Boss Undressed

My friend PK did a little more research into recent Bruce shows given my complaints about Springsteen's failure to meet my expectations Monday night. Writes PK, "He doesn't do 4-hour marathons but actually he hasn't done those for a very long time. The Sunday night show was 24 songs, the Monday night show 23 songs. I went back into the ultimate fan site, Backstreets.com, and looked at the set lists of all the shows I had seen Bruce in years past, and the high-water mark for me was 25 songs on the '99 tour. Of course, what distinguished that tour was there was no album he was promoting so it was just the band and all their classics.But now that I've looked at the data, he's not really any shorter now than he was 8 1/2 years ago when I first saw him."

Fair enough. And an anonymous poster noted that all the shows on this tour have started about 8:20. But at the risk of enraging the Springsteen cult, many of whom are friends of mine, let me expand on my sacrilegious critique of St. Bruce.

The emperor has no clothes. The shows are starting at 8:20 - even though the tickets stipulate the show is scheduled to start at 7:30 - because Springsteen can't bring himself to admit what my friend PK pointed out. He no longer does marathon shows. There's nothing wrong with that, certainly not for a 58 year-old man. But why does he have to pretend -or conjure the illusion - that he plays as long as he once did?

He starts nearly an hour later than the scheduled time because if he did start on time the show would end around 9:30 and only serve to highlight how short his shows have become. (Can it really be true that a Bruce show now is shorter than a Flyers' game?). Ever heard of an opening act?

And why do fans have to be aware of how much later previous shows on tour started to know how delayed their show will be? Talk about catering to an exclusive clientele. This is likely all well and fine with the diehard groupies, but it isn't helping out the casual fan (like myself) and certainly goes against Bruce's "man of the people" persona. A "scheduled delay." How's that for an oxymoron.

And it is more of a sad commentary on the affairs of the entertainment industry that a professional, workmanlike performance of Bruce and the E Street Band like the one I enjoyed Monday night can be made into the be all, end all of concert shows. Yes, it was good. Entertaining. Groovy. But it wasn't a life altering experience nor did it justify all the hyped anticipation i've been hearing about the shows. Sort of like being married to Julianne Phillips. Having seen one of the performances I certainly did not feel the need or desire to go to the second Washington, DC show like some people I understand do.

And speaking of the show itself. What was up with the popcorn maker/fairground icon that was spotlighted at the very beginning of the show? It was accompanied by carnival music which lead me to believe the band was leading off with Tunnel of Love, but they didn't. And we never saw the popcorn maker again, nor was there any subsequent reference made. What was that all about?

The sound was muddled at various points throughout the show, but never more than on She's the One when the driving base lines sounded like they were emanating from a 20 year-old cracked speaker in my basement.

And the song selection...oh marone! Dancing in the Dark? As the second to last song? Are you kidding? The biggest commercial sellout song in the Springsteen catalogue. And for fans of my generation the song is most remembered for the embarrassing video and the fact that Courtney Cox, in a breakout cameo, is prominently featured in a faux pas de deux with Springsteen onstage. In a concert chock full of "new" songs, Dancing in the Dark is one of the "classics" you choose to include in the playlist!

Finally, another anonymous poster noted that Monday's show did indeed have an encore. My mistake. Upon reflection they are correct. I thought Bruce and the band's brief break was actually an intermission, particularly since it came less than two hours into the show. As it turns out, it was the end of the show, so the last 5 songs were the encore.

Timing is Everything

There are a range of opinions about the last 2:24 of the Eagles-Redskins game and clock management. Redskins "associate head coach - defense" Gregg Williams stoked the burgeoning war of post-game words between the two coaching staffs when he said in a Sunday night interview he told his players that if the "Eagles were dumb enough not to take a knee then to let them score a touchdown." The idea being that the Skins would only be down 8 points and still only need one possession to tie, albeit a touchdown and 2 pt. conversion.

Indeed, there are typically instances in a NFL game where the clock decision is clear cut. And just as typically, the head coach, whose primary responsibility on game day is time management, gets it wrong. It is why I am in the process of writing a guide on football time management.

After reflecting upon the matter further and hearing several different perspectives from friends, I think both sides have legitimate arguments and that perhaps there is no "right" answer concerning these specific circumstances.. The Eagles won, so Reid obviously made the correct call. But the alternative may have just as likely resulted in a win so, it too, may have been as high a percentage decision. Alas, we'll never know.

Indeed, during the game I briefly thought that the Eagles might take a knee after gaining possession at the Redskins 10 yard line with 2:24 to play, and up by 1, 26-25. The Skins were out of timeouts and i thought perhaps the Eagles would at least run the clock down to the 2:00 minute warning and leave the Skins with no more opportunities to stop the clock.

Under this scenario, the Eagles would have had 2nd down at 2 minutes and likely taken a knee. They could have then run the clock down to approximately 1:16 before having to take a knee on 3rd down. Facing 4th and 10 from the 10 (not sure if it was goal to go or not, but it doesn't matter) they would have called timeout with 1 second on the play clock which would have been about 35 seconds to go. Akers would have come in for the 27 yard FG. That would have taken 7 seconds off the clock. The net result would have been the Eagles kicking off to the Skins up 29-25 with 28 seconds to go, the Skins out of timeouts and needing a touchdown to win the game. The worst case under this scenario is that Akers misses the FG and the Skins take over at their own 17 yard line with 28 seconds to go and rather than needing a touchdown, need only a field goal to win, though again, with no timeouts.

On the flip side, and what really happened, is that the Eagles scored before the 2:00 warning and the Skins returned the ensuing kick to their 30 and had 2:18 with no timeouts to go 70 yards for the touchdown. That is a lot of time, especially against a defense that earlier in the season gave up a 97 yard TD with less than 2:00 to go. It would have been much more concerning had big-play WR Santana Moss been active, but as it was Randle-El has plenty of speed to be extremely wary of the deep threat.

Obviously, the main benefit of the approach the Eagles did take was that Skins would have to score AND get the 2pt conversion, and even then the worst outcome for the Eagles is a tie and overtime. Even with a successful Hail Mary or a 60 yard pass interference call the Eagles were essentially guaranteed of OT.

I see both points of view. Shrink the game to roughly three maybe four plays but risk losing on a fluky TD, or give your defense a cushion - a margin of safety in requiring a TD and 2 pt. conversion that doesn't it lose it but merely extends the game. One friend argued strongly that you ALWAYS take points - especially touchdowns - whenever you can get them. The upside benefit greatly outweighs the downside risk.

Like I said, the outcome confirms that Reid made the right call. Still, I can't help thinking that the better call should have been to take a knee and run the clock down to the 2:00 warning, and then run an actual offensive play. At that point, I wonder if the Skins would still have let Westbrook score.

But the best call was the one recommended by my neighbor after we debated it after the game. Westbrook should have run it to the one yard line and then fallen down. I'm not actually sure what the procedure is at that point. I think the refs eventually have to whistle the play dead even if no Redskin even tries to touch the player and make "down by contact." That would have made the FG a true chip shot, given the Eagles an opportunity to take a knee on second down, run another 40 seconds off the clock and then tried for the TD on 3rd down - the best of all possible worlds. (unless Westbrook were to pull a "Bettis" and cough it up at the goal line for the game clinching TD and have the defense return it the other way for the score).

Anyway, like I said, it is unusual in that there is no clear cut right answer, and unusual that two opposing coaches pointedly disagreed in the press about the decision after the game. Gregg Williams thought the Eagles made the wrong call. Andy Reid thought he made the right call. The Eagles won so Reid does too in this instance. But if the Skins had scored 8 points in the last two minutes...

E Street Band during Born to Run

Again, no encore. No curtain call. 2 hours!?

Verizon Crowd Shot

Tramps Like Us

I still have to download the pictures of Sunday's Eagles game from FedEx Field's "dream seats." In the meantime, here are pictures from the Bruce Springsteen concert last night from a Verizon Center suite.

On Sunday night, the concert started an hour later, supposedly cause Springsteen's plane was late getting into Washington. Since they were in town all day on Monday, I'm not sure what the excuse was for starting an hour late (8:30) last night. And this being my first Bruce concert, i was more than a little disappointed that it was over in a little more than two hours. What happened to the legendary four hour marathon jam sessions? Several of us were joking in the box, at 58, we'd have settled for a 3 hour Bruce show. But two hours? As the woman next to me said, "I've been attending his concerts since 1973 and this is the shortest show I've ever been to."

