January 21st: After The NFC Championship Game

So I didn’t keep a running diary. Maybe I should have.

But there wasn’t a whole lot to write about during the NFC Championship game, was there? I mean, beforehand I had a nagging feeling about the game. I had this weird feeling that something was about to go horribly wrong.

During the first quarter, I was explaining to my friends what the Packers strategy should be, and then realized with a shock of horror that the Giants were doing it.

Towards the end, I didn’t even care if the Packers pulled off a magical victory. The Packers shouldn’t have even been in that position to begin with.

Instead, we’re all left wondering how things went so wrong. It was a sure thing, wasn’t it? Let’s go through a couple of points and see.

1) The penalties.

The penalties that come to mind the most are Al Harris’ illegal contact penalty that negated his interception, Nick Collins’ roughing the passer penalty, and the two (two!) offsides penalties down at the goal line.

So, how do you fix that? Well, Al Harris is an aggressive player. That’s what he’ll do. He was being roughed up by Plaxico all night, and maybe it was wrong to play him so physically, but that’s how he plays.

Nick Collins’ penalty was stupid, but I thought it was on the edge of clean. You’re applying pressure. That’s what pressure is. It could have gone either way, in my book. The refs called it that way. Whatever.

The offsides at the goal line? That was just idiotic. You have to be calm, and those guys were obviously too hyped up.

So, the first one I mentioned really can’t be helped, and the other ones were just mental errors from really young players. In other words, there isn’t a whole lot you can do to fix it. That’s the bad news.

The good news is, there isn’t a whole lot you need to do to fix it. These guys are young. For a lot of them, this was their first postseason. Now they know what needs to be done, and they’ll do it next time. Simple as that.

2) The running game never got going.

You knew that after the Packers rung up 200 yards against the Seahawks on the ground, the Giants were going to be ready for a steady dose of Ryan Grant. The strategy I mentioned to my friends was that of a prizefighter. You rough up the middle so that later on, you can take bigger shots. You can imagine how horrible I felt once I realized that the Giants had roughed up the Packers so that they could now have their way with them.

Still, the Packers’ strategy was correct in the beginning. They went to a couple of receivers outside, trying to get the Giants to back off. Their hope was that they would take a guy out of the box to cover, leaving the middle of the field more open. That didn’t happen, and Grant couldn’t find a hole. When Grant finally did get a hole, he squirted through for a decent gain, but he had trouble all night.

Now, one could argue that it’s best to stick with your running game, and eventually you’ll break one. The problem is that sometimes, you don’t break one. How many 3-and-outs did the Packers have because they started bad on first down with a run that went nowhere? Once you get those long third downs, you’re in a heap of trouble, and it just keeps piling up.

What to do? What to fix? Once again, I don’t know. The line is fine. Chad Clifton and Mark Tauscher are some of the finest tackles in the league, Scott Wells is good, and the guards are so-so to above average, depending on the play. Can you get better guards? Maybe, but you’ve got some guards with good tools. They just need to learn how to use them.

Once again, the bad news is, you can’t really upgrade the position. The good news is, you can’t really upgrade the position. It’s fine. There just needs to be a little more training.

3) Plaxico Burress put on a clinic.

It didn’t matter where Burress was, upfield, downfield, left, right, running hooks, ins or outs. He just plain caught the ball. This is unusual, because normally Burress only catches stuff that’s away from him. He’s not a good “right-on-the-hands” receiver. Do you want to hear my theory about him? Sure you do.

My theory about Burress is that he’s not very good at concentrating. He reminds me of Antonio Freeman in that way. Freeman had a lot of drops, but he would make these amazing catches when the ball would fall on his back, or he would have to dive through the air to catch it. A lot of other stuff? In and out of his hands.

In this weather, Burress knew that he had to concentrate on catching the ball. He had to work harder to catch it, so he was able to. Normally he can’t, but today he could. Don’t believe me? Watch him in Phoenix. He’ll drop half of the easy passes that come to him.

