American Football Conference:

East:

New England Patriots (14-2). I know the first team to go undefeated during the regular season in thirty five years. It is just such a rare feat that even with their relatively easy schedule, I see them slipping up twice. Likely foes would either be San Diego, Indianapolis or Pittsburgh, however I think the game at the Jets (week 2) may be a game to watch.

New York Jets (10-6). I can legitametly see this team doing this well. Normally I would not be so high on a team that has tried to build its core through free agency, however, Brett Favre will do some Brett Favre magic, and he automatically adds three wins to your record each season.

Buffalo Bills (8-8). The Bills are on their way back, but they aren’t quite there yet. A lot of the moves that they have been making are smart, and they are building a quality core. If they could add a proven quarterback and some more on defense, they would be in contention for the wildcard.

Miami Dolphins (3-13). The team is better, and that isn’t saying much. They will win more than one game this season, but they won’t win much more.

North:

Cleveland Browns (11-5). The Browns have improved on the team they were last season, and looking comparatitively to the Steelers schedule, the Browns is far less intimidating. I think the Browns improve slightly from last season and win the division.

Pittsburgh Steelers (10-6). The Steelers are a good team, but they have one of the hardest schedules I have ever seen, including a five game stretch in which they face the Colts, Chargers, Patriots and Cowboys.

Baltimore Ravens (6-10). The loss of Johnathan Odgen will hurt botht the passing and running game, and the lack thereof a proven quarterback will hurt as well. Baltimore’s former strength, its defense, is not what it once was. 

Cincinnati Bengals (6-10) Carson Palmer has TJ Houshmandzadeh and Chad Johnson, first round pick Keith Rivers is behind because of his holdout. That is the team. I think Rudi Johnson has carried the ball too much and won’t really be effective, and since the Bengals can’t play defense, they will be forced to throw anyways, leading you to believe that their passing offense is top of the line.

South:

Indianapolis Colts (12-4). I am not worried about Peyton Manning, he will be more effective at 50 percent than most quarterbacks are at 100 percent. Colts have some tough road games, but this team continues to improve their defense, which has always been the weakness.

Jacksonville Jaguars (11-5). I don’t know how David Garrard is such an effiecent passer living on the island of misfit wide receivers. The defense is strong, and so is the running game. Look for the Jaguars to continue thier ball control offense, dominating defense.

Houston Texans (9-7). Houston has their first ever above .500 season as a franchise. They are making the right moves to improve the team, and look like geniuses right now for taking Mario Williams instead of Reggie Bush or hometown hero Vince Young. Still not on the level of Jacksonville or Indianapolis, but in two or three years, they may be.

Tennessee Titans (5-11). Yes, Vince Young somehow led the Titans into the playoffs last season, but after seeing how the Titans handled the offseason, and not buying into their success as a team last season, I can see them falling significantly. Defense isn’t happy, and Young isn’t a franchise QB.

West:

San Diego Chargers (14-2). Another top tier team with a very favorable schedule. As long as Tomlinson and Gates and Rivers are healed from their injuries, and the defense plays as they have been the past two years, this team is a top team in the NFL.

Denver Broncos (8-8). After San Diego, this division is quite average. The Broncos have been evidence of that the past two seasons. The defense is weak up front, however, if they can play ball control and Cutler is improved, the team can reach eight wins. If the running game or Cutler stumbles, they will fall even further than they have.

Kansas City Chiefs (6-10). Kansas City has done a lot to improve this off season. Yes, trading Jared Allen (who likely was done after this season in KC) hurts now, but the pieces that they got will help them. Once Herman Edwards is gone, as too is Brodie Croyle, expect the Chiefs back in the playoffs.

Oakland Raiders (5-11). The Raiders might return to the glory once the power of Al Davis is delegated to others who know what they are doing. The team has players at the skill positions, but they are great athletes, not nessecarily even good football players.

National Football Conference:

East:

Dallas Cowboys (13-3). Dallas, on paper has the best team in the NFC. However, they have to clear the hurdle of not being able to win a playoff game since 1996, even though they may of had the most talent on paper in previous years.

New York Giants (11-5). Yes the Giants are the defensing Super Bowl Champions, however I think that they will struggle on defense without the leadership of Michael Strahan. The team is poised and will be back in the playoffs.

Washington Redskins (8-8). The Redskins played very inspired football at the end of last season following the tragic death of Shaun Taylor. They added a lot of young weapons to the offense, but I think Jim Zorn’s inexperience will prevail in key situations and the Redskins play .500 for the season.

Philadelphia Eagles (7-9). This team is really a two horse team. McNabb and Westbrook. Neither have played a full season since god knows when. The defense has players, but this team rides on the shoulders of Westbrook and McNabb.

