Bill knows about as much about football betting as he does about baseball, or anything related to sports really (part 2)

Before we get started on laughing at the rest of Bill's pre-wild card round gambling manifesto, let's review his results from the first two rounds.  Has he FINALLY figured out everything there is to know about betting on playoff games?

Wild card results: 1-1-2 (SF/GB and KC/IND both pushed)
Divisional round results: 2-2 (He got SF and NE right, thought NO and DEN would cover, and in picking the latter violated his own rule #1 below; even when this guy is right, he's too dumb to succeed)

So with the house -110 edge on any spread bet, he's lost money so far.  Still three games left to recoup those losses though!  I'll be sure to post about his championship game picks at the end of this week even if it's not part of a full post.  In the meantime, let's hear more from the guy who says that the NFL went TOTALLY BATSHIT during the last seven postseasons because the same things that used to happen during the 90s and early 00s kept happening.

I don't see things changing, either. We knew the NFL wanted perpetual parity by ushering in the Salary Cap era, but the Bigger, Stronger, Faster era might be having a bigger impact than anything else. 

"The NFL has a lot of parity today because of the salary cap, but you know what's creating even more parity?  The players are bigger and more athletic than they used to be."  This is great analysis except for the fact that players have been getting steadily bigger and more athletic for like 80 years now.

These guys are clearly too huge now; 

Clearly!  Obviously!  These are words that people who know they are grasping at straws use.

YouTube videos of the 1970s games have little correlation to what we're watching now. 

That is not true.

And let's be honest — nobody really cares. The league's PED testing system remains a laughable joke, as does the fact that it won't discuss weight limits or any other out-of-the-box idea that might make the league's players a little more, um, realistic. 

As much as I hate the NFL, you know who probably considers the idea of weight limits a non-starter?  That would be the NFLPA.  As in the organization that is the counterbalance to the NFL on most issues related to evolution of the game.  Too much nuance for Bill to grasp I guess.

Instead, it's cracking down on hard hits, cheap shots and headhunting — a decent start, but nothing that will solve the fundamental problem of NFL players outgrowing a sport that was originally designed for different bodies and different speeds.

I won't disagree that the guy who invented football in 1870whatever couldn't possibly conceive of a 6'4" 290 pound defensive end who runs a 4.5 40.  I just don't think the players have "outgrown" the sport.  Safety equipment isn't what it could be, and frankly, the practice of cracking down on hard hits and cheap shots probably should have started decades earlier than it did.  Watching clips of games from the 80s and 90s, I cringe at many of the JACKED UP quality hits.  They're absolutely brutal, way beyond anything that happens in today's game.

Whether it's a coincidence or something more (and I say the latter), it sure seems like we're seeing more and more injuries to marquee players. 

That is the wishy-washiest sentence you could possibly write on this subject.  You'd have to exert significant effort to do a worse job of expressing a real idea there.  "Completely anecdotally, it seems like there are a lot of injuries to good players, which MAYBE MIGHT COULD be the result of something other than blind luck, although I don't really have any idea of what that something would be."  Nevermind the fact that there is essentially nothing different about the way stars play the game and the way average players play the game.  Nevermind that Bill is probably only writing this because he's a Greatriots fan, and yes, they have been pretty snakebitten this year.  Losing Gronkowski and Wilfork sucks.  Those guys are awesome.  At the same time: SHUT THE FUCK UP YOU ASSHOLE.

The lack of depth has been astonishing. In Week 16, the injury-ravaged Patriots started four guys they found off the street — not even off practice squads, but off the street. 

Guys get signed off the street in December every season.  The Patriots had to sign a bunch of them at once because the Patriots have been unlucky this year.  In conclusion: star players are getting hurt all the time these days, probably because of a comet passing too closely to earth or something.

Now throw this in: The slew of NFL safety-first rule changes made it easier for receivers and tight ends to run over the middle, and also allowed quarterbacks to stand in the pocket without worrying about being decapitated or being bernardkarmellpollarded. In the old days, you'd just assume that a shitty-to-mediocre QB would self-destruct in the playoffs because of the defensive pressure, the intensity or whatever. That's why three of my 15 Manifesto 4.0 rules revolved around quarterbacks: "Never, ever, EVER back a crappy QB on the road," "Check out the backup QBs" and "Before you make a decision, take one last look at the quarterbacks again." But in today's safety-first NFL, how many times did we see the likes of Mike Glennon, Christian Ponder or Jason Campbell looking exceedingly comfortable in an allegedly scary venue like Seattle or San Francisco? 