How do you stop that? You can cover better, I suppose, but how? Do you move safety help over? That wouldn’t have stopped the short out patterns. Should you replace Al Harris? Not really. Burress is 6’5”. Harris is about 6’0”, like a corner should be. Some plays, Burress just plain fought better for the ball, because he’s bigger.

So, the bad news is, you can’t really improve that. The good news is, it’s already really good, and that’s why you can’t improve it.

With all of this, what can we take away from this game? A few things. We are supporting a very good team that needs a little more experience. Eli Manning reminds me of Eeyore, because nothing ever makes him happy. Brandon Jacobs should have jumped in the stands, because it would have been hilarious.

Also, this proves fairly definitively that you need to play at the end of a season to win games. The Giants fought the Patriots in Week 17, and neither team had anything to gain from winning. They still fought tooth and nail. Coughlin challenged his team to win, and they responded. That’s what happens. Hats off to them.

The Packers will find more players via the draft, but now they’re finally ready. They finally have all the pieces in place. They have the depth. They just need experience, and they’ll be ready.

In the meantime, *$%$ the Giants.

January 14th: Writing About The Packers/Seahawks As It Happened

I decided to try something different for this article. In this article, I wrote my thoughts before the game, after the 1^st quarter, halftime, 3^rd quarter, and then my final thoughts. But first:

I’m pretty sure I like the Brewers acquisition of Mike Cameron. I don’t like that Cameron is a user (he’ll be suspended for the first 25 games of the season), but I do like the flexibility that they now have.

They can put Cameron in center, and they can move Bill Hall to 3^rd. Hall is much more natural in the infield, and he even hits better. Then, they can move Ryan Braun out to left field, where he’s much less of a liability defensively speaking.

So, on to my thoughts on the game. These are my real thoughts, not edited, not rewritten. Enjoy.

--

Before the game:

I’m really pumped for this. Is it just me, or is this the first Packers’ playoff game in a long time that you feel totally confident about?

Matt Hasselbeck is all right, but the Packers defense has a good enough pass rush, plus the cornerbacks to stop him, and there’s no running backs to speak of on the Seahawks. Shaun Alexander is just a shadow of his former self. Maurice Morris? Please.

Favre doesn’t have to go nuts in this game. He doesn’t have to press. But if he has to throw, this is the team to do it on. The Seahawks front seven is quick, but the running game can easily negate that, and no one can put out five quality cornerbacks.

In other words, the Seahawks defense is good, but they won’t score the points to keep up with the Packers. My prediction? Packers 28, Seahawks 14. It’ll be over by halftime.

--

After the 1^st quarter:

That was a really rough start. I don’t know about you, but I was upset.

However, it was great seeing the Pack respond. Favre was methodical. After a rocky start, Grant ran hard. The defense stiffened. Hasselbeck looks lost.

Another great thing: On Grant’s 25-yard run, Greg Jennings laid out a NICE block. What can’t that guy do?

I always think power is better than speed on a defense. When you have snow, or a bad field, your speed advantage is gone. It’s no coincidence that early on, when there was no snow, the Hawks defense looked good. As soon as the snow started sticking, the Seahawks looked bad. Things are looking good.

--

Halftime:

So far, here’s what I haven’t liked:

- That “roughing the kicker” call on Brandon Jackson. Consider: a couple of plays later, Nick Barnett tackled Nate Burleson on a normal play. They slid together for about five yards. Jackson slid towards the punter. It was an accident. I’m still mad.

- The missed tackles. Maybe it’s because the uniforms are slippery. The Seahawks are missing some too. Still, let’s wrap them up, folks.

- Brian Baldinger’s pinky. They keep cutting to him sitting at Foxboro, and his distended pinky is freaking me out. (By the way, how depressing of an assignment must Baldy have? “Here, you go stand on the field at Foxboro for a while. You’re not even going to cover the game. Just wait there.”)

Here’s what I did like:

- Atari Bigby is everywhere, laying down tough hits and intimidating wide receivers. They hear the pitter-patter of his feet and get scared. What a player.

