Boner Gone

Sad news. Boner was my favorite character in Growing Pains.

Flyers Help Rout Russkies

The Flyers were central to Canada's rout of Commie Russia last night in the Olympic hockey medal round.

So says the Toronto Globe:

[Mike] Richards was equally effective, hounding Malkin, a frequent NHL adversary in the Pittsburgh Penguins-Philadelphia Flyers' rivalry. Richards' play, to strip Malkin of the puck just inside the Russian blue line with Canada holding a 2-0 first-period lead, may have been the turning point in the game. Richards moved the puck up to Toews on a quick transitional play, who then found Nash breaking into the clear.

A Sad Day

The Eagles have released Brian Westbrook rather than pay him the $7+ million he's due this upcoming season. The move was not unexpected (though the possibility of a renegotiation was a possibility) and follows hard on the heels of the Chargers parting ways with LT.

What a sad day. Not too often does a local college standout become the best player - really the irreplaceable player  on several of the Eagles' NFC championship squads - on the hometown pro team.

The Eagletarian has a list of Westbrook's five greatest plays.

#1 is certainly the punt return vs. the Giants. Sometimes a single play saves a season and this was one of those instances. One of the best parts about this play is that it is a standard of the Eagles' pre-kickoff video highlight and ALWAYS got a roar from the crowd who both appreciated the play and its significance in the 2003 season. This was the season/game in which McNabb suffered through a mystery injury to his thumb which everyone denied but was obvious to all. Almost 2-4, Westbrook's TD made them 3-3. They lost only one more game the rest of the season.

Interestingly, the Westbrook almost game winning TD vs. the Bucaneers in 2006 isn't mentioned. With 33 seconds left, Westbrook took a short pass that he converted into a 52 yard score. Unfortunately, Matt Bryant hit a 62 yarder at the buzzer to win the game and overshadow Westbrook's accomplishment.

The primary missing game is last year's Cardinals-Eagles Thanksgiving night game. 4 days after McNabb got benched in Baltimore in a disastrous loss that left them at 5-5-1 and in complete QB turmoil, the Eagles returned home to play high scoring Arizona. Westbrook who had been hampered all year by a gimpy knee and ankle, clearly took pain killing/cortisone shots before the game and returned to his usual form. With McNabb back starting, Westbrook and the Eagles marched down the field on the opening drive and scored a TD on a Westbrook 5 yard run. Westbrook wound up with 4 touchdowns - 2 running, 2 receiving - and 110 yards rushing. Propelled by the win, the Eagles wound up squeaking into the playoffs and upsetting both the Vikings and Giants.

So not only did Brian Westbrook save two seasons with his electric play, he also saved the fate of Donovan McNabb two times.

He will be missed.

The Case for McNabb

Superb summary of McNabb's status as Eagles' QB and why he should stay with the team.

Polling for McNabb

My friend PK asks:

Is this just hate, or are they seeing something in Kolb that I've not seen? Because every time he came in midway through a game, he stunk. In 2 starts, 1 was not good, the other - against the lowly Chiefs - was good. I'm looking at Kolb and seeing us likely having the worst QB in the division next year. 

Yet, here's a chunk of Sal Pal's write up, showing the Philly sport fans see Kolb as some miracle worker:

Right after the Saints won Super Bowl XLIV, Philly.com -- the Web site for the Philadelphia Inquirer and Daily News newspapers -- polled readers with the following question: "Who has the best chance of leading the Eagles to a Super Bowl victory?"

Kolb, with just four career touchdown passes, finished first by a wide margin: 43 percent to McNabb's 32 percent. Considering Kolb's level of

inexperience, that is a shocking repudiation of McNabb. (Vick got just 7 percent of the vote, losing out to "someone else," which got 17

percent.)

What's more, a recent poll commissioned by the local Democrats stuck a question about McNabb in the end: Should McNabb stay or go? More than 71 percent of the likely voters in the city of Philadelphia said McNabb should go.

More Lito

So why should Eagles fans care about the fate of the Jets' Lito Sheppard and his $10 million bonus due next month? Haven't we moved on?

Because Sheppard's bonus - and whether he gets it or not - affects the conditional 2010 draft pick the Jets sent the Eagles (along with a 5th last year) in return for the discontented defensive back.

