Great game on Friday night, for once, as North Melbourne defeated Essendon 93-82 in an exciting game that flip-flopped several times. But Saturday...yawn...five games that all played to form, and the closest one was 43 points in the end:
- Adelaide over St. Kilda 119-73 (although the Saints started with a three-goal lead!)
- Hawthorn over Melbourne 155-50, and it wasn't that close.
- Sydney pulled away from Geelong 120-77 after a close first three quarters.
- GWS proved its credentials by annihilating poor Carlton 135-57, following their "famous victory" over the Hawks last week.
- And poor Gold Coast fielded whoever they could in a 135-43 rout by the West Coast Eagles that was well over 100 points shortly after three quarters, before they called off the slaughter.
So, expectations for Sunday were NOT high. And then...
- The Western Bulldogs (having fought to use Etihad Stadium this week, rather than give it up to a soccer tourney) fought back from 32-0 to tie the game at 88 with less than 4 minutes to go, only to see 7-0 Fremantle win by 13 (101-88) in the end. What a incredible game from both teams!
-As the legendary Rex Hunt (my favorite footy voice of all time!) broadcast his 2000th game of AFL/VFL footy (and the stories he can share!...), his ole team Richmond upset Collingwood 105-100 in a game that had 12 lead changes!
-And finally, amazingly rising from the dead, the Brisbane Lions pulled away from the much more talented Port Adelaide Power and won 102-65!
So, the ladder as it sits right now...
1. Fremantle. 7-0 and unbeaten - but happy to have been challenged this week! Still two games clear of all competition and rolling on all cylinders.
2-5. West Coast, Sydney, Adelaide and GWS, all 5-2. All four look like realistic finalists, although I'd take Freo over any of them at the MCG or anywhere else right now.
6-9. Hawthorn, Collingwood, Western Bulldogs and North Melbourne, all 4-3. No reason any of the four couldn't be finalists, but certainly not all nine teams will make finals. Oddly, the difference between 8th and 9th places right now - between Western and North - is exactly ONE point in the percentage: Western has exactly as many points scored as allowed (616/616, or 100.0%), while the Kangaroos have one less point than scored (656/657, or 99.9%).
10-13. Richmond, Essendon, Port Adelaide and Geelong, all at a desperate 3-4 and trying to stay close to finals contention. With fifteen games (2/3 of the season) still to go, there's still plenty of time to make the top eight - after all, Richmond made it from a 3-10 start last year - but the teams ahead of them are going to make it difficult!
14-16. St. Kilda, Melbourne, and Brisbane, all happy to be 2-5 because most folks have them pegged for the bottom of the ladder and maybe not having won any games by now!
17-18. Gold Coast and Carlton, 1-6, desperate for anything positive to happen this season. GC literally had too few players to practice last week, and Carlton "simply doesn't have the talent" to keep up with the rest of the league this year. Gold Coast in particular is a huge disappointment, having expected to make finals this year.
Monday, May 18, 2015
Wednesday, May 13, 2015
A couple of interesting retirements in Australian Rules...
Brent Reilly, longtime Adelaide Crow who recently passed his 200th game, is retiring amidst his recovery from a horrible skull fracture in a training accident back in February. His doctor has advised him never to play contact sports again with the danger of recurrence to his skull, and for obvious reasons he's agreed. One of the great aspects of Aussie Rules is the "manliness" of playing without helmet or padding - but sometimes casualties occur. Interestingly, more injuries seem to happen with American style football, because of the protective gear - you don't see Aussie players leading with their heads, for example, or hitting each other as hard as the linemen do in the NFL. Rarely have any retired footy players had trouble with concussion or head injury issues for those reasons. Still, it's hard to see someone like Brent Reilly have to retire early because of something like this.
On the other hand, here's a different reason for an early retirement that I've almost never heard of in the NFL - only the legendary Pat Tillman comes to mind...
Kane Cornes, fast approaching his 300th game at Port Adelaide (a huge milestone!), has decided to retire immediately following that game on May 23rd. The reason? He's been offered a position as a firefighter for the city of Adelaide.
Picture Shaquille O'Neal actually following through on his thought to become a Miami undercover cop, and you've got an idea what this means in Australia.
Cornes is about to be the only player in Port Adelaide's history to play 300 AFL games, a testament to his durability and ability...and yet, he's ready to step aside now, just because it's a convenient time to start his firefighter training. (He also doesn't want to risk any more injuries in advance of his retirement, although he's been remarkably durable over his 3oo games.)
Amazing.