- It’s cliché to say, but Favre is amazing. His TD pass to Jennings was masterful, and the stumbling flip move to Donald Lee was something only he could have done.

--

After the 3^rd quarter:

Is Fox showing a Fantasy Update? Do they know how fantasy football works? Geez.

One of the best things about this game is seeing the Seahawks look completely freaked. Hasselbeck looks confused. I think it’s the same thing that’s been happening to some teams lately: They score so quickly and so soon that they let down, and they can never really get up for the rest of the game.

Also, as a QB, you have to be cool. Remember the story about Joe Montana in the Super Bowl before The Drive? When he gets into the huddle and tells the guys, “Hey, I think John Candy is in the front row”? That’s cool. That’s not getting pressured. Hasselbeck is not handling the pressure well. Good for us.

The snow is crazy! Did you catch that they even had to change up the camera angle so that you could actually see the action? That’s so cool.

Marcus Pollard just had a sure touchdown pass go in and out of his hands. He’s having a rough, rough day.

--

Monday morning:

I root for the Packers, obviously, but there aren’t a whole lot of teams I root against, with one glaring exception: The Dallas Cowboys. Maybe it goes back to the Thanksgiving game in 1995 when Jason Garrett (the third-stringer) played extensively, and Erik Williams blocked John Jurkovic in the back of the knee, tearing his MCL, and the Cowboys still won handily.

Not that I’m still bitter.

You can imagine, then, how happy I am today. The Cowboys gift-wrapped that game for the Giants. In doing so, they exposed the Giants glaring weaknesses, but couldn’t capitalize on them.

Here’s my quick breakdown: The Giants weren’t getting pressure until they started putting more men in the box. Tony Romo had time, Marion Barber was gouging the defense, and it was turning bad. Then the Giants started bringing five- and six-man blitzes.

Anyone who reads Tuesday Morning Quarterback will tell you that blitzing is a dangerous proposition. Every time you send an extra person into the line, you’re leaving someone uncovered in the secondary. That’s exactly what happened.

But something else happened. Jason Witten, Romo’s most valuable receiver, now had to stay in to block. Barber had to stay in to block, too, meaning two weapons were taken out of the game. On top of that, Patrick Crayton dropped several easy passes, and any one of them would have broken the game wide open.

What does this mean? What is the Packers’ strength? That’s right: Their solid receivers don’t drop the ball, so the Giants can’t bring too much pressure. Therefore, without having extra men in the box, Ryan Grant will slash his way through the defense, just like Barber did. When the Giants move people into the box, Donald Driver and company will be wide open.

The extra factor is having the game in Lambeau. How cool is that, having another championship game in Lambeau Field? I’m excited just thinking about it.

In other words, everything the Giants do, the Packers can counter. Everything the Packers do, the Giants have no answer for. The Packers magical season will continue. Raise your hand if you thought we’d be here at the beginning of the year.

That’s what I thought. Enjoy.

January 7th: Wild Card Round

Some thoughts on the NFL playoffs:

Before we get to the NFC games, I’d like to make a comment about the other Saturday game. I don’t know how many of you tuned into Jags/Steelers. If you did, though, you saw a team that would never had won that game a year ago come to Heinz Field and win. What was the difference?

David Garrard.

Would Byron Leftwich ever have made that great run at the end of the last Jaguars possession to get the Jags into field goal position? Absolutely not. Byron Leftwich would probably still be running, and in the meantime, his ligaments would have shredded, and his arm would be hanging by a piece of flesh. But he has great leadership skills!

So, on to the NFC games: I guess Eli Manning has arrived. We were all waiting for him to make the leap. It seems he finally has. I’m just as surprised as the next guy.

I really don’t think Eli is going to live up to his brother. Eli’s lowest passer rating for a season has been 55.4. Peyton’s worst was in his rookie year, when he posted a 71.2. It’s been stratospheric ever since, with, of course, the 2004 season there, with it’s NFL-record 121.1 rating.

It is still nice to see another good quarterback in the NFC, for a simple reason. The more good quarterbacks there are, the better every other team gets.