Eagles - Redskins back and forth

Here’s a little opposing coach gamesmanship/bickering that you don’t usually see – especially from such esteemed old pros such as Joe Gibbs and Eagles D coordinator Jim Johnson:

 

“Gibbs was unflinching in his defense of the draw play as well, although Eagles defensive coordinator Jim Johnson commented after the game that he expected it. Gibbs allowed quarterback Jason Campbell to decide at the line whether to run the draw or pass. He praised Campbell for opting for the draw play, although Portis fell three yards short of the goal line. Gibbs also had a terse assessment of Johnson's comment: ‘Normally they do [know what play is coming] after it's over with. . . . They're always pretty sharp on that,’" reports the Post.

I told you so

Yesterday I said that the feeling at FedEx on Sunday was that the Eagles were the one with the winning record and it was the Redskins who were struggling to get to .500. Writes Mike Wise in today’s Washington Post, “So how come 5-4 feels like 3-6 or 2-7 around here?”

 

I wrote earlier about the likelihood that the Eagles will soon be 5-6 after getting thrashed by an elite AFC team on the road – just like last year. Phil Sheridan writes similarly today, “Chances are, the Eagles will win Sunday and lose to the Patriots. That would give them a 5-6 record with five games to play. They were in precisely that situation last year when they reeled off five consecutive wins, stole the division title, and went to the playoffs again. Can they do it again? Theoretically, yes. Realistically, it sure seems unlikely…It should be noted that last year's task appeared at least as daunting as this year's. The Eagles had that December stretch of three consecutive road games against division opponents. They won all three.”

 

And weeks ago I suggested that the simplest and fairest way to resolve the $3 million overpayment to Brian Westbrook was to just add it to his compensation in the form of a contract extension signing bonus or roster bonus. Today Les Bowen writes, “Now that Brian Westbrook has agreed to pay back that extra $3 million you accidentally paid him in 2006, now that you don't feel like you're in some silly test of wills over an accounting mistake, maybe it's time to revisit Westbrook's contract…Recognizing that Westbrook is much more than he seemed to be in 2005, and deserves a little bump-up for that, won't invite chaos. There is only one Brian Westbrook on this team, the other players know that very well. The front office could win some goodwill at a difficult time.”

Other Side of Philly Heart

“Philadelphia fans are considered gold-medal Grinches, possessing hearts a few sizes too small. But in recent weeks, they have bombarded the Eagles’ practice facility with thousands of messages in support of Reid. “I actually joked not too long ago that this is the side of the Philadelphia sports fan that doesn’t often get revealed,” Banner said.” - - NY Times

Great Pics

Fabulous photo gallery of yesterday’s Eagles-Foreskins game on the Washington Post here. Check out the great action shots of McNabb, Westbrook, and of Sean Taylor facemasking LJ Smith. And this photo was splashed across the front page of the Post sports section.

THEY'RE BACK!

Yes it was a sloppy, mistake filled game by both teams. But at the end of the day, the Eagles beat a 5-3 NFC East rival on the road. They did it with guts, heart, a terrific goal line stand, and of course, Super 5 and Brian Westbrook. It was a game the Eagles had to win and, in true Andy Reid, Donovan McNabb, Jim Johnson defense fashion – in really what has become a hallmark of the Reid/McNabb era - they did.

 

I was at the game yesterday. In the very front row on the 25 yard line of the Redskins side of the field. Danny Snyder’s so called “Dream Seats.” There is nothing as satisfying for an Eagles fan living in the Washington, DC area than to leave FedEx Field after an Eagles victory against the Redskins. Eagles fans are whooping it up all over the parking lot, high fiving anyone in the concourses wearing green and sullen and silent Skins fans quietly exit out of the stadium.

 

I’ll have lots of pictures to post tomorrow, but first one quick story.

 

I was wearing my McNabb jersey and after #5 threw his first pass into the ground at the feet of Kevin Curtis in the first quarter, a pass that usually signifies the game has begun – a 50-ish Redskins fan in the row behind me says, “time for a new quarterback.” I shook my head and said something to the effect of “you’re crazy.”

 

He said it again about 4 or 5 times over the course of the game, particularly after McNabb fumbled in the 4^th quarter. He wasn’t obnoxious about it, just a little gamesmanship. And I playfully kept defending McNabb’s honor in a good natured fa to fan back and forth. So when McNabb hooked up with Westbrook for the 57 yard TD screen pass, I turned to talk my “friend” but he was gone – as fast as Westbrook took it to the house. He never did return and I’ll never see him again.

 

I also can tell you the vibe in the stands if not on the field was that the team in green had a better record and was shooting for the playoffs, and not the other way around. Hopefully that vibe will continue.

Patterson Kudos

Trent Cole we know has 9 sacks. We also know Darren Howard has been a big disappointment, and Jevon Kearse continues to struggle back from last year's devastating knee injury. But those are the ends, what about the middle of the line - Brodrick Bunkley and Mike Patterson? We haven't heard much about them. The run defense appears vastly improved - notwithstanding last week's game. And while the interior d-line is not accumulating a lot of sacks they do appear to be generating sufficient (not great, but not bad either) "push" in the middle of the pocket. So it was good to see the following in today's Inquirer. Good to see that Patterson is earning his big contract extension and good to see that Bunkley is having the impact everyone thought he would in drawing attention and making those around him better.

"Defensive end Trent Cole, who has nine sacks, has been the Eagles' best defensive player. But the second-best, from the way coaches and teammates talk, might surprise some fans. That would be defensive tackle Mike Patterson, who leads the line with 207 tackles, by the Eagles' count, an extraordinary total for an interior lineman. Often, d-tackles have done their jobs if they stand their ground and jam up blockers, leaving the glory for others.

But Patterson, who has benefited from the dramatic improvement of Brodrick Bunkley next to him, jams up the blockers and makes the tackles. If he had a few more sacks (he has 1 1/2) or if the Eagles were doing better as a team, Patterson would be a very strong Pro Bowl candidate.

Defensive coordinator Jim Johnson said one of his unit's few bright spots against Dallas was the play of Patterson against Cowboys guard Leonard Davis.

"He's a steady run player, and he's having a good year, no question about it," Johnson said.

"[Run stopping] is just one of those things that we came in in the offseason and worked real hard on," said Patterson, who included Bunkley in his response. "To make sure we got stronger and we were getting the right looks, and we were playing the blocks right."

TO: What I Think

A friend asked me “where I was on this whole T.O. thing” after the Dallas loss. He went on to offer his own take of the still volatile relationship between TO-McNabb-the Eagles- and the Fans.

 

“ I have never really understood why the public perception is that the Eagles did the right thing by deactivating him and banishing him from Philly,” says my friend. “I have always thought this was a big mistake and lost respect for McNabb, a guy I always thought was a top tier qb, for pretty much forcing that result by being a baby about it (his comments this week blaming others for the 3-5 start doesn't exactly make me think better of him).”

 

Fair enough. But here’s my take

 

 

What do I think of the whole TO thing?

 

I think TO is one of the two best receivers in football, arguably the best, and absolutely the best when Randy Moss chooses to quit on his team from week to week.

 

I think TO is a future Hall of Famer.

 

I think TO is a certifiable head case.

 

I think if TO hadn't gotten hurt and broken his ankle in 2004 the Eagles would probably have won the super bowl.

 

I think that coming back early from the injury, playing with screws in his ankle and risking a career ending injury in the super bowl speaks to his impressive desire to win.

 

I think that his 9 catches for 122 yards in the super bowl with a not-yet-fully healed ankle was one of the greatest and most overlooked performances in any athletic championship game in recent memory.

 

I think that if the Eagles had won the super bowl TO would have been a god in Philadelphia for the rest of his and his children's lives.

 

I think that Jeff Lurie disgraced himself and the franchise by not giving TO an assurance or guarantee that if he played in the super bowl and suffered a career ending ankle injury that the Eagles would honor the remainder of his contract.

 

I think that after the game with all of the above, TO got clued in to the fact that he signed a bad contract which was essentially only a two year deal, the Eagles commitment to him was temporary and they were going to let him go after the 2005 season, and that he wasn't going to see a dime of the out-year escalator annual salaries.

 

I think TO deliberately waged a 10 month war to sabotage and undermine McNabb with the team and the public in a bizarre attempt to get the Eagles to renegotiate the contract.

