What?

Tim Hasselbeck on SportsCenter discussing the Eagles' game plan this weekend while playing against the Saints' productive offense:

"They're not going to be able to match the Saints point-for-point"

So... they have no chance of victory?

Just Bad Old Writing

Figurative language is a dangerous thing when employed by a man named Mark Sheldon. I know the Reds have been pretty bad since the ASG, but I wouldn't wish this sort of writing on any team except maybe the Cubs.

CINCINNATI -- With a day-night doubleheader looming for the Reds on Monday, manager Dusty Baker wanted to protect his bullpen like a lioness and her cubs or a college freshman and the last slice of pizza.

What?

I mean, I guess I understand the similes, but... what?

Unfortunately for Reds starter Bronson Arroyo, quality starts and victories are mixing like oil and water lately.

What?

Oh, I get it.

Get an Education

A tip of the cap to current Mets outfielder and former Braves outfielder Jeff Francoeur, who recently said something so stupid that it merited its own post with his picture from the team he used to play for because it's funnier than any picture I could find of him playing for the team he currently plays for.

Regarding last night's Mets-Braves game, in which the Mets kicked around Braves starter Derek Lowe in the 4th inning:

The Mets reeled off 10 hits in the fourth, setting a franchise record for one inning.

Hey, cool, it's not every night you set a franchise record!

"That was a lot of fun," Jeff Francoeur said. "You just keep pounding balls into the gap. The one thing you don't want to do is hit a home run. That's a rally-killer."

Really?

Also a tip of the cap to the old FJM, which first brought to my attention the fact that some people in baseball actually believe homered runs are undesirable events. And a tip of the cap to A-Dave for passing along this tidbit of foolishness.

Sunday Night Baseball Liveblog #2: Joe Morgan Likes Manny Ramirez... A Lot

PNoles and I are watching the game again tonight. Should be a real bundle of laughs.

7:14 CST: I just turned on the game, like 45 seconds ago, and Joe has already praised Joe Torre for calling a hit and run with Manny Ramirez on first and James Loney at the plate. He mentioned that if the Dodgers want to make the playoffs, they're going to need to do more of that and stop "waiting around for the home run." Sending Manny Ramirez: pretty much asking for an out. (Too bad it worked and Loney managed to slap a single through the left side. Bah humbug.)

7:21 CST: Casey Blake clubs a 3 run bomb on a pitch that K Zone shows as being about three inches above the knees. Joe insists that it was "up in the zone... for a sinkerballer." Maybe he missed his location and wanted it to sink out of the zone, but buddy, it doesn't matter what kind of pitcher you are. Three inches above the knees is three inches above the knees.

7:22 CST: Jon Miller praises Blake for "coming through in the clutch!" I don't know how clutch you can possibly be in the top of the first, but I guess whatever the upper limit of that categorization is, Blake hit it.

7:31 CST: Stephen Drew gets thrown out trying to steal second. Joe does not approve. Well, which is it, Joe? You don't want them to wait around for the three run bomb, do you? (Actually, Joe's probably right here. It's just funny to hear him not approve of a SB attempt, regardless of context.)

7:35 CST: Joe's analysis re: Brandon Webb's struggles: "Make no mistake about it... when you're going for your 20th win, a lot of things go through your mind. Especially in this day and age, when so few guys get there." I'm awarding him zero points for this one.

7:40 CST: According to Joe, the name of the Diamondbacks' starting pitcher is actually Brandon Wells.

7:47 CST: Joe, re: the Brewers' petitioning of the league to change the scoring of the Pirates' only hit in today's game to give C.C. Sabathia a no hitter: "I've always thought it was in the rulebook, from back in my umpiring days, that the first hit had to be a clean hit."

1) Can you imagine how awful Joe would be as an umpire, what with his complete inability to make tough decisions?
2) That's not in the rulebook.

7:55 CST: Jon praises Casey Blake for squibbing a grounder past Webb (Wells?), allowing Matt Kemp to advance from 2nd to 3rd. He calls it good "situational hitting, to get the ball past the pitcher like that!" Call my crazy, but I don't think there's a situation in the whole game of baseball where your goal ISN'T to hit the ball past (or away from, in the case of bunting) the pitcher.