Consider what a baseball GM said this past offseason. His unspecified NL team was close to making a deal this past offseason, but the deal fell through. His reason was simple. He was basically quoted as saying, “Why? Our team can win the division without any major improvements. Why bother?”

The AFC has had to keep pace with the Patriots and Colts since 2000. Those teams have been so dominant that if you have only a half-decent team, you’re done. Don’t believe me? The Ravens would have been a playoff team in the NFC, easy. In the AFC? They were 3-13.

In the NFC, you can mostly get away with an OK team. The Eagles were bad, and they posted an 8-8 record. The Cardinals looked okay, and they were running light at QB all year. The Vikings, with no quarterback, almost made it to the playoffs. There’s no way any of those teams would have competed in the NFC.

So, in other words, the more consistently good teams there are in the NFC, the better the rest of the conference has to be. If Eli Manning plays well, the Giants are better. The better the Giants are, the better the Packers have to be. The better the Packers have to be, the better players they go out and get, the better coach you have, and the better they play in crunch time. Simple as that.

--

Speaking of the Seahawks, I’m really hoping that Matt Hasselbeck does the coin toss again for the Packers. I mean, he wants the ball, and they’re going to win, right?

This, at long last, is playoff football. Win or go home. Here’s where we see how good of a coach is Mike McCarthy. Is he a Marty Schottenheimer-type, that can only get you to the playoffs, but can’t get you the elusive ring? Or is he the real deal? I’m psyched to find out.

--

What more can I say about the Bucks? They seem listless. They just beat the Bobcats, but who hasn’t beaten the Bobcats?

If the Bucks don’t do that great this year, though, I don’t think Coach Krystiak (remember, he middle letters have been revoked) should go, nor Larry Harris. Harris went against the grain and picked a contender for Rookie of the Year, while delivering an international star to Milwaukee. Krystiak needs time to implement his system, whatever it may be. He’s supposed to be a good coach.

However, I reserve the right to change my mind if they continue collapsing throughout the season.

Sports Notes

First things first: Thanks for the good year, Wisconsin. You lost your bowl game, but we’re not bitter. I think Coach Bielema said it best: “I told the guys, I don't expect to see any smiles but I don't want to see anybody hanging their heads.”

See you next year, Wisconsin.

--

I’m officially changing Larry Krystlaksjfniak’s last name. Until the team gets straightened out, I’m taking away his letters. He is no longer Larry Krystklasdfmiak, but he is now just Larry Krystiak. Larry, you have to earn these letters back.

When you look at this team, you see that they’re not bad. Sure, Bobby Simmons has been pretty average, but when they got him, he looked like a great player. Charlie Villanueva for T.J. Ford looked great at the time, because Ford’s spine can collapse like a travel cup at any moment. Now it’s Larry Krystiak’s job to get all these players working together.

The Miami game is a start, sure. They beat Miami in Miami. That’s great. Miami stinks this year, though. They only have Dywane Wade and that’s it. I’d hardly call beating them a resounding achievement.

Let’s hope they’re on their way.

--

So, I brought up the differences in winning percentages between the Cowboys and the Packers opponents. By my admittedly rough math, the combined record of opponents that the Packers have beaten is 100-124 (.446). The combined record of opponents that the Cowboys have beaten is 121-135 (.472). The combined record of opponents that the Packers have lost to is 27-21 (.562), whereas the combined record of those who the Cowboys have lost to is 32-16 (.666).

You can’t really choose who you play. You can only choose how you play against those teams. Lest we forget, the ’72 Dolphins played versus two opponents with winning records.

However, opponent’s winning percentage is a really good gauge of future success. The Cowboys were good this year, undoubtedly. So were the Packers, but they still aren’t quite at that level. Just don’t be surprised if next year the Packers don’t have as great a record as this year.

--

Congratulations also go out to Mike McCarthy, who finished second in Coach of the Year voting. The award went to Bill Belichick instead, but losing to a coaching legend is nothing to sniff at. You can’t really fault most voters for going with a guy who led a team to the first 16-0 regular season in 35 years, and has racked up 19 regular season victories in a row.

