I Hope Steve Young Dared Stu Scott to Do This

Working on a TMQR. In the meantime...

Because otherwise, Scott and his producer should be placed in a crate and mailed to Mongolia. After Houston's 30-17 win over Jacksonville last night, Sportscenter had a "transition shot" (or whatever you want to call it; a "fun" little cut scene they shoot somewhere in the city that's hosting MNF, and then show before or after commercial breaks during and after the game) coming back from break featuring a dude in SCUBA gear in the shark tank of Houston's city aquarium. Said dude was wearing a Santa outfit over the gear, and holding a Texans helmet. Take it away, Stu:

(singing)
Saaaaaaaaaanta Claus is comin' to town!
Saaaaaaaaaanta Claus is swimmin' to town!
San-ta Claus was swimmin' (shoehorn this last part in to fit the rhythm of the song) intheTexans'win!

Douchechills. Nothing but douchechills.

Like I said, I really hope this idea originated with Scott's fellow MNF pregame commentator Steve Young. That's the only way it wouldn't automatically become the worst moment in the history of televised sports commentary.

TMTMQR: Will Someone Please Just Fire Gregg Easterbrook Already

Now. Immediately. Today. Yesterday, if possible.

Did Marion Barber get the ball across the goal line against Washington before his knee went down? Did Santonio Holmes get out of bounds with three seconds remaining in the first half against San Diego, stopping the clock so Pittsburgh could kick a field goal in a game the Steelers ended up winning by one point? Did Marvin Harrison get the ball across the goal line before his knee went down against Houston? Did Ben Roethlisberger get the ball across the goal line at all on the key play of Super Bowl XL?

All valid questions. All of them somewhat easily answerable under football's current replay format.

More importantly, why do we even have to discuss this stuff? Let's put a chip in the football and end these debates.

Oh, wow. There's an idea. Just like that, huh? No more disputes! No more debates. Never mind the horrific practical obstacles associated with this idea- do you have any idea how little this would do to reduce the number of issues associated with tough calls around the goal line? As Easterbrook himself admits later in this article (in a section I didn't copy and paste), even when the ball crosses the goal line there's still the question of whether or not the carrier was down or had possession at that moment. And that will have to be reviewed. So guess how much time and stress this measure would save? The answer is equivalent to the number of sports journalism jobs I would like Gregg Easterbrook to have as of right now, or yesterday if possible. Now on to the practical questions, which are even more significant.

If swim meets and horse races can be photo-timed to the hundredth of a second, it is ridiculous that the football world has to argue about whether a ball crossed a line.

Worst comparison ever. Absolute worst. I don't need to explain the differences between timing a race and this idea, if you can even call it an idea. There are too many of them.

Some kind of radio chip embedded in footballs, and weighing next to nothing, could surely provide a GPS-like readout on whether the ball touched some kind of electronically projected line in front of the end zone

So where in the ball will you put the chip? Under the laces? But what if only the tip of the ball crosses the goal line plane? I guess you could put a chip on both tips. But what if there's a big dogpile on the goal line (on, say, a QB sneak on 4th and goal from the 1) and only some tiny sliver of the ball located at a random point opposite the laces and in the middle of the ball crosses the plane? So I guess what we can do is cover every ball with tiny microchips so that when any part of it crosses the theoretical electronically projected line, an alarm located in the referee's headset that sounds like crazy bells and whistles goes off. OR, how about this- we just start using a big computer chip instead of a ball. Anyways, please also consider the following potential issues:

1) Regardless of where you put chips, or how many of them you use, players will make a big stink about how the chips make the ball feel/move differently when thrown/kicked
2) Whatever equipment projects the magical electronic line will probably be kicked, rolled into, or otherwise accidentally moved or disturbed by a player or someone else running into it on the sidelines
3) Will this magical projected line be able to sense the ball crossing the plane in the middle of a pile of players?
4) Will the chip never, ever, ever malfunction due to impact or weather?
5) Is this idea likely to be cost efficient? (Answer: FUCK NO)

I could go on all day. This is a horrendous, atrocious idea. Oh, I cut Gregg off before he could finish his last sentence. He was saying that this idea will help us figure out if a ball crossed the plane along the goal line, AND-

and along a field's sidelines.