I don't know.  You're the one making the manifesto, maybe you'd like to answer the question rather than phrasing it rhetorically and assuming that everyone will agree with you?  Campbell probably looked comfortable on occasion because per Football Outsiders, the Browns had an average pass protecting offensive line (the Bucs and Vikings were slightly below average in this category).  Ponder is terrible so it doesn't really matter if he was comfortable or not.  And Glennon, who the hell knows, maybe he's actually good.  More importantly, what the hell kinds of conclusions are we supposed to draw from this paragraph?  Unlike Bill, I'll answer my own question.  There aren't any to be drawn.  He's correct that rule changes have favored more offense, but who gives a shit?  Those changes help the teams with the Peyton Mannings and the Tom Bradys much more than they help the teams with the Jason Campbells and Mike Glennons.  SCOFF SCOFF SCOFF JASON CAMPBELL is not gambling advice.  No surprise that until he CRACKED THE CODE AND FIGURED OUT THE NFL, Simmons thought it was.

Swinging it back to this year's playoffs: In the old days, I would have said, "No way Andy Dalton can win a playoff game on the road, he'll self-combust" and back that mind-set with a sizable illegal wager. In 2014? I mean … name me an AFC team/crowd combo that's breaking Andy Dalton. It doesn't exist. 

Well, the Chargers and the Bengals' own home crowd, evidently.  He threw two picks against San Diego, lost a fumble, was sacked three times and was under heavy pressure all game.  He was terrible.  Good for San Diego for making Bill look like a tard.  I kind of feel bad for Dalton, and for Bengals fans.  Kind of.  Not that much.

Only Andy Dalton can break Andy Dalton. (And don't worry — he might.) Everyone has a puncher's chance in 2014. Everyone. And that's one of many reasons why Playoff Gambling Manifesto 5.0 will never happen.

Other reasons:
1) Too many podcasts with Malcolm Gladwell to tape; not enough time to write
2) Everything we thought we learned about the NFL from 2006-2013 IS ABOUT TO CHANGE AGAIN, SO MUCH CRAZINESS ON THE HORIZON (translation: more failed picks on the horizon)
3) Guy trying to write manifesto is a fucking idiot

The good news? We learned a few lessons and suggestions over these past eight years. You don't have to live by these babies; just keep them in your hip pocket and sprinkle them into your gambling life however you want. Call it a Pseudo-Manifesto.

Peter King would be proud of Bill for backing these assertions with so little ethusiasm.

SUGGESTION NO. 1: Find this year's "NOBODY BELIEVES IN US!!!!" team and give strong consideration to riding them like Secretariat.

We're currently riding a streak of six "NOBODY BELIEVES IN US!" playoff teams: the Giants (2007), Cardinals (2008), Jets (2009), Packers (2010), Giants (2011) and Ravens (2012). 

I like the massive stretch to include a Jets team that was pretty fucking good to begin with even though it didn't win its division, and also failed to make the Super Bowl.  SIX IN A ROW FOLKS.  IF YOU THINK ABOUT IT WE SHOULD ADD THE 2006 BEARS AND MAKE IT SEVEN BECAUSE REX GROSSMAN WASN'T A HALL OF FAMER.

Four won Super Bowls, the fifth came one minute away from the title, and the sixth nearly made the Super Bowl with Mark Sanchez. 

The 2000 Ravens, 2001 Patriots, 2003 Panthers and 2005 Steelers should all fall into this category as well.  I wish I were on a podcast with Bill right now so he could make up a reason they don't.

We've covered this phenomenon a million times in this space; it's a real thing. 

DIE.

When everything's relatively equal, a little extra motivation goes a long way. Athletes love proving people wrong, and the greatest thing about sports is that, in the words of Joaquin Andujar, "youneverknow." Our best "NOBODY BELIEVES IN US!" possibilities for this year's playoffs?