 

I think the Eagles made a huge mistake in not cutting or trading TO in the 2005 pre-season after he was initially suspended from the team during training camp.

 

I think TO got the better of Hugh Douglas in their famous locker room fight.

 

I think TO tried to divide the Eagles team and players.

 

I think TO was grossly insubordinate to the coaching staff and particularly the offensive coordinator.

 

I think TO should have been and was rightfully suspended by Andy Reid for the last nine games of the 2005 season.

 

I think TO made McNabb a better quarterback.

 

I think TO and McNabb may have been able to co-exist for the whole 2005 season and maybe advanced far into the playoffs if McNabb hadn't gotten hurt.

 

I think that the TO experience means that the Eagles may never try to acquire a premier in -his-prime WR while Andy Reid is still head coach because of the baggage such players usually bring.

 

I think the lack of a premier WR will doom this Eagles team/era (McNabb, Dawkins, Westbrook) to nothing more than a playoff caliber team at best.

 

I think TO is an ungrateful prick for disparaging former teammates, particularly his starting QBs (Garcia- McNabb).

 

I think TO is very smart.

 

I think TO is often disingenuous.

 

I think TO is behaving himself in Dallas in an attempt to restore his image and that he realizes disrupting another franchise may get him blackballed.

 

I think McNabb has more class in his left hand than TO will ever have.

 

I think TO is the worst kind of diva, one with a severe inferiority complex but with truly extraordinary God given talent.

 

That's what I think.

 

 

  

 

Sunday's game

Sunday’s Eagles game will be a lot closer for me than the usual games at the Linc. My neighbor has scored us FedEx Field “Dream Seats” so hopefully I’ll have up close and personal pictures of the game.

 

Hopefully, too, the Eagles will maintain their FedEx winning streak.

Good Things Come in 3s

Paul Domowitch’s article today gives me the hook I need to elaborate on something I’ve wanted to write about since the Dallas disaster. Domowitch decides to be contrarian today and defends the Eagles’ much-maligned WRs.

 

“But the popular talk-show notion that the problem with the 3-5 Eagles right now is that they don't have good enough wide receivers, well, that one I'm not buying…. Would it be great to have Randy Moss or Chad Johnson or Larry Fitzgerald or Plaxico Burress or that guy down in Dallas? Absolutely. But there are only about a dozen legitimate No. 1 receivers in the league.

 

The reason the Eagles have plummeted from third to 11th in the league in passing and from sixth to 18th in scoring is not because of Reggie Brown and Kevin Curtis…. And the difference between last year's other starting wideout, Donté Stallworth, and his replacement this year, Curtis, is, well, there isn't really a difference.

 

"It's a wash," said a personnel man for an NFC North team.”

 

All very true. But it also overlooks some very important points. Yes, there is no appreciable difference in WR production from last year to this year. But why is last year considered some gold standard? And there’s 40 speed and “football” speed (i.e., quickness and burst). And it sure looks like the football speed difference between Kevin Curtis and Donte Stallworth is much greater than the 0.1 second difference in their 40s.

 

Finally, there may only be about a “dozen legitimate No. ! receivers in the league.” But as a supposed super bowl contending team, the question becomes why the Eagles haven’t moved heaven and earth to acquire one of these players. Yes, the TO thing was a nightmare, but you would think having seen what a #1 WR can do for your offense and QB the Eagles would have been more aggressive in replacing TO with another #1. Instead, they were content to borrow Stallworth (the Saints former #2 WR) and then replace him with Curtis (the Rams former #3 WR). The Eagles are going backwards on the depth chart when it comes to acquiring other teams wideouts!

 

To be fair, the coaching, game plan and play calling have not helped. I counted only two passes in last week’s Dallas game that were thrown longer than 15 yards – one to Brown on the one sideline and one to Curtis late in the game on the other sideline (Curtis got hurt on the play)…both incomplete. I don’t count Brown’s 1^st quarter 45 yard catch. I don’t recall exactly how far that pass traveled in the air, perhaps 15 yards, but not much farther if at all. But most of the yardage gained on that play was Brown’s run after the catch.

 

Now, whether deep passes aren’t being thrown because a) they’re not being called b) McNabb isn’t throwing the ones that are called or c) the WR just aren’t very good is all interrelated and becomes a chicken or egg dilemma that only Eagle insiders can answer.

 

But it was the Dallas game that reminded me of the truism in the modern NFL. Indeed, it was the Cowboys teams of the 90s that highlighted the need for 3 playmakers on offense to really be effective. They had Aikman, Smith, and Irvin. Known as the “triplets.” That team brought the concept to the fore but other championship teams in recent history have relied on the same scheme. The Niners had a revolving cast of playmakers at QB, RB, and WR. First Montana then Young at QB, Roger Craig and Ricky Watters at RB, and Jerry Rice the constant at WR.

 

Oddly, the idea was perhaps best distilled to its essence by the hyper-intensive, ultra inarticulate Ray Rhodes, who became notorious for repeatedly uttering the immortal phrase, “I need players to make plays,” at press conferences after his most recent loss in his last 3-13 season.

 

Indeed. The bottom line is you need 3 playmakers on offense to be a championship team. They don’t all have to be superstars, but they all have to be upper echelon players with the potential to be game breakers when presented the opportunity. It has been a hallmark of the Andy Reid tenure that they have traditionally only had 2 playmakers on offense: McNabb and Westbrook. And the results speak for themselves – falling just short. When they added the third, #81, they went 13-3 and played in the super bowl. Right now they still have only two playmakers, and one is playing on one leg. All due respect to Reggie Brown and Kevin Curtis, but they are not that 3^rd playmaker. If the Eagles have any super bowl aspirations they’re going to need to add that 3^rd piece to the offense in the offseason.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Deadly Curious George

Seriously, when will our government seriously begin protecting the health of American children? How many more Chinese toys have to be found dangerous before the US gets clued in that these are willful and deliberate actions of a hostile nation purposely designed to harm our children?

 

“About 175,000 Curious George Plush Dolls were recalled Thursday, becoming the latest popular toy made in China found to be contaminated with dangerous levels of lead,” reports the AP.

Great 88

Bob Clarke must be doing a little dance right about now…he ruined Eric Lindros’ career. Still, an MVP award, an Olympic gold and a silver aren’t too shabby for the can’t miss prospect out of London, Ontario. Remember how excited the city was when the Flyers traded for him…and the arbitrator eventually ruled in the Flyers’ favor that the trade was valid? (indeed, an eerily similar scenario played out with a premier yet star-crossed athlete in Philadelphia – the wide receiver who must not be named).

 

Remember when the Flyers were good? Remember when the Corestates/First Union/Wachovia opened? Remember when the Flyers still mattered?

 

It was way back when #88 was wearing the orange and black. Thanks for the memories Eric Lindros. And F-U Bob Clarke

The Final Lidge Verdict

A compilation of analysis from the “Brain Trust.”

 

Lidge has a mental problem since the NLCS a few years back against St. louis. He's a wuss and couldn't close.  He blew first to 2 opportunities s (maybe even 3) this past year, went to setup and was dominant and then got back to closing in 2nd half when Astros couldn't close anything and he was very good.  I bet his overall numbers last year were pretty good and if you removed his worst 4 outings he'd be lights out in the other 22 games.

 

We get a closer AND  a frontline starter, because we flip Myers back into rotation. It's like the Thome deal to ChiSox in that regard, we got a good CF in return and freed up Howard to play full time heading into '06.

 

Again, that's if Lidge works out.

 

Bourne was a nice addition, but if all goes well, we ought to be able to find a similar type player on the market in late July (think Dave Roberts in '04). The Myers thing is what makes this a good deal.

 

We just got the best offseason starting pitcher and a quality closer. My initial concern was that Lidge was going to set up Myers (which would help the mental thing), but if Myers is back in the rotation then it's a HUGE upgrade.  Basically becoming Myers for Bourn

 

Lidge’s ERA was respectable, 3.36 or 3.60, around there. Down from disastrous '05, but way up over '03 and '04, when he was lights out. Lidge was not very good in the second half when he returned as closer, he just was not as disastrous.  Common sense tells you that if Lidge were his old self, or even close, they would not have traded him for Bourn.