Hey, dick-for-brains: how many times during the average football game does anyone care whether or not the ball broke the plane of the sideline? The answer, of course, is zero unless there's a fumble rolling towards the sidelines that gets recovered at the last second before it goes out. And even then, you still have the question of whether or not the player had possession. Maybe Gregg thinks every player's shoes should also be coated with microchips, so we can figure out if they stepped out of bounds or not.

Considering the state of miniature electronics, this doesn't seem as if it would be very hard to do. College engineering departments surely would compete for the right to design such a system. The system might prove too expensive for high schools and small colleges, but with all the money involved in the NFL and in football-factory colleges, the price of adding electronic sensing would be small by comparison. So let's insert a chip in the football!

To steal a phrase that was popular when I was about eight years old: let's not, and say we did. Jesus. This is the lead-in to his TMQ column this week. The first thing he wanted readers to see after they arrived at his article. Really? This is the best he can do? What a fucking dolt. Think through your ideas before you put them into writing, please.

The next step should be an artificial-intelligence device that can remember NFL rules! Because the zebras don't seem to know them. Perhaps robots could be built to officiate NFL games, programmed with a rulebook memory that does not fail on national television. Imposing 10-foot-tall robots with perfect memories would command the respect of players. And if the coach of the Giants wanted to challenge a ruling, he would call to the robot referee, who would wear a white carapace, "Gort -- Coughlin barada nikto!"

I may be a blogger, but you are a huge nerd.

In other football news, TMQ has grown accustomed to timid Preposterous Punts by NFL coaches seeking to avoid criticism. I also thought I'd seen it all -- but of course I was wrong. With New Orleans leading Kansas City 27-20 with 10:05 remaining in the game, the Chiefs faced a fourth-and-2 on the Saints' 40-yard line -- and punted!!!!!!! Kansas City had lost 16 of its last 17 games going into Sunday's contest, and, needless to say, now has lost 17 of its last 18. You've failed 16 of the last 17 times, what do you have to lose? Why are you punting???????

I agree. It was stupid for KC to punt in this situation. However, the reason I'm including it in this post is because it's another classic example of one of TMQ's Pillars of Idiocy (TM pending): the idea that anytime a coach does something that's not risky or totally gung-ho, he's doing it because he's a selfish asshole who just wants to minimize the margin of defeat and boost his own resume (yes, by losing). He doesn't care about his players, he doesn't care about the fans, and he certainly isn't making the decision because he thinks (correctly or incorrectly) that it will help his team win the game. Hey, Gregg: you're out of your fucking mind. Herm Edwards is definitely stupid, but I guarantee with 100% certainty that he did not punt on the 4th and 2 with 10 minutes because he was "seeking to avoid criticism." No one- NO ONE- not one single fucking writer or fan with any kind of brain, would have criticized him if he went for it and failed in that situation. NO ONE. And while he may be dumb, he's smart enough to know that.

Further, TMQ notes that although NFL coaches order mincing fraidy-cat punts when there's still a chance of victory, after hope has been lost, then they go for it. Herm Edwards would not try for a first down on fourth-and-short in opposition territory when there was plenty of time left to win the game. Down 30-20 to New Orleans at the two-minute warning and facing a fourth-and-10 in his own territory, Edwards went for it. Likewise, trailing by nine points -- two scores -- with 4:28 remaining, Lions coach Rod Marinelli ordered a punt on fourth-and-4. When the margin was still nine points but the game clock was down to 1:22, when it made no difference what the Lions did, then Marinelli had his charges go for it.

Interesting. He's admitting that there are times when all hope is lost, and it doesn't really matter what a team does. Speaking of that, and speaking of self-contradiction (which we weren't but are now):

Buck-Buck-Brawckkkkkkk: A week ago, St. Louis, trailing 40-0, kicked a field goal -- then did not even have the dignity to onside kick, kicking away. Sunday, trailing by 35-3, St. Louis kicked a field goal -- then did not even have the dignity to onside kick, kicking away. Not even attempting to win is simply unprofessional. Anyone who has purchased a Rams ticket this season should receive a refund.