Green Bay Packers: Somehow made the playoffs after playing Matt Flynn, Scott Tolzien and Seneca Wallace at QB for 40 percent of the season … gave up more points (428) than they scored (417) … nearly lost a win-or-go-home game to a Bears team that was so limited, the general reaction of Chicago fans was, "I'm bummed that we lost, but I'm relieved the season is finally over" … severely banged-up on both sides of the ball … it's unclear if people remember how good Rodgers is (if they don't, the fourth-and-8 play should have reminded them) … had major trouble selling out this weekend's playoff game against the Niners, fostering a little "even Packers fans don't totally believe" sentiment … and here's the biggie: They're GETTING POINTS at Lambeau this weekend. Nobody believes in you, Green Bay!!!!!!

And then they lost to their superior opponent, as you'd expect them to do most of the time.

San Diego Chargers: Barely finished 9-7 … only made the playoffs after getting major help from Geno Smith and Geno Smith's dong … oh, and they needed five quarters and Ryan Succop's shanked game winner to beat KC's second string in Week 17 with their season on the line … have a tortured playoff history that includes the traumatic "Freezer Bowl" loss in Cincinnati during the Dan "MFIC" Fouts era … are playing in Cincinnati this weekend … oh, and they're coached by a guy who said "You know what?" approximately 377 times during this allegedly inspiring speech.

This was actually a pretty solid pick.  The Chargers were clearly better in January than their record indicated.  They did go 2-0 against the spread in their two games.  Of course, when twelve teams make the playoffs and you're picking one from each conference (bound to be a bottom four seed, and probably a bottom two seed) to be a "NOBODY BELIEVES IN US" team, you don't really deserve much credit for finding a team that could cover on the road twice in a row.

SUGGESTION NO. 3: Beware of the "Everybody Believed In Us" team.

The bastard sibling of the "Nobody Believed In Us" team.

Well, that seals it.  Broncos-Seahawks in the Super Bowl next month.

A few years ago, I compared this phenomenon to Albert Ganz, the bad guy in my favorite movie ever (48 Hrs). 

How unfuckingsurprising that a B+ buddy cop action comedy would be his favorite movie ever.  BUT WHAT ABOUT MIDNIGHT RUN???????

Nick Nolte shoots him at the end, followed by Ganz looking down at the bullet hole and hissing, "I can't believe it … I got shot." You never want to be riding the consensus favorite that's suddenly and incredulously staring down at that bullet hole — whether it's the 2001 Rams, the 2007 Pats, the 2012 Broncos or whomever. 

Unless it's the 2004 Pats, 2008 Steelers (up against the NOBODY BELIEVES IN US Cardinals) or 2009 Saints.  In that case, ride that favorite all the way to moneytown!

Overconfidence = playoff death. 

Except when it doesn't.  Holy shit, this guy is a fucking clod.  He is writing this paragraph 100% because of the 2007 Patriots.  Guaranteed that if they win that Super Bowl, the only rule in the updated manifesto is BET ON BILLY B, HE ALWAYS GETS THE JOB DONE.  What an asshole.

I don't think we have a Ganz team right now; it would have been the Seahawks, but that Week 16 home loss to Arizona may have shaken them out of it. If Seadderall blows someone out in Round 2 and gets a round of "Seattle might be a juggernaut!" momentum going? Be careful, my friends. Be careful. That also leads into our first lesson …

OK, and now you know--Seattle over Denver in the Super Bowl.  Not sure if they'll cover or not.  Maybe we'll find out as Simmons continues to wow us with his powers of mystical bullshit.

LESSON NO. 1: Beware of the "Looked A Little Too Good The Previous Round" team.

One of the few Manifesto staples that still works — remember, people love overreacting to whatever happened the previous week (and during the Twitter/Internet/Talking Head era, overreacting in general). A good recent example: the 2011 Saints dropping 45 on the Lions in Round 1, charging into San Francisco in Round 2 as four-point favorites … then losing to Alex Smith.

In a game that came down to the final possession, with SF scoring the deciding TD with nine seconds left.  I agree: EVERYONE SHOULD HAVE SEEN THAT COMING FROM A MILE AWAY!  Betting a four point road favorite is a scary proposition any time, but Jesus, Bill.  Pick a better example than that.  And be sure to conveniently ignore the 2010 Packers (beating Chicago in Chicago by a TD the week after clobbering the Falcons in Atlanta), the 2011 Giants (winning the NFC title game in San Francisco after stomping the Packers in Lambeau) or a dozen other examples from the last ten years I could have used.

LESSON NO. 2: Beware of any and all aging QBs in cold weather.