8:04 CST: Joe is sure that acquiring David Eckstein will help the Diamondbacks because they "need a little more leadership on the field." Hopefully they also need more mediocre defense and poor hitting, because Lil' Eck will be bringing those to Phoenix as well.

8:13 CST: OK, guys. Webb isn't keeping his sinker down in the zone and Lowe is. We get it. You can only talk about that for so many straight half-innings (going on five at this point) before it gets stale.

8:17 CST: Joe, re: Andre Ethier's RBI double with 2 strikes: "Well, with two strikes, he changes his mindset and just wants to drive the run in." What was his mindset before he had 2 strikes? Try not to drive the run in? Foul off as many pitches as possible? Check out the hot girl sitting behind the dugout?

8:26 CST: And Webb is out of the game. Earlier today, the front page headline on espn.com was his picture, with the headline "Oh, What a Webb!" Any guesses about that one? Anybody? Is it a play on that oldies hit "Oh, What a Night?" What am I missing here?

8:33 CST: Jon has a theory as to why Joe Torre is such an effective manager: "He has the ability to phrase something, and not make it sound like a cliche!" (I use an exclamation mark because Jon always sounds like he's excited about everything.) If it even exists, I'm not sure that ability is more or less important to a manager's ability level than filling out a lineup card. We'll call it a push for now.

8:50 CST: PNoles's apartment has several visitors in it right now, so I'm having trouble hearing Jon and Joe over the awful racket going on in here. It is helping me enjoy the game a lot more, though. Every cloud has a silver lining.

8:57 CST: Going back to the Eckstein trade: how the hell did he clear waivers? The whole AL let him get away? Really? Haven't these teams ever heard of winning?

8:59 CST: Since I'm grasping at straws here, I might as well offer commentary on the commercials. I kind of enjoy these Mike's Hard Lemonade spots that are obviously ripping off Tommy Boy, but what demographic are they going after? There can't be a huge overlap between Chris Farley fans and sugary malt beverage drinkers.

9:05 CST: Speaking of how excited Jon gets when pretty much anything happens, Tony Clark just missed a catch in foul ground during an 8-0 game. "HE DROPPED IT! HE HAD IT, AND IT BOUNCED OUT!" Easy, tiger. Easy now.

9:12 CST: As the third out is recorded in the top of the 6th, Joe reveals that he'll be pressing Jon for Jon's MVP and Cy Young picks during the next half inning. Hopefully Joe is willing to give his own opinions as well- I'm already getting tingly thinking about the possibilities.

9:15 CST: Obviously Jon has his finger squarely on the pulse of pop culture; after a brief K Zone montage of Lowe's sinker tonight, he manages to funkily blurt out "Derek Lowe, 'get down' tonight!" Hopefully Kool and the Gang will be visiting the booth later in the evening.

9:19 CST: Joe finally settles the age-old debate about the relative levels of passion for baseball expressed by fans on America's two coasts. "A lot of people say people on the east coast care more about baseball. But I'm a west coast kind of guy! I really think the guys in Los Angeles... the fans in San Francisco... I think fans on the west coast really care about baseball too." Good to have that all cleared up.

9:27 CST: Jon has told Joe to back off the end-of-the-year award questions. Oh nooooo!

9:28 CST: Wait, wait, wait, wait.... whoa. We're back on topic. Jon says some wishy washy crap about the Cubs' whole lineup. Joe then takes the reins. He helpfully reminds us that we won't know until the season is over (thanks a lot), but then reveals his dark horse candidate: Carlos Delgado. His OPS+: 122. Pujols' OPS+ (not that I'm saying he's necessarily the best pick, just that he's one of many potential better picks): 191. Cue up the laugh track.

9:41 CST: Jon and Joe discuss NL Cy Young candidates without saying anything especially dumb. Of course, Joe was quick to point out that many guys have had excellent seasons. As opposed to 2007, when one and only one guy had an excellent season.