North:

Minnesota Vikings (11-5). The Vikings were big spenders for medicority in the offseason this year with Berrian and Williams. Adding Jared Allen helps, and the draft, what they had left anyways, was good. They have improved, and have the elements (run game and defense) you need to be successful  in the NFL.

Chicago Bears (10-6). The Bears are being overlooked because of a bad season last year in which they went 7-9 and were decimated by injuries on the defensive side. The offense is very lacking, however, the defense should be back to its form from 2005 and 2006 and special teams is the best in the league. The offensive line has improved, so whether it be Grossman or Orton, they won’t be on their back so much and the holes will be there for Forte.

Green Bay Packers (6-10). Yes the Packers had a good team last year, but they lost the guy who led them. It reminds me a lot of the Broncos of 1999 who went 6-10. They had a good team, Elways retired, the team wasn’t so good anymore. Aaron Rodgers is already shaken and I think will struggle, a lot. Behind Rodgers is Brian Brohm and Matt Flynn, good luck Packers.

Detroit Lions (4-12). The Lions are more of a well, the offensive line couldn’t block last year and they didn’t make any significant improvements there. Kitna can throw the ball, even though his yards are deceiving because the Lions are often behind, as are the receivers. Not much expected from the Motor City.

South:

New Orleans Saints (12-4). Personally I am not high on the Saints, but I think if Duece is healthy, which is the key to all of this, they will be the second best team in the NFC. The defense has improved and they continue to add weapons to the offense that is already explosive.

Tampa Bay Buccaneers (10-6). The Bucs have some pieces, sporadically placed that would give you hope to their success. They don’t have enough at any one place, however the defense is still one of the top third in the NFL, and if Ernest Graham continues the way he played last year, the Bucs won’t worry about the wrecked Cadiliac.

Carolina Panthers (7-9). The Panthers always seem to receive rave reviews prior to the season starting, but they have a lot of internal problems with key players. The run game will be there, but passing not so much, and I think the defense will stuggle, and that was often their strength.

Atlanta Falcons (5-11). Matt Ryan was the best QB in the NFL draft, but I am not sold on a guy who doesn’t even throw 2 touchdowns for every 1 interception (30td, 17int). The Falcons run and run and run, which Michael Turner does, but he isn’t a number one running back. Arthur Blank has done a good job trying to clean up the franchises image, but they are going to stuggle this season.

West:

Seattle Seahawks (8-8). Seattle has one of the top home field advantages in the NFL. The problem is, the team that plays there has been on the decline for the past couple of seasons, yet, the rest of the teams in the division cannot catch up.

Saint Louis Rams (6-10). The Rams have the offensive weapons, although aging or frustrated, they still have the weapons. They keep drafting on defense, and improving on that side of the ball. The Rams won’t be good by any stretch of the imagination, but they will be better than last seasons performance.

Arizona Cardinals (6-10). The Cardinals, like Carolina are a popular pick to have a breakout season, but it never seems to happen that way. I think they are improved, but I don’t see them being the good team that everyone invisions them being.

San Fransisco 49ers (2-14). Simply put, the worst team in the NFL. Alex Smith has not lived up to it, and although the defense has good, young players (Patrick Willis), the offense cannot score nor can they move the ball.

2008 NFL Playoff Picture
AFC
#1 Seed San Diego Chargers
#2 Seed New England Patriots

#6 Seed Pittsburgh Steelers at #3 Seed Indianapolis Colts
#5 Seed Jacksonville Jaguars at #4 Seed Cleveland Browns

Cleveland and Indianapolis advance, Cleveland will lose at San Diego and Indianapolis will beat New England. 

San Diego will advance from the AFC to the Super Bowl

NFC
#1 Seed Dallas Cowboys
#2 Seed New Orleans Saints

#6 Seed Chicago Bears at #3 Seed Minnesota Vikings
#5 Seed New York Giants at #4 Seed Seattle Seahawks

Both lower seeds in the NFC win, pairing it up to be the Giants at New Orleans, and Chicago at the Cowboys. The Saints and Cowboys prevail.

The Cowboys represent the NFC in the Super Bowl.

Super Bowl XLIII
San Diego Chargers defeat the Dallas Cowboys

NFL Awards
MVP: Tony Romo, Dallas Cowboys
Offensive Player of the year: Drew Brees, New Orleans Saints
Defensive Player of the year: Mario Williams, Houston Texans
Offensive Rookie of the year: Johnathan Stewart, Carolina Panthers
Defensive Rookie of the year: Jerod Mayo, New England Patriots
Comeback Player of the year: Mike Brown, Chicago Bears

And that is what I think, as of right now. Just like the ‘experts’ I could be way off line, or I could be close. It is just what I think, just for fun.