Hyperbole, anyone? Sheesh, if you're going to hold franchise to that standard, no one should have had to pay to attend a Pittsburgh Pirates game for the past 15 years. Additionally, if there is such a thing as a time when "all hope has been lost" or it "[makes] no difference" what at team does (his words from the previous paragraph regarding punts), I'm pretty sure being down 40-0 and 35-3 fits those descriptions. And don't give me crap about that time Buffalo came back from like 60 points down to beat Houston in that crazy playoff game- those Bills were a playoff team in front of a home crowd. These Rams are, uh, for lack of a better term, bad. And they were the road team in both those games.

Sour Decision of the Week: With the score 13-13 in overtime, Philadelphia faced a fourth-and-1 on its own 22-yard line with 1:30 remaining in the fifth quarter and punted. The end result was the NFL's first sister-kisser in six years. But for the Eagles, wasn't a tie as bad as a loss?

I am almost sure that it will not be. The reasoning for that is a little complex, but it's sound and I'll get to it in a second. First, Gregg, you tell me why you think it's as bad as a loss and I will then tell you why you are wrong and need to go away forever.

Philadelphia, at 5-4-1, is in last place in the NFC East.

Yes.

TMQ suspects that at the end of the season, that tie will effectively be a loss for the Nesharim. The situation in the NFC East seemed to justify a little risk taking.

F for explanation, F- for analysis. You "suspect" that it will effectively be a loss by season's end. Great. So, now that you're done not thinking, let me tell you what I am thinking.

Here's the NFC playoff picture- the North and West both stink, and will only produce one playoff team each. The Giants are basically in as East champs. Assume the Panthers win the South, as they are currently 8-2 and a game up. So that means the two wild cards come down to the Eagles, the 7-3 Buccaneers, and the 6-4 Redskins, Cowboys, and Falcons. That's five teams going for two spots, and I'd say it's likely that each of the two wild card winners will have at least ten wins. At least two (if not more) of those teams will go 4-2 (or 3-3 in Tampa's case) from here on out. Here's where it gets kind of complicated; this may lead to tiebreaker questions. The tiebreaker that is used when teams going for the wild card end up with the same overall record is record within the conference. A quick check of the standings, however, reveals that the Eagles (at 4-4) have a worse conference record than every other wild card contender except the Cowboys (who are also 4-4).

Stay with me now.

So imagine the Eagles had won this game rather than tied it. They would now have the same record as the Cowboys, Falcons, and Redskins. However, if the season were to end on this hypothetical day, the 7-3 Buccaneers would take one wild card and the 6-4 Redskins would take the other based on their 5-3 conference record. It wouldn't matter whether the Eagles were 6-4 or 5-4-1; their tiebreaker (4-4) wouldn't be good enough anyways.

Keep staying with me.

So now let's go back to reality, in which the Eagles did not win the game. Having a tie on your record basically assures you that you will not end the season with the same record as anyone, and thus will not need to utilize any tiebreakers. But that's OK for the Eagles, because they are worse off than every other contender in the conference in terms of tiebreaker strength. They will now (if they get hot) finish somewhere in the neighborhood of 9-6-1 or 10-5-1. 10-5-1 will get them in the playoffs unless two other teams finish 11-5, which is reasonably unlikely. The Bucs could do it, but I doubt any of the 6-4 teams will go 5-1 down the stretch and do so. 9-6-1, on the other hand, will probably not get the Eagles into the playoffs unless three out of their four competitors fail to get to 10-6, which is pretty unlikely. So that's what we're left with- the Eagles must win five of their final six games to get to the playoffs.

We're getting closer.

Now let me tie it all together by going back to fantasy land. What if the Eagles had won against the Bengals last week? Well, first of all, it's worth noting that beating the Bengals would not improve their conference record. It would still be 4-4, and still be worse than the Redskins', Bucs', and Falcons' conference records. In this case winning five of their final six would get them to 11-5 and an almost certain wild card bid. On the other hand, winning four of their final six (the scenario that puts them at 9-6-1 and almost certainly out of the playoffs in real life) would get them to 10-6. And you know what? Because of that poor conference record, this would still almost definitely still keep them out of the playoffs unless A) only one other wild card contender reaches 10-6, incredibly unlikely, or B) they enhance their tiebreaker by winning all four games against NFC competition and losing both against AFC competition, also incredibly unlikely considering that those four games are against the Cardinals, at Giants, at Redskins, and Cowboys.