On the other hand, here's a different reason for an early retirement that I've almost never heard of in the NFL - only the legendary Pat Tillman comes to mind...
Kane Cornes, fast approaching his 300th game at Port Adelaide (a huge milestone!), has decided to retire immediately following that game on May 23rd. The reason? He's been offered a position as a firefighter for the city of Adelaide.
Picture Shaquille O'Neal actually following through on his thought to become a Miami undercover cop, and you've got an idea what this means in Australia.
Cornes is about to be the only player in Port Adelaide's history to play 300 AFL games, a testament to his durability and ability...and yet, he's ready to step aside now, just because it's a convenient time to start his firefighter training. (He also doesn't want to risk any more injuries in advance of his retirement, although he's been remarkably durable over his 3oo games.)
Amazing.
Here's a wild scheduling idea...and the AFL may just adopt it!
The Australian Footy League plays a 22-game season, with an 18-team league. That means you play 17 teams, and five of those teams, you play twice. Currently the AFL has a system of weighting where you take the final order from last year, and you divide it into three tiers of six (teams #1-6, #7-12, and #13-18). For those five duplicate games, each team plays three teams within its OWN tier, and one team each from the other two tiers, the idea being to keep the schedule as competitive as possible (and it has the additional advantage/disadvantage of giving teams which finish lower on the ladder a slightly easier schedule than those higher up). The duplicate games under this system always allowed for a second matchup of intra-city games (Brisbane/Gold Coast, Adelaide/Port Adelaide, etc.), and other rivalry games (Carlton/Collingwood, etc.), which may or may not help with equalization but kept fan interest high.
Well, there's now a move to change that system, and it's a change that I simply can't imagine American football putting up with (for reasons you'll see in a moment):
During the first seventeen games, each team would play every other team once, a pure round-robin. After seventeen games, the top six would be set. So would the middle six, and the bottom six. Then, the last five games would be a round robin within the groups of six. So, the top six would play for positioning within the first six finals spots, the middle six would fight for finals' spots seven and eight, and the bottom six would slug it out for draft positioning. Every game would connect two teams of relatively equal strength. This is being called the "17-5" model, for obvious reasons, and it seems fairly straightforward. BUT, you wouldn't know in advance what games you were going to get those last five rounds of the season - can you imagine U.S. television networks and football franchises going nuts over that? They scream about the "flex game" on Sunday nights - imagine if you didn't even know which weeks you had HOME games? (Although, I suppose that might be fixable...I can think of some unfixable problems, though...)
Another possibility is simply going to divisions or conference setups - maybe you start with three conferences, and they play each other twice and everyone else once, and you know ahead of time who your five duplicate opponents are. For ex., put the four western clubs from Perth and Adelaide in with, say, Western and Geelong? Then, take your four eastern clubs in Sydney and greater Brisbane, and add in, say, St. Kilda and Richmond? Finally, you leave the other six Melbourne clubs together, probably the ones with the most tradition together - Collingwood, Carlton, Essendon, Melbourne, North Melbourne, and Hawthorn. If you don't like my combinations, change them. I'm just making an example.
Personally, I like the conference idea better, but I would still place them in one large, eighteen team ladder. I'm very intrigued by the "17-5" model, but it feels a tad...I was going to say "unfair", but it probably isn't. "Weird"? Unusual, certainly, as I don't know of any other league who's ever done this. Nothing against trying something unusual, right? The AFL has tinkered with its playoff system so many times it's unfathomable - in fact, it's hard to believe they've kept this top 4-biased set-up for twenty years now! Why couldn't they try this next year?
Well, there's now a move to change that system, and it's a change that I simply can't imagine American football putting up with (for reasons you'll see in a moment):
During the first seventeen games, each team would play every other team once, a pure round-robin. After seventeen games, the top six would be set. So would the middle six, and the bottom six. Then, the last five games would be a round robin within the groups of six. So, the top six would play for positioning within the first six finals spots, the middle six would fight for finals' spots seven and eight, and the bottom six would slug it out for draft positioning. Every game would connect two teams of relatively equal strength. This is being called the "17-5" model, for obvious reasons, and it seems fairly straightforward. BUT, you wouldn't know in advance what games you were going to get those last five rounds of the season - can you imagine U.S. television networks and football franchises going nuts over that? They scream about the "flex game" on Sunday nights - imagine if you didn't even know which weeks you had HOME games? (Although, I suppose that might be fixable...I can think of some unfixable problems, though...)