I’m excited to see how McCarthy fares as a playoff coach. As anyone who follows Marty Schottenheimer’s career can tell you, being a great regular season coach and being a great playoff coach are two separate things. So far, McCarthy has acquitted himself well in the regular season. We’ll see how he stacks up in the playoffs.

--

I hope you indulge me a little bit, but I have to give out some end-of-the-year awards. I’ll call them the Eel Awards, which is what you get when you spell my first name backwards. We’ll just call them the Eelies.

It’s no secret that I love music, and this has been an unusually great year for music. I have to give my Album of the Year Eely to Arcade Fire for their amazing album “Neon Bible.” If you’ve never heard of Arcade Fire, look for the songs “Wake Up” and “Keep the Car Running.” If you can find the video on YouTube for “Rebellion (Lies)” you’ll also have a really good idea of what they’re like.

I also have to give an Eely to The Bourne Ultimatum. It’s rare when the third part of a trilogy wraps everything up so nicely, and gives you the payoffs you’re expecting. Bourne did all that and more.

In sports, my Eelies go to my current mancrush, Ryan Braun. Consider this: His OPS puts him in the company of Alex Rodriguez and Albert Pujols. That’s the kind of player we have on the Brewers now.

In fact, Braun was good he almost overshadowed the recipient of my other Eely for Outstanding Achievement in Being Outstanding: Prince Fielder. It’s so easy to forget about the great season he had, but with a 1-2 punch like Braun and Fielder, this team should be good for a while, or at least until the Yankees pay them $200 million apiece.

My final Eely goes to the one, the only, Brett Favre. After a year where everyone said that he was done, he came back to prove the doubters wrong. Check that: He didn’t just prove the doubters wrong, he pantsed the doubters in front of their girlfriends at Homecoming, and the doubters ran to the boys’ room embarrassed while the rest of the class stood outside laughing at me. Them, I mean. Not me. That didn’t happen to me. (cough)

December 31st: Packers Beat Lions, Plus NFC North Review

I now know that the Packers will be successful in the playoffs.

How do I know this? How can I say this with such certainty? Because of this: Coach McCarthy refused to take his foot off the accelerator. Even with nothing to gain by a win, he refused to let the team accept a loss as an acceptable outcome.

Look at Indianapolis in past years. They have frequently been among the best teams, posting great records year after year. Yet, for some reason, they lose in the playoffs, even with great players and everything right there for the taking. I have a theory about this: When you don’t put meaning into games at the end of the season, it’s hard to find meaning in the playoffs.

Case in point: In 2005, the Colts were sitting on a record of 13-0. Then San Diego beat them. After that, they played Jim Sorgi extensively and gave everyone extended two week vacations. Result? Early exit from the playoffs in the divisional round.

In 2004, with nothing to play for, the Colts rolled over for the Broncos in week 17, losing 33-14. The result? A loss in the divisional round to the Patriots.

In 2006, however, they played right up until the final bell. The result? A motivated team that won the Super Bowl.

In 2003, they fared well also, playing hard until the end. That was the season that they started as a wild card, and went up against the Patriots in the Championship game, losing to the soon-to-be Super Bowl champions in a hard-fought game.

So, the years where they backed off once they had nothing to play for, they lost in the playoffs. When they fought for every last game, they got much farther.

What does this all mean? The Packers fought for this last game. They sat their starters after the first quarter, but by then, everything was pretty much over. They went out there to win the game, not just rest and relax. This means that they’re sharp and prepared. They have an extra week to rest, but they have an edge going into the playoffs. They proved they can win again after that embarrassing loss to the Bears, and that they can still be productive using their second-stringers.

I mean, we had a Craig Nall sighting, for God’s sake! And he looked good!

The Patriots agree with me, and that’s why they went 16-0. The Cowboys agree with me, and that’s why they didn’t pull Romo until late in the Redskins game. The only team that doesn’t agree with me this year is the Colts. We’ll see how that works out for them.

--

Now that we won’t be seeing any NFC North teams in the playoffs anymore, it’s a good time to assess how they performed and how dangerous they looked at the end of the year.