Do you see what I'm trying to say? I swear I'm almost done.

Basically, by taking the tie, the Eagles didn't change their playoff chances one bit. A win would have done them basically zero good. However, you know what would have absolutely killed their playoff chances? Going for that 4th down on their own 22, failing, and giving up a field goal and losing the game. That would put them at 5-5, and probably require them to go 6-0 to get to 11-5 and into the playoffs. As things stand they probably "only" need to go 5-1.

OK, I get it, time to wrap up.

This, my patient readers, is why Gregg Easterbrook is a zilcheroo. Now, this whole mini-essay took me about 20 minutes to type and probably took you about two minutes to read through and process. But it only took about 45 seconds to conceptualize. You think Gregg could have spared an extra 45 seconds while writing this week's TMQ, to look at what I looked at in the standings, and say to himself , "Hmmm. Although it wasn't particularly exciting that the Eagles punted in OT, it didn't really do anything to damage their playoff hopes. I probably shouldn't rip them for that." Would that have been so hard? Evidently. Man, I hate this guy.

Donovan McNabb has been ripped by the sports media for admitting after the game that he did not know NFL regular-season contests end after five quarters, unlike postseason contests, which continue until someone wins. Could it be that the Eagles' coaches didn't know this either?

No. It could not be. I would literally bet my own life that the vast majority (if not all) of the Eagles' coaches were aware that NFL regular season games end in ties after 15 minutes of OT. Literally. If someone would take the bet, I would place my own life on the line that this is the case.

Sweet 'N' Sour Results: In Week 10, the key element of Minnesota's victory over Green Bay was Minnesota coach Brad Childress' deciding to go for it on fourth down, challenging his players to win. This week, with the score tied at City of Tampa, Childress went for it on fourth-and-1 -- Adrian Peterson dropped what would have been a touchdown pass. Then trailing by six with 2:29 to play and facing a fourth-and-3 on his own 27-yard line, Childress went for it rather than booming a mincing punt and trying to shift the blame in the postgame news conference. This try didn't work, either -- two sweet decisions with sour results. But suddenly Minnesota has an all-out-to-win attitude, and the football gods are likely to smile on this team down the stretch.

This is similar to the Herm Edwards analysis. I don't disagree that both of these 4th downs were good calls. However, HEY, ASSHOLE: NOT EVERY PUNT IS A REFLECTION OF A COACH'S DESIRE TO SHIFT BLAME AWAY FROM HIMSELF. THAT'S SOMETHING YOU MADE UP. IT'S NOT REAL. JESUS FUCKING CHRIST.

Reader Comments: TMQ regularly claims tenths of seconds are too brief to have meaning in athletics. Reader David Williams of Dunbar, W.Va., writes, "While I agree with your assessment of athletes, coaches and officials, keep in mind that musicians deal with fractional divisions of seconds all the time. Take the Sousa march, the Stars and Stripes Forever -- that march is traditionally played at the speed of 120 beats in a minute, one beat every half second. The thunderous passage for trombones and tubas in the middle of the final section has everyone playing four notes on each beat, one one-eighth of a second each per note. The difficulties are higher for concert artists. I can think of passages in violin concertos that require 12 notes played in one second. So maybe the way to get an accurate assessment of whether an NBA player really can get a shot off in half a second is to have Hilary Hahn or Joshua Bell be the replay official."

I've covered this topic ad nauseum, and given an item I'm going to cover below, it would be hypocritical for me to harp on it too much again. So, a few quick points:

1) It's really sad that he still won't fully admit how obviously wrong he is. There is no commentary from him accompanying this letter: just a word-for-word copy and paste, and he moves onto the next topic. So he's still not really owning up to it.

2) I like that it was a fan of classical and marching band music (stereotypically associated with snobby people, in my opinion) who got his letter published. I bet that if you wrote him a similar letter and talked about some heavy metal song that goes 180 beats a minute, there's no chance it ever makes the column.