Another possibility is simply going to divisions or conference setups - maybe you start with three conferences, and they play each other twice and everyone else once, and you know ahead of time who your five duplicate opponents are. For ex., put the four western clubs from Perth and Adelaide in with, say, Western and Geelong? Then, take your four eastern clubs in Sydney and greater Brisbane, and add in, say, St. Kilda and Richmond? Finally, you leave the other six Melbourne clubs together, probably the ones with the most tradition together - Collingwood, Carlton, Essendon, Melbourne, North Melbourne, and Hawthorn. If you don't like my combinations, change them. I'm just making an example.
Personally, I like the conference idea better, but I would still place them in one large, eighteen team ladder. I'm very intrigued by the "17-5" model, but it feels a tad...I was going to say "unfair", but it probably isn't. "Weird"? Unusual, certainly, as I don't know of any other league who's ever done this. Nothing against trying something unusual, right? The AFL has tinkered with its playoff system so many times it's unfathomable - in fact, it's hard to believe they've kept this top 4-biased set-up for twenty years now! Why couldn't they try this next year?
Tuesday, May 12, 2015
Here's a drastic situation for the Gold Coast Suns
Each AFL team dresses twenty-two players for a match - 18 starters, 3 bench players ("interchange"), and one substitute. In other words, 21 play from the word go, and one serves to replace an injured player.
Gold Coast head coach Rodney Eade, whose tenure with the Suns has begun with a shocking five losses in six games, has expressed his concern that Gold Coast will not be able to field a full team - he only has twenty players who are able to practice at this point. If his feeder team was playing this weekend (they have a bye), they would have to forfeit because they're going to be loaning the senior side too many players to leave enough for themselves!
The last numbers produced this weekend by the AFL itself imply that the Suns have more players injured than NOT injured!
"The list of those unavailable already includes the likes of Gary Ablett, Jaeger O'Meara, David Swallow, Nick Malceski, Jack Martin and the suspended Steven May. Eade said it could be argued the club was missing 12 of its best 15 players."
What a predicament! For a team expected to make its first finals ever this year, this injury ravaged season has been nothing short of disasterous.
Gold Coast head coach Rodney Eade, whose tenure with the Suns has begun with a shocking five losses in six games, has expressed his concern that Gold Coast will not be able to field a full team - he only has twenty players who are able to practice at this point. If his feeder team was playing this weekend (they have a bye), they would have to forfeit because they're going to be loaning the senior side too many players to leave enough for themselves!
The last numbers produced this weekend by the AFL itself imply that the Suns have more players injured than NOT injured!
"The list of those unavailable already includes the likes of Gary Ablett, Jaeger O'Meara, David Swallow, Nick Malceski, Jack Martin and the suspended Steven May. Eade said it could be argued the club was missing 12 of its best 15 players."
What a predicament! For a team expected to make its first finals ever this year, this injury ravaged season has been nothing short of disasterous.
It's not concussions, but head injuries are still potentially lethal...
We've talked a lot about the potential for repeated head injuries to cause one of two fatal downfalls to football as played in North America: (1) the long-term brain poundings football players get lead to dementia and its related issues for the players down the road, which we can already see leading current players away from the sport, and (2) the financial cost for leagues and institutions hosting football teams when lawsuits are brought to court and won against them for physical and mental damage to the players.
Here's a new case out of Iowa, where a high school athlete was "allowed" to continue practicing and playing after what seems to have been a severe head trauma that bled. In this case, it was the head coach and the school nurse who were held particularly culpable.
If you're the administration or school board of that school, and you just got hit with a million dollar bill because of your football program...what do you do?
Here's a new case out of Iowa, where a high school athlete was "allowed" to continue practicing and playing after what seems to have been a severe head trauma that bled. In this case, it was the head coach and the school nurse who were held particularly culpable.
If you're the administration or school board of that school, and you just got hit with a million dollar bill because of your football program...what do you do?
Sunday, May 10, 2015
The AFL ladder looks very strange...
Week Six down under was almost as wild as week Two was - five legitimate upsets out of the nine games, including the youngest team beating the reigning double premiers, and the fifth largest comeback in footy history by St. Kilda, of all teams!
Let's start at the end, though: the standings (or "ladder") after 27% of the season -
1. Fremantle Dockers (6-0) - alone on top, two games clear of everyone, and even more amazing, they're also 6-0 against the spread! At some point, they'll come back to the pack.
I think.
2-7. At 4-2, it's the Sydney Swans and five pretenders to the crown, none of whom were really expected to be here: Collingwood, the Western Bulldogs, Adelaide, West Coast, and Greater Western Sydney. They've all played well, with one or two weak games scattered, and all deserve to be here.