Or, as it's better known, the Favre/Manning Theory. (And hopefully not this month, the Favre/Manning/Brady theory.)

Maybe we SHOULD call it the Brady theory after last year's AFC title game performance, except maybe not because Brady beat the Ravens in the previous AFC title game in cold weather, and also except maybe not because Brett Favre was pretty good in the 2007 postseason (sure, he had that backbreaking INT that won the NFC title for the Giants, but he had 5 TDs and 2 INTs in two games that postseason), and also maybe not because this is a retarded idea in the first place before you even examine the anecdotes.

LESSON NO. 3: Beware of all dome teams in cold weather.

Thanks to Chase Stuart for this stat: Dome teams are 3-22 in the playoffs when they're outdoors and it's 35 degrees or colder.

So naturally the Saints went into Philly on a cold night (not sure what the low was, but it couldn't have been above 40) and won.  And that stat is interesting and all, but doesn't help us pick against the spread.

Take it from a lifetime New Englander who spent the last 12 years in Southern California and turned into a total cold-weather wuss — at some point, your body decides, "Look, I'm not used to being cold" and acts accordingly. 

TAKE IT FROM ME, ONLY I KNOW WHAT IT'S LIKE TO BE IN MY LATE 30S AND BE COLD.  BEFORE I CAME ALONG NO ONE WOULD HAVE BEEN ABLE TO EXPLAIN THIS TO YOU.  YOU'RE WELCOME.

LESSON NO. 4: Don't make any three-team, 10-point teasers with three Round 2 favorites.

As covered earlier, the last time all four Round 2 teams went "chalk" was January 2005. This isn't even a lesson, it's a rule — no three-team teasers in Round 2. Period. Don't even think about it. The cousin of this rule: "Beware of the two-team teaser or parlay on paper that looks a little too easy." Gambling is never easy. Ever. Ever. Ever.

You would have won a four way 10 point teaser on this year's divisional round favorites easily.  You would have won a three way parlay with the Seahawks, Niners and Patriots fairly easily.  THIS IS A HARD AND FAST RULE FOLKS, IT'S NEVER THIS EASY, EXCEPT WHEN IT IS.

SUGGESTION NO. 4: Be careful with any team that battled a major off-field distraction during the week leading up to the big game.

Also known as the Eugene Robinson Corollary. 

This is a great point.  This one time, a player on a team that was a huge underdog got arrested the night before the Super Bowl (not the week leading up to the game).  His underdog team then got thrashed by the favorite the next day.  MANIFESTO: UPDATED.  The better example would have been the Raiders and Barrett Robbins in 2003, which was 1) an off field distraction that actually took place over the course of several days leading up to the game, not the night before it, and 2) happened before a game in which the favorite lost.  But since you (the person reading this) and I are not dumb, we won't take a single example as ironclad proof that we should always bet a certain way in a certain situation, so why are we talking about this?

All dong-photo scandals, PED scandals, sex scandals, 

Yeah, this one really bit the 2010 Jets (Rex Ryan and wife foot fetish video) in the ass right before their game against the Patriots, didn't it?

locker room fistfights, hooker/strip club scandals and vengeful-former-employee scandals go here. To be fair, the Ravens won last year's Super Bowl even after the Ray Lewis/deer antler spray fiasco became a major story for a couple of days followed by everyone looking the other way and pretending it never happened — that's why I made it a suggestion and not a rule.

You're a cunt.

SUGGESTION NO. 5: Ignore final records and gravitate toward how teams finished in November and December.

Again, this one doesn't always work — 

BWAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA he thinks that some of them always work.

remember "red-hot" Washington losing to Seattle in Round 1 last season? 

What an asshole.

SUGGESTION NO. 6: "Before you pick a team, just make sure Marty Schottenheimer, 

Hasn't coached in years and will never coach again

Herm Edwards, 

Hasn't coached in years and will never coach again

Wade Phillips, 

Hasn't been hired as a head coach in years and will never be hired as a head coach again

Norv Turner, 

Jesus, who knows, I wouldn't put it past some team to give him another shot

Andy Reid, 

The Chiefs were the better team and should have won that game

Anyone Named Mike, Anyone Described As Andy Reid's Pupil and Anyone With the Last Name Mora" Isn't Coaching Them.