"Monday Night Football" Analysis: Phil Dawson of Cleveland had just put the Browns ahead 29-27 with 1:44 remaining on a 56-yard field goal kicked with the gusting wind, and then Buffalo reached first-and-10 on the Cleveland 34 with 1:03 remaining and a timeout. Buffalo was facing into the wind -- the Budgies needed another 15 yards for a realistic field goal opportunity. But ultra-conservative coach Dick "Cheerio, Chaps" Jauron acted like the game was already won, running Marshawn Lynch straight ahead three times. To the surprise of no one except "Cheerio, Chaps," the 47-yard attempt into the wind failed, and Cleveland prevailed.

It was questionable coaching by Jauron; it almost seemed like he was more concerned with running the clock down so Cleveland couldn't score one last time when they got the ball back than with assuring his kicker a better chance to hit the field goal. But I've included this item here because of Gregg's hyperbolic claim that the Bills needed to get inside the Cleveland 20 to have a shot at "a realistic field goal opportunity." It's the NFL, asshole. Pretty much every kicker is very good up to 45 yards or so. Yes, they get better the closer they get, and there was a headwind on Monday night. But it's not like the coaching staff should have felt that there was no "realistic" chance of the kick going through unless it was a 35 yarder. The failed 47 yard attempt that lost this game for Buffalo didn't miss because it came up short. Is this to say that Jauron didn't coach questionably? No. Is it to say that a 35 or 40 yard attempt would have a much better chance at succeeding than a 47 yard attempt? No. Is it to say that I love nitpicking on every stupid little thing Gregg Easterbrook says? Absolutely.

"Friday Night Lights" Update: Once again, the Dillon Panthers won on the final snap, this time a last-play 50-yard touchdown pass. The Panthers are 5-1, yet a character said "The playoffs start next week" -- again the FNL gang has been so obsessed with relationship talk and longing glances that the team has forgotten to play enough games.

You bring this up every fucking week. We get it. The show isn't written with much regard for portraying the scheduling rules of Texas high school football accurately. IT'S NOT A BIG DEAL.

And this brings up the hypocrisy issue I mentioned before, but at least when I bitch about Gregg's inability to understand how fractions of a second work, it's because he has said something dumb about one of many different sports: basketball, swimming, track and field, etc. When he brings up this "OMG they're not playing enough games!" thing, it's the same fucking thing, over and over and over and over and over again. We get it, Gregg. OK?

/Larry B cups hands around mouth to amplify his voice

WE GET IT.

Criminy on a crutch. This guy... is... the... fucking... worst.

The only good part about this column is that he didn't have a "Wacky Wine of the Week." I really thought that was going to become a regular thing.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Needless to say, the Vikings went on to lose.

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

Forget the 17-point margin;

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

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

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

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

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

Needless to say, the Lions went on to lose.

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

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

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

Needless to say, the Tigers went on to lose.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Wrong, as already explained.

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

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

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

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

it isn't just bad tactics.

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

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

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

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

Easy on the hyperbole, Joe Buck.

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

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

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

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

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

I think I'll go with "both."

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

OK, I'm done.

FMTMQR: Gregg Easterbrook Thinks You Are a Fan of the TV Show "Friends"

So I'm sitting there, looking at LOLCats (and subsequently laughing out loud, just like the name promises), when I realize that I never finished this up. Everyone enjoy it- it's the last we'll hear from Mr. Young Joe Pesci Lookalike until August.

I also hope you don't take tenths or hundredths of a second seriously, though the draftnik system surely does.

I'm skipping his big intro about how the draft is a quasi-joke because no one really knows which players will be good and which won't. It's wrong, it's right, it's been done before. Let's instead jump to Gregg's completely asinine attempts to devalue modern timing systems. It's a continuous thread throughout the column, and gets stupider and stupider each time he brings it up. It's in the exact same vein as his refusal to understand that just because a team threw an incomplete pass while leading with 7 minutes left, and then lost on a last second field goal by the other team, that doesn't mean the first team would have won the game had they run up the middle instead of throwing that pass. You'll see what I mean. He's so tragically dumb I just can't explain it. What a lummox.

Aqib Talib went 20th, to the Bucs. Before the draft, the Houston Chronicle reported Talib's stock was rising because at his pro day he ran a Wright 40-yard dash, improving on the 4.46 he ran at the combine. Set aside that it is inconceivable the timing was accurate enough to make this a statistically significant difference. Suppose the timers were flawless -- 4.42 is 0.9 percent faster than 4.46. Vernon Gholston went sixth, to Jersey/B. Before the draft, Todd McShay reported that Chris Long looked slow at 4.75, but Gholston looked fast at 4.67. Assume it's 10 yards to the quarterback, considering forward and perpendicular movement. A defensive end who runs a 4.67 would get there 7 inches before a defensive end who runs a 4.75.