The question: how many of them will be able to stay up here? I say: Sydney, Western, and Adelaide for sure, but the other three all have a shot to hold on and make the top 8 for finals.
8-12. At 3-3 we find the five teams who expected to be up at or around the top of the ladder: Hawthorn (WAY ahead on percentage over the others), Port Adelaide, Essendon, Geelong, and North Melbourne. Presumably, even this early in the season, not all of these teams are going to turn it around and make finals - the question, though, is which ones WILL do it, and which ones won't? I say: Hawthorn, Port, and (if you force a choice on me) North Melbourne, by a hair over Essendon.
13-18. Right now, there are three 2-4 teams and three 1-5 teams which will be separated for draft order after September. I know, there's plenty of season left, but none of the two-win teams (Richmond, St. Kilda, and Melbourne) and certainly none of the one-win teams (Carlton, Brisbane, and the surprisingly bad Gold Coast Suns) have shown any potential of making any significant charge on the top eight. Keep in mind, however, that last year Richmond left round 14 at 3-10 and won their next nine games (including at Sydney) to sneak in as the eighth seed! After what the Saints did this weekend, anything is possible!
The games this weekend included the expected:
- North Melbourne over Richmond 109-74
- Fremantle over Essendon
- Adelaide beats Gold Coast
- Sydney over Melbourne
...the unexpected:
----Geelong found legs and ran down Collingwood 100-59, an outcome which was only predicted by about 25% of betters.
---- West Coast pulled away in the third and held on on the fourth quarters against Port - IN Adelaide!
---- A very similar situation gave Brisbane its first win, sending Carlton coach Mick Malthouse and his teams into another week of intense media scrutiny.
---- Despite the false claims that it was their best win ever (defeating the supposed "superteam", your crosstown rival Sydney Swans, to start last season is still #1!), coming from behind twice to overwhelm the two-time premiers Hawthorn by ten points.
...and the ludicrous: Western was up by 55 points after scoring the first goal of the second half. They had completely overwhelmed the Saints on all fronts, and led 70-15; the only two goals the Saints had in the first half were flukes, or it would have been 70-3. Suddenly, the Saints came to life - scoring a couple of what looked like token goals - then a couple more - continued to stop the Bulldogs from scoring - stayed aggressive, and got within two goals (12 points) at three quarter time - even after a pair of quick Western goals increased the lead to 23, St. Kilda held their composure like a champ and kept scoring, catching and passing the Doggies later on to win by seven points. It was the largest second-half comeback ever, the fifth largest ever, and kept Western from being alone in second at 5-1.
Let's start at the end, though: the standings (or "ladder") after 27% of the season -
1. Fremantle Dockers (6-0) - alone on top, two games clear of everyone, and even more amazing, they're also 6-0 against the spread! At some point, they'll come back to the pack.
I think.
2-7. At 4-2, it's the Sydney Swans and five pretenders to the crown, none of whom were really expected to be here: Collingwood, the Western Bulldogs, Adelaide, West Coast, and Greater Western Sydney. They've all played well, with one or two weak games scattered, and all deserve to be here.
The question: how many of them will be able to stay up here? I say: Sydney, Western, and Adelaide for sure, but the other three all have a shot to hold on and make the top 8 for finals.
8-12. At 3-3 we find the five teams who expected to be up at or around the top of the ladder: Hawthorn (WAY ahead on percentage over the others), Port Adelaide, Essendon, Geelong, and North Melbourne. Presumably, even this early in the season, not all of these teams are going to turn it around and make finals - the question, though, is which ones WILL do it, and which ones won't? I say: Hawthorn, Port, and (if you force a choice on me) North Melbourne, by a hair over Essendon.
13-18. Right now, there are three 2-4 teams and three 1-5 teams which will be separated for draft order after September. I know, there's plenty of season left, but none of the two-win teams (Richmond, St. Kilda, and Melbourne) and certainly none of the one-win teams (Carlton, Brisbane, and the surprisingly bad Gold Coast Suns) have shown any potential of making any significant charge on the top eight. Keep in mind, however, that last year Richmond left round 14 at 3-10 and won their next nine games (including at Sydney) to sneak in as the eighth seed! After what the Saints did this weekend, anything is possible!
The games this weekend included the expected:
- North Melbourne over Richmond 109-74
- Fremantle over Essendon
- Adelaide beats Gold Coast
- Sydney over Melbourne
...the unexpected:
----Geelong found legs and ran down Collingwood 100-59, an outcome which was only predicted by about 25% of betters.