 

While i won't dismiss the mental issue completely, a lot of his trouble last year can be contributed directly to Phil Garner's mishandling him the first week of the season.  Going back and looking at his game log, it's insane the way Garner misused him, then discarded him when he had trouble pitching in a meaningless situation.

 

Opening day he gave up a homer to Xavier Nady in a 2-1 game in the ninth.  Big deal.  SIX DAYS LATER in his next appearance, Garner brings him trailing 5-1 in the top of the ninth.  He gets a quick ground out, then a single, walk, and then get Albert F'n Pujols to hit a double play ball that Morgan Ensberg kicks away.  All hands safe, bases loaded.  Rolen then doubles them all in.  THAT, my friends, cost Lidge his job until July 17 when Wheeler got hurt.

 

His K/9 and K/BB are all you need to know about Lidge, and they are both healthy.  Obviously not what they were in his simply incredible 2004 season, but still top notch.  And he had a 3.35 ERA and 1.257 WHIP last year, despite being jerked around by the manager.  He also played through a balky knee that eventually needed off-season cleaning up.

Fade to Black?

Bob Brookover gives a more detailed and tangible mid-season “what went wrong” analysis than his colleague Les Bowen, and also gives a glimpse of the looming issues to be confronted in the offseason.

 

Some interesting tidbits here:

 

“Since taking the team to Super Bowl XXXIX, Reid's Eagles are 19-21 and have had to endure some thoroughly embarrassing performances, including Sunday's loss to Dallas….

 

Reid also used to dominate against NFC East teams but is 5-10 in his last 15 games against the Eagles' division rivals...

 

When the Eagles imploded in 2005, the losses on the field had a lot to do with the losses in personnel...This team, by contrast, has been relatively healthy, with the lone exceptions being free safety Brian Dawkins and cornerback Lito Sheppard. [Only the two best players on defense]”

 

But the biggest point of contention is Brookover’s assertion that McNabb deserves to play out the season, which is all well and good, but it overlooks the fact that ACL injuries are a two year recovery. It is to McNabb’s credit that he is playing as well as he has – better than Culpeper or Palmer at similar points in their recovery – but it is ridiculous to suggest that all McNabb gets is this year to play. It would be a huge mistake. Next year is the year he should be allowed to play, not this year. The Eagles will be making a huge mistake in “letting him play” this year only to let him leave or benching him next year, that is the year that matters most.

 

 

A Mormon?

Is Andy Reid a Mormon or do I just think that cause he went to BYU? Regardless, Utah has taken an interest in the plight of Andy Reid and his family judging by this Salt Lake Tribune column.

Brother Lidge

In the interests of equal time, I give now my brother’s fuller opinion of the Lidge trade:

 

“I really like Bourn and he made our lineup  dynamic – we have Utley/Rollins/Howard as our big 3.  As good as any trio in baseball.  What I really liked was the versatility the team had with the others.  We could go big – Burrell or we could go small – Bourn.  Bourn/Rollins/Victorino in the order is ridiculous on the basepaths.  3 of the top 10 steal guys in the NL.  If we go Werth and Burrell then we’re thinking long ball.  Of course, if the Phillies go with Burrell and Victorino, they have speed and some power on bench.

 

Bourn is automatic for 2^nd base (except against the Rockies in the playoffs when Charlie didn’t send him – for absolutely NO REASON AND WASTED HIM AS A PINCH RUNNER).

 

I’m sorry to see him go because we lose the versatility, but you have to give up talent to get talent.

 

Overall I’m happy. Werth cannot be an everyday player so they now need a Centerfielder presuming they don’t re-sign Rowand for the ridiculous $14 million/year. (Bourn/Werth platoon I was okay with, but not just Werth - especially with Burrell around).

 

Lidge should be okay.  Minute Maid is pretty hitter friendly also.”

 

More Lidge

My other most knowledgeable baseball friend, now more svelte but still larger than my other most knowledgeable friend, and a former minor leaguer or something like that to boot, offers his opinion on the Lidge deal: 

 

“The Phils made a good deal here.  Bourn has plus speed obviously, but a fringe bat, and the rest are spare parts.  Lidge allows Myers back into the rotation where he belongs.  the Phils are simply a third baseman away from being the favorite in the NL next year.”

 

More Lidge and Phillies' Relievers

Acquiring the soon to be 31 year-old Lidge (DOB 12/23/76) has got my
friend Pk in a reflective frame of mind.

To wit, "A lot of this depends on Lidge's health and durability. If he's
healthy and can still throw strong, I think it's a great move. I'm
always worried, however, about acquiring "closers" after their peak
years, which happens to be a forte of the Phillies management. (Think
Bobby Thigpen, Jose Mesa, Turk Wendell, Flash Gordon, Todd Jones and so
on and so on.)

More on Lidge Deal

My most knowledgeable of baseball friends comments on the Lidge-Bourn deal: “My only questions are (1) is Lidge there mentally -- if not, Philly will only exacerbate that problem, and (2) can he succeed as a hard-throwing fly ball pitcher in that wiffle ball park.” Um, hopefully a change of scenery will solve #1 and as for #2 the preliminary answer has to be….no.

 

Coincidentally, in my fantasy NL baseball league this past season I actually traded Bourn and some others for Lidge and some others. Thankfully, that makes me the anti-Ed Wade of fantasy baseball.

Roofies for Kids

First it was lead in children's toys made in China, most notably Thomas the Tank engine. Now news of the most bizarre kind. The Chinese-made children's craft toy, Aqua Dots, is being recalled because some of the pieces if ingested metabolize in the stomach to become a substance called GBH, otherwise known as the "Date Rape Drug." Incredible.

Hey, here's a plot suggestion for the Fox TV show 24. Why not have Jack Bauer go back to China to track down the bad guys poisoning American children with lethal toys.

On a more serious note, how long and to what extent do Chinese-made toys have to threaten our children before American officials catch on that this is a deliberate attempt to stunt the healthy brain and physical growth of future American generations. Couldn't this be considered terrorists attacks? At this point, we are way beyond one bad Chinese factory manager or one "rogue" factory. Chinese manufacturers have already caused more harm to American citizens than the mullahs in Iran have threatened to do.

Why does Nancy Nord still have a job? Why do American officials continue to believe these incidents continue to be random and unconnected, even as they continue to pile up and all share one common thread--targeting the health of American children.

Long Gone

I’m wondering if the Phils even made half-hearted offer for Curt Schilling. I’m sure memories run deep, and the last thing Dave Montgomery wanted was Schilling telling everyone what a joke Citizens Bank park was after he gave up his 20th homer of the season there… in May.

Quinton Gets the Call

Quinton Mikell will replace Sean Considine at SS. Interestingly, Mikell had been spelling Brian Dawkins at FS during his injury. More coincidentally, Mikell dislocated his shoulder in the super bowl and later had shoulder reconstruction. The player he replaces, Sean Considine, is out for the rest of the year also because of a shoulder injury.

 

Someone smarter than I will have to detail the important talent/skill differences needed between free safety and strong safety. I thought Mikell had done an excellent job in Dawkins’ stead, to the point where I was beginning to think that maybe the Eagles had stumbled upon Dawkins eventual replacement and heir apparent in their versatile backup safety. But now that Mikell is the starter at SS for the rest of the year, I’m already picking up chatter that perhaps Mikell could be a permanent fixture there and be the starter into the future regardless of Considine’s return to health next season.

 

So which is it? Is Mikell a better FS or SS? The answer will determine which of the other safety positions they will still have to fill in the offseason – and by “fill” in terms of Brian Dawkins I mean to bring and groom to be his eventual successor.

Consdine's Shoulder

The news out of S. Philly couldn’t be better for Sean Considine-haters, a club whose membership of those that despise undersized white defensive players grew in recent weeks as charter members of the Matt McCoy Must Go group got their wish and have now since migrated to their next Eagles obsession.

 

Considine is out for the rest of the year with a shoulder injury. I have not seen reports of which shoulder and what exactly the injury is. Curiously, though, I have read reports from Eagles sources saying that Considine will be healed and ready for the 2008 season. I say curiously cause I seem to recall that Considine’s rookie season was also cut short by a shoulder injury, and thanks to the lack of accurate reporting, it is not at all clear if the current injury is the same injury and/or to the same shoulder, and if it is is it more of a chronic condition at this point which would call into question his fitness for 2008.