9:44 CST: I am shocked MLB didn't bring Dane Cook back for their playoff promos. Why not? Part of advertising is getting people to remember your message, and I don't think Dane could possibly have done a better job in that capacity. Everyone say it with me: there are only how many Octobers?

9:58 CST: I just realized, we didn't have any Joe-less half innings tonight. Either he's holding it, or tonight he managed to take his bathroom break(s) during a commercial break(s).

10:01 CST: Joe and Jon wax poetically about the alleged HOF credentials of one Maury Wills. The comedy of this doesn't really need to be expanded upon much: let's just leave it at his career OPS+ of 88. Although, I have to say I'm surprised that Joe would be in his corner. It's not like Wills was part of the Big Red Machine.

10:11 CST: Sorry, I kind of tapered off at the end there. That's enough nerdery for tonight. We'll be back next Sunday as Joe and Jon continue their elaborate dance of idiocy. Remember, as unfunny as I am, at least I have two working eyes! (I really wanted to end on a high note, and taking a shot at Stu Scott seemed like the way to do it.)

Apparently Afghanistan Is a Much Nicer Place Than I Originally Thought

From the AP writeup about the rather touching story of that country's first Olympic medalist:

Noor Ahmad Gayezabi said a silent prayer while watching the small family TV with his 13-year-old son. "Help Nikpai. Help Nikpai. Help Afghanistan."

Then he watched his country win its first-ever Olympic medal.

Rohullah Nikpai defeated world champion Juan Antonio Ramos of Spain on Wednesday to earn the bronze medal in the men's under 58-kilogram taekwondo competition, sparking applause, wide smiles and laughter in homes, restaurants and ice cream parlors around the country.

I'm sorry, could you repeat that? I thought you said "ice cream parlors."

What?

And yes, the article goes on to tell an anecdote about people in just such a parlor celebrating the medal. Still: extremely strange. Does the AP have an agenda here? If they're trying to convince the public that things are peachy keen over there, this is a little over the top.

Yeah, Seriously, What the Hell?

Per CS's heads up from yesterday's comments. I don't read Deadspin anymore (although I probably should, because I'm getting sick and fucking tired of going over to The Big Lead and finding post after post that's basically a picture of a mediocre looking chick that he insists is a "Vegas 10", and then some horrible sports related prediction) so this slipped past me.

When? How? Why? That's really his? No way. What the hell?

Not that that post lights the world on fire, but at least 1) it's not about Boston and 2) it shows he has a sense of humor re: blogs and commenters who frequently eviscerate him. I'm going to lay off him for a couple of days now out of respect.

Duh-Whaaaaa?

This was a couple of days ago. I totally forgot to mention this. It's from a Twins/White Sox broadcast from perpetual dumbass Hawk Harrelson. Quote not exact, but close.

I tell ya one thing about Alexei Ramirez. He's the best baseball player we've got on our roster. Does he give you the most production? Certainly not. We've got several guys who are more productive. But as far as just playing the game of baseball goes, he's the best guy we've got.

Honorable Mention: Pablo Ozuna and Nick Masset

Bert Blyleven: Great Pitcher, Awful Analyst

He's been writing pieces for MSNBC.com, and I'm finally ready to call him out.

Here, he ranks the top aces in baseball

Here are his AL choices.

1) Roy Halladay, Blue Jays.

OK sure. I don't agree, but you're welcome to that opinion.

2) Josh Beckett, Red Sox

Yeah, yeah...

3) Erik Bedard, Mariners

He's filthy, and might be my #1. Totally deserves mention in this list.

4) Justin Verlander, Tigers

Good, good, nice choice.

5) C.C. Sabathia, Indians

Also an outstanding young pitcher.

6) John Lackey, Angels

Great work, you're on a roll!

7) Jon Garland, Angels

STOP!

Garland has a 105 ERA+. He's perfectly "above average". He is not an "ace". You already have John Lackey on this list, so why did you choose another Angels pitcher, unless you're really trying to rank the best overall starters in the AL?