Favre went to Green Bay and was reinstated into the league. This was a big deal. A really big deal. Then after a day and a half, he left without even stepping foot onto the practice field. I have a few friends that are Packers fans, and they seem torn. One, who I admit may not be the most knowledgable on football of the three, is the most knowledgeable and level headed of the group, but he thinks that Favre should just stay retired. Which really isn’t a bad place for him to be, on his ranch in Mississippi. Another one thinks that Favre should go back to Mississippi, but he doesn’t care where he plays, it is all about the Packers anyways and he is still pissed at Brett. The other might as well be on Favre’s jock, permanently. Seriously.

As a person who is not a fan of the Packers, I love this mess. Personally, I would hate to see Brett in any other uniform but a Green Bay Packer uniform, however, part of me would want to see the dilemma that is posed if indeed Brett plays football in another city other than Green Bay Wisconsin.

I think that there are such diehard fans of Brett favre, that the Packers fan base would shrink instantly. The Favre faithful would be faithful to him, and not the team, and if say he was traded to Tampa Bay, if Tampa ended up playing Green Bay in Green Bay (which sadly the Packers play at Tampa week 4) the crowd would probably cheer Brett more than they would cheer Aaron Rodgers.

I just feel that Packers fans feel that they have to pick either Favre or the Packers in this mess. He revived the Packers, he made Green Bay relevant again, he has been the face of the Packers for 16 seasons. He basically has been the Packers. Everytime you think of the Packers, who do you think of, Brett Favre.

Of course, fans could just stay with their team, and the people of Wisconsin could continue to root for the Packers, even though they have kinda kicked the biggest superstar the state has seen out. I can see some anger amonst fans toward the franchise, especially if Rodgers struggles, which he will.

So who do you pick, the hero of the franchise, Brett Favre, or the franchise that kicked the hero to the curb, the Green Bay Packers.

Case for Favre: If you are a fan of the Packers only because of Favre, obviously you take his side. He made football in Green Bay relevant again. He is one of the top quarterbacks of all time. He carried the franchise on his back. He is the franchise. Wherever he goes, he will always be synanomous with the Green Bay green and gold. He felt forced out, he wants to be a Packer, they don’t want him. He doesn’t want to play anywhere else, Green Bay is his first option, that is where he wants to be. They don’t want him, but he wants to play, he will play, well, somewhere else. If you like him, follow him to where he goes.

Case for the Packers: They have been grooming a quarterback for three seasons now, and they want him to play. Brett had been lingering on the edge of retirement for years, and finally now he does, so the team moves on. The team was there before Brett, and very succesful through the 60′s, but in the 1970s-early 90′s they weren’t so much. The team will be there after Brett, it is the team, your team, other greats played there, don’t forget about Bart Starr or Vince Lombardi.

Best case scenario: Favre stays retired, and always stays a Packer.

Worst case scenario: Favre goes to Minnesota and they win the Super Bowl

Best case scenario for me: Favre goes to Chicago and wins a Super Bowl

Most likely scenario: Favre plays on another team for two seasons

Most likely scenario #2: Favre goes back to Mississippi and continues making wrangler commercials

2008 NFL predictions coming soon

Obviously being a track guy, week two of the Olympics is the week I want to watch as much of the ‘athletics’ as I can. I am not knocking any of the other sports, because there are so many that I would love to watch, it is just the two dominating sports of the Olympics are track and swimming. Other sports, such as diving or gymnastics or other sports which incorporate judges to determine the outcome always leave me wondering, espeically after the figure skating conspiracy. Team sports like Soccer, Softball and Baseball no one really cares much about during the Olympics, it isn’t that sports biggest stage.The typical baseball fan is worried about the major league pennant race with his team and could care less if the United States is playing Guam in the semi-finals of the Olympics.

I think some of the more interesting stories of the Olympics are of course Michael Phelps. I think this time, as compared to Athens, he has not talked about his quest to win seven or eight gold medals. The media and the commercials have talked about his quest much more than he has, at least this time around. Even if he does win eight gold medals at the Olympics, I don’t think it will be as great as when Mark Spitz did it, because in 1972, when the Olympics were a larger than life event, they were a big deal, not only did he win seven gold medals, he broke the world record in every event. Think about that. In one Olympics, he broke seven world records, and won seven gold medals. Many athletes are lucky to win a gold, or break a world record, but seven of each, in the same week, that is one of the greatest moments ever.

Speaking of great moments in Olympic history, 1992 Barcelona summer games unfortunate 400 meter runner Derek Redmond has become a popular Visa commercial, that I cannot help but get chocked up seeing it.