Getting Closer

The Phillies trade for Astros former closer Brad Lidge is a good thing, right? That’s what my brother asked after being informed of the deal that sent Michael Bourn, Geoff Geary, some minor leaguer named Mike Costanzo to Houston for Brad Lidge and Eric Bruntlett.

 

I would have liked this deal a whole lot better last year, but then again, had this deal been done last year the Phillies would have given up a whole lot more than a platooned outfielder and a middling middle reliever.

 

Bourn is an underrated player who gave the Phillies offense some extra oomph with his speed on the base paths. Without Bourn or Victorino in the lineup in late August and early September you could see how the Phillies offense became mired in station to station baseball, Dobbs and Burrell clogging up the paths, and totally dependent on Utley and Howard to knock guys in. And assuming Rowand is leaving, an outfield of Burrell, Victorino, and Werth/Bourn – with Bourn coming in for Burrell late in games on defense or pinch running wasn’t half bad. Now, though, Burrell, Victorino and Werth? Not as impressive.

 

Lidge falter this past year and lost his closers job. His decline is probably due to mental issues since his numbers – games played, innings, saves, etc – have remained pretty consistent over the past 4-5 years, i.e., it’s not something physical.

 

Fortunately, learning from the Eagles’ mistakes, Pat Gillick had the presence of mind to call Brett Myers before the trade was announced to inform him of the deal and that, oh yeah, you’re moving back to the starting rotation. Fortunately, Gillick came to his senses and realized that Myers as a starter was better for the Phillies than Myers as a closer, especially as the starting pitching free agents are weak – doubly so after Curt Schilling re-signed with Boston.

 

Hamels and Myers on the front end and Lidge on the back end? That’s a pretty good pitching combination if Lidge can return to form.

 

But the biggest cause for optimism has to be that Ed Wade was on the other end of this deal. So the Phillies are practically guaranteed to have gotten better talent in return for whatever Wade wanted.

Don't Play the Kid

Ashley Fox turns in a bravura performance today in the Inquirer defending McNabb and imploring the Eagles to "not play the kid."

"The Eagles are 3-5. The natural tendency is to blame the quarterback or blame the coach.For the record, I'd do the latter. But that's another conversation for another day," she writes, though i don't know why we have to wait to start blaming Andy Reid for this mess.

But she hits all the lowlights of the coaching and personnel deficiencies, including "But it's just wrong to think that the 23-year-old Kolb will make this offense and this team better. He won't. He can't. He doesn't yet know how. Maybe one day, but not now.

What would help are a few players not named Westbrook who can actually catch a pass and make a play. It would help to have a true No. 1 receiver, not someone you think can emerge as a No. 1. It would help to have a healthy, proven tight end. It would help to have a legitimate second running back...That the Eagles lack all of the above is not McNabb's fault. Yes, he takes sacks when he should throw the ball away. Yes, his passes aren't always on the mark. Yes, his record of late isn't the greatest.

But have people forgotten how he started the year off last year? How he was lethal with the long ball? How he still could move? How he thrived when he had a good wide receiver?

All of that is not gone. McNabb's not done. He doesn't have the weapons, and he's not 100 percent McNabb. That isn't an excuse; it's a reality. So is this: A quarterback is always better his second year after a major knee surgery than his first.

So don't accept the knee-jerk premise that benching McNabb for Kolb is the right thing to do. It's not.

For one thing, as dead as the Eagles looked against Dallas - and they did look dead as early as the second quarter - the season isn't over. Get a win in Washington and another against the Dolphins, and the Eagles would be .500 with six games to go.

It's a long shot, to be sure, but the Eagles aren't out of it. Not yet. The Giants were 6-2 and looking strong a year ago and look what happened. They crumbled, losing six of their last eight to sneak into the playoffs a dead dog."

Mid season post-mortem

Les Bowen writes an unusual mid-season post-mortem looking back at all the "signs" since the Saints loss last January and suggests that there were plenty of hints that the optimism for the 2007 season was overblown. Of course, its easy at 3-5 to look back and see bigger troubles now than appeared back then.

In particular, Bowen cites the McNabb canceled press conference last January under still ambiguous circumstances as exhibit 1 in the early stage rupture and diverging interests between head coach and franchise QB. He cites the questionable draft, a disgruntled Brian Westbrook, and Andy Reid's personal problems. Indeed, i think he gives too much weight to Reid's distractions and not enough elaboration on "the failure to add an impact receiver or defensive player high in the draft as a bigger deal than it looked to someone on the outside." Surprisingly, he doesn't mention Jeremiah Trotter's shocking termination from the team as an indication that all was not right at One Novacare Way.

But what is particularly jarring is his suggestion about how fluky bad luck - like a couple of muffed punts and a 97 yard game winning drive - can quickly turn into a season long malaise. Jarring because Eagle fans saw it happen first hand and jarring because it is entirely conceivable it could happen this year. (Though one of Reid's greatest strengths as coach has been his ability to keep seasons from unraveling and two the Eagles already had a season like this in 2005).

Anyway, here is what Bowen writes:

"Whenever I think of fluky outcomes, though, I think of 2003, and Brian Westbrook picking up a bouncing punt just as the Giants were about to put the finishing touches on a 10-7 victory that would boost them to 3-3 and drop the Eagles to 2-4. The Giants were the better team that day in just about every measurable category; they outgained the Eagles nearly three to one. But Westbrook took the punt back 84 yards for a touchdown, with 1:16 remaining, and the Eagles somehow escaped the Meadowlands without being arrested for theft.

For the Birds, the gift victory started a nine-game win streak. They finished 12-4. The Giants went 2-8 the rest of the way, finished 4-12, and got their coach fired. At the time, it was a fluke. By the end of the season, when the Eagles were a good team and the Giants were a bad team, it looked more like the hand of karma, or something - bad things happen to bad teams.

The point of this digression is, the Packers, definitely not the better team back on Sept. 9, are 7-1 now. The Eagles aren't. Maybe they just never were going to be."

First Laugh Tracks...

…Now “Cheer Tracks?”

 

That is the revelation stemming from the investigation into the audio glitch that occurred in the Pats-Colts game Sunday. Now you know – the networks pump in canned crowd noise to enhance the viewing experience.

 

Profootballtalk.com has all the info:

“CBS has taken the blame for the skipping sound in the crowd noise early in the fourth quarter of Sunday's Pats-Colts game.  Some folks believe that the audio glitch was a direct result of attempts by CBS to add crowd noises to the broadcast.

The audio of the incident is right here.

As Chris Mortensen of ESPN mentioned during Monday NFL Countdown prior to the Ravens-Steelers game, some networks have been known to enhance their productions by adding their own canned crowd noise. 

We've heard from several sound experts over the past day, and our research confirms that one of them is actually a big wheel in the music and television industry.  Here's what said unnamed sound expert had to say about the phenomenon, without prompting:

"The sound was a glitch a digital playback machine, which was providing additional crowd noise to be piped into the broadcast to cover for the crowd's quiet spots, or to enhance the 'up' feeling on a big play.  Multiple types of demeanor or 'feels' are available to be triggered, to properly match the game's mood.  It does not replace the live crowd, but is used for enhancement.  The machine (computer, actually) had a brain fart.  It happens."

The problem, as the source pointed out, is that CBS doesn't want to admit that it essentially does in our living rooms what the Colts have been accused of doing at the stadium -- artificially manipulating the live sound.”

 

Irony of Ironies

“Coach Bill Belichick also said Monday that the Patriots (9-0) did not have use of the coach-to-quarterback communication system.

‘Basically, we didn’t have a coach-to-quarterback operation, so we had to signal in all of the plays, which is unusual, but that’s the way it was,’ Belichick said in Foxborough, Mass. ‘What all was going on, I can’t tell you, but I can tell you that, from a functional standpoint, the coach-to-quarterback was basically useless,’” reports the NY Times.

 

Officer Chuck Cassidy

My thoughts and prayers go out to the family of Philadelphia police officer Chuck Cassidy, killed in the line of duty last Wednesday during an armed robbery. And though it is little solace, there is satisfaction in knowing that the alleged perpetrator has been apprehended and will be brought to justice.

A cop killing is a unique and special breed of crime. As one police officer commented in an article I saw this weekend, if a criminal will kill a cop, they are a mortal danger to every law-abiding citizen.

That is why I favor the death penalty for cop killers. And I hope the Philadelphia district attorney seeks that recourse.

