NFL 2005 Season Week 14 Picks

if Barry Sanders was jobbed, than Jamal Lewis was jobbed even worse for not even getting a first place vote when he ran for more yards than Sanders.  And that same year, McNair threw 24 td passes and just over 3000 yards and Peyton Manning's numbers weren't jaw-dropping(good, but not jaw-dropping), and those 2 shared the trophy.  Shouldn't Lewis be upset?

Oh yeah, and the VIkings finished ahead of only the New Orleans Saints and the Charolette Bobcats in the Fan Satisfaction Rating (http://sports.espn.go.com/chat/sportsnation/franchiseRanks).  The Brewers actually were ranked 17th out of all of the major pro sports.

Early picks for MVP?  I'm thinking Carson Palmer.  Any takers?

Lewis probably should have gotten more consideration, but by 2003 I think big rushing numbers lost some of their impressiveness (like HRs in baseball lately).  I think I said this the last time this argument came up (probably started by me then as well) but when Sanders ran for 2000 yds, it was only the 3rd time in history and it had been 13 years since the previous 2000 yd rusher.  Besides Sanders himself in 1994, there hadn't even been a 1800 yd rusher since 1986 at that point.  When Lewis got 2000 yds in 2003, he was the 5th person to do so and the 3rd within 7 seasons.  Plus from 1997 to the end of the 2003 season, there were also three 1800 yd rushers.  So while 2000 yds for Lewis was still an accomplishment, I suspect it didn't seem like that big of a deal anymore to the voters.

Also, Manning's 2003 was better than Favre's 1997, and you could make a case that McNair's was as well (he was very efficient that year high yds/attempt and QB rating)

Palmer is a good bet, Shaun Alexander is as well.  It should probably still be Peyton Manning's (his and Palmer's stats are near identical, plus the fact that he's leading his team to an undefeated season), but I think the voters might be sick of voting for him and may pick someone else if they are close.

Favre's '97: 35TDs, 3867 yards, 60% comp %, 7.53 yds/attempt

Manning's '03: 29 TDs, 4267 yards, 67%, 7.53 yds/attempt

I don't think Manning's 2003 was better than Favre's 1997 (probably equal, manning may have a slight edge for the sake of argument, but there is no obvious winner), and QB rating is probably the worst rating system in the history of pro sport(since when ins 158.3 a perfect score, the only thingworse in the college qb rating system which can go up infinitly if the conditions are right), but I'll concede that Mannings QB rating in 03 was higher than Favre's in 97.

As far as Favre-Sanders goes....maybe there's an X-factor. maybe because Favre's team when to it's 2nd straight super bowl and he had just won 2 MVPs, compared to Sanders being on a mediocre at best team, they gave the benefit of any doubt to the player that was able to put wins on his teams record books.  Sure the Lions made the Playoffs that year, but the Packers won their 3rd straight NFC Central title, went to their 2nd straight Super Bowl, and Favre's numbers were still comprobable to his previous 2 seasons.  Given Favre and Sanders co-MVP's was the right thing to do.

I chose Palmer because #1, has moreyards and td's than manning, and he doesn't have the team that manning has. Manning has a steller defense that is a big part of the colts undefeated season.  Manning deserves a lot of credit though, as does any 2+ MVP winner.  I didn't really think of Alexander, but he's a good choice too.  I would love to actually see a defensive player win MVP instead of a QB, or how about an O-lineman.  Somebody's got to protect Mannings' blindside.

I secretly hope the Packers lose.  This will be the first time ever that I will hope that Wisconsin picks a Bush.

Speaking of Fair and Balancer:  I was watching a "debate" last night on Fox News with their "political analysts" about issues from the new Patriot Act, Torture, and some other issues.  The only think that I found interesting though was the fact that THE PANEL OF ANALYSTS DID NOTHING BUT AGREE WITH EACH OTHER.  One guy says how good it is that we have the Patriot Act and how important it is to renew it, and the other 2 guys basically one-up the guy by saying how much more important it is than the previous guy actually made it out to be.  No desent.  No rebuttal.  No "i don't agree with you".  There was a general consensus it seemed, that Sen. McCain was kind of a phony(he apparently betrays republicans for voicing opposition to the current president) , or that he was overstating the issue of torture in a resent article where he states that torture doesn't work(he gave the names of the Green Bay Packers defensive line when pushed for names of his flight crew).  What's fair and balanced about having 3 panelists and a host who all share the same biased view? Crazy. Go Brewers

the viewing area on the new text box format is too small.

one more politcal rant:  Wisconsin State Legislatures are soon to pass a bill (that will be vetoed) that will make it legal to carry a concealed weapon.  So basically, it will now be legal for potential criminals to carry a gun.  and get this, there will be NO public records of who holds a permit for a concealed weapon.  As a gun owner myself, this type of policy scares me.  Ask an inner city poor family if they think putting more guns on the street is a good idea.  Now, ask the same question to a rural, conservative family that lives in a small town that doesn't face nearly the same type of violence as the inner-city family faces.  Guns don't prevent crimes, they tend to intensify already tense situations.  If you are being robbed at gunpoint and you pull a gun out to defend yourself, you're probably going to get shot.