Where's Kazmir? Vazquez? Wang? Greinke? Possibly the biggest sin of all, where's Fausto Carmona? And hell, why not rattle off Burnett, Buchholz, and Blanton? Felix Hernandez? James Shields? Healthy Rich Harden? There's guaranteed a few more to name, but where the FUCK did you get the idea that Jon Garland was the 7th best starter in the AL? Jon Garland?????

Wait, there's more, he tries to justify this crap.

After winning 18 games in 2005 and 2006

Hi Bert. Wins are not good for evaluation, Bert. Matt Cain was 7-16 last year, Bert. The White Sox crushed the ball on offense in 2006, Bert.

the right-hander posted just 10 victories last season and had a losing record (10-13).

But he pitched better in 2007 than 2006, Bert.

But the White Sox experienced a tough 2007 and for 2008 Garland has changed uniforms, traded last November to the Angels, where he should flourish with increased run support.

Bert, the offense scoring more runs does not make Garland a better Bert. I mean pitcher, Bert. It just means he'll accumulate more of an outdated pitching statistic intensely correlated with run support, Bert.

Bert.

Garland induces a lot of groundballs

But his GB% has alarmingly declined from 48% to 43% to 41% over the last three years, Bert.

and he does not give up a lot of home runs.

You win, Bert.

He will battle hitters hard and can handle throwing a lot of innings (he’s pitched over 200 the last four seasons).

Jason Marquis has averaged something like 200 over the past 4 seasons, Bert. Jon Garland is like Jason Marquis with less homers, Bert.

He has an aggressive approach aimed at getting ahead of hitters

Which contrasts to Fausto Carmona, who tries to get behind hitters in the count, Bert?

He stays around the plate and doesn't give up many walks.

But he also doesn't strike out guys, Bert! Is striking people out important, Bert? Is the combination of 4.5 K/9 and a decreasing ground ball rate a good sign, Bert?


Garland grew up in Southern California and with him going home a big year might well be in the cards, maybe in the range of 18 to 21 wins.

Please send me a historical report showing statistical data that pitchers pitch better in their home states, Bert. Do you even know who James Shields is, Bert?

For Garland the positives with the Angels are not only on offense

None of the positives for Jon Garland are on offense, Bert. Jon Garland doesn't hit in the vast majority of his baseball games, Bert. If Casey Kotchman decides to break out and club 67 homers, this does not make Jon Garland a better pitcher, Bert.

but also on defense where he can expect solid fielding behind him all season long.

That also does not make Jon Garland a better pitcher, Bert. It makes Jon Garland look like a better pitcher, Bert. That's why we have things like Defense Independent Pitching Statistics and Defense-Adjusted ERA, Bert.

I can't believe I just had to convince Bert Blyleven that Jon Garland is not a top 7 pitcher in the American League. I'm literally kicking myself for bringing that "Circle me, Bert!" sign to the last baseball game I saw in the Metrodome.

Just kidding, I've never been to the Metrodome. I actually want to be the one who gets to push down the trigger for the dynamite when that thing goes up in smoke.

For the interested, Jon Garland currently boasts a 5.50 ERA. He has started 3 games, thrown 18 innings, and has struck out a fuckingwhopping (yes, that's a word) 2 hitters.

He Might Have To Transfer To Michigan After This

Terrelle Pryor's announcement earlier today as to where he'll attend college starting this fall:

Everybody here? Alright, good. (Unzips warmup jacket to reveal school shirt, puts on school hat) The University of Ohio State.

Hmmmm... let's break this down. I like the cool and casual style. He made sure all 350 invited media members were present, and then just dove right in. No fluff. And the fact that he utilized both a shirt and and a hat, rather than just a hat like most kids do, was a nice change of pace. But there's one major issue here. I think everyone knows what I'm talking about. He didn't use that school's vernacular name, which when said aloud usually makes me want to smother whoever said it with a chloroform-soaked rag. Get with the program, Terrelle: if you're going to be a Buckeye, you're going to have to sound like a fuckbag whenever you say "[explitive] Ohio State University."