But let me also make an observation, having been up in Philadelphia this past weekend. Any and every police force works a cop killing the hardest of any crime. As they should. For the reason stated above about the threat to the general public, but also as a personal and deadly assault on the “thin blue line” and to avenge a colleague’s death. But I don’t think there is another police force in the country that works such cases harder than Philadelphia’s finest. I don’t know if Philadelphia had a disproportionate number of police killed in the line of duty while I was growing up or what, but from my vantage point no police officer on that force will rest until the killer is caught.

A Used Ford

Bob Ford has lost his mind. What else can be said of his ridiculous and ridiculously premature call to “play Kevin Kolb.” Now.

 

Says Ford, “The Eagles are not very good, and aren't going to be a true contender for a long while - long enough, regrettably, that it is time to make the most painful of decisions. It is time to put Kolb out there and begin to see what they have.”

 

What the?! This team was supposed to be a playoff contender. They are still one 97 yard drive and two muffed punts away from 5-3. I refuse to believe that this team is as bad as it may have seemed Sunday night. How can anyone (particularly the Philly sports media) go from thinking super bowl to thinking that the team needs to be rebuilt in the span of 8 weeks? Somebody is very wrong about something. Perhaps the truth lies in the middle. The offseason upgrades weren't enough (especially Curtis at WR) but the core is still there to contend. To put Kolb in the lineup, especially now, is to signal a total rebuilding of the team. How do you go from divisional playoff game to comprehensive rebuilding effort in half a season with no major injuries?  And playing Kolb now might make some – Ford – feel better but it still isn’t going to make up for the lack of talent at WR.

 

Besides, things could look very different in two weeks. If the Eagles can beat the Redskins and take care of the lousy Dolphins, they’ll  be 5-5. The Skins have us and at the Cowboys. They could/should be 5-5. The Giants have Dallas and at Detroit. They could be 6-4 headed to Minnesota (though I think we want the Giants to win that Lions game). My gosh, for as terrible, terrible as the Saints started the season, they are only one game better than us right now. Is anyone calling for Drew Brees’ head in the Big Easy?

 

NO! Say It Ain't So!

“The Sox will issue an official announcement at some point today, but Theo said it was ok to post here so I am. We agreed to a 1 year contract late last night. Today was the MRI, which I passed,” writes Curt Schilling about returning to the Red Sox in 2008.

Take a Pass

As bad as the Eagles played Sunday, their play calling was even WORSE. Exhibits 1 and 2 are the last two possessions of the first half.

 

Yes, McNabb threw the pick three plays after Lito Sheppard intercepted Romo at the Eagles 17 yard line. But the larger question is why McNabb was he even passing at that point?

 

Sheppard’s INT stopped a Cowboys score and the Eagles should have been happy to go into the half down 14-7.

 

But no, at their own 17 with under 2 minutes to go, Reid calls 3 straight pass plays. The first two were incompletes and so only burned several seconds off the clock, now at 1:42. The worst, though, has to be the 3rd and 10 pass play that McNabb was intercepted on. Why pass there?!?!?! Let me repeat: 3^rd and 10 from your own 17 with 1:42 till the half. And you’ve dodged a bullet by picking off Romo and preventing a Dallas score. It is inexplicable to me how such a conservative offense and game plan all of the sudden decides that 3^rd and 10 from your own 17 is now the time to pass downfield – into a dime package no less!

 

Run the ball and run out the clock – or force Dallas to call TO (don’t recall how many they had) – punt and go to locker room. McNabb is getting killed for the pick, but Reid is not getting similarly criticism for the terrible play call. How about a draw play there?

 

A completion at best gets you a first down near your own 30. Second best possibility is a completion that keeps clock running and makes it 4th down.

 

Aside from an INT, the next worse from Eagles perspective is an incompletion – stopping clock without need for a Dallas TO and receiving a punt.

 

But wait. The play calling got worse after McNabb’s INT before the half. Now down 21-7 and with the ball on your own 22 with :22 seconds left in the half, what does Andy Reid do? Take a kneel down? NO! He calls a screen pass! WHY!?!?! Do you really think Westbrook is going 78 yards on a screen pass? After he had been held to 0 yards on four catches so far in the first half? Take a knee.

 

I think Reid has reclaimed the play calling from Mohrninweg in the wake of his kids imprisonment. It’s his way of trying to exert control and keeping his mind off of his personal problems. But like his parenting, his play calling is a disaster. And just like his family, it is others – be it Britt, Garrett, or McNabb – that pays the penalty.

Dumb Bunnies

This is pretty funny. Walking into the game on Sunday night we ran into some girls who were very excited and very proud of their sign which they were sure the cameras were going to at some point zoom in on, and they would get on national TV.

They obviously are living in 2005, since if fell to my friend Besty to inform the girls, "that sign is great, but the game is being broadcast on NBC."

The girls didn't believe him at first - they thought he was pulling their leg. But when they confirmed it with some other passersby, they were quite, how shall I say, chagrined.

Good thought, well executed. Unfortunately, it was the wrong night and wrong station.

9-7?

My brother looks at the schedule and, independent of me, still thinks the Eagles have an outside shot at the playoffs.

 

He writes: “4 of the Eagles last 5 games are very winnable – the Seahawks aren’t any good and neither are Bills.  Giants at home? I like our chances.  Cowboys looks like an L and Saints is probably too, but the jury is still out on them.

 

Best case is 9-7 (lose to Pats and Cowboys) and that gets us close only if Lions start playing like the Lions and get to 7 losses.  We win tiebreaker against them, though we need to beat the Skins and probably the Giants AND Cowboys games (which looks likes a loss and will cost us a berth) to beat them (the Lions) in tiebreaker.  No one else in the NFC is any good.

 

The poor AFC teams.  To get to the Super Bowl you are going to have to beat the Colts and Pats back to back on the road.  It’s not happening.  The Steelers look good and just crushed the Ravens and they have absolutely NO shot at making the SB.  The Eagles have a better chance than the Steelers – seriously – what’s more likely? We beat the Cowboys and Saints to get to the playoffs where we’d play the Packers and Seahawks, or Pittsburgh goes to Indy and then New England in successive weeks and wins.  I really feel bad for the AFC teams.   And then in one game (NFC vs. Pats/Colts) anything can happen.  The NFC has one small chance in SB.  AFC teams have no chance.”

 

I would only add that it is a very long season, and it is only halfway gone. Injuries will start to pile up. A road win vs. the Cowboys looks unlikely at the moment, but if Tony Romo, or Marion Barber, or #81 were to get hurt than the Eagles’ chances would look considerably better.

Cowboy Up

Yes, the Eagles prospects are grim after Sunday night’s comprehensive defeat to the hated Cowboys. The papers are filled with the sages’ opinions that the season is, how do you say…..”over.”

 

But they’ve been here before. Specifically, last year. I don’t want to ignore the hard realities on display Sunday night that exposed a team with serious shortcomings in every facet of the game, but the season is not yet lost. At least not yet.

 

Until they actually lose that 7th game, anything is possible. They were 5-6 last year without their starting quarterback and having just been humiliated (as humiliated as Sunday night) in Indianapolis. They were facing 3 straight NFC East road  games in which NO ONE gave them a shot at running the table. In short, things were just as bleak. And really were the Jacksonville or Tennessee losses last year – at home – any worse a setback than Sunday night?

 

Obviously, things are different this year. The Cowboys, Giants, and Washington are all better, while the Eagles appear to be worse than last year. Sure, the division has been lost. But a wildcard remains an option. Last year, the NFC East sent three teams to the playoffs. This year it may be repeated (though that 3^rd team may be the Redskins and not the Eagles). Certainly, it doesn't look good, but remember – it isn’t over till that 7^th loss. And And it all begins with a win against the Redskins next week. It’s a very winnable game. Or at least it is for a team that still has playoff possibilities. We’ll see if that team is the Eagles by next Sunday night.

 

If not, then, we’ll have to endure a rest-of-season debate about playing Kolb.

 

Rock bottom

Gerry Faust never lost to Navy. The Faust years were the leanest of my Fighting' Irish fandom and even the fomer Moeller High head coach was always able to beat Navy.

Not so offensive "guru" Charlie Weis. I'm not upset about the upset, mind you. Who but the most die hard or hard hearted wasn't pulling for Navy in the 4th quarter and into the 3! overtimes. Indeed, as a ND fan I'm glad the streak ended.