As odd as it seems to obsess over hundredths of a second, if you don't think that seven inches could matter to a pass rusher, or even that four or five inches could matter to a defensive back in deep coverage, you have probably not watched more than five football games in your entire life. How you can be Gregg Easterbrook, a (presumably) well-paid part-time pretentious NFL analyst, and make fun of the concept that teams might want a DE to get to the QB seven inches quicker, is beyond comprehension. Football being "a game of inches" might be the truest cliche of all time. That seven inches could be the difference between a TD pass and a forced fumble. The four or five inches Talib picked up could be the difference between a TD pass or a deflection that turns into a pick. Unbelievable. I hate the draft and draft hype as much as the next guy, but to mock this process is to basically claim that it doesn't matter how fast football players are. Fucking. Unbelievable.

Meaningless decimals have run wild throughout football scouting and commentary. Dominique Rodgers-Cromartie, who went 16th to Arizona, ran the cone drill in 6.74 at the combine. Not in 6.73, not in 6.75 -- in 6.74.

Yes. That was his time. The world record in the 100 meter dash, held by Asafa Powell of Jamaica (glad I looked that up, I had no idea) is 9.74 seconds. Not 9.73. Not 9.75. You know why it's good to be that precise? I'm going to act like a caricature of an angry woman and not tell you why. You should already know.

Absurd hundredths were scattered throughout combine results. Last year on draft day, the ESPN broadcast crew debated whether Yamon Figurs runs a 4.29 or 4.3. A player running a 4.29 would complete a 40-yard dash 3 inches ahead of a player running a 4.3.

And that faster player would be able to make maybe a catch or two per season that the slower player wouldn't.

And this business of wanting to run on a "fast surface" for the best possible hundredths-of-a-second readout.

We've kind of gravitated away from picking on poor technical writing here at FJayM, but that's a sentence fragment. Just saying. And this idea that Gregg Easterbrook is really smart.

Malcolm Kelly of Oklahoma ran a 4.68 on FieldTurf at the University of Oklahoma, then arranged a retest during which he ran a 4.63 on AstroTurf. So the "fast surface" improved his time by 1 percent. And NFL scouts took this seriously.

Back when timing first became this precise, the scouts that laughed at this kind of precision were probably looking for new jobs relatively soon thereafter. This is like making fun of a company for keeping track of their accounting down to the penny and caring about a 1% gain in sales over the course of, say, a week. Haw haw! What a bunch of maroons! It's just a percent! We here at Eastercorp aren't worried about that kind of nitpicking! We only consider changes in sales significant if they're more or less 15%. That way, you know it's a big deal.

Absurd tenths in women's basketball: In the Tennessee versus Rutgers women's basketball game in Knoxville on Feb. 11, Tennessee won 59-58 when, according to The Associated Press, "the game clock appeared to pause for more than a second just before reaching zero, and Tennessee made a pair of foul shots with two-tenths of a second remaining." The speculation was that a homer clock operator helped the first-ranked Vols win the game. AP reported, "Television replays showed the game clock seemed to pause at two-tenths of a second for more than about 1.3 seconds" as Tennessee struggled for a last-gasp rebound and got the foul call. Thus The Associated Press has introduced the concept of "about 1.3 seconds." If not for the absurdity of tenths of seconds on the game clock, the clock would simply have ticked from one to zero and Rutgers would have won.