---- West Coast pulled away in the third and held on on the fourth quarters against Port - IN Adelaide!
---- A very similar situation gave Brisbane its first win, sending Carlton coach Mick Malthouse and his teams into another week of intense media scrutiny.
---- Despite the false claims that it was their best win ever (defeating the supposed "superteam", your crosstown rival Sydney Swans, to start last season is still #1!), coming from behind twice to overwhelm the two-time premiers Hawthorn by ten points.
...and the ludicrous: Western was up by 55 points after scoring the first goal of the second half. They had completely overwhelmed the Saints on all fronts, and led 70-15; the only two goals the Saints had in the first half were flukes, or it would have been 70-3. Suddenly, the Saints came to life - scoring a couple of what looked like token goals - then a couple more - continued to stop the Bulldogs from scoring - stayed aggressive, and got within two goals (12 points) at three quarter time - even after a pair of quick Western goals increased the lead to 23, St. Kilda held their composure like a champ and kept scoring, catching and passing the Doggies later on to win by seven points. It was the largest second-half comeback ever, the fifth largest ever, and kept Western from being alone in second at 5-1.
Friday, May 8, 2015
The DeflateGate report is out.
And it doesn't look good for Tom Brady.
The NFL's report, which took four months to complete, determined that three people in the New England Patriots organization "more probably than not" knew and/or took part in the efforts to lower the pressure in the Patriots' game footballs so as to make it more to the starting quarterback's liking: equipment assistant John Jastremski, locker room attendant Jim McNally, and quarterback Tom Brady himself.
Beyond the physical data verifying that the footballs used by the Patriots in the AFC Championship game were indeed significantly below the NFL-required pressure, it also provides enough circumstantial evidence that makes it "more likely than not" that it was not only a deliberate act on the part of Jastremski and McNally (and at the very least tacitly condoned by Brady; more likely suggested by Brady), but that it was a pattern of behavior stretching back well into the regular season, based on such things as text messages between the two employees that certainly appear to confirm that they did exactly that throughout the season, specifically for Brady, who provided them with game paraphernalia as thank you's for doing so.
To clarify, Brady went to great lengths in the week following the original expose' to explain that yes, he much preferred the balls to be inflated "to the lower end of the legal range" of 12.5 to 13.5 psi, because it gives him a better grip on the ball, a better feel for it in cold weather, and allows his receivers to catch the ball more easily. To top that off, it was Brady himself who led the campaign to change the NFL policy on this very subject in 2007, creating the bizarre rule that each team should be in charge of its own footballs that it uses on offense, rather than the conventional notion that the neutral NFL would have control over the equipment used in the game.
(By the way, if the NFL hasn't changed that policy by August's first pre-season game, they should shut the place down.)
So, yeah, Tom Brady LOVES his footballs to have pressure as low as he can get away with in the footballs he throws.
Is there ANY way that a rational human being can conceive of a situation where an assistant equipment man and a part-time locker room attendant would contrive to illegally lower the pressure in the game balls WITHOUT THE KNOWLEDGE OR APPROVAL OF THE MAN WHO HANDLES THEM FOR A LIVING?
Interestingly, the report exonerates head coach Bill Belechick and ALL other Patriots players, coaches, and employees. The culture under Belechick has notoriously been to stretch the rules to the point of complete malleability, and sometimes beyond it (see: "Spygate", "Snowplow on the Field") to win football games.
But this time, it isn't specifically Belechick who's at fault.
It's the win at all costs culture he created.
I understand that the commissioner has no credibility AT ALL on the subject of appropriate suspensions. (See: Rice, Ray, takes one and two.) And I understand that while this affects the validity of the very sport his job depends on, it should NOT demand a penalty as harsh as the one for the scandal in which players' very health and well-being were compromised by bonuses being given for injuring them (i.e., the New Orleans Saints' "Bountygate" scandal - do we HAVE to use the suffix -gate on EVERYTHING?).
But the penalty seems pretty clear to me, within a range:
- Fire the two employees immediately, with a show-cause for working in the NFL for the next five-ten years. They have no reason to still be attached to the NFL.
- Whatever the Spygate draft/money penalty was, assess something between that amount again to double that amount. This is worse, but of the same magnitude.
- Tom Brady needs a significant suspension. Four to eight games seems appropriate to me - less than the season long suspension Saints head coach Sean Payton suffered, but more than a slap on the wrist. Ben Roethlisberger served six for "circumstantial evidence"-proven crimes off the field; this was less damaging to individuals but more damaging to the sanctity of the fairness of the product the NFL produces. Six games seems appropriate.