This Notre Dame team, obviously, isn't very good so losing to Navy this year wasn't going impact their rankings or bowl games, etc. And let's face it. The streak had become embarrassing. Not for Navy, but for ND. Navy is practically a Division I-AA team, or what is now called the Bowl Championship subdivision. Notre Dame is, well, Notre Dame. One of, if not the most, storied college football teams in history. A perennial top 10 team, with blue chip recruits at every position and heisman hopefuls every couple of years. It's not like this streak was a matchup of equals, or even of conference foes who while not in the same talent level were at least in the same "league."

References to the streak was a prompt for many to question why exactly ND was still playing Navy every year. (They have a long history and Navy loves the game. Their AD has said the annual game will go on in "perpetuity.")

So it's good for everyone - ND, Navy, and college football generally - that the streak came to an end today.

But that doesn't excuse the continued descent of the program under Charlie Weis. His fans point out that this team has former head coach Ty Willingham's seniors, so the talent is thin. But there are only 6 scholarship seniors on the team. And ND only has given out 71 scholarships - while they can max out at 85. Whose fault is that?

And one would think a team of freshmen, sophomore, and junior Weis recruits would be able to beat Navy. Alas, not so. And it isn't just the players. What in the world was Weis thinking not going for the potential game winning FG with 45 seconds to go in the game? And their final play on the attempted two point conversion play - an off right tackle sweep that couldn't gain a yard and a half. It looked half-hearted as much as half-baked. I seriously have to wonder if Weis in some subconcious recess wanted Navy to win. That or he is an even worse coach than his 1-7 record suggests.

Congratulations to the Naval Academy on a win well-deserved. But this is a wake up call that Charlie Weis might not be the savior to restore the team to perennial contention he originally appeared to be.

NFL Head Coach

A friend writes:

3 years ago you woulda heard how Tony Dungy and Andy Reid were the greatest people on earth. And, oddly, I predict lots of similar talk this weekend about Reid on the NBC pre-game show, and an insane amount of glorification of him by Madden and Michaels.

They will glorify Reid. Remember, these are the same 2 guys [Madden and Michaels] who double-handedly turned Brett Favre into some sort of bizarre national hero when he abandoned his family in Mississippi and selfishly went off to play a MNF game against Oakland after his father died, a game that still gets jammed down our throats as if somehow playing football rather than staying with your family during a tragedy was -- OF COURSE -- the right thing to do.

God forbid, imagine if any of us had a similar level tragedy and we told our families: "Sorry, but Dad/Mom would have wanted me to stay here [in the Capitol/at the law firm/at the accounting office/at the news desk/etc] working."

But that's the NFL mentality. And on Sunday, Reid will be glorified as a similarly great man for showing up to coach a fucking football game while his family completely crumbles. It will make me want to vomit.

But not nearly as much as I'll want to vomit when Reid calls a shotgun formation and motions the lone running back out of the backfield on a 3rd and 1 situation.

I couldn't agree more (about Reid, Madden and Michaels, and the empty backfield 3rd and 1)..The glorification of the NFL head coach work "ethic" has reached ridiculous proportions. it is time that people start asking hard questions about these coaches' time management skills and also the personal and emotional toll these long hours bring.

Here's an example of the absurdity of this line of thinking. It's from the Associated Press' Jim Litke. "The Redskins' Joe Gibbs was one of the first control-freak coaches, so much so that on his first go-round in Washington, he famously had his wife tape the dinner-table conversation on nights he didn't make it home , which was often. But he was able to balance work and family life without so much as a hiccup."

Gibbs freakin' had his wife tape the dinner conversations cause he wasn't there and wanted to listen to what he was missing. it is admirable but insane. Litke thinks it is an example of Gibbs being able to "balance work and family life."

Bad Sad Dad

it was not surprising that Eagles Head Coach Andy Reid's sons had drug relapses that have now landed them in jail. No, the most shocking development of this family tragedy is Reid's apparent willingness to overlook the problems under his own roof. It was the sentencing judge's jarring judgment that the Reid's are "family in crisis" and that there is "no family structure" that most clearly laid out the underlying problems of the father, and was a powerful repudiation of those that have suggested that Andy was essentially blameless in the run-ins his two knucklehead twentysomething sons, being adults themselves, had with the law (and drugs).

What did Andy Reid know? And when did he know it? With Andy, like his post-game press conferences...we'll never know. And now that the kids have been sentenced, there is no legal venue to further explore the home life impact on the sons. Of course, we could see a confessional book from Britt or Garrett at some point in the future ( a father and sons intervention/reconciliation on Oprah?) but that is most likely after Reid is no longer Eagles coach.

Speaking of which, at this point, the prospects of Andy Reid resigning before the end of the season are preposterous. Why? What good would come of that? More to the point, both his sons are in jail each for at least the next two months. Reid would resign for the purposes of doing what exactly? Visiting his sons in jail? Sitting around stewing and pining for more pass plays?

I think it entirely conceivable now that Reid does resign after the season, or we could be looking at an NFL-first season long (2008) leave of absence by a head coach.

Note: I don't mean to suggest that Andy Reid has not tried to help his sons. I think he and his wife have been trying to both deal with and help each of their children under incredibly trying circumstances. In that context, i think it amazing that Reid has been able to accomplish professionally with the Eagles what he has while wrestling with tough, terrible personal problems at home.

Schilling: My Take

I think my friend's analysis is spot on. Though I don*t think Schilling has as much interest/preference in returning to Red Sox as you might think, or even Schilling suggests. My belief, or more likely hope, is that another year in Boston has a been there/done that feel to it. (And for PR purposes, in case he does actually return to Boston, he has to maintain the patter/illusion of "wanting" to come back to Boston. He will insist on that right up to the point where he signs with another team).

Coming back to Philadelphia makes a lot of sense for him. Especially if he can actually get them over the hump and further burnish his already considerable post-season reputation.

I would not be surprised if he waits things out and sees what moves the Phillies make regarding Rowand, Centerfield, and 3B before committing to anything.

Schilling's Philadelphia Story

My baseball friend who earlier expounded on the A-Rod to Detroit possibility lays out the arguments for Curt Schilling to come "home" to Philadelphia in 2008:

I think Curt would love the idea of returning to a city where he is loved; playing up the "I never wanted to leave but I had to b/c management then didn't have a committment to winning" act;
being on a team that is the best on paper in the NL East; being perceived as the guy who puts them over the top; and competing in a weaker more pitcher-friendly NL where his diminished fastball is not as problematic.  From the Phillies perspective, he gives them the #2 they lost when they sent Myers to the pen; it lengthens their rotation; and it is a PR bonanza.  On the downside, the guy needs to get in better shape and I think he would prefer to return to the Sox, even for less cash.

Schilling: Philadelphia possible destination

Reports the AP, “Although his first choice remains Boston, Red Sox pitcher Curt Schilling said on his blog that he would consider a dozen other teams for a "last year" based on quality of life and a chance to make it back to the playoffs.

 

Schilling previously said he would only rule out the rival New York Yankees. On Tuesday evening, he posted on his blog, 38pitches.com, the following list: ‘Cleveland, Detroit, Anaheim, New York Mets, Philadelphia, Atlanta, L.A., S.D., Arizona, Chicago Cubs, St. Louis, Milwaukee.’"

A-Rod and the... Tigers?

My most knowledgeable of baseball friends (a diehard Indians fan now living in Gotham) writes thusly:

 

I am as sick, already, as anyone of all the A-rod talk, but living in NY makes it all but impossible to tune it out.  In light of that, one thing that has amazed me is that no one has even suggested the possibility of A-Rod signing with the Tigers.  It just seems to be a team that should be on a short list of possibilities, particularly if you believe, as many do, that the Red Sox, Yankees, Mets, Cubs and Angels are out of it.  Here are my reasons:

 

The Tigers biggest weak spot at this point is 3B, where Brandon Inge really struggled last year.  If the Tigers add A-Rod to a lineup that will feature Granderson (CF), Polanco (2b), Guillen (1b), Sheffield (DH), Ordonez (RF), Ivan Rodriguez (C), Maybin (LF) and Renteria (SS) they would have the best lineup in baseball.  That would be complemented by a starting rotation featuring Rogers, Verlander, Bonderman and Miller, and a bullpen, that when healthy, is solid and capable of even better with Rodney, Zumaya and Jones.  The Tigers would immediately become at least co-favorites with the Red Sox to win it all. 