This is a nice little trick. You tell a story that has nothing to do with your awful argument, then act like the only logical conclusion of the story is something that reinforces said argument. Here's the thing, fucknuts- some things you can do on a basketball court take less than a second. Say there are ten seconds left in an imaginary game between the Jemeles and the Jaybirds. The Jemeles are leading by one. (This is starting to feel like the kind of rules quiz you'd see in Sports Illustrated for Kids. I don't have a problem with that, and you shouldn't either.) The Jaybirds have the ball. They inbound it, dribble around for a little bit, then put up a shot that gets blocked out of bounds. The whole process took 9.7 (how ridiculous of me to use such precision! but anyways) seconds. Since a full ten seconds didn't pass, however, and the clock doesn't measure tenths, it still shows a full second remaining. When it is restarted, it will take a full 1.0 seconds to expire. Suddenly you've extended the quarter by .7 seconds, and according to the NCAA and NBA, that's enough time to catch and shoot a jumper. The Jaybirds capitalize on this opportunity and hit a baseline turnaround to win the game. After the Jemeles are done claiming their defeat was somehow a product of racism, and switch over to blaming the timing system, what are you supposed to tell them? They got screwed, plain and simple. Going back to the real life example, say there hadn't been a mysterious clock stopping discrepancy and Tennessee had legitimately been fouled with 0.2 seconds remaining. Now what, Gregg? Can Rutgers blame their loss on the clock then? Yeah, I thought so. Go back to your tower.

Absurd tenths in men's basketball: In the 2007 NCAA men's Sweet 16, Southern Illinois trailed Kansas and had an inbounds play with 3.1 seconds remaining. The pass was deflected out of bounds by a Kansas player, and when the referee signaled Southern Illinois to try again, he noticed the clock erroneously still showed 3.1. As officials huddled around the replay monitor trying to decide how much time to take off, CBS color commentator Bill Raftery pronounced, "They should take two-tenths off, two-tenths is the correct number." CBS announcers can sense the fifths of seconds!

Raftery is a train wreck, but I don't think he was "sensing" it like a goddamn fortune teller. He was looking at the tape in slow motion and estimating how much time elapsed while the ball was in midair post-deflection.

Following inspections of the replay, officials ordered the game clock reset to two seconds. Verne Lundquist protested, "That's too many tenths of a second." CBS announcers can sense tenths of seconds!

In slow motion, they absolutely can. This is called looking at something and then processing the information you acquire. Many humans are very good at it.

Absurd Tenths in the NBA: In Game 4 of the 2007 NBA Finals, at the end of the second quarter, the ball careened out of bounds -- Cleveland possession with 0.2 seconds showing. Referee Bennett Salvatore confidently signaled the scorer's table to change the clock to 0.5 seconds, making it possible under NBA rules for the Cavs to attempt a catch-and-shoot. NBA referees can sense thirds of seconds!

I... I don't see what's so hard about this. Perhaps Gregg is unfamiliar with slow motion replays. That would fit with my earlier guess that based on his mockery of the scouting process, he must not have seen many football games. If he actually tunes in to check out a few contests this fall, man, he's in for a treat.

Better still was a Golden State-Washington regular-season game in 2007. The clock expired with the Warriors ahead by two points, and a Wizards player was fouled seemingly just after time expired. Officials looked at the replay and ordered one-tenth of a second put back on the clock, thus allowing two free throws and an opportunity for Washington to tie the contest. This ruling could have been correct only if basketball officials can sense a tenth of a second.

Or, alternatively, this could have been correct if the officials had magic powers (and capes!) and were capable of looking at a split-screen view of the clock and the on court action in slow motion and determining whether or not the foul occurred before time ran out.

When Golden State coach Don Nelson used profanity to protest the decision to restore one-tenth of a second, officials correctly signaled a technical foul on Nelson. Washington proceeded to hit all three free throws, winning the game. You don't often lose after being ahead when the clock expired!

Except that they weren't, because they fouled the other team before that happened.

NBA vice president of basketball operations Stu Jackson reviewed the ending and declared, "The crew made the correct decision to conduct an instant replay review which ultimately resulted in putting one-tenth of a second back on the clock." Even NBA executives are now able to sense one single tenth of a second.

Using italics there makes you come across as even more of an ignorant horse's ass. I'm done repeating the same points over and over; like I said back at the beginning, this is just like his "if only [Team] had run the ball up the middle instead of throwing a clock-stopping incompletion with 11:32 remaining in the 4th, that field goal would have never been attempted!" garbage. How can someone not understand this? How? Get your head out of your rectum, Gregg, and go back to square one. Start with the concept that time can be divided into tenths of a second without using magical voodoo. Then consider that some things in sports take less than a second to do. Then try to move up to the idea that sometimes things happen between the point when there are 1.0 seconds left in a game and when there are 0.0 seconds left in a game. If you get there, but still can't figure out why these segments I've copied and pasted here are a pile of shit, email me and I'll cuss you out some more. Silly goose.