Here's a Jets' beat writer, Rich Cimini, detailing the Sheppard contract:

I wanted to post the actual number's in Lito Sheppard's new contract. The Jets gave him a four-year, $27.2 million extension that kicks in for 2010. He'll receive a $10 million bonus in March, 2010. For 2009, his contract will remain the same -- a $3 million base salary.

This is a huge deal, basically $30 million over five years. For that much money, he'd better revert to his Pro Bowl form.

Free-agent S Jim Leonhard arrived around 5 p.m. Saturday in Florham Park, N.J. There's a good chance he'll sign Sunday.

Remember Laveranues Coles? I'm hearing he'll make a decision Sunday, choosing between the Bills and Dolphins. The smart money is on the Dolphins.

 

UPDATE II: Interesting details are trickling in on the Sheppard contract. It's a complex, but clever deal by GM Mike Tannenbaum that protects the Jets if Sheppard is a bust.

Some tidbits:

• Technically, there's no guaranteed money in the contract. Sheppard will make $3 million this season, the same he would've made with the Eagles.

• In March, 2010, there's a $10 million option bonus. If the Jets decide to pay it, a new four-year, $27.2 million kicks in.

• If Sheppard is injured and misses considerable time, the Jets can get out of the deal after one year and they wouldn't owe the Eagles a draft pick in 2010. If that's the case, all it would've cost them is a fifth-round pick in the '09 draft. One person familiar with the deal said it could amount to a "one-year test drive" for the Jets.

• The conditional pick in '10 can rise to a second-rounder, but only if he hits an 85% playing-time plateau AND receives the four-year extension. And if that does happen, the Jets would get a fifth-rounder back from the Eagles.

• If Sheppard makes 85%, but doesn't receive the extension, the Jets would owe a third-rounder to the Eagles and would recoup a fifth rounder.

• Obviously, there are a number of different scenarios, and I won't bore you with them, but this is the essence of the trade. Bottom line: If Sheppard stinks, it'll be a one-year deal for $3 million and would cost them a fifth-round pick. If he becomes a full-time starter, the Jets probably will have to give up a second- or third-rounder in addition to this year's fifth and they'll have to pay him roughly what this year's top cornerback free agents (the Colts' Kelvin Hayden and the Ravens' Domonique Foxworth) received on their just-signed deals.

So basically after everything is said and done, Sheppard signed a one-year $3 million deal. A far cry from the 5 year, $30 million contract that agents and the press love to tout. And it's the same salary he would have got from the Eagles. The one (only?) benefit I can see from Sheppard's point of view is that the trade and new contract will allow him to become a free agent in 2010 - something that wasn't happening with his long-term contract with the Eagles. It was a risk considering his injury history but it looks like even without getting the $10 million from the Jets he's going to get a big signing bonus from some team.

Sheppard didn't meet the 85% threshold - he only played in 11 games but was a starter through the end of the season. And he's not likely to get the bonus either. So presumably the Eagles don't get that conditional 2010 pick. 

What's intriguing in all of this is that the Eagles' 2010 draft site notes that the Eagles are sending their 5th rounder to the Jets as part of the Lito Sheppard deal and are getting the Jets' 4th rounder back. So have the Eagles and Jets worked out the contingencies of the Sheppard trade already or are there more adjustments to the picks coming (like, you know, the Jets getting more of their picks back)?

As it stands now, the Jets got Sheppard for one year and the Eagles 5th rounder in 2010 and the Eagles in return got the Jets 5th rounder in 2009 (#153 which turned out to be TE Cornelius Ingram) and their 4th rounder in 2010.

$400 Million?!?!?!

Why is David Stern's announcement that the NBA is projected to lose....$400 million !!!!! this year not front page news but is relegated to a footnote in the all-start game notebook, coming after a story about the winner of the dunk contest? What's more, Stern said the league has lost millions in the years before this season. Sure it's posturing in the pending labor negotiations but this is big news - an American professional sports league is hemorrhaging cash. The front page of sports sections were filled with stories about possible NFL blackouts several months ago, so I'm not sure why this isn't getting more coverage.

Of course, any league is going to lose tons of money when teams like the Sixers have to pay Chris Webber $50 million just to buy out the remainder of his contract.

Top 10 Without a Ring

ESPN counts down the top 10 players without a super bowl ring. Lots of Rams and Vikings and thankfully no Eagles.