Reader Extra Participation Friday: Go Ahead, Tell It Like It Is

It's late, I'm fucking beat, and I'm in the mood to get made fun of. So let's open up the floor for negative comments. That's right- I want you to let loose and tell me what the absolutely worst part of this blog is. Or the worst five parts. Whatever tickles you. Keep in mind, however, that your criticisms will almost definitely not lead to any improvements around here. This isn't a restaurant comment card where if you put like "why do u carry coke products they stink, get pepsi products they r better" the place will immediately start carrying Pepsi because they're terrified of losing your business. It's really just more of a chance for you to vent. So... tell it like it is. Come on. My life already stinks, it's not like your harsh words will make it any worse.

I'm going to go ahead and take the easiest one right out of the gate- we stole our name, format, and style from another blog. I hadn't realized this until a couple of very keen-eyed commenters last fall pointed it out. But son of a bitch, I went and checked out their site, and it's true! Oops. Our bad. So that's definitely shitty. What else ya got?

FMTMQR: You Can't Be Fucking Serious

(For anyone new who is confused by the above acronym: if Gregg Easterbrook, aka the Tuesday Morning Quarterback, writes something stupid in his column (Ha! If!), I usually complain about it the next day in what I call the Wednesday Morning Tuesday Morning Quarterback Review. If you can't figure out why this one is titled FMTMQR instead of WMTMQR, please navigate away from this site. Go to Google and search for "GED programs.")

Let's just get right to the action; it'll be brief, because I want to watch the Djokovic/Federer match. What? Tennis is for sissies, you say? Well, that may be true. But at least I'm not pulling a total nerd move like you and reading a blog. Go practice kissing the robot you built some more. Nerd.

Norv Turner's decision to punt in New England territory in the fourth quarter when trailing by two scores might go down as the single worst coaching decision of all time. Let us count the ways in which the decision was ludicrous. First, the Patriots have the best offense in football history, so the odds of getting the ball back quickly without New England scoring were very low. Second, you need a touchdown and a field goal and are in field goal range. Why aren't you at least attempting a field goal? Sure a long field goal try might not work, but punting is guaranteed not to work!

OK. I'll buy that. That punt was a bad decision (more on it later), and since the Chargers were down 9 points, a field goal would have drawn them within one score. That's fair analysis.

But then... IN THE VERY NEXT PANDAFUCKING PARAGRAPH:

Giants coaches, please note -- two straight playoff games have featured opponents playing the Patriots close through three quarters, then folding in the fourth quarter after going passive. (Trailing New England by 11 points late in the divisionals, Jacksonville passively kicked a field goal on fourth-and-goal.)

NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO

NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO

If you are not wholly and completely insulted by those two paragraphs when read together, I don't know what to tell you. I don't care where the Jaguars were on the field. THEY KICKED THE FIELD GOAL TO GET WITHIN ONE SCORE. YOU JUST CRITICIZED THE CHARGERS FOR NOT DOING THE EXACT SAME THING. Fucking.... fuck. No. This is not happening.

Stat of the Week No. 10: Three days after appearing on the cover of Sports Illustrated, Favre threw a killer overtime interception that cost the Packers the NFC Championship Game at home.

If he's referring to the always talked-about cover jinx, I guess I can't blame a guy who bases most of his analysis on "the football Gods" for also believing said jinx. Still, this isn't even a stat. It's a description of a play. That happened in a game. And is not "cleverly noteworthy" in any way, like the rest of the stats of the week are intended to be. So Favre threw a horrible interception. And? Why not just make the stats of the week a rundown of the most significant plays of the week? I vote yes. Everyone else who votes yes, raise your hand. OK, now raise your hand if you just don't give a shit. OK, put them down, I get it.

By sending in the punt team, Turner quit on the game. At that point, he no longer was trying to win -- rather, he appeared to be attempting to hold down the margin of defeat so people would hire him to do banquet-circuit speeches in the offseason and introduce him as a coach who gave the Patriots a good game.