- Does it change the outcome of Super Bowl 49? Logistically, I have to say no. But it sure puts an asterisk on it in the minds of a loooooooot of people, including me.
This damages Brady's entire reputation in a way that a steroid scandal does to other players. It puts an asterisk on the 2014 season and Brady's passing numbers for a minimum of last year. Does it keep him out of the Hall of Fame? Probably not, but it's worth asking the question. Brady's interviews following the exposition of the evidence after the Colts game have been proven to be what they felt like at the time - lies, fabricated hastily and imperfectly, surrounding enough of his honesty about why he would want deflated balls to explain his actions in the case. And in particular, for a player whose good looks and aw, shucks image was crafted on his appearance of being a down-home guy who was exactly what he appeared to be, this is a whole set of nails in the coffin of that image. We will never see Tommy in that light again.
Even Bill Belechick will take a small hit - oh, sure, he was acquitted. And he was never the good ol' boy that Brady was, anyway. But it's yet another strike on the culture he created at Foxboro, that win-at-all-cost mode of operation that made the Patriots the villains of the NFL. It's one thing to be the rebels, like the Oakland Raiders were (and still would be, except that they're an afterthought as a hollow (art) shell of a team). It's quite another to be the outlaw. Expect a LOT more scrutiny, New England. Walk far away from that line, because you're going to be judged more harshly than ANYONE else in 2015, whether fair or not.
And the saddest thing is this - like Alex Rodriguez, like Barry Bonds, like Lance Armstrong - the Patriots were going to be good without all of the cheating. But their insecurity forced them into playing beyond the rules, to playing with an ace up the sleeve, because the full house they already had might not be quite good enough.
And it cost them more than the pot. It cost them their reputations as men.
The NFL's report, which took four months to complete, determined that three people in the New England Patriots organization "more probably than not" knew and/or took part in the efforts to lower the pressure in the Patriots' game footballs so as to make it more to the starting quarterback's liking: equipment assistant John Jastremski, locker room attendant Jim McNally, and quarterback Tom Brady himself.
Beyond the physical data verifying that the footballs used by the Patriots in the AFC Championship game were indeed significantly below the NFL-required pressure, it also provides enough circumstantial evidence that makes it "more likely than not" that it was not only a deliberate act on the part of Jastremski and McNally (and at the very least tacitly condoned by Brady; more likely suggested by Brady), but that it was a pattern of behavior stretching back well into the regular season, based on such things as text messages between the two employees that certainly appear to confirm that they did exactly that throughout the season, specifically for Brady, who provided them with game paraphernalia as thank you's for doing so.
To clarify, Brady went to great lengths in the week following the original expose' to explain that yes, he much preferred the balls to be inflated "to the lower end of the legal range" of 12.5 to 13.5 psi, because it gives him a better grip on the ball, a better feel for it in cold weather, and allows his receivers to catch the ball more easily. To top that off, it was Brady himself who led the campaign to change the NFL policy on this very subject in 2007, creating the bizarre rule that each team should be in charge of its own footballs that it uses on offense, rather than the conventional notion that the neutral NFL would have control over the equipment used in the game.
(By the way, if the NFL hasn't changed that policy by August's first pre-season game, they should shut the place down.)
So, yeah, Tom Brady LOVES his footballs to have pressure as low as he can get away with in the footballs he throws.
Is there ANY way that a rational human being can conceive of a situation where an assistant equipment man and a part-time locker room attendant would contrive to illegally lower the pressure in the game balls WITHOUT THE KNOWLEDGE OR APPROVAL OF THE MAN WHO HANDLES THEM FOR A LIVING?
Interestingly, the report exonerates head coach Bill Belechick and ALL other Patriots players, coaches, and employees. The culture under Belechick has notoriously been to stretch the rules to the point of complete malleability, and sometimes beyond it (see: "Spygate", "Snowplow on the Field") to win football games.
But this time, it isn't specifically Belechick who's at fault.
It's the win at all costs culture he created.
I understand that the commissioner has no credibility AT ALL on the subject of appropriate suspensions. (See: Rice, Ray, takes one and two.) And I understand that while this affects the validity of the very sport his job depends on, it should NOT demand a penalty as harsh as the one for the scandal in which players' very health and well-being were compromised by bonuses being given for injuring them (i.e., the New Orleans Saints' "Bountygate" scandal - do we HAVE to use the suffix -gate on EVERYTHING?).