As far as running goes, I want to see if Tyson Gay has a strong enough leg to be competitive in the 100. He looked like he was going to run away with both the 100 and 200 before he strained his hamstring at the Olympic Trials. Usain Bolt may double in the 100 and 200, and let us not forget about Asafa Powell in the 100. All three of those guys have run 9.77 or faster in the 100 meter dash. In the 400 I want to see Jeremy Wariner win, I really do. I would also like to see someone have the nerve to honor, 40 years later, two men that stood up for what they believed in at the Mexico City games of 1968. If someone was brave enough to tribute them as well as standing tall for what they believed in and standing in the red, white and blue, I don’t think that there would be anything more heroic about the games than that.

The ‘Redeem’ Team as they have been dubbed are off to a fairly good start playing exhibition games, let’s see if they can dominate as the once did, or at least not embarass themselves.

I suppose I am also excited for other, lesser known events that only really get prime time when the Olympics air, but events like archery, short track cycling, field hockey and water polo. Maybe I am a little crazy, but I am looking foward to watching each and every one of those events and have actually created a schedule of what events I want to watch each day.

My advice, if you are watching the olympics, stay away from sports or the Olympic website if you are actually going to watch events. Don’t spoil it for youself. Try to watch any swimming final in which Michael Phelps is in, try to watch the sprint finals, even the field and distance finals in track and field, follow the USA basketball team and what they are doing, but don’t take the time to watch until the medal round. Try to watch some of the lesser known sports, and maybe just maybe, watch some gymnastics, because they are very talented, I just don’t like judges scoring events. Wrestling and boxing are present too, so there is a little something for all.

It will never change though, there will always be pre-season rankings. You will always have teams try to go wire to wire as number 1, but with the target on their back from the start of the season, it is so hard to even stay top five the whole season, let alone number 1. On the other side of the coin, you have teams ranked much higher than they should solely based on the reputation of the University. Last year Michigan was a good team, not a 5th in country team, but a good team, yet because they were Michigan they got the number 5 ranking and lost, in what some call the greatest upset ever, although Appalachian State is the three-peat champions of Division I-AA (I refuse to call it bowl subdivision, non-bowl division, etc.).

Although I think pre-season rankings are irrelevant, the coaches and assosiated press deem them important enough to make them, so I will post them and write what I think about them.

What I like about teams like Ohio State (yes they have lost two consecutive national championships, two Florida in Florida and LSU in New Orleans) but Ohio State is not afraid to schedule top tier teams from other conferences. Ohio State and USC will shape the rest of the top 25, just as much as teams will shape their own destiny. Obviously inter-conference battles will determine a lot as far as national championship hopes and BCS bowl games. LSU-Georgia, Georgia-Florida, Ohio State-Illinois, Oklahoma-Texas, Oklahoma-Missouri, and so on, other games may make or break a teams chances immediately, such as the Illinois versus Missouri game at the end of the month.

Five teams that I see dropping in the rankings and possibly out of the rankings. Texas, Texas Tech, Clemson, Auburn and Michigan. Michigan I think will have an adjustment year under Rich, but will be on track next year, and in 2010 they will be a top 10 team, I believe. I think that Tech passes too much to be a top tier team, and Texas I think is ranked as high as they are based on the prestige of the program and not nessecarily because they are the 10th best team in the country. I feel that the ACC is the worst out of the BCS conferences (listed below) and Clemson is an overrated piece of an overrated conference. Simply put I am not sold on Auburn being a top tier team this season.

College Football conferences ranked
1. SEC, top to bottom most talent and most quality teams, no questions, number 1 conference
2. Big East, I think top to bottom this may be the most competitive conference in the nation, and if they had more teams and more of a reputation, the Big East would be able to make a run as being the best conference. Louisville, West Virginia, Pitt and Cuse are all on the map, UConn, South Florida, Cincinnati and Rutgers are all on the verge.
3. Big 10, They had 10 out of 11 teams bowl eligible last season. They have the top tier teams, the top half of the conference is strong, but gets real thin towards the bottom. Yes, Ohio State and Michigan are top teams, Wisconsin is always in the top 25, Penn State is past its glory years, maybe, but still very good program and Illinois and Michigan State seem to be on the verge.
4. Big 12, I think much of the same as the Big 10, however I think the main difference is that they have more teams on the decline than they do on the rise, while the opposite is true of the Big 10 (who have more teams on the rise than decline, even Northwestern is rising). Oklahoma is always great, I think Missouri and Kansas won’t be what they were, Texas maybe, Texas Tech, unlikely.
5. ACC, I don’t think this conference has enough pieces, maybe if the programs that should excel start to excel, this conference could be one of the top, but until Florida State and Miami are back on top, then this conference is reliant on Virginia Tech and Wake Forest and North Carolina and Clemson, and those teams just aren’t doing it for me.
6. Pac 10, USC and the rest of them. That is what this conference has become, and it is a shame.

Teams that used to always be ranked that aren’t, I mean I am used to looking at the pre-season rankings and seeing Notre Dame, Nebraska, Miami and Florida State. Those are teams that have severly fallen off the grand scheme of things map in college football this decade.