Allegedly, this is the exact same thing Jack Del Rio of Jacksonville did two weekends ago. Actually, it is completely false, fabricated, made up, and many other things that synonymous with those words. I'll concede that coaches might do stuff like this during meaningless regular season games. But you're really telling me that in the playoffs, with all of the following on the line: a Super Bowl trip... a shot at eternal glory... a shot at extra eternal glory for knocking off a 17-0 team... a shot at a ring bigger than your head... a shot at silencing all the critics that continuously mock you for being a shitty coach and looking totally confused most of the time... all the hookers and cocaine you can buy (should you win the SB and decide to spend your bonus that way, hey, whatever, I mean it's your bonus, spend it however you want, if you just want to buy a house or something, that's fine too)... with all of that, a coach is going to stop trying to win? No, no, no, no, and no.

OK, sorry, that's all I've got for now. I'm off to pansyland to dance in a field full of lollipops and watch some tennis!

But Will It Play in Peoria?

I'm in beautiful Nashville, Tennessee right now and after witnessing last night's Blues/Predators game in person, I wanted to post with local flare. So here is Jessica Hopp of Nashville's The Tennessean.

Experience and youth worked in perfect harmony on Monday night, and the tune that was produced certainly showed no hint of the Blues.

GET IT? Because the Predators beat the Blues, you see. And what Ms. Hopp has done here is take the team name - in this case "Blues" - and used it in another commonly found application of the word. What will it take for people to stop doing this? I'm rooting for a Chris Hansen/Nashville Predators line about molestation, but we all know that won't happen.

After losing the first three games of the season against St. Louis, Nashville snagged its second win in three days against the Central Division rival with a 6-3 victory in front of 13,642 fans at Sommet Center.

Under 14,000 fans and new ownership gets to move the team out of Nashville. I have to say that I enjoy being able to drive to another city and watch their classless fans carry on the legacy of "Stone Cold" Steve Austin's greatest hits from the late 90's. Nashville moved right behind the Red Wings in the division and nobody is coming to the games because almost all the seats are the expensive ones.

And now I point you to the end of the article where a Tennessean reader vents frustration.

Deafmike wrote: Great game for a Monday afternoon.......

Because yesterday was a holiday, puck dropped at 5pm. Somebody in our row joined the game right before the second period ended at 6:40pm. Maybe it's a pet peeve, but how hard is it to get to a game somewhere around when it starts?

Presenting: Scoop Jackson Finishes Embarrassing Himself

Let's pick up where we left off on Wednesday. Scoop was trying to come to the right conclusion (Randy Moss won't win the NFL MVP this year) by citing all the wrong reasons (such as: Barry Bonds has shown us that jerks can't win MVPs).

Moss won't win the MVP award because as well as he's played -- and in some minds (including this one) he outplayed Brady this year -- MVPs are like NCAA teams trying to win the BCS: If you begin the season too far off the elite list or not ranked in the top 25, it's impossible (even if you go undefeated, like Hawaii this year or Boise State last year) to play for the national championship. In Moss' case, while there is no preseason "ranking" on this topic, he began the season too far off of everyone's list to be the MVP in the end.

Interesting. The "you can't win if no one expects anything from you when the season starts" theory. Yet earlier in this same article, Scoop wrote that:

His teammate, Tom Brady, will win that award and at least one other player, probably Brett Favre, will get more votes of recognition than Moss.

Is that the same Brett Favre who had a 1:1 TD/INT ratio in 2006? And a QB rating in the low 70s? Yeah, so given that Favre will probably get significant MVP consideration, we're going to go ahead and ditch that idea.

Moss won't win the MVP award because he's not a quarterback. Or a running back. The last non-QB/RB to win the AP MVP award was Lawrence Taylor in 1986. And no wide receiver has ever won it -- not even Jerry Rice in 1987, when he won the Pro Football Writers' award.