We’ll start with the Vikings. Their defense was solid, as usual. It all starts with their two guys in the middle, Pat Williams and Kevin Williams. (No relation.) As usual, they were really, really scary. For once, their linebackers are finally keeping pace with their solid line, with guys like Chad Greenway providing 103 tackles.

The offense is the major story, though. That offensive line makes me nervous, and Adrian Peterson is scary good.

(Does it confuse anyone else that there’s two Adrian Petersons in the league? I think we should start calling the Vikings’ Adrian Peterson something different to differentiate. Maybe something like Ädrïän Pëtërsøn. You know, because he’s a Viking.)

Anyway, Ädrïän Pëtërsøn is great, but the run is supposed to set up the pass. When you’re setting up Tarvaris Jackson throwing to Sidney Rice, you’re really not setting up much. They’re definitely doing better, and they’re on their way, but it’s going to take a bit before they really challenge the Packers. The Vikings are an all-around solid team on the way up.

The Bears are next up. Why is it that quarterbacks last all of three weeks in Chicago? It doesn’t matter who they draft, or who they bring in. Every quarterback they bring in turns into Generic Bears Quarterback Part 12, and they need to find another one. They don’t have a decent running back (I’m not sold on Cedric Benson), and no wide receivers to speak of.

Sure they have Brian Urlacher on their defense, but no one else. Mike Brown is now injured by stiff breezes, lollipops and sunshine. Devin Hester returns kicks for touchdowns, but I have a solution to that. Don’t kick to him. There. How hard was that?

And the Bears still beat the Packers twice. So yes, the Bears in a sorry state, but as far as the Green and Gold goes, you have to respect a team that plays terribly all season long, only to get momentarily agitated enough to beat the Packers. Maybe they’re saving their energy for the Packers. Who knows.

Last but least are the Detroit Lions. After seeing his team once again fail to do anything worthwhile, Matt Millen did the honorable thing and fired the person responsible: Mike Martz. Yes, the same Mike Martz that knows offense inside and out and yet still couldn’t make heads nor tails of this rotten collection of castoffs and stowaways for two seasons. He’s the problem in Millen’s mind.

Never mind that there is absolutely no talent across the board on the Lions. Never mind that John Kitna is your Plan A, B, and C at quarterback. Never mind that every year you draft a wide receiver in the first round. And let’s not forget that you’re using the dynamic duo of Kevin Jones and Tatum Bell as your running backs, and yet your most valuable back is Aveion Cason.

(Seriously, if Tatum Bell can’t gain 1,000 yards in Denver, what are you doing bringing him onto your team? I could gain 1,000 yards in Denver.)

In other words, keep up the great work, Matt Millen. Every year you continue your work with the Lions, it’s two fewer games that the Packers have to worry about.

--

One last note: The combined record of opponents that the Packers have beaten is 100-124 (.446). The combined record of opponents that the Cowboys have beaten is 121-135 (.472).

The combined record of opponents that the Packers have lost to is 27-21 (.562), whereas the combined record of those who the Cowboys have lost to is 32-16 (.666). What does this mean? I’ll have the answer on Thursday, along with some Brewers and Bucks talk.

December 27th: Packers Lose To Bears

Welcome back! I hope all of you had a great weekend.

So, about that Packers loss. It’s not really that much to get worked up over.

“But, Lee, you handsome devil, how can you say that?” you might say. “They got played off the field! It wasn’t even close!”

This is true. The Bears’ offensive and defensive lines just played harder than the Packers’ lines. The punting was atrocious. Everything that could have went wrong did.

However, there’s a couple things to remember. How important was this game for the Packers on a scale of 1 to 10? Remember, they have the division locked up and a first-round bye. Sure, maybe they could have gotten home field advantage, but that depended on the Cowboys losing another game, so that’s not a gimme either. I’d say it was about a 4, and that’s only because the Bears were involved.