Five teams that I think will rise in the rankings: South Florida, Arizona State, Oregon, Illinois and Virginia Tech. Arizona State and Oregon I both see going up in the rankings and I think both, if either can beat USC, both have legitmate shots at winning the PAC 10. Illinois has a tough schedule but they are a tough team. The loss of Mendenhall doesn’t hurt as much as the loss of Leman. South Florida was ranked number 2 at one point last season, they have grown from that experience and Virginia Tech won’t be demoralized early by LSU this season so they can get off on the right foot before ACC play.

Five Teams that I think will show up in the rankings. UCONN, TCU, Michigan State, Nebraska and Florida State. I just think these teams will be impressive enough to make the top 25, and I expect a couple of them to be in there at the end of the season.

I really think that at the end of the year Georgia will be in the national championship game, even with all the problems that they have had so far this season, without the season even begining. They have a tough schedule, as you would in the SEC, Illinois has a tough schedule, but I expect them to win the Big 10 this season. UCONN is my suprise pick to win the Big East, even though I think between West Virginia and South Florida is the real battle. Oklahoma goes unchallenged in the Big 12, USC won’t win the Pac 10 and the ACC is anybody’s.

Once the news got out that Tim Donaghy was gambling on basketball games, many players, general managers, owners and fans wondered, what games did he alter for his own benefit. All parties involved felt jaded that the result of the games, some of which were very important, were not in the hands of the coaches nor the players but in the hands of one official. One official that could make a key call here, a henius foul call there, and only making these calls for personal benefit.

This morning Tim Donaghy was sentenced to 15 months in Federal prision. I know he won’t ever have a job as an NBA official again, and he has to go to jail, and he provided a lot of information which may lead to more scandal, which is what no one is hoping for. The NBA already is on thin ice with their credibility toward the manner, and depending on what is found out from the information leaked by Donaghy, the NBA could and would lose a lot of credibility and a lot of money.

This whole case, had it happened in any other league, it would do the same damaging blow to its credibility. Some people think this may only be the tip of the iceberg, and it may very well be, but how do the leagues and the organziations and the governing bodies regulate this sort of thing. How is it possible to find out one of your leagues officials is gambling on the games he is officiating?

There was an official, his name slips my mind right now, but he received phone calls more often than his (Donaghy) bookie and most calls were immediately before or after a game, or before or after placing a bet. That is severe circumstansail evidence, and it is much better to have physical proof, but with that type of phone record, it is very hard to believe that Donaghy acted alone in this gambling matter.

I think that as a whole it would be a lot easier to have referees orchestrate this in the NBA than any other league. When you call a foul in the NBA it immediately results in points scored (assuming the team you called the foul on is at or over the limit). Another factor that makes it easier is there are only three guys officiating an NBA game, so they can conspire more easily and if one of them makes a call, it is going to have a much larger effect on the grand scale of things.

In baseball it would be easy for the home plate umpire to manipulate the strike zone a little bit, even though the balls and strikes are often reviewed by someone at the major league office, but even if the strike zone in manipulated, it doesn’t immediately result in any runs. Same with hockey, both of these sports have small officiating crews, but if a penalty or a safe call is ruled only for the purpose of the ref trying to win money and it not being a legitamite call it does not automatically translate into points on the board.

In basketball it is much easier for the refs to change the game. I know some people weren’t suprised by the fact that Tim Donaghy was altering games. It had been an expectation of some fans and media alike, games were being altered by calls the refs made that they should not. But there was no proof, it was just a quick blip on the radar. Basketball ‘experts’ figured in the back of their mind that it wouldn’t be hard for a ref to alter a game. They always insinuated it when there was a large discrepancy of free throws shot between the winning and losing teams, but until Donaghy was caught, no one was really accusitory of this occurance.

The NFL would make it nearly impossible for one ref of seven or eight to singlehandedly change a game. There are replays, and so many referees watching only a small fraction of the big picture. Sure you could throw a flag and get a touchdown called back, or call a key pass interference penalty when the other team is driving late in the game trying to kick a game winning field goal. But then again, no matter what call they make in the NFL, it doesn’t put points on the board like it does in the NBA.

Fifteen months in a federal prision, three years of supervised release in which he much seek treatment for mental issues and gambling issues. I guess I don’t know if that was fair, too much or too little, but he may just be the tip of the iceberg in not only the NBA, but all professional sports as far as people, players and coaches doing what they can to alter the outcome of games.