But the penalty seems pretty clear to me, within a range:
- Fire the two employees immediately, with a show-cause for working in the NFL for the next five-ten years. They have no reason to still be attached to the NFL.
- Whatever the Spygate draft/money penalty was, assess something between that amount again to double that amount. This is worse, but of the same magnitude.
- Tom Brady needs a significant suspension. Four to eight games seems appropriate to me - less than the season long suspension Saints head coach Sean Payton suffered, but more than a slap on the wrist. Ben Roethlisberger served six for "circumstantial evidence"-proven crimes off the field; this was less damaging to individuals but more damaging to the sanctity of the fairness of the product the NFL produces. Six games seems appropriate.
- Does it change the outcome of Super Bowl 49? Logistically, I have to say no. But it sure puts an asterisk on it in the minds of a loooooooot of people, including me.
This damages Brady's entire reputation in a way that a steroid scandal does to other players. It puts an asterisk on the 2014 season and Brady's passing numbers for a minimum of last year. Does it keep him out of the Hall of Fame? Probably not, but it's worth asking the question. Brady's interviews following the exposition of the evidence after the Colts game have been proven to be what they felt like at the time - lies, fabricated hastily and imperfectly, surrounding enough of his honesty about why he would want deflated balls to explain his actions in the case. And in particular, for a player whose good looks and aw, shucks image was crafted on his appearance of being a down-home guy who was exactly what he appeared to be, this is a whole set of nails in the coffin of that image. We will never see Tommy in that light again.
Even Bill Belechick will take a small hit - oh, sure, he was acquitted. And he was never the good ol' boy that Brady was, anyway. But it's yet another strike on the culture he created at Foxboro, that win-at-all-cost mode of operation that made the Patriots the villains of the NFL. It's one thing to be the rebels, like the Oakland Raiders were (and still would be, except that they're an afterthought as a hollow (art) shell of a team). It's quite another to be the outlaw. Expect a LOT more scrutiny, New England. Walk far away from that line, because you're going to be judged more harshly than ANYONE else in 2015, whether fair or not.
And the saddest thing is this - like Alex Rodriguez, like Barry Bonds, like Lance Armstrong - the Patriots were going to be good without all of the cheating. But their insecurity forced them into playing beyond the rules, to playing with an ace up the sleeve, because the full house they already had might not be quite good enough.
And it cost them more than the pot. It cost them their reputations as men.
Now, how about some stateside news? Bring back UAB FOOTBALL!
One of the truly sad situations in CFB last year was the shutting down of the Alabama-Birmingham football program, just when it was turning a corner into respectability...in fact, it qualified for a bowl game last fall, except that when the Alabama State Board of Education mandated that it shut down after the 2014 season, no bowl game would take them.
Now, the UAB boosters program has raised six million dollars to reinstate the program.
The Board of Ed has not responded to this motion. The unspoken assumption is that the state board was worried that the program would overshadow the Crimson Tide at 'Bama.
Waah.
Now, the UAB boosters program has raised six million dollars to reinstate the program.
The Board of Ed has not responded to this motion. The unspoken assumption is that the state board was worried that the program would overshadow the Crimson Tide at 'Bama.
Waah.
First, two quick notes from the AFL Friday night game...
Friday night in Australia is early morning here in the States, so the Friday Footy package comes on at 4 a.m. here in Idaho...it's not that we're psychic and can predict the outcomes a day in advance! Needless to say, though, we had predicted Collingwood to move to 5-1, but instead it's Geelong defeating the Crows 100-59 with a blitzkrieg of a first half: five goals in the first ten minutes to lead 30-1, leading 70 to 10 just before halftime. Collingwood crept back into the match in the second half, closing within 23 before three goals in two minutes for the Cats put the game out of reach.
Two points of note: One is in this article the game score is linked to, and that's the curious and inexplicable fact that since round 14 of last year (a span of fifteen straight games), whatever team played Carlton has LOST their game the next week. Collingwood won by 75 over the Blues last week and were five point favorites last night...but the Blues jinx got them! In fact, looking at the schedule, it seems very likely to continue for another few games, at least until round 10, when Sydney follows up a game against Carlton with a visit to the Gold Coast, where they'll undoubtedly be massive favorites against the currently 1-4 Suns...
The second note is one of the best examples of coachspeak you'll ever hear, in the main article on afl.com.au. After the game, Collingwood head coach Nathan Buckley was asked about the game - the game, you understand, where his team had a five goal deficit before the fans had sat down from the concession stand, and where they scored one goal to eleven for Geelong with a few minutes to go in the half...