Kolb Contract

The Kevin Kolb contract extension rumors, which the Inqy blog felt compelled to specifically knock down, don't make any sense. The certainly don't make sense until after it is determined whether 2010 will be an uncapped year. That decision will come in the next month and judging by the impasse between the league and union appears more and more likely. 

If next season is an uncapped year, then Kolb doesn't really need to be extended since one of the provisions that kicks in in an uncapped year is a lengthening in the number of years of service before a player can become 1) a restricted free agent and 2) an unrestricted free agent. Bottomline, he's not going anywhere soon with or without a contract extension - unless the Eagles decide to move him.

"America's" Cup

I remember when the America's Cup was broadcast on ESPN. Now it's relegated to a brief mention when weather forces a race cancellation. And who was the genius that scheduled this to compete with the Winter Olympics.

2 Points?

Was the Lance Moore drop that was reversed on instant replay for the Saints' two point conversion really the right call.

From the NFL's VP of Officiating via TMQ:

Adventures in Officiating: Zebras on the field called the New Orleans deuce attempt incomplete, then during a TV timeout, reversed it. Lance Moore was juggling the ball and never seemed to control it, then the ball bounced when he hit the ground. NFL vice president of officiating Mike Pereira (who recently announced his retirement) said afterward the two points should have been scored because once there is any possession in the end zone or above the white line, the play ends, so it doesn't matter if the receiver loses the ball as he hits the ground, which normally means incompletion. That's not how I read the rule -- and remember, the NFL wasn't shy about misquoting its own rules to justify the ending of the Packers at Cardinals playoff game.

What makes the NFL's explanation unusual is the apparent distinction they refs and the league used to make between catches in the endzone that result in TDs and those at the goal line that cross the plane and are ruled TDs - or in this case two point conversions.

I believe the rule for end zone catches is that the receiver must retain possession ALL THE WAY THROUGH THE CATCH - even after the receiver lands and/or rolls out of bounds regardless of whether he had possession at any point in the field of play (end zone). But Pereira says that is not the case anymore.

The league's ruling with respect to Moore's catch seems to be that the receiver can lose possession of the ball at any point after the ball crosses the plane of the goal line. Maybe they changed the rule for end zone catches cause it favored catches made outside the end zone at the expense of those made in it.

Of course, this could all be cleared up if the NFL rulebook were publicly available, like on their website. But it's not for some inexplicable reason.

Dat Who

There seems to be a lot of mixed reviews of the Who's halftime show. Count me one of those who loved it.

Of course, the Who were one of my favorite music groups growing up (along with the Kinks). That said, the show last night was great, a perfect way to rip through a catalog of all-time great songs all in 15 minutes. You got the patented Pete Townsend windmill, Daltrey's "Yeaaaaaaaahhhhhhhhhhhh!!! during Won't Get Fooled Again, the lighting, and what i really liked - not having any of those ridiculous fans/dancers they allow on the field and next to the stage during the show.

Sure the group is ancient. The remaining two original members must be in their late sixties. And I could have done without seeing Townsend's gut repeatedly. They were off-key in parts but that's the beauty of live music. Besides, it looked like they didn't care - as rock legends are wont to do - and were having lots of fun. Bonus points: no Janet Jackson boob peek or Bruce Springsteen's crotch sliding into the stage camera.

All in all, perfect.

Coronation Interruptus

A funny thing happened on the way to coronating Peyton Manning the best QB of all time. Not only did the Colts lose, but his play in the 2nd half - notably his pick six INT and his disastrous timeout at the end of the game - are sure to renew questions about his ability in big games. Or maybe not. Most of the coverage appears to focus on the Saints, Brees, and the Manning angle is on how the loss only prevented him from cementing his all-time legacy.

Funny, cause if Donovan McNabb had a second half like Manning, #5 would be absolutely crucified for blowing the game.

Having watched the game last night, it's hard to recall where it went wrong for the Colts. Their defense was stout - stopping the Saints on a great goal line stand. Really, the defense "only" gave up 24 points to a very high octane offense. Unfortunately, the Colts' high-powered offense could only post 17 points. Amazing.

Manning's stats were very solid and, like I said, I can't really recall the Saints "stopping" Manning much. But how did they only score 17. Certainly part of it was the Saints ball control, gobbling up game time in huge chunks in the 2nd quarter, though the final time of possession was essentially even.