What about the Bears? They have nothing to play for. They’re done for the season. The only thing they can hang their hat on is beating the Packers. Lovie Smith said that his number one priority was beating the Packers when he was hired. The Bears wanted this game because they had nothing else. This game was a 10 for them.

Another important factor is the fact that whenever these two teams play, throw out the records. They always play each other really hard, no matter what record they have. Even with the Bears abysmal record, they’re not a bad team. They just don’t have a quarterback.

Some people have bandied about the stat that the Packers have been swept by the Bears in 2 of the last 3 years. That’s the kind of stat that you hear and are a little shocked by, isn’t it? However, Mike Sherman was coach for the first year. You can throw that year out. Then, last year, the roles were reversed. The Packers had nothing to else to play for except an 8-8 record, and the Bears were basically set for the playoffs. The Packers blew out the Bears 26-7.

The timing of this game is also perfect. This is after the Pack bodyslammed the Raiders and Rams. They could start getting a little cocky, and they probably did. They’re a young team with a young coach. They figured this would be an easy mark. In the NFL, there are no easy marks.

Next up are the Detroit Lions, and I truly pity them. After such an embarrassing loss, the Packers are going to be angry, and they’re going to take it out on the Lions. It won’t even be close.

Now, some people are pointing to this team as having a “second half collapse,” as 2 of their 3 losses have been in the second half of the season. But really, the only “bad” loss was this one against the Bears, and as we’ve discussed, there’s nothing to be worried about with this game. Most of the games the Packers have won in the second half of this season, they’ve won convincingly.

There’s really no comparison between this Lions team and the Bears team that the Packers just lost to. So, I predict that the Packers will beat the Lions by the score of 38-7.

--

About the Bucks: It’s been a grim season so far, hasn’t it? As I write this, they’re losing 68-38 to the Nuggets. They’re only 11-15, even though they’re a team with some good young talent.

I had fairly high hopes for this team. You look at the players they have: Redd, Bogut, and some really good role players and solid pieces. I wasn’t high on Yi Jianlian at the beginning of the year, and he’s winning me over quickly. I was very high on Larry Krystkowiak (hereafter referred to as Larry Krysaspdoaiak, or Larry Krysaslkmxcwiak, whichever buttons I hit on my keyboard).

For them to be at this point so far is a little appalling. They shouldn’t be doing this bad. They’ve lost 9 games by 10 points or more. For having a couple of teams that are on the upswing, like the Packers and Brewers, to see the Bucks flopping as bad as they are is really upsetting. So, what’s wrong with the Bucks?

One of the problems has been their obviously dismal away record. This is a function of youth, I believe. Give them a little more time and they’ll iron that out, once they get used to playing on the road. There might be some problems with that idea, though.

Their next 23 games include 14 road games (not counting their current game at the Nuggets). Even if they win all of their home games and a handful of their road games, that puts them at 24-27, or, in other words, in a really tough spot. And can you really see them beating New Jersey, Phoenix, and Houston, at home?

However, I don’t watch the games enough to know what other problems there are, and what they can do to fix them. What do you guys say? What can be done to fix the Bucks? Leave your comments below, and we’ll put our heads together. Maybe we’ll send something to Larry Krystsadxcvkiak.

December 17th: UW Whitewater, Favre, and Eric Gagne

Congratulations to UW-Whitewater, for their Division III championship win. They won 31-21 over Mount Union, the winningest program in college football since 1990. Justin Beaver ran for 249 yards for the Warhawks.

See, Division I? That’s what a champion looks like. You do some playoffs, and the better team wins. It’s not really complicated. Figure it out so that we don’t have any more debacles like this season.

So, due to circumstances beyond my control, I couldn’t watch the whole Packer game. I caught the end of it, and listened to the beginning. However, I do have some points from the game.