I made this tweak in 2010 and feel good about it — especially when the "Anyone Named Mike" rule miraculously covers the Always Shaky Mike McCarthy and Mike "You Know What?" McCoy (both involved this weekend!) as well as Mike Smith, Mike "The Sideline Karma Gods Put A Curse On Me" Tomlin, Mike Munchak and the recently fired Mike Shanahan. We're also covered if Mike Shula, Mike Martz, Mike Mularkey, Mike Tice or Mike Sherman ever make comebacks. I'm not saying you bet against the Mikes — just be psychotically careful with them. As for Andy Reid … we'll get to him in a second.

At least here he's just trying to be goofy, not analytical.  Oh dear God, he's not actually trying to be analytical, is he?  Oh Lord in heaven.  I hope not.  WHATEVER YOU DO DON'T BET ON MIKE MCCARTHY OR MIKE TOMLIN.  SURE, THEY HAVE TWO RINGS AND THREE SUPER BOWL APPEARANCES BETWEEN THEM IN THE LAST SIX SEASONS, BUT THAT NAME, IT'S JUST NOT RIGHT.

LESSON NO. 5: Don't forget that the most important people on a playoff team are the coach and the quarterback.

The kind of deep analysis you usually can only get by tuning into a pregame show so Howie Long or Chris Carter can shout it at you.

Here's a little game for you: Before every playoff game, rate the coaches and quarterbacks from 1 to 10, add up their scores, then make sure you're OK with the math before you keep going. A good example from last year: Joe Webb (1) + Leslie Frazier (3) against Aaron Rodgers (10) + Mike McCarthy (5). A four against a 15??? And you thought about taking the Vikings +7½???? Really? My numbers for Round 1 this weekend …

Kansas City: Alex Smith (3) + Playoff Andy Reid (3) = 6
Indianapolis: Andrew Luck (8) + Chuck Strong (7) = 15

(Hmmmmmmm. And I only have to lay a field goal with Indy at home???)

Lucky him that the published spread at the time he made his pick was Indy -1--that prevented him from going 1-2-1 in the four wild card games.  Wouldn't surprise me if he went back and edited that after the game.

New Orleans: Cold-Weather Drew Brees (5 or 6) + Sean Payton (9) = 14 or 15
Philly: Sold His Soul Nick Foles (8) + Chip Kelly (7) = 15

(An even battle! Now I'm even more confused.)

At least you admit it.

San Diego: Cold-Weather Phil Rivers (7) + Mike McCoy (3) = 10
Cincinnati: Andy Dalton (3) + Marvin Lewis (6 or 7) = 9 or 10

(Basically dead even! Remember — Rivers won in cold weather this year in K.C. and Denver.)

Weren't we just piling on Marvin Lewis?  And rightfully so?  I hate to support Bill's dumb method here, but in this case it would have told you to bet on San Diego for sure.

San Francisco: Colin Kaepernick (5 or 6) and Jim Harbaugh (10) = 15 or 16
Green Bay: Aaron Rodgers (10) and Mike McCarthy (3 or 4) = 13 or 14

(Who else is abjectly terrified of taking the "3 or 4" coach against the "10" coach?)

AND YEA VERILY IT CAME TO PASS (actually it was a push)

LESSON NO. 6: Never bet too much money on your own team, and (obviously) never bet against your own team, ever, under any circumstances.

I bet against my own teams all the time.  I love doing it.  It's not for everyone, but if you're gambling small amounts and really like hedging your emotions (boy do I ever!), it's the way to go.  I think I'll go put down $20 against the Broncos this weekend, in fact.   That sounds like an excellent idea.  Except that when the Patriots beat them, I'll have to publish a note of apology and acknowledge that Bill was 100% right, just like he always is.

Goes without saying. If your team made the playoffs, you already have enough at stake. To be fair, I violated this lesson somewhere between eight and 25 times during the Belichick-Brady era — including Super Bowl XLVI, when I bet most of my winnings from the 2010 Hilton SuperContest on a Vegas ticket for

No one gives a fuck.

SUGGESTION NO. 7: Don't try to be a hero, just try to win money.

I get it. You want to be cute. You want to say things like, "I don't care about Andy Reid's history in big games, or Alex Smith's history in general … that's precisely why nobody will see the Chiefs coming this weekend!" and load up on the Chiefs, then feel like a hero when they covered.