Looking at the drive chart, the Colts had eight drives and only punted twice - and one of those punts came after the Colts took over at their own 1 yard line and were trying to protect the ball and run out the clock on the 2nd quarter. They had 3 scores, a missed FG, the INT, and their last drive that ended on the Saints' 5 yard line. It's hard to argue with a performance that results in 3 scores and should have been four and ends with another drive at the five yard line.

And yet, in crunch time, Manning folded. The INT was terrible, both from a play call point of view - supposedly it is one of the Colts' go-to plays and clearly the Saints and Tracy Porter in particular were looking for it. Manning went to the well once too often. Had they run Wayne on a stop and go, it's a touchdown the other way for the Colts and likely a Manning second super bowl ring.

But the most inexcusable moment of the game for Manning was the timeout he called on their last drive when Addai took it the New Orleans 3 yard line with 1:16 to go. It was the Colts first timeout of the half and it essentially meant the game was over and the Saints would win. For such a supposedly smart "field general" Manning should have known better than to have called the timeout. Indeed, he tried to waive off the call upon second thought  but the refs awarded him his request.

Under two minutes and down by 14 without their full complement of TOs thanks to Manning, the Colts needed a TD and an onside kick recovery - a 10% chance according to league statistics when kicking teams try it in the 4th quarter.

Had Manning not called timeout (and the Colts scored), the Colts would have been able to force a Saints punt (assuming a 3 and out) without needing to recover the onside kick. Admittedly, there would not have been much time left, but the Colts could have gotten the ball back. Without that precious 3rd timeout Manning wasted, the Saints could run out the clock.

Again, INTs happen. But the timeout Manning called was his worst play of the game.

Editorial - Super Bowl Censorship - NYTimes.com

The New York Times publishes an editorial on not censoring the anti-abortion ad during the super bowl. Yet not a peep about CBS rejection of a pro-gay ad.
Editorial - Super Bowl Censorship - NYTimes.com

Fujita

A pity it took a super bowl and Tim Tebow to learn more about the fascinating Scott Fujita.

The unanswered question that needs more coverage and exploration is why an anti-abortion ad is acceptable to CBS but a pro-gay one is not.

L'Affair Team USA

Shades of Eric Lindros and Rod Brind Amour, only on the world stage, albeit a sport less followed in the U.S. than hockey. The big question is why Roy Wegerle spilled the beans - and when he did.

With the World Cup just months away, Soccer Dave is warming up.

The Two Pointer

An article on the fascinating considerations of the 2-point conversion (and a picture of Andy Reid accompanying the article, to boot).

Some interesting stats from the NY Times:

During the 2009 regular season, 64.8 percent of games were within 8 points during the fourth quarter, the time when most coaches say they start pondering the 2-pointer (the Jets' Rex Ryan said he would never consider it before the final drive of the third quarter).

Despite closer games that would seem to demand it, coaches are becoming no more comfortable going for 2. According to Football Outsiders, a Web site devoted to statistical analysis of the N.F.L., teams attempted 53 2-point conversions in the 2009 regular season (not counting botched extra-point kicks that turned into 2-point attempts). That's the third-fewest attempts in the last dozen years, and well below the 98 attempts in 1998.

This season, teams converted 45.3 percent of attempts, well down from the 60 percent rate in 2006, when coaches used the 2-point sparingly, only 35 times, and the third-lowest conversion rate since 2000.

Still, conversion rates hovered at or above 50 percent just three years ago, only to drop in the past two seasons.

One problem: coaches cannot seem to decide if passing or running is a better option for those 2 yards. According to Football Outsiders, 73.6 percent of 2-point tries this season were by pass, even though their success rate was only 41 percent. The run was successful 57.1 percent of the time. Since 1998, the pass has been used more than the run, even though its conversion rate has been higher than running just once, in 2002. 

Amazing that 74% of attempted conversions - for 2 yards no less - were passes?! Whose calling all of the plays...Andy Reid! Whatever happened to 3 yards and a cloud of dust. Forget about deciding whether to go for it or not as being the coaches' biggest decision. The biggest choice - and the most obvious - is to call a running play. D'uh.

The interesting thing is that teams should be going it for it more often than they do. I wonder if the 2-pt. conversion will evolve like the 3 pt. shot in basketball where it has become accepted that the reward of the extra point outweighs the risk of the lower percentage scoring opportunity.