows.

-The worst thing about the Chargers is that they can't wear those powder-blues every week.

and their subpar WR corps. (except for my buddy rhema mcknight, who is on the practice squad. i am flagrantly name dropping him at this time.)

-I used to think Los Angeles would get an NFL franchise sooner rather than later. Now it's looking like the reverse is true. We're going on Season 13 without an NFL presence in the nation's second-largest market.

not a prediction, just a general observation and a stat. therefore, wrong.

-Chic 2007 NFC pick San Francisco isn't ready yet. Let the 49ers finish .500 or better (and they haven't done that since 2002) before we start crowning them.

what? are you serious? i know a lot of people are saying this could be the year san fran jumps from kind of crappy to kind of good and challenges for a playoff spot. but gene uses the phrases "2007 NFC pick" and "crowning them," as in, things you would say about a team that goes to the super bowl. absolutely no one is saying the niners are going to win the conference. no one. is gene trying to make a bold prediction out of a gigantic straw man? sure looks like it.

-Chargers general manager A.J. Smith won't be able to blame Marty Schottenheimer if San Diego doesn't reach the AFC Championship this year. According to Sports Illustrated's player rankings, new coach Norv Turner has the No. 1 running back in the game (Tomlinson), the No. 2 linebacker (Merriman), the No. 1 tight end (Antonio Gates), the No. 2 defensive tackle (Jamal Williams), the No. 3 offensive tackle (Marcus McNeill) and the No. 5 offensive guard (Kris Dielman).

that's right, the chargers have some awesome players. so on an unrelated note, if they don't reach the AFC championship, there's no way they can blame marty schottenheimer. because he's not coaching the team anymore. (hint, gene: you just named the guy who is san diego's head coach/blame taker in that very paragraph! get back to me if you want to change that first sentence.)

-Week 1 Mini-upset Special: Baltimore over Cincy at Cincy (ESPN, Monday, 7 p.m. ET).

close but no cigar. although that offensive PI call on todd heap during the potential game tying touchdown was pretty atrocious.

-Of the six new head coaches in the league, Arizona's Ken Whisenhunt will have the most impact on his team's record.

not saying this is wrong. but it can be measured... how?

-Philly's no-name WRs Kevin Curtis and Reggie Brown will surprise you with their production.

surprise me how? by being even worse than i expect? by being significantly better? by also playing defense and each recording double digit sacks? what if their mothers are reading this- would mrs. curtis and mrs. brown truly be surprised if their sons went off and had pro bowl caliber seasons? ok, i need to stop with the rhetorical questions, i'm getting a little simmonsish here. (ps- are you as excited as i am to read about the celtics twice a month all winter/spring? i'd say their upcoming season rates as an 8 on the potentially-exciting-but-also-potentially-stomach-punchish-while-still-being-unintentionally-hilarious scale.)

-He isn't Randy Moss (the guy Favre desperately wanted the Packers to sign during the offseason), but rookie WR James Jones of San Jose State will become one of No. 4's favorites.

considering there are usually only about 5 WRs and 1 pass catching TE on a team, i sure hope jones becomes "one of" favre's favorites. if he doesn't, there's probably a serious chemistry issue there.

-I'll do better than the 53 percent I got right last year.

great conclusion. and by my count, you're already almost half way to being wrong about that! keep up the good work, gene.