• I was worried about this being a trap game for the Pack. Sure, St. Louis is 3-11 now, but they finally got back Marc Bulger and a healthy Steven Jackson, and they really had nothing to lose. It seemed like it would be that way until the Packers broke it open in the 2^nd. But you really can’t overemphasize how well prepared this team is, something that was sorely lacking in the Sherman years.
• Don’t be too upset about Steven Jackson running for 147 yards. Jackson ran hard, and when he has a full head of steam, he’s hard to stop. The Packer defense played their assignments almost perfectly at times, and he still broke off some runs. He’s just that good. If Jackson was on a better team, you would be hearing the same superlatives about him that you hear about LaDainian Tomlinson.
• Of course, Brett Favre is now the all-time NFL passing yardage leader. Quick weird stat: The previous all-time passing yardage leaders, Fran Tarkenton and Dan Marino, had no NFL championships between them. That’s kind of weird, isn’t it? I don’t know what it means, but it means something.
• Seriously, though, what other great things can you say about Favre? We’re just lucky he’s been here as long as he has, and it’ll be a sad day when he hangs it up. Here’s to 17 amazing seasons, and here’s to several more.

As we all know, the Mitchell Report just came out. We’ve heard the big names, like Roger Clemens, Andy Pettitte, and Barry Bonds. But the name that's probably the most important to Brewer fans is Eric Gagne. There are other former Brewers on the list, but none of them got $10 million contracts just a couple of days ago.

First, the good stuff about the report. While there were some juicers on the team, it doesn’t seem like the Brewers were encouraging steroid use like some other teams were (cough Yankees cough). That’s definitely a good thing, and let’s hope no other reports come out to prove otherwise.

The problem with Gagne isn't just the contract, although I'm not crazy about a guy who barely closes anymore and pitched horribly in Boston. Even if there were no steroids involved, that would still bother me, but this is my problem. Here's a quote from the report (italics ours):

When the Boston Red Sox were considering acquiring Gagné, a Red Sox official made specific inquiries about Gagné’s possible use of steroids. In a November 1, 2006 email to a Red Sox scout, general manager Theo Epstein asked, “Have you done any digging on Gagne? I know the Dodgers think he was a steroid guy. Maybe so. What do you hear on his medical?” The scout, Mark Delpiano, responded,

Some digging on Gagne and steroids IS the issue. Has had a checkered medical past throughout career including minor leagues. Lacks the poise and commitment to stay healthy, maintain body and re invent self. What made him a tenacious closer was the max effort plus stuff . . . Mentality without the plus weapons and without steroid help probably creates a large risk in bounce back durability and ability to throw average while allowing the changeup to play as it once did. . . Personally, durability (or lack of) will follow Gagne . . .

Awesome. So we've got this guy and we're on the hook for $10 mil.

There's been suspicion about Gagne around baseball. He's one of those players who did great and then all of a sudden just stopped right around the time that they started doing better steroid testing. But what kills me is this: Instead of waiting for the Mitchell Report, they went out and got the guy anyway, five days before it came out.

You know what this tells me? It tells me that the Brewers already knew what kind of player Gagne was. They already knew he was juicing and they didn't care.

In Wisconsin, we have certain things we like. We like our sports stars a certain way. Our favorite stars are guys like Brett Favre, Robin Yount, Michael Redd, guys who punch the clock, work hard, and get the job done. We want our guys to leave it all on the field, and we don’t like players who take plays off. So, Gagne isn’t an effort guy, just a pill guy. That’s fantastic. That’s not the kind of player we like here.

I still wish they would have gone after a different route for their closer. Would it had been so hard to get Joe Nathan from the Twins? He is absolutely money, having a better save ratio than Cordero did last year. If he would have been playing in New York or Boston, he would be bandied about as a “best ever” type of guy.

Instead, we got Eric Gagne, a guy who closed successfully for the beginning of last year and hadn’t done anything for the two years previous, who we’re paying $10 million to, and who doesn’t have the tenacity to stay healthy.

I really hope I’m wrong about this, but this could be an absolute disaster.

One really good thing about the report though: How ridiculous does the Yankees team of 2000 look now? I’m a Yankee hater, though, so that might just be me.

What do you think? Do you like the Gagne deal more or less now? Do you think we should have given him the contract we did? Also, should I back off the Yankee hate, or is that justified? (Hint: No, I should not, and yes, it is justified.)