This will be a year long competition between myself and my girlfriend, Sarah, whose blog can be found here: http://realwomenwatchfootball.blogspot.com/. Is this an idea borrowed from Bill Simmons and his wife's little competition? Yes. Is it different? Yes, it is. How so, you may ask? My girlfriend loves football and watches it religiously, while Bill Simmons' wife doesn't know the difference between a safety that awards two points and the two safeties that line up in the defensive backfield on every play. Starting next week, I shall give you all a running count of a who is in the lead in our competition. Without further ado, here we go (spreads are taken from http://www.footballlocks.com/nfl_point_spreads.shtml); my pick is bolded:
Tennessee (+6) at Pittsburgh
This should be a typical Steelers game. Ugly, low-scoring, and defensive minded. It also should have been the AFC Championship game last season, if not for a Chris Johnson injury and Alge Crumpler fumbles against Baltimore. I could see either team pulling this one out, but think Pittsburgh has just enough, winning 17-14, but still allowing Tennessee to cover.
Miami at Atlanta (-4)
These are two playoff teams from last year who I don't see returning to promised land this year. I think Miami didn't get much better, and cannot stay as healthy as they did last year while Atlanta just has too much firepower for them at home.
Kansas City at Baltimore (-13)
I just don't think Kansas City is quite there yet, plus I don't think Cassell with be playing. The combination of a relatively inexperienced quarterback (probably Brodie Croyle) against a vicious Baltimore D, at home, means this one could get ugly.
Philadelphia (-1) at Carolina
While I hate Michael Vick, I also think that Philadelphia is that good, while the NFC South as a whole is mediocre. Just about any Philly win covers this one, so I think they're a safe pick.
Denver at Cincinnati (-4.5)
Is it unreasonable to think that I may never pick Denver to cover this entire season? The team has been in disarray since Josh McDaniels took over, and their shifting from a 4-3 to a 3-4 and not having the personnel to pull it off means things could get uglier this season than they currently are.
Minnesota (-4) at Cleveland
Since so many NFL players use Twitter nowadays, I'd think that if Eric Mangini told his players who would be the starting QB, we'd have found out. That leads me to believe that the team doesn't know, which means that they probably won't fare very well in Week 1, even if the Williamses aren't allowed to play.
New York Jets (+4.5) at Houston
OK, this is a bit of a homer pick on my part. I know Houston plays well at home and the Jets are starting a rookie QB, but Rex Ryan has revamped this defensive unit. Additionally, the Jets are going to run, run, and run some more, and Houston's defensive tackles aren't exactly world beaters.
Jacksonville at Indianapolis (-7.5)
I just can't pick against Peyton Manning at home, especially when Maurice Jones-Drew is nursing a tender ankle right now and Jacksonville's offense revolves around him.
Detroit at New Orleans (-13)
That's a ton of points to give, but Detroit was terrible on defense last year, and didn't do much to address it in the draft, as it used both of its first rounders on offensive players. While New Orleans doesn't have a great defense either, Matthew Stafford, the Lions' newly appointed starter, hasn't blown me away in the pre-season. Couple that with the fact that the Superdome gets loud, and we could have another blowout.
Dallas (-6) at Tampa Bay
Tampa Bay is rebuilding, Dallas just got rid of its biggest headache, Terrell Owens. I like the offense to explode in Big D this year, starting with a romping of a 4-12 bound Buccaneers team.
San Francisco (+6.5) at Arizona
This is a matchup that San Francisco should have won on Monday Night Football last year. Mike Singletary, despite being a bit quirky, can motivate his group of players. I don't think Arizona can do what it did last season, and that harsh reality kicks in during Week 1.
Washington at New York Giants (-6.5)
Until the Redskins figure out how to utilize Jason Campbell's strong arm (Santana Moss has become somewhat useless in this offense, but should mesh well with Campbell), I don't trust them to put up big points. Couple that with a stout Giants defense, and the Giants win by 10.