I think Manning, Palmer, Alexander, Edgerrin James, Tomlinson, and Steve Smith probably have the best chance right now.  It'll come down to whatever team does best probably.  An O-lineman will never win MVP, and it looks like there have only been 3 defensive MVPs.  Unless Sharper averages 2 ints and one TD per game for the rest of the year, no defensive player will have a chance.  Personally, if the Panthers win out I'd vote for Smith.  He's pretty much single-handedly carried that offense all year.  The second leading receiver on the team is Foster with 28 catches compared to Smith's 82.  The 3 other receivers on the team have combined for a whopping 47 catches, with an average per catch of 2 yards less then Smith.

Your statement that "Guns don't prevent crimes, they tend to intensify already tense situations." I can agree with.  Your point that "it will now be legal for potential criminals to carry a gun" I disagree with.  Not that it isn't true, but the implication of the way you're saying it.  Remember the classic game CLUE?  Should it be illegal to carry rope, lead pipes, any knife, wrenches, and candlesticks because potential criminals might use them?  If you're being robbed at gunpoint and you pull a gun to defend yourself, you better shoot first.

Don't get me started on DeShaun Foster.  Jon always picks up people I drop.  I carried Foster on my team for like 3 years, I finally drop him because they kept giving Davis the TDs, and now Davis concedes the team to Foster.  Thanks a lot buddy.

Speaking of having people on your team for 3 years, we need to start a keeper league.  Badgers are whooping up!

what would be great is if the Texans, already having Davis at running back, decide to go for someone like Leinert with their pick, assuming they have a pick ahead of the packers.  That way, the packers could still get Bush without having a pick ahead of the Texans.

"Leonard Little has come alive" ... must be nice to be able to do that...

The Texans arent going to pick Bush.  They need offensive lineman and they arent giving up on Carr since he isnt even being allowed to throw the ball.  If they get the #1 I can almost guarantee it will be traded away to someone who wants Leinert or Bush.

If they pass Conceal and Carry I'm going to buy the exact gun that Han Solo had and get that belt too.  Thats the sweetest belt ever.

They would want a kings ransom for the pick. I don't see them passing on Bush unless they get some sort of Hershal Walker-esq deal for the pick. People are so high on Bush they would need to be traded another teams starting offensive line for the pick.

You would have to be a Tony Manderich like o line prospect to warrent passing on Bush AND Leinert. If I remember correctly the Packers passed on some highly touted running back to take Manderich. How did that work out again? I think Micah knows.

That was inspring, but I'd still like to be in the race for the #1 pick.  What is Bush doesn't actually enter the draft? 

If Bush doesn't enter the draft someone is paying those USC kids to stay in school.

Suckers!

The niners and texans probably won't win again anyway. And San Fran could sure use a running back.

I know how it worked out for the Packers to take Mandrich.  They won a Super Bowl with another Hall of Fame player and the Lions were mediocre for the next ten years.

For the record, I called the Gado play in the endzone correctly as soon as it happened.  And sweet, the Packers just blew their chances at the number one pick.

As great as Bush is, we all know that no one is a sure thing in the draft anyway.  Plus, you can have great players at number five in the draft too.  Obviously Bush has the greatest probability of success based on what we know now, but if I were a Packer fan I wouldn't get too upset about not being in the running any more.  It goes against all modern sports analysis to "wait and see" and to not get swept up in the next big thing, but really, no one knows what was a good draft until about 15 years after it happens.  I mean, what if next year there's someone even better?

umm.....what?

There were about 5 things on that play that should have givin the lions a safety. The mediocraty of the Lions aside the Packers still could have had Barry and Favre on the field together in their primes. The fact that the Lions never did anything to help Barry isn't his fault (and is actually why he wanted out)

Also obviously there is a chance Bush will to nothing in the NFL, but that doesn't change how the pick will be valued. Realistically he was running behind an NFL line and had a Heisman winner in front of him that teams had to respect. Bush's backup apparently looked pretty amazing when he got out there too.

Jon get on aim.

The holding was clearly in the endzone.  But it doesn't matter.  Texans and 49ers play each other in the last week of the season in the Reggie Bush Bowl.

I'm saying that things worked out pretty good for the Packers despite the fact that Manderich was a bust.  Had the Packers picked Sanders the Packers would have been slightly better for a while, Lindy Infante probably wouldn't have been fired, and Wolf and Holmgren never would have been hired as GM and Head Coach.  They never would have gotten Favre, reggie white would not have come to green bay because he would have no motivation, the Packers are forced to move to Milwaukee, and the team we once knew as the Packers would now be the Milwaukee Mustangs.  That's how big the playoffs are.   ok, i got a little carried away there.  But had the Packers picked sanders, they never would have gotten Favre.

I don't think that's nessisarily true, but obviously I can't disprove that either.