Baseball:

3. Cubs-Cardinals: This rivalry, as the good ones in baseball do, go back nearly a century. The Cubs and Cardinals haven’t been in pennant races with each other lately, but anytime these two teams meet, whether it be at Wrigley or at Busch, you see half Cubbie Blue and half Cardinal Red, and every game is sold out. The teams have enourmous respect for each other, but want nothing more than to win the series againt their rival. In the past decade a few events have happened that have showed the enourmous amount of respect the two organizations have for each other, as well as the respect the fan bases have for each other. McGwire and Sosa, especially since the Cardinals ended up playing the Cubs when McGwire hit number *62. The other two incidents would be the deaths of Cardinals pitchers Josh Hancock and Darryl Kile. Coincidently enough, the Cardinals and Cubs were playing each other when both of those happened.

2. Yankees-Red Sox: I think in a lot of peoples minds this is the best rivalry in baseball, but I think the media overplays it a lot. You have players switching teams between Boston and New York, such as Johnny Damon. I think the fans and media blow this one up though. The fans don’t like each other. The media needs something to talk about. This one has been relevant this decade though because both teams have been in the post season, not only battling each other, but being the legitimate teams to beat in the American League. Maybe because it is over-hyped I am just sick of it, but I just don’t think it is the best rivalry in baseball.

1. Giants-Dodgers: This rivalry has been going on 100 years, 50 on each coast. The Giants and Dodgers both moved to California, and brought the rivalry with them. It has been a long time since they were continuosly battling in a pennant race, but I think this rivalry can be summed up by Jackie Robinson retiring when he found out he was traded to the Giants. Instead of playing for his rival, he retired. That is what that rivalry has been like to the players thoughout its exsistance. They don’t like each other. It doesn’t get a lot of media play, because the teams are on the West Coast. If you are a Giant, you want to beat the Dodgers, and vise versa. You think that Willie Mays ever wants the Dodgers to win anything?

Overrated rivalies: I think all the intraleague games, like White Sox v Cubs, Yankees v Mets, Giants v A’s, and so on are all overrated. Yes, if they do keep intraleague play, those should be the games kept, but I think that there is no rivalry that exsists, just the media blows it up, and now there are so many fair-weather fans that like both teams, it kind of dulls the effect of it.  

Football:

3. Browns-Steelers: And I mean the actual Browns and not the now Baltimore Ravens versus the Steelers. Since the Browns have been on the rise the past few seasons, since coming back as an expansion team, the rivalry has intensed between the two franchises. Last season the Browns narrowly missed the playoffs, and the Steelers were bounced in the first round, but when those two teams get together, it is old-fashioned black and blue, lets go get ‘em football. I am glad to see the Browns back on the rise so two blue collar cities can have at it with their football teams.

2. Raiders-Chiefs: I think you could have any of the three teams in the AFC West between the Raiders, Chiefs and Broncos. I think Raiders and Chiefs is more so, because for both teams, they don’t care if they go 2-14, as long as they beat the other team for those two victories. Also I added the stadiums that they play in. The Black Hole and Arrowhead with the sea of red, those two stadiums outwiegh the other teams in the division. Also, if you remember when Marcus Allen switched teams to become a Chief, how much Raider fans hated him. Raiders fans hate everyone, but specifically the Chiefs, and the Chiefs just want to smoke the Raiders.

1. Bears-Packers: This is the oldest, the teams have the most championships, the most players in the Hall of Fame, this is indeed the best football rivalry. What I said about the Raiders and Chiefs applies here too. The Bears care most about beating the Packers, and vise versa. They have played in the rain, sleet, snow and sun, and always leave it all out there trying to beat their rival. Lately it was a dominated rivalry with Favre winning so much against the Bears, but in the past 3 or 4 years he hasn’t had very good luck.

Honorable mention: Redskins v Cowboys, Redskins v Giants, Giants v Cowboys. I think all three of these, especially with how close the East has been the past few years are good, but none of the rivalries stand out more than the other, that is why I can’t have it in a top three. I also like the Broncos v Chiefs and Broncos v Raiders, but it isn’t the same as Chiefs v Raiders.

Overrated Rivalries: Colts v Patriots, Patriots v Jets, Jets v Dolphins, other AFC East matchups. The teams in the AFC east (the Colts haven’t been in a while, but they were) don’t really have the historyof rivalry as the other do. Granted the Colts and Jets met in the most important Super Bowl ever, but over time, you cannot find a consistant frame where the teams were all pretty good. Colts and Patriots is just the two best quarterbacks and the other teams are not up to par.

Hockey:

I think the rivalry has kind of died in the NHL. I think there are still some good ones, like Detroit v Chicago, and maybe Chicago v St. Louis will make a comeback. There is also Boston v New York Rangers and the Maple Leafs v the Canadians. I don’t know how to rank them but, if I had to, I would probably go, and it is funny that I have all original six teams up there, but I would go 3. Boston v New York, 2. Chicago v Detroit and 1. Toronto v Montreal.