Remember this; it's actually the real reason why Moss won't win. Good for Scoop for stumbling into it. Bad for Scoop for failing to realizing that this is the case is because WR performance is so incredibly dependent on QB and OL performance. Was Moss ineffective in Oakland simply because he didn't care? Really? He looked pretty deflated at times, but he obviously still had his physical tools. You think he was being that lethargic, every down, every game? Or could it maybe be the case that with shitty QBs behind a shitty OL throwing to him during 2005 and 2006, he was simply unable to rack up any decent numbers? It was probably a combination of apathy and supporting cast, but the second is far more significant than the first. I'm not saying WRs are 110% dependant on their QBs/OLs, and can't do anything to affect the outcome of a game on their own. But QBs/OLs help WRs look good a whole lot more often than the other way around.

Small sample size alert, but I'm going to make my point anyways. On Moss's 60 yard-plus TD against the Giants in the 4th quarter last Saturday, he simply ran a fly route. The corner on his side of the field let him go after 10 yards, presumably expecting safety help. That help came extremely late (almost as if the coverage was blown), and Moss caught the ball ran untouched for the TD. I know he's fast, but lots of guys are fast. At least 40 or 50 other wideouts in the league could have scored that TD. The reason that play and many other Brady to Moss plays this season worked like it/they did was because Brady had his usual 15 seconds in the pocket to allow things to develop, and he throws a good deep ball. The end.

Even though breaking Rice's season record for TD catches is just as impressive and significant as Brady breaking Manning's mark for TD passes, Moss won't get the MVP because he won't get the same recognition. In any other season, what he accomplished would have been more recognized and honored, but with Brady having his best statistical season, we didn't necessarily realize Moss' domination. That's not wrong, that's just human nature.

This doesn't carry much water. And by doesn't carry much water, I mean is complete nonsense. Pundits have been tripping over themselves to ass pat both players pretty equally this year. Brady might have an edge, but if he does it's pretty slight. I don't think Moss's hype would suffer much had he only finished with 20 TDs, nor would he eclipse Brady if Brady had only thrown 45 TDs. People don't care all that much about football records. Shouldn't all time passing TDs represent the rough equivalent of baseball's all time home run record? Compare the buildup and reaction Favre and Bonds each got during the past year. It's not much of a contest. Therefore- football records aren't that big of a deal.

Moss won't win the MVP award because he's been too perfect. For most players this would be a gift not a curse, but for him it's too distant from the picture that has been painted of him since he was drafted in 1998. The sullenness, the sulking, the walking off of the field with time left on the clock, playing only on certain downs, the Raiders experience -- all of this represents how the public sees Moss, defines who he is in our minds. But this year he's almost been angelic. And instead of giving him sole credit for changing and maturing, we will say it was the Patriots organization that changed him. Even though he had more of an effect on them than they did on him.

Moss won't win the MVP award because we don't want to honor that truth. The truth that the main reason the Patriots were able to go undefeated is because of the attitude change the team inherited from him. We see Spygate as the reason for the anger or "chippiness," as Tom Jackson calls it. But it was Moss who helped the Patriots get hard.

That's a load of anecdotal bullshit so massive, I surprised my computer didn't "poop out" trying to put it on the screen! (See, I said I was going to use more bad jokes and exclamation points this year.) Seriously though, wow. Where did this come from? How can a guy who gets paid to write about his opinions gets away with something like this?

See if you can follow Scoop's logic here. Moss has been a total dick and bad teammate several times during his career. It's fair to say he has a reputation for assholism. He also put up relatively poor numbers on the field during the two years before he came to New England. Bill Belichick also has an assholish rep, but he's got three Super Bowl rings. He clearly knows how to be angry and remain effective as a coach. Moss goes to New England and stops being a dick. He also starts putting up great numbers. Belichick continues to be a dick. The team continues to enjoy success. Clearly, this is all due to... Moss? I got myself lost somewhere in there, but that's Scoop's fault. How exactly the fuck we're supposed to buy into what he just wrote is anyone's guess.

It reminds me of a half-assed English paper, the likes of which I would have written in high school. I would just state conclusions left and right without justifying them and hope the teacher didn't bother to think while reading the essay. Replace "I would" with "Scoop is", "teacher" with "reader", change the verb tenses, and that's pretty much what seems to have happened here.