Well, based on my logic, when Favre was drafted by the Falcons, Ron Wolf was GM of the Jets and he called Favre on draft day and told him that if the Falcons didn't draft him that the Jets would take him with the next pick.  Well, the Falcons drafted him, Wolf went to Green Bay the next year and the first thing he did was Hire Holmgren and trade for Favre.  Had the Packers not been a 4-12 team the year before, I doubt that Wolf would have been beckoned to come to Green Bay.  It's possible that the Jets could have ended up with Favre.

This is nothing to get too serious about, but I think the Packers would have been a team just like the Lions after drafting Sanders.  Barry would have given them what it took to win a few division titles, maybe a few playoff games, and keep them good enough that they would not get any good draft picks for a while.  Kind of like how the Packers have been for the past 4 or 5 years, except that the Lions never did get to or win the Super Bowl.

Maybe if the Packers had drafted Sanders, the Lions would have held him to -3 yards one time and I could bring that game up every time anyone around me mentioned the Packers or Barry Sanders.

Here is what really would have happened:

The Packers draft Sanders in '89.  The next year (1990) the combined weapons of Barry Sanders and Sterling Sharpe help backup QB Anthony Dilweg to shine in relief of an injured Don Majkowski who is released at the end of the season.  In 1991 the Packers (under Dilweg/Sanders/Sharpe) go 12-4 and win the Super Bowl.  They repeat the next year with a 14-2 regular season record and win 2 more titles before the decade is out (1995, 1997).  Dilweg, while never "Montana/Marino/Elway" great, is good enough (think Phil Simms) and goes onto a Hall of Fame career. 

Sterling Sharpe doesn't injure his neck and plays a full Hall of Fame career.  He is considered by many to be the 3rd best receiver of all time (Rice, C.Carter) when all is said and done, and people refer to Shannon as Sterling's little brother. 

Barry Sanders never has a reason to want out of football and goes on to obliterate Walter Payton's All-Time rushing record, amassing over 20,000 yds and 175 TDs in his career.  He is rightly considered, far and away, the Greatest Running Back of All-Time (screw Jim Brown).  Needless to say he joins Dilweg and Sharpe in Canton.

Plausible

The question of course then is what becomes of Vince Workman?

1988: The Packers pass on Sterling Sharpe to select Ickey Woods from UNLV.
1989: Already enthralled with the Ickey Shuffle, the Packers cannot pass up the chance to take Barry Sanders.  They select him and create the greatest RB combo ever.
1991: Screw Favre...Packers select Todd Marinovich and win the next 17 super bowls.
1992: Packers still take Terrell Buckley and he totally rules forever

Don't forget inexplicably passing on Chris Chambers for Super Star Robert Ferguson.

One of many ex badgers to go somewhere other than Minnesota and have good careers.

what is the fate of Favre after all this?

His fate is already sealed.  After having to endure this season's hardships, the Packers draft Reggie Bush and go 14-2 next year en route to another super bowl victory.  As soon as the clock hits 0:00 in the super bowl, a golden chariot lead by white horses will descend from heaven to escort Favre to his proper place at the left hand side of God, where he will rule football from above, just as Dale Ernhardt rules Nascar from God's right hand side.

no, I mean what is Favre's fate after the Packers draft Barry Sanders and all of what Matt said has transpired?

The Badgers beat previously 7-1 UNC Wilmington tonight.  That could end up being a good quality win come Selection Sunday.  The also cracked the ESPN/USA Today Poll this week at #24, but of course the love is lacking in the AP poll (28th).

Favorer stuck with the Falcons where they only made the playoffs once, in 1998, where they lost to the Vikings in the NFC title game.  The Vikings then went on to win the Super Bowl over the Broncos 43-38.

That should be Favre, of course.  I must have hit the change button instead of ignore during the spell check, which brings up the bigger question of how any spell check program worth its salt could not be programmed with Favre already in it.

political-type rant, so you don't have to read this if you don't want to:

How is it that with Bush's approval ratings hovering around 40% or so that Bill O'Reilly still claims that over 95% of America agrees with his opinions.  His percentage of people that he claims agree with him and his viewpoints continues to grow, while the approval ratings for the president he supports and clearly voted for continue to remain quite low.  I understand that O'Reilly makes up most of what he talks about anyway, especially stats, but wouldn't it be more believable to claim that maybe 75% of Americans agree with him rather than 90 or 95%?  Weird.

Are you talking about Reggie Bush's approval ratings?  If you aren't then you should take it to the forum.

The packers got screwed.  Had the refs decided that the holding took place in the endzone, the Packers would have been down 15-13 and on defense with 7 minutes left.  Man, talk about getting hosed.  However, I was very surprised and impressed with the reversal of the intentional grounding call in the endzone for the fact that it definitely was not intentional grounding.  I always thought it would be a good idea for a rb to throw the ball away if he was going to be tackled for a loss.  So bad and good call, but either way the packers now need to lose and get some help to stay in the running for home-field disadvantage, or for reggie bush.