I think that the relocation of teams and the too sudden of expansion, and the lockout have all been reasons as to why rivalries in hockey have kind of simmered down and haven’t been what they used to be. Especially with the harsher punishment being handed out, there is less retaliation (not just in hockey, in baseball too) being allowed and teams don’t tolerate it as much.

If there is an overrated rivalry it is Colorado v Detroit. It was a couple of post season series, but since then, nothing. I think it is still hyped, but I don’t think it is worth it.

Basketball:

College basketball has all the rivalries today. NBA is about the one on one matchups, the Kobe v Shaq, or Melo v LeBron, or whatever superstar is squaring off against the other superstar. In the college game, every season there are top rivalries that take place, and they are the only ones I would consider to be true rivalries. Every conference has them and has many of them, too many to list. Duke v North Carolina, Illinois v Indiana, UConn v Pittsburgh, Syracuse, USC v UCLA, and so on all over the country, everywhere. College basketball is where the basketball rivalries live.

I mean we can agree to disagree because I think a lot of how we view rivalries is based on our geographic perception. If you live in San Fransisco, you might say that the Giants v Dodgers is number one for baseball, but you might think that Oakland vs Denver is number one in football or Basketball it is the Lakers vs Spurs, or something of that nature. It depends on your perception, but that is mine.

For a 38 year old man, who was undrafted, to have the career he went on to have. 12 seasons, all in Denver. He was probably one of the more underrated wide receivers of a generation. Now it seems whenever a player retires, they want to evaluate whether or not he is a hall of fame player.

When I think of hall of fame, I think of the greatest of the great, not just great players. I think the knock on Smith, was he quietly amassed statistics and because he was underrated, he never got the recognition he should have. As an objective person, when I think of Rod Smith, I don’t think of him as a hall of famer. Not that my opinion matters, but I don’t see him in the hall when I think of it, evn though he holds the NFL records for yards and catches by an undrafted player. He only had four seasons in which he didn’t have over 1,000 yards. Over those eight seasons in which he did have over 1,000 yards, six were over 1,100 yards, three were over 1,200 and one season he had over 1,600 yards (yes that is over 100 yards per game).

Even with all those numbers, Smith’s name doesn’t stick out to me like a Marvin Harrison does and I have trouble associating him with the Hall of Fame. But comparatively to a recent inductee, Rod Smith deserves to join John Elway as a Bronco in Canton.

Michael Irvin of the Dallas Cowboys was inducted into the Pro Football Hall of Fame in 2007. His statistics I guess don’t matter as much because he was a part of the Cowboys teams of the 90′s, which were not the greatest teams of all-time, but nonetheless very popular teams. Irvin won three Super Bowl titles with Dallas, Smith won two with Denver.

Both players played in 12 NFL seasons, Smith being more durable playing in 183 games compared to Irvin’s 159 (a season and a half worth of games). Smith has nearly 100 more receptions than Irvin (849-750), the touchdowns are in Smith’s favor (68-65 in receiving touchdowns, Smith had 71 total Td’s). Irvin has the narrow edge in yards, 11,904 to 11,389. All in all, both players show comparable statistics to each other, so if one is in the Hall, the other should join, at least it makes a good theory, correct.

Smith, as of right now is 18th in all-time receiving yards, he will be passed by Torry Holt of the Rams sometime early in the season. Smith is 11th in receptions and isn’t even in the top 20 for receiving touchdowns.

Two players that may suprise you to be in the same statistical categories as Smith, which would also top Irvin are former Jaguars Jimmy Smith and Keenan McCardell. Both have measurable stats in yards and receptions. Also at the same time you look at two guys who may also be considered underrated, or at least it is because one of them has been on the downside of his career for a while, but Andre Reed and Issac Bruce are two top stat guys, who very easily could have arguements made for them to be in Canton.

I wouldn’t object to any of these guys being in the Hall, but I also wouldn’t object to them staying out. I can’t say any of them were the greatest of their era, and I wish I could. I like Bruce (and his stats will get him there) and Smith (his stats should get him there), but with the other guys, and what they had accomplished, it is hard to draw a line to say who should be in, and who should be watching the inductions speeches from home.

The problem with Hester isn’t that he is asking for more money, he deserves it, he has shown he deserves it, it is that there has yet to be a precident established for how to pay return men in the NFL. He is a WR, who used to play corner, and in college he seemed to play a little bit of everything, but his primary responsibility is to return punts and return kickoffs. That is what he is. He might see more playing time at WR, but he isn’t going to be the number one or even number two wide receiver. He is the number one threat the Chicago Bears have, but he won’t be the number one WR.