Ask yourself this question: If your life depended on it, you'd really bet on Alex Smith and Andy Reid in a road playoff game?

(You would?)

(You'd do that?)

(Seriously?)

"Don't try to be a hero" sounds like good advice from the guy who has now probably spent ~100 hours of his life writing several different "manifestos" that describe the SECRET WEIRD TRICKS you need to know when betting on the NFL.

LESSON NO. 7: When in doubt, gravitate toward the one pick that (a) would screw over the most gamblers and experts, and (b) would definitely be going against the single worst gambler you know.

This joke is too easy to make (and to be fair, he ends up making it himself a few lines down).

Remember — there's a reason casinos keep adding new buildings, online gambling sites keep fighting to be legal everywhere, and bookies risk incarceration just to take your dumb/predictable/bandwagon wagers. 

Yes, it's called the house edge, you fucking fucktard.  Vegas doesn't want a bunch of action on one side of a bet, in hopes that the other side will prevail and they'll have a windfall.  Vegas wants risk-free money.  It gets that when both sides of a spread have equal action and pay -110.  Holy fucking dogshit, how have you (apparently) not realized this concept after gambling for years and years and years?  It's embarrassing.  I am embarrassed for you.  I am embarrassed for myself for having to write this paragraph and point out how embarrassing this is for you.  If any of the six of you reading this aren't experienced with sports gambling, let me give you a little tip: there is nothing a sports book hates more than when one side of a bet has way more action than the other side.  Joe Posnanski wrote an awesome article about Vegas taking a horrible beating during March Madness 2012 because (if I remember correctly) there was a ton of action on the low-seeded underdogs in round one, and they all covered against their high-seeded opponents.  Or something like that. The directors of the sports books were practically inconsolable.  Posnanski makes it sound like they all got taken out into the Nevada desert and shot after that weekend.  Unfortunately the article is not loading properly from any source so I can't provide a link, but if you want to try to find it yourself, Google "Posnanski Madness Money and Mayhem" and click around for a while.  It's worth the time if you can find it.  I just spent 5 minutes looking for it and couldn't find a working link though.

But yeah, more importantly, Bill is a mouth breather.

By the way, I finished the 2013 regular season with a 108-140-8 record against the spread. At least for this season, there's a good chance that I'm the worst gambler you know.

Stunning display of self-awareness!  Sadly, it's too late for him to save this blimp crash of an article.

WMTMQR: Gregg Easterbrook Should be Strapped to a Rocket and Blasted into Deep Space

Well, well, well. Look who has a bunch of bullshit and garbage to say about the Super Bowl.

Also, in the spirit of my occasional recommendation of funny non-sports blogs such as Marmaduke Explained (even though that guy is obviously a self-worshipping douche) and Garfiend Minus Garfield, I'd like to present You Will Not Be Dating Me. It's not a guffaw-inducing parade of laughter, but it does frequently use one technique that I have come to know and love over the course of my almost two years at FireJay- ending a post with an angry and critical one liner. Give them a shot.

The Super Bowl was fascinating from start to finish, and for the fourth quarter, both teams saved the best for last, reminding us of why we love sports.

We already know why we love sports. We don't need to be reminded of it. Sports aren't something that you might need a reminder about, like your occasionally annoying girlfriend or running long distances (if you're into that kind of thing). Leave the "why we love sports" nonsense to Rick Reilly, please. Not that he's any less infuriating.

Two years ago, when football pundits were forecasting a pass-wacky Indianapolis-Chicago Super Bowl, yours truly wrote a pregame column saying the Colts would win by running the ball. And verily, it came to pass. This year, with pundits forecasting a game decided by the hot Arizona offense against the No. 1 Pittsburgh defense, TMQ wrote a pregame column predicting, "Super Bowl XLIII will come down to how the Arizona defense performs against the Pittsburgh offense." Arizona had the lead with 2:24 remaining, the Steelers were stuck on their own 12-yard line; it came down to how the Arizona defense performed against the Pittsburgh offense, and the Pittsburgh offense carried the final two minutes.