Moss won't win the MVP award because of his braids,

Pretty unlikely.

because he publicly admitted that he smokes weed,

That was like four years ago. I don't think the media cares that much any more. And again, when it comes to drugged up athletes and MVPs, see Bonds comma Barry.

because he's unapologetic about his West Virginia roots and doesn't mask who he really is,

The key to Peyton Manning's MVP awards: being very apologetic about his Louisiana roots, and constantly masking who he really is. Doesn't the guy just seem like a great big fake? I'll bet he doesn't even like most of those products he endorses. Same for Brett Favre and Steve McNair with Mississippi. And Shaun Alexander with Kentucky.

and because he's never been ashamed of how the world sees him.

Lawrence Taylor was clearly very ashamed of how the world saw him. That's how he was able to drag an award home.

Moss won't win the MVP award because of that beard. (Anyone who can make Ricky Williams' old facial hair look groomed doesn't stand a chance.)

I know I'm taking this too seriously. That's what we do here at FireJay. But Kurt Warner won an MVP with a trashy-ass beard and a wife that looks like an alien.

I'm just saying is all.

Moss won't win the MVP award because all of those unbelievable catches he made this season (remember the one-handed grab against the Colts or the one-handed, double-covered, over-the-shoulder catch in the corner of the end zone against the Dolphins in Week 7?) tend to have people thinking that Brady's accuracy is what is making Moss look good, when actually Moss has made bad passes by Brady look like genius decisions.

More anecdotal bullshit. Also, for every bad Brady pass Moss has turned into a catch, there are probably like 15 good, accurate passes that were served up on a platter for Moss. When Brady has all damn day to throw in the pocket (easily the most frustrating part of watching Patriots games when you hate them), most passes are going to end up right on target. Thanks, offensive line!

Which brings us back to the beginning. The reason Randy Moss will not win the MVP award is because of this: He's Randy Moss. And a lot of people simply can't get past that.

I am past it. I was never hindered by it in the first place. I think most MVP voters can probably honestly say the same. Here's the deal: WRs just aren't that valuable in an offense relative to QBs, RBs, and OLs (not that the latter is in the voting discussion). It's not that WRs don't matter, or that they're all interchangeable with each other, but they simply don't matter to the same extent everyone else on the offense does. That's why Moss looked so bad in Oakland; he didn't have anyone helping him out, and simply couldn't amass good numbers or make a significant difference on the field all by himself. That's also the reason Brady was effective for years while throwing to unheralded WRs; a good QB can put up good numbers and make a significant difference on the field all by himself. Scoop himself touched on this earlier in the article so I give him credit for that. It's just sad he couldn't take the idea all the way to completion, and instead wrote the rest of the crap in this article.

In summary-

Actual reasons Moss will not win:
WRs almost never do, because they almost never realistically deserve to

Not actual reasons Moss will not win:
Voters don't notice players who had low expectations placed upon them coming into the season
Moss is a jerk and jerks never win MVPs
No one noticed his WR TD record because of Brady's QB TD record
Moss's attitude is totally the reason the Patriots played well this year
He has braids
He is from West Virginia
He once admitted he smokes weed
He's not ashamed of the way the world sees him
He is Randy Moss, and people just can't deal with that

Give Scoop credit for this: he didn't play the race card.

That's how far my standards have fallen for ESPN's writers. I now applaud them simply for not saying things that are horribly and flagrantly wrong.

i'm not 100% sure this counts as a mixed metaphor

but i am 100% sure it counts as stupid. bob griese, calling the penn st.-michigan game on abc, talking about how michigan needs to establish a ground attack because they don't want to put too much pressure on their freshman quarterback:

"Once they get that running game going, anything else is just the cherry on top of the iceberg."

you sure it's not gravy at the end of the tunnel?

just what the world needs: more eli manning coverage

not that anyone cares, but due to a cross country move and subsequent job search i'm not going to have a ton of time to contribute here for the next couple of weeks. fortunately, i still have a mind like a steel trap for ridiculous quotes i hear. espn football "analyst" and former player eric allen, on manning's performance during the giants' saturday night preseason game against the jets:

"He proved he could be a proven football player on the football field."

excuse me??