It was said that Hester wants a six year deal worth 45 million dollars, or thereabouts. That is too much. He knows it, or at least I hope he can realize it. Maybe if he actually becomes the number one WR in Chicago, then he can get paid like that, but until then no. They should really set up his contract as incentive laden, but not so much on performance, but if he plays certain number of offensive snaps, he gets so much money. Kind of what the Bears did with Lance Briggs, where if he played a certain number of snaps, they wouldn’t franchise tag him again.

I think a fair deal for Hester would be something in the 6 year 30-35 million dollar range. That would make him the highest paid player on the offense by far, and I also think that if you structured it right, it would allow the team to persue other key parts to allow the offense the ability to score rather than the team relying on Hester, Gould and the defense. If he did a 6 year deal, worth 35 million dollars, and they gave him 15 or so up front, that would still ensure him 3-4 million per season, and he would be averaging nearly six, making him the highest paid returner in the game. That is what he should be.

But it is hard, because no one in the game is as electric as Hester. You have to pay him, because he is the best return man in the game, but how do you pay him. Return guys don’t get paid, WR’s get paid, Cornerbacks get paid, Quarterbacks and offensive linemen get paid, but return guys typically get paid on what their natural position is and them returning kicks is a bonus. Not with Hester, returning kicks is what he does, playing wide receiver is secondary.

After this deal gets done, look for it to be the precident when other, such as Joshua Cribbs and other return guys (maybe the likes of a Leon Washington), when it is time for them to do their deals. None will get paid like Devin, but Devin will get paid. The Bears have a history of taking care of their own.

I was suprised that the game did not sell out nor did it match the Liberty’s attendance records, it however was showing that the second rate league is taking steps to increase itself amongst other second rate leagues, or I suppose more accurately niche leagues. The kind of leagues I am talking about are like the Arena Football League, Major League Soccer, the WNBA, Major League Lacrosse and to an extent even the National Hockey League has become a niche sport.

I think all of these leagues have been taking steps in the right direction. The WNBA showed that they are willing to do things that will help promote the game as a whole. Although the league will always be in the shadow of the NBA, just as women’s college basketball will always be in the shadow of men’s, the outdoor game shows that they are trying to become strong enough as their own entity. I think that being the first non tennis event to be played at the world’s largest tennis only venue is something the league can be proud of. I think that that was the perfect venue to host a basketball game.

In 2000, Arizona State hosted Tennessee in a women’s college game at Bank One Chase Ballpark. I don’t think that venue would have been good for a basketball game, being there before for a baseball game. Maybe it was because I was younger and less attenative, but I didn’t think it was that great of a venue to watch a baseball game either.

The outdoor classic is something that has helped the NHL gain popularity, and it would be nice to see the WNBA continue this, especially during their regular season, unlike what the NBA is doing and having an outdoor game in the pre-season. The WNBA is set up perfect for this, basketball is a summertime game, and that is when the league is in season. They should try and play more outdoor games, especially regularly. I know trying to secrue venues that would work would be difficult, however I think it is something that would definently raise the level of the WNBA.

However, I was somewhat upset when he was trying to qualify for the Olympics. It wasn’t that him trying to qualify was a big deal, but it was the fact that he did have a scientific advantage when he was running. I know, how could a guy with no legs have a scientific advantage when he was running, but he did.

When an able bodied runner is running a sprint, they legs give back 88 percent of the energy that it takes when the ground is struck while making a stride. With Pistorius’ artifical legs, he was getting back 91 percent of the energy. That doesn’t sound like a lot, but if you account in the number of strides that are taken during a 400 meter race (which was what Pistorius was attempting to qualify in) you have a very significant difference. Not only that, but if you have ever run a 400, or any race in that matter, the lactic acid build up in your legs allows them to tire more quickly, depending on the body’s threshold to that sort of thing. If you don’t have legs, they won’t tire because the acid is not building up in them.

I don’t dislike or discredit anything that Pistorius has done. I actually have a lot of respect for what he has tried to do and what he has done, it really is incredible. I just don’t think that, even if he did manage to reach Olympic qualifying standard, which he did not, but even if he would have, he does have an unfair advantage. The IOC has such a long list of banned substances because they believe each and every one can help an athlete in some way. His artificial legs helped him in a way that normal legs cannot help you.

I also applaud the move that the nation of South Africa made to decide to exclude him from the 1600 meter relay team. If he was not one of the members that should be on the relay team, than it was absolutely the right move. He did not qualify in the 400, and if he wasn’t one of the top 6 from South Africa he should not have been on the relay team either. If the country however left him off the team as a public relations move, so they would not have to deal with the media backlash, then that is wrong.

Pistorius has set the world record for amputees in the 100 (10.91), 200 (21.58) and 400 (46.25), all of which are impressive enough in themselves. He has beaten able bodied runners at meets, and he has crushed many world records. Pistorius is a great story, and if he qualifies for the Olympics we will see what happens, although it is an unfair advantge, let us wait, seeing as how he is only 21.