Record ratings for series finale of "Debate Friends": Jon Stewart says Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama debated so many times, their smackdown was a reality series. Now the 21-epsiode series has ended -- but without a series finale. Here is the tear-jerking series finale episode:

Shown: A familiar apartment. Scattered around are various sentimental objects: a foosball table, coffee cups from Central Perk, a deck of pinochle cards, bowling balls, travel brochures to Hawaii, Bibles, camouflage hunting suits and lots of shotguns. Hillary Clinton is seen dabbing back tears.

HILLARY: I can't believe I went to the wrong airport! I thought he was arriving at Dulles, but it was Andrews Air Force Base. I went to the wrong airport and missed him! I was going to beg him not to take his new job as president, and just go on debating me forever. (Throws back a shot of Crown Royal.) Maybe I should shoot some ducks to take my mind off this. (Picks up a shotgun.) I wonder which end the bullets go in? (Pours another shot of whiskey and throws her head back.)

(Unseen by Hillary, Barack Obama has stepped into the doorway and has been standing behind her the entire time.)

BARACK: I can't leave you. I just gave my ticket on Air Force One to John McCain. He can be president -- that seems to be what the Democratic National Committee wants, anyway. We'll go on running against each other forever.

HILLARY: Are you bitter?

BARACK: There's a campaign bus outside waiting for us. I heard there's a primary in Manitoba. It's nonbinding -- but let's go!

HILLARY: Oh Barack, promise me there will be sniper fire!

(They leave hand in hand. Schmaltzy music plays, and we see the apartment door close.)

I hope you didn't read all that. I sure didn't. I just copied and pasted it to show that he really, actually, just wrote a 250-ish word joke BASED ON THE SERIES FINALE OF "FRIENDS." Boy, that Easterbrook really knows his audience, doesn't he? First of all, didn't that show end like five years ago? Regardless of everything else, this is heinously untimely. Why not just go the whole nine yards and make a joke about "Cheers" or "M*A*S*H" while you're at it. Second, besides Chris Hart, how many of his readers actually like "Friends" enough to get/enjoy what he's done here? I'd be astounded if it were more than ten percent of them. Nicely done. Ho hoooooo. I'm holding my belly. This is even funnier than that time Matthew Perry's character had that cheeky one-liner, and Jennifer Aniston's character got fake upset about it! Roll the laugh track, and make sure we present a version of New York City that contains nothing but white people with lavish apartments. SMACK!

Absurd hundredths on NFL Network: As noted by many readers, including David Warder of Cumming, Ga., last season during the Saints-Falcons game on MNF, Ron Jaworski said quarterback Chris Redman of Atlanta was doing a good job because he was "making his three-step drops in 2.1 seconds." Warder adds, "If only he'd have shaved those drops down to 2.0 seconds, the Falcons might have won."

I haven't seen the segment in question, but if Redman got sacked or had his delivery badly altered several times just before he was about to unload the ball, that would be a perfectly fair bit of analysis.

The time sense possessed by the "Monday Night Football" booth crew turns out to be nothing compared to the perceptive powers at NFL Network. NFLN's Rich Eisen was narrating combine coverage when Darren McFadden ran his 40. McFadden hit the finish line, and before his number was flashed, Eisen pronounced, "I'm going to say that was a 4.38."

I'm not going to blame him. He was "announcing" probably the most useless sport-related event ever to be shown on television. He's got to fill up the airtime with something. Put anyone in that booth and make them watch 20 hours of guys lifting weights and sprinting and they'll probably start playing guessing games like Rich did. Hell, assuming the NFLN crew was on location, were I in their position eventually I'd just start asking the combine organizers if I could do the drills.

The last thing I wanted to share with you is from Gregg's team-by-team draft reviews. He managed to put a little something in the column for all 32 franchises. Some were detailed and analytically sound. Others were like this (reprinted in its entirety):

San Diego: The Bolts tabbed DeJaun Tribble in Round 6. Wasn't DeJaun a character in "Star Wars"?

You're a fucking embarrassment.