St. Louis (+8.5) at Seattle
Seattle was maybe the unluckiest team in the NFL last year in terms of injuries. While they will probably win this division this year, I like a healthy Steven Jackson (is that an oxymoron?) and an upgraded O-line to help St. Louis keep this one under the spread.
Chicago (+3.5) at Green Bay
I just like the Bears this year. I don't know why. I like them to surprise Green Bay on Sunday night in Lambeau.
Buffalo at New England (-10.5)
Let's see...one of these starting offenses managed only three points during the preseason. The other is just one year removed from being the highest scoring offense in NFL history. Oh yeah, the team that can put up the points is at home. This one's easy.
San Diego (-9.5) at Oakland
San Diego is a popular pick to win the Super Bowl this year. It doesn't matter that Oakland is at home. Al Davis is still the owner, and they're still not very good.
So there you have it...Week 1's matchups all picked. I ended up going with 5 underdogs to cover, and a majority of road teams (nine, versus seven home teams) to cover. I also went with two road underdogs to cover, so we shall see how it all turns out.
Note: This spreads were taken earlier in the week and some have changed since then, so the link provided will have some different spreads than what I used here.
Showing posts with label Bill Simmons. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Bill Simmons. Show all posts
Monday, September 7, 2009
Wednesday, September 2, 2009
The Beginning...
This is a blog much like many before it. It will center around sports, but it will be far superior to everyone else's for several reasons. First, it won't be riddled with grammatical errors and typos, thus making it easier on you, the reader, to enjoy the content without wanting to rip out your hair. Second, I'm covering a VAST range of sports. As much as I love Bill Simmons, I'm going to outdo him. Last, and most important, it'll be better because I will be the one writing it. Nobody else can say that about his or her blog.
To show you that I am not kidding about the range of sports I will be writing about, this first entry will discuss the mainstream sport of women's tennis. This is an easy topic to discuss since I am sitting and watching Venus Williams play a woman named "Mattek-Sands" at the US Open as I write. There are three things I would like to talk about regarding women's tennis: Grunting, Serena Williams, and Dinara Safina. That's a nice order to talk about them too, since the first involves the second (and third), and the hottest debate topic in the WTA is who should be the #1 ranked player, Williams or Safina?
Thus, let's continue to grunting. Not only do I consider it unnecessary, but it's incredibly annoying. Monica Seles began this practice many years ago, and it has unfortunately caught on. I play tennis quite often, and find that grunting has no impact whatsoever on my game when I strike the ball. Is it OK every now and then when you go for a little extra on a serve or big forehand? Absolutely. I also have no problem with players yelling after the point, whether it be a happy scream or an angry one. But during the point? With each stroke? I'm putting the television on mute and rooting against you. This has gotten to the point where yesterday's greats (Chris Evert) have made public statements about how out of hand it has become. I only hope that the new generation of players forgoes this habit and we can usher in an era of ball meeting strings being unaccompanied by an orgasmic shriek.
My next issue is with Serena Williams. She is easily one of, if not my least, favorite athlete in any sport alive today. Her arrogance continues to amaze me with each press conference. Please don't accuse me of anything; she is, without a doubt, the best female tennis player alive today (I will discuss this more in the next topic), but she is also the most annoying. I have yet to hear her praise an opponent when she loses. Look at Andy Roddick at Wimbledon this year and Roger Federer at the Australian Open. Both, despite being disheartened at having come so close to winning a major (Roddick especially), were gracious in defeat and didn't hesitate to discuss the accolades of their respective opponents. Serena's continuous statement is, "I'm my own biggest opponent." Last I checked, there's another player on the other side of the net hitting balls back at you. She has the ability to make you play poorly Serena. Much like Justine Henin confounded you many times and Maria Sharapova blasted you off of Centre Court at Wimbledon in 2004, your opponents deserve some credit when they beat you. Please step off of your high horse and recognize that.