"At the 10-minute mark of the game we're five goals down, so that's not the way that we wanted to begin," Buckley said.
"We spoke about starting well but we didn't get there. All credit to the Cats..."
SO, coach..."That's not the way you wanted to begin"? Down five goals right away? No, we wouldn't THINK so... "We spoke about starting well but we didn't get there"... No? Down 70-10 isn't starting well? Huh... Glad you told us! Never would have guessed it.
(To his infinite credit, however, as almost every AFL coach and player does, he owned up to the failures of the team, and undoubtedly began addressing the issues immediately. After all, what else are you going to say after a defeat like that? So, did we win? No? Well, we're planning to appeal...)
Two points of note: One is in this article the game score is linked to, and that's the curious and inexplicable fact that since round 14 of last year (a span of fifteen straight games), whatever team played Carlton has LOST their game the next week. Collingwood won by 75 over the Blues last week and were five point favorites last night...but the Blues jinx got them! In fact, looking at the schedule, it seems very likely to continue for another few games, at least until round 10, when Sydney follows up a game against Carlton with a visit to the Gold Coast, where they'll undoubtedly be massive favorites against the currently 1-4 Suns...
The second note is one of the best examples of coachspeak you'll ever hear, in the main article on afl.com.au. After the game, Collingwood head coach Nathan Buckley was asked about the game - the game, you understand, where his team had a five goal deficit before the fans had sat down from the concession stand, and where they scored one goal to eleven for Geelong with a few minutes to go in the half...
"At the 10-minute mark of the game we're five goals down, so that's not the way that we wanted to begin," Buckley said.
"We spoke about starting well but we didn't get there. All credit to the Cats..."
SO, coach..."That's not the way you wanted to begin"? Down five goals right away? No, we wouldn't THINK so... "We spoke about starting well but we didn't get there"... No? Down 70-10 isn't starting well? Huh... Glad you told us! Never would have guessed it.
(To his infinite credit, however, as almost every AFL coach and player does, he owned up to the failures of the team, and undoubtedly began addressing the issues immediately. After all, what else are you going to say after a defeat like that? So, did we win? No? Well, we're planning to appeal...)
Tuesday, May 5, 2015
AFL Week 6 predictions
The best game of the weekend may be the first game for once - the Friday night clash between two surprise teams in the MCG. Collingwood is a surprising 4-1, losing only to a blazing Adelaide team in round 2, and meanwhile Geelong started the year 0-3, winning against a terrible Gold Coast team and a slumping Richmond team the last two weeks. Yet for some reason the Cats were originally the betting favorites until the smart money took over and agreed with me that Collingwood should win the game with ease.
Saturday sees six games, a huge fixture for one day in the AFL:
Richmond @ North Melbourne (should be a North victory)...
St. Kilda @ Western (the first game the Bulldogs will be favored in!)...
Hawthorn @ GWS (the Giants are good, but not THIS good yet!)...
Adelaide @ Gold Coast (the Crows need this win, and should get it)...
Sydney @ Melbourne (Swans have lost two in a row; they won't lose this one)...
and Essendon @ Fremantle (the Dons are good, but not "go into Fremantle and win" good).
Finally, on Sunday, we round out the slate with two interesting games: Brisbane @ Carlton, at the bottom of the ladder (Carlton's had more pressure on them, oddly, because Brisbane was always going to be a work in progress - go with the Blues to win at home); and West Coast @ Port Adelaide, which has a pair of middle of the pack teams who might each be SO much more than that! Port's much closer to reaching its potential, however, and that's going to push them to the victory over the Eagles.
Saturday sees six games, a huge fixture for one day in the AFL:
Richmond @ North Melbourne (should be a North victory)...
St. Kilda @ Western (the first game the Bulldogs will be favored in!)...
Hawthorn @ GWS (the Giants are good, but not THIS good yet!)...
Adelaide @ Gold Coast (the Crows need this win, and should get it)...
Sydney @ Melbourne (Swans have lost two in a row; they won't lose this one)...
and Essendon @ Fremantle (the Dons are good, but not "go into Fremantle and win" good).
Finally, on Sunday, we round out the slate with two interesting games: Brisbane @ Carlton, at the bottom of the ladder (Carlton's had more pressure on them, oddly, because Brisbane was always going to be a work in progress - go with the Blues to win at home); and West Coast @ Port Adelaide, which has a pair of middle of the pack teams who might each be SO much more than that! Port's much closer to reaching its potential, however, and that's going to push them to the victory over the Eagles.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)