           

The Tigers also have a GM who can deal with Boras to get a deal done and a manager that would be a good fit for A-Rod.  The Tigers also have a GM who could get a deal done with Boras, a manager A-Rod would like and a player (Sheffield) that seemed to be the one A-Rod was closest to on the Yankees.

 

The money is obviously a problem, but Mike Illitch is actually a big spender who has never had a problem shelling out huge dollars for Red Wings teams.  Also, as tight as it will be in the first couple of years, that is somewhat offset by the fact that they have some young guys like Granderson, Maybin, Verlander and Zumaya who do not make a whole lot of money because they are not yet arbitration eligible, and in a couple of years, the bigger contracts of Ordonez, Ivan Rodriguez, Rogers and Sheffield will be ending.  Add in that this is one of those places where signing A-Rod could lead to a significant bump in ticket sales and marketing opportunities for the team.

 

Detroit is no New York, Chicago or LA -- and that should cut both ways with A-Rod.  It is a place he can own, the media pressure will be minor and it is still a major city.  In today's marketing world, a player need not be in New York, Chicago or LA to be a coveted endorser.  Being in the comparable city of Cleveland certainly has not prevented LeBron from becoming a global marketing star.  And, with Windsor a tunnel ride away, there are certainly plenty of casinos and strip joints to satisfy A-Rod in the few months a year he actually lives in the Detroit area rather than Miami. 

 

Is this just the paranoia of an Indians fan getting to me, or does it not make sense for each side to seriously consider such a deal?

Unconscionable

As I note in my profile, I am interested in politics and so some of my post may be related to such. Well, this is one of those posts. Senator Jay Rockefeller took to the Washington Post op-ed page yesterday for one of the most extraordinary examples of self-delusion and rationalization ever to grace that newspaper. A defense of the telecommunications companies complicity in cooperating with the President’s warrantless surveillance program by the chair of the senate intelligence committee was a chilling message about our national leaders commitment to fundamental principles of our citizens rights under the constitution.

 

Here’s a link to the op-ed.

 

And here are the jaw-dropping thoughts of one of this nation’s senior Democratic lawmakers:

 

“Today there is significant debate about whether the underlying program -- the president's warrantless surveillance plan -- was legal or violated constitutional rights. That is an important debate, and those questions must be answered. In the meantime, however, these companies are being sued, which is unfair and unwise. As the operational details of the program remain highly classified, the companies are prevented from defending themselves in court.” - - Incredible. Rockefeller admits that there is a “debate” over whether the plan is legal and/or constitutional, but then asserts that the companies shouldn’t be held legally accountable for something they did that may be legal/unconstitutional.

 

“So we crafted legislation to do two important things: modernize the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act so the program is monitored by the courts with proper checks and balances, and keep the focus over legality where it belongs -- on the government.” - - Again. Rockefeller isn’t really saying that for the past thirty years FISA was NOT monitored by the courts? Yes, that’s exactly what he’s saying. Of course, FISA was monitored by the courts and did have checks and balances – such as they were for a judicial panel that never once rejected a warrant sought by federal prosecutors. The last bit about “legality” would be funny if it weren’t so sad. Legality? Didn’t Rockefeller write in a previous paragraph that legality was an open question…still up for “debate?”

 

“First, there is no automatic amnesty. All Americans, including corporate citizens, must follow the law and be held accountable for their actions. The bill authorizes case-by-case review in the courts only when the attorney general certifies that a company's actions were based on assurances of legality, and the court is specifically required to determine whether the attorney general abused his discretion before immunity can be granted.” - - accountability…except for telecommunications companies. Relying on the attorney general to “certify” assurances of legality? Why would anyone rely on this cabinet secretary’s assurances that the earth revolves around the sun? It is the AG’s previous certifications of legality that got everyone into this mess. Now you are going to rely on the same institution to help extricate everyone from their complicity in undermining the Fourth Amendment? Rockefeller is a very trusting guy. Too trusting. And why rely on the assertions of the AG who can’t be trusted and has a conflict of interest in any decision made. Where are the courts in all of this oversight?

 

“The fact is, private industry must remain an essential partner in law enforcement and national security. We face an enemy that uses every tool and technology of 21st-century life, and we must do the same. If American business -- airlines, banks, utilities and many others -- were to decide that it would be too risky to comply with legally certified requests, or to insist on verifying every request in court, our intelligence collection could come to a screeching halt.” - - This is the most astounding and unsettling of Rockefeller’s claims. Rockefeller doesn’t want private companies to act as a bulwark against government overreaching. Rockefeller doesn’t want companies asking too many questions about the legality of government warrants. Rockefeller is content for everyone to rely on executive assertions of legality – just like the administration’s insistence that they don’t torture. If they say it, it must therefore be true.

 

The fourth amendment is inconvenient. The whole ordeal of going before a judge to get approval to search a person or enter their home. It’s a hassle for police and prosecutors. In the age of terror, Rockefeller suggests, the 4^th Amendment has become too inconvenient.

 

Many Democrats have become frustrated with this President and the war in Iraq. The conventional wisdom holds that Congress’ unpopularity has to do mainly with their inability to end the war and bring the troops home. I think such an opinion gives too little credit to Democrats and the public. Most are realists and understand that so long as the President wants troops in Iraq, Congress is unable to reverse the situation owing to the constitution’s separation of powers.

 

No, Congress’ unpopularity is due primarily to frustration of rank and file Democrats have with their party and leadership being constantly and continually outmaneuvered, outflanked, out-strategized, and out-communicated with respect to the war and this administration’s actions. Congressional Dems won a sweeping electoral victory last year based on the unpopularity of the war. And yet, after they took office the administration managed to increase the number of troops in Iraq, won a reprieve of nine months (the infamous Petraeus report), and then meekly accepted the general’s assurances of progress in Iraq. Congressional democrats still don’t know what happened or is happening with the administration’s warrantless spying nor of the politically-based prosecutions of Democrats in many of the 93 US attorney jurisdictions – or of the politically-motivated firing of US attorneys that didn’t play ball.

 

Rockefeller’s op-ed is in the same vein. These Democratic surrender monkeys have already capitulated to George W. Bush without first finding out the who, what, when, where or how of the story. That is what drives Democrats to distraction. Not their inability to withdraw the troops from Iraq, but their inability to do anything at all. Even something so basic as to determine if the 4^th amendment is still in effect.

Rowand, the New Burrell

Aaron Rowand’s $14 million/year asking price got me thinking….At that salary, maybe Pat Burrell’s white elephant $15 million/year (2008 is the last year of that monstrous deal) isn’t so bad after all. Is it possible that the average major league outfielder’s contract has finally caught up to Burrell’s then-premium deal?

 

Let’s go to the numbers.

 

Rowand played in all but one game, with 189 hits, 105 runs, 45 doubles, 27 homers and 89 ribbies. He batted .309 with a .374 OBP, and a .515 slugging average.

 

Burrell played in 155 games (though was occasionally taken out late in games for defensive purposes. Rowand is one of the top defensive centerfielders in the league). Burrell had 121 hits, 26 doubles, 30 homers and 97 ribbies. He batted .256 with a .400 OBP (owing to his amazing 114 walks) and slugged .502. Burrell had one more strikeout (120) than Rowand, which in itself is amazing cause the iconic image Phillies fans hold of Burrell is flailing away – hands high, ass out - at the low and outside pitch for the whiff.

 

To summarize:            .309     .374     .515     189      45        27        89

                                    .256     .400     .502     121      26        30        97       

 

As my brother noted in last month, Burrell really turned it around in the second half of the season and produced like a true leftfielder. “Not a $15 million outfielder, but a solid, professional effort,” said my brother. So if Phillies fans still harbor resentment and frustration with that level of production for $15 million/year, surely no one would be pleased if the Phillies met Rowand’s asking price of $14 million for nearly identical offensive numbers.

 

I suppose there is a chicken and egg question to the Burrell/Rowand deals. Is Rowand seeking comparable money cause Burrell’s contract is now the standard for such production? Or is Burrell’s salary – offered back then more out of projections than tangible results - out of whack for that kind of offense and Rowand is similarly overpricing himself? Or, as I queried earlier, is $14-15 million/year now the going rate for 30 HRs, 93 RBIs (not even 100!), and a.500 slugging average?!

 

Only in Philadelphia.