The last thing I want to talk about is the ongoing debate about who should be #1. The ranking system currently in place makes sense, since it rewards players for playing more events (and excelling in them). This is done so the WTA can protect itself by having the top players play in as many events as possible. Even though the four majors count more points-wise, a consistent player can shoot up in the rankings despite lackluster performances in the majors. In the case of Williams v. Safina, there is no doubt that Williams has had far better performances in the majors (she currently holds the US Open, Australian Open, and Wimbledon titles), but she not only doesn't play much outside of the majors, but she also does very poorly there. I understand that she has other interests outside of tennis and pursues them, but she cannot be upset that she currently sits at #2 in the world when she understands the ranking system and still chooses to play the limited schedule she does. Is Safina the best player in the world? No, Williams is. Does Safina deserve to be ranked #1 based on the system they have in place? Without a doubt.
To show you that I am not kidding about the range of sports I will be writing about, this first entry will discuss the mainstream sport of women's tennis. This is an easy topic to discuss since I am sitting and watching Venus Williams play a woman named "Mattek-Sands" at the US Open as I write. There are three things I would like to talk about regarding women's tennis: Grunting, Serena Williams, and Dinara Safina. That's a nice order to talk about them too, since the first involves the second (and third), and the hottest debate topic in the WTA is who should be the #1 ranked player, Williams or Safina?
Thus, let's continue to grunting. Not only do I consider it unnecessary, but it's incredibly annoying. Monica Seles began this practice many years ago, and it has unfortunately caught on. I play tennis quite often, and find that grunting has no impact whatsoever on my game when I strike the ball. Is it OK every now and then when you go for a little extra on a serve or big forehand? Absolutely. I also have no problem with players yelling after the point, whether it be a happy scream or an angry one. But during the point? With each stroke? I'm putting the television on mute and rooting against you. This has gotten to the point where yesterday's greats (Chris Evert) have made public statements about how out of hand it has become. I only hope that the new generation of players forgoes this habit and we can usher in an era of ball meeting strings being unaccompanied by an orgasmic shriek.
My next issue is with Serena Williams. She is easily one of, if not my least, favorite athlete in any sport alive today. Her arrogance continues to amaze me with each press conference. Please don't accuse me of anything; she is, without a doubt, the best female tennis player alive today (I will discuss this more in the next topic), but she is also the most annoying. I have yet to hear her praise an opponent when she loses. Look at Andy Roddick at Wimbledon this year and Roger Federer at the Australian Open. Both, despite being disheartened at having come so close to winning a major (Roddick especially), were gracious in defeat and didn't hesitate to discuss the accolades of their respective opponents. Serena's continuous statement is, "I'm my own biggest opponent." Last I checked, there's another player on the other side of the net hitting balls back at you. She has the ability to make you play poorly Serena. Much like Justine Henin confounded you many times and Maria Sharapova blasted you off of Centre Court at Wimbledon in 2004, your opponents deserve some credit when they beat you. Please step off of your high horse and recognize that.
The last thing I want to talk about is the ongoing debate about who should be #1. The ranking system currently in place makes sense, since it rewards players for playing more events (and excelling in them). This is done so the WTA can protect itself by having the top players play in as many events as possible. Even though the four majors count more points-wise, a consistent player can shoot up in the rankings despite lackluster performances in the majors. In the case of Williams v. Safina, there is no doubt that Williams has had far better performances in the majors (she currently holds the US Open, Australian Open, and Wimbledon titles), but she not only doesn't play much outside of the majors, but she also does very poorly there. I understand that she has other interests outside of tennis and pursues them, but she cannot be upset that she currently sits at #2 in the world when she understands the ranking system and still chooses to play the limited schedule she does. Is Safina the best player in the world? No, Williams is. Does Safina deserve to be ranked #1 based on the system they have in place? Without a doubt.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)