What about how the Pittsburgh defense forced a fumble from the Arizona offense to end the game? Doesn't that mean TMQ was wrong? Even if you disagree, it's mind numbingly stupid to say that because the game was close and the Pittsburgh offense had the ball on what was essentially the game's final drive, therefore the whole game game down to that matchup. I think James Harrison might have something to say about that. Anyways, if the Cardinals had stopped the Steelers on that last Pittsburgh drive, he'd still obviously be tooting his own horn about his brilliant prediction. This is a clever trick by Gregggggggg: if the game is close in the 4th quarter, he has a 50/50 chance at being right with his bold prediction. Either the Steelers have the ball last and he's right, or Arizona has the ball last, in which case he will spin the facts to still insist that he's right.

"In past Super Bowls in which a great offense has been paired against a great defense … the great offense and great defense roughly neutralized each other, leaving the trophy to be decided by the lesser offense against the lesser defense," TMQ noted a week ago. And verily, it came to pass.

Fuck you.

The zone blitz is misnamed; announcers shout, "It's a blitz!" because six or seven gentlemen look like they're coming, but only four actually rush.

WRONG. If it looks like a bunch of guys are going to rush, but only four do, then it's just a disguised coverage. TMQ is correct that announcers often misidentify it, but he's misidentifying it too. If only four guys rush then by definition the defensive call was not a blitz.

And when Fitzgerald broke into the clear down the middle for the long score that might have proved to be the winning touchdown, who was the sole Steeler nipping at Fitzgerald's heels for the final 20 yards? James Harrison, a linebacker. The Pittsburgh speed guys had given up on the play, but Harrison did not.

WRONG. WRONG WRONG WRONG WRONG WRONG. The final Steeler to give up pursuit was Ryan Clark. Harrison and Troy Polamalu gave up simultaneously about five yards before him. But then again, Polamalu was a high draft pick and Harrison went undrafted (AND played in NFL Europe! Don't forget! Actually, that's impossible, because if you do TMQ will remind you about two paragraphs later!) so Harrison is by default more interesting. Fun fact, however: Clark was also undrafted. If TMQ were aware of this his mouth would definitely be attached to Clark's nuts just like it is to Harrison's.

Now it's fourth-and-20 from the Pittsburgh 36, and TMQ's Law of the Preposterous Punt holds that the trailing team that punts in opposition territory in the fourth quarter will go on to lose. Arizona did punt and did lose, but considering it was fourth-and-20 and the Cards held three timeouts, punting made sense. The ball was downed on the Pittsburgh 1, which was sweet. Three plays later, holding in the end zone pulled the score to 20-16, and two snaps after the free kick, Arizona led 23-20 and the best quarter of the 2008 season was in full swing.

What a gigantic pie in Gregg's face it would have been had the game ended that way. This is how sad my life has become as a result of this blog: when Fitzgerald scored his long touchdown, one of the first thoughts to go through my mind was "I'm going to shit all over TMQ for this."

Often along the streets of Washington, TMQ observes SUVs and driver-service cars idling their engines for lengthy periods as the drivers wait for some government official or diplomat. This column has noted the trend toward government officials demanding bodyguards and private jets not to be safe but to feel more important. Perhaps somewhere some official has said, "My driver must keep the engine running for security against terrorism."

Perhaps. We don't know, but it's more fun to speculate than to rely on facts. That helps you make unsubstantiated points which sound really powerful.

Starting an engine takes five seconds! Computer-controlled engines of cars built since about 2000 do not require warm-up time, as they perform the same when they first light as they do after an hour of idling. Plus, so far as I could determine, there has never been an attack against a government official walking toward his or her car in the United States.

Hmmmm. You sure? Does the president count as a government official? It's OK, I understand how this slipped through the cracks. It's not like it was a major news story while Gregg was an adult.

Get Rid of the Penny! Four commemorative Lincoln cents will be released by the United States Mint in 2009. Why does the penny even exist anymore? One cent has no monetary meaning.

Actually, it's legal tender for all debts public and private in the United States. It's worth 1/100th of a dollar.

Pennies clog our national pockets and purses.

Sort of true. Change by its very nature tends to be a little bulky and annoying from time to time. I don't know if "clog" is the best word.

The cent forces clerks to waste time handing out hyper-specific sums of change,

$1.38 in change is a ridiculous amount! $1.35 or $1.40 is so much less specific.

which we must then lug around.

Are those twelve pennies in your purse hurting your back, Gregg? Give them to a homeless person or leave them at the counter. No one is forcing you to burden yourself with them. See, the thing is, I kind of agree. Maybe we should get rid of the penny. (Gregg makes some good points about how they cost more than a penny each to mint and distribute; thus, the treasury loses money when producing them.) But leave it to him to ruin the argument by being a moron.

In the first three quarters against Pittsburgh's standard defense, the Cardinals gained 127 net yards passing -- 27 net yards, if you subtract the 100-yard interception return for a touchdown. In the fourth quarter against the soft two-deep look, the Cardinals passed for 247 net yards and nearly won the Super Bowl. So from this, what do you conclude about the prevent defense? Plus, the one thing the soft two-deep zone "sells out" in order to stop -- the long touchdown -- it failed to stop.

WRONG. Refer back to the video above. On that play, the Steelers actually had eight guys on the line of scrimmage. Gregg is correct in that it was also a two deep look, but they weren't playing a soft zone or a prevent. In prevent you usually only have two or three downlinemen on the line of scrimmage, and you certainly don't play up on the receivers in most "soft" zones. This was just a great throw by Warner and a great run after the catch by Fitzgerald.

Harrison got TMQ's MVP vote despite no sacks and just three tackles. The Steelers' defense is a collaborative effort that is about results, not personal stats -- and note that after his 100-yard touchdown, Harrison did not dance around the field pointing at himself.

Because he had just sprinted, hurdled, and juked for more than 100 yards you fucking dummy. Very few 250 pound people, even elite athletes, can do that and still have energy to "dance around the field pointing at himself." Harrison may well be a relatively humble guy, but this is about the worse example you could choose to try to prove it.

On offense, Pittsburgh had a man in motion on almost every snap. Early on, Arizona defenders seemed confused about who had the motion man, especially when Hines Ward went in motion. Twice near the goal line, Pittsburgh sent Ward in motion inward, back toward the formation, then ran Willie Parker behind him the other way effectively.

With so much effectiveness that Parker didn't get into the end zone on either play.

Then on the game-winning play, Holmes lined up in the right slot and ran an out. No one covered him!

WRONG. Apparently TMQ is unfamiliar with how a zone defense works. I couldn't find a good camera angle to show it, but basically Holmes was "covered" by the zone about two steps after leaving the line of scrimmage. Sure, no one was manned up on him which might not have been the best idea. But saying "no one covered him!" is WRONG.

But could we clear something up here? No opponent of the Pittsburgh Steelers is afraid of towels. The Terrible Towel is a nice spectator tradition; it has no effect on the game. Mega-pumped football players in body armor are not afraid of towels.

This from a guy who talks incessantly about "the football gods" and the myriad of ways they affect the outcome of games.

And did Harrison get the ball across the goal line at the end of the first half? Maybe, but if the league would simply chip the football as TMQ keeps asking, we'd be sure.

You're outrageously stupid. This is the new "[Team X]'s linemen were literally standing around, doing nothing!" Stop bringing it up. You're embarrassing yourself.

Absurd Specificity Watch: The day before the Super Bowl, Weather.com forecast there would be a 1 percent chance of precipitation at 4 a.m., a 10 percent chance at 3 p.m., a 0 percent chance at kickoff and a 10 percent chance during the fourth quarter. Weather.com forecast that at kickoff, the temperature would be 62 degrees, the humidity 52 percent and the wind east-northeast at 4 mph. Reader Steve Whitlock of Atlanta reports he once noted Weather.com forecasting a 4 percent chance of rain at 9:30 a.m. Jon Blum of Citrus Springs, Fla., notes the Web site Weather Underground last week listed the temperature in his town at 73.4 degrees. Last week it snowed in Washington, D.C., and during the snow, Weather.com forecast the chance of precipitation would be 62 percent at 8 p.m., rising to 67 percent at 9 p.m.

I can't tell what his complaint is in items like this- if he's saying that there's no way we can measure things like the weather with this level of precision, or if he's saying that this level of precision is unnecessary when talking about thing like the weather. Either way, it's a gigantic waste of my time to read and not worth complaining about. (And if I say something isn't worth complaining about, then it really must not be worth complaining about.)

Next Week: The stadium lights are out, the film rooms have gone dark, and the cheerleaders have put their miniskirts away in very small drawers. But the final act of the 2008 NFL season remains: Tuesday Morning Quarterback's annual Bad Predictions Review. Here's a foretaste: Everyone was wrong about everything!

Whoa. That's a whoooooooooooooooooooole lotta irony right there.