The people who love Jeremy Lin most aren't Knick fans, or Harvard alumni, or Asian-Americans, or people who hate Floyd Mayweather. It's people who love puns and plays on words. These fans of lingual (see what I did there) goofiness are gleefully swimming in the sea of possibilities that Jeremy Lin's name provides them.
There's Linfinite possibilities to Lincorporate Lin's name in a play on words. It's just so easy to Lintegrate his name. The term "Linsanity" is now Lingrained in our collective language. And this Lincredible story has Lingratiated itself into the hearts and minds of sports fans from coast to coast.
I really don't know what Linitiated my desire to write this post. But if you really like it, you can Link to it.
Anyway, I think pretty soon I'll get tired of the Lincessant plays on his name. It's becoming ReLintless. Just like every internet meme out there, you laugh your ass off and can't get enough for 48 hours then you cringe every time you see/hear it. So Linjoy it while it lasts.
I was a little puzzled by Claude Julien's decision to start Thomas in back-to-back games. But he was 6-2 in his previous 8 starts before last night. Meanwhile, Rask had lost 4 straight, including that 6-0 Buffalo debacle. Thomas also had a 1.26 GAA against the Canadiens and a .964 SV% this season. So that's probably why he started.
It was how he finished that was most impressive. He's undefeated in shootouts this year, and he was stellar in last night's.
The Canadiens are a team in disarray. 6 points behind Toronto for the last playoff spot, with 3 teams to leapfrog over. They don't have a team identity, they don't seem to have any sense of direction. Are they a finesse power play focused team, or are they defensive and opportunistic? It's a little of both, but not enough of either.
The B's took advantage of Montreal's attempt to copy the Rangers by giving up the points on defense. The Habs collapsed and allowed the Bruins' defensemen plenty of time and space to shoot. Eventually Ference took advantage and scored.
The Bruins got careless and lackadaisical at times. That's how Montreal scored their shorthanded goal.
The 3rd period was especially unfortunate for the B's. They tried to play a prevent defense and run out the clock, and there's just no such thing in hockey. Montreal took advantage. The most painful play was Chara's giveaway a few feet from Thomas.
Chara looked out of sorts all night after taking a puck to the chin. And how about those high and mighty Montreal fans applauding his injury? These are the same rabid jerks that complain about hockey not being played the right way. Stay classy, les scum.
The Bruins dominated overtime, though. Seguin froze Carey Price in the shootout, and Tim Thomas did the rest.
This team is having it's good stretches and bad stretches. They haven't strung together 60 minutes of good hockey for a long, long time. But the capability is there.
Hopefully Thomas can re-find his groove. And Marchand is a few posts and crossbars away from scoring a few goals lately.
I've been talking about Jeremy Lin since he was in college. I was privileged to see him dismantle Boston College twice. What amazed me was hos quick he was with his movements, and how tight his dribble was. He's a smart player, but the athleticism is there. He might not be able to sprint up and down the court with the NBA's fastest players, but in short bursts, he might be the quickest draw in the Association.
A few haters have been saying that Lin is only front-page news because he's Asian-American. But I think his play has spoken louder than the haters' words. You have an undrafted Harvard alum (Harvard, like all Ivy League schools, doesn't offer athletic scholarships) leading the New York Knicks to victory when their so-called stars are out. This story is a story no matter what the ancestry of the main character is. I think this story occurring in New York is a bigger reason for this story's prominence then Lin's race.
Yes, he is Asian-American. But more importantly, he's a really good basketball player.
I've always liked Lin. He plays the game smart, he plays the game fast. He decides what to do, then does it before the defense realizes he'll do it. He is lightning fast. He's just fun to watch. It's a rare combination of fundamental soundness and awareness with sheer athleticism.
Do the Rangers look familiar to you? They remind me of the Bruins. Excellent goaltending, a stalwart and systematic defense, and offense from multiple lines. This is the blueprint that Julien and the Bruins took to the Cup last year, and the Rangers are remarkable similar.
When two similar teams face each other, the difference between winning and losing comes down to a few plays. For instance, on the Rangers' second goal, Brad Marchand just passed the puck out of his zone into space. He didn't pass to a teammate. And the quick-striking Rangers reclaimed the puck, and soon put it past Thomas.
To be blunt, if the Bruins meet the Rangers in a playoff series, I'd have to favor the Rangers. It'd be close. It'd be a 7 game series. With a few going to overtime. But right now the Rangers are executing the Bruins' gameplan better than the Bruins are.
The Bruins set out on a 6 game road-trip. And this is a good time for them to return to their core strengths and string together a few wins. They haven't won consecutive games in over a month.
This is the start of "Trophy Season." The Hockey East tournament starts in just under a month. The NCAA tourney follows shortly thereafter. This is the beginning of the important part of the season. It's when games are must-win. And for the 3rd year in a row and the 17th time ever, BC won the Beanpot. With 6.4 seconds left in the first OT period.
It was a classic game. Six of the last 9 Beanpot finals have gone into OT. And these two teams are likely to meet again in the Hockey East tourney, and could very well go deep in the NCAA tournament. Fun fact: the 9 times a team from Boston has won the NCAA Championship, they won the Beanpot just a few weeks earlier.
BC has finally figured out their goaltending situation. Parker Milner has won 6 straight starts, and allowed only 10 goals in that stretch. BC isn't as explosive as they've been in years past, buy last night we saw their sound defensive play. They make good decisions with the puck and have an excellent Penalty Killing unit. And when their Power Play shows up, they're very tough to beat.
BU, for their part, also looked good. Millan is an excellent, experienced goalie. BU can play physical. They just need to stay out of the penalty box.
I remember when there seemed to be a campaign to run Rajon Rondo out of town. It wasn't that long ago. All his faults were listed, his successes were dismissed, and he was stamped and packaged for export to some other town.
I don't know if Rondo is the key to the Celtics' future, but he is a key to their present. His triple-double yesterday propelled the Celtics past the Bulls 95-91. And his youth will become more and more important as the back-to-back games begin to build up and the season takes its toll on his more seasoned teammates.
The Celtics and Rondo are a perfect fit right now. Other teams didn't seem to find him very valuable. And maybe they're right. He wouldn't be valuable for them. But with the C's, he is valuable. He's a solid point-guard with the ability to explode as he did Sunday afternoon.
The Bruins needed to win this game. They've been struggling for a month now, entering the game on a 5-6-1 slump. They were utterly dominated by the Sabres in their previous game. They needed to skate hard, play physical, and take care of the puck. They needed to win. And they did all that.
The goals they allowed were the result of unfortunate mistakes, not bad habits. Tim Thomas, for instance, could have stopped Nashville's 3rd goal. But he got up out of the butterfly too early and opened up a huge gap for Mike Fisher to score. Other than that, though, Thomas was fine.
Marchand and Bergeron were playing hard, especially in the 1st. And it eventually resulted in a shorthanded goal. Lucic was skating around like a madman all game and it paid off with the game-tying goal scored 67 seconds away from another loss.
Seguin and Bergeron scored nifty goals in the shootout and it was over.
The Bruins outworked and outplayed Nashville. If not for the occasional miscue, they would have won the game in regulation by 2 goals.
We know how good this team can play. They don't need to be lights out for the remaining 29 regular season games. They just have to be good and continue to practice good habits. Then turn it on in the playoffs.
Bruins host the Rangers Tuesday night in a meeting between the two best teams in the East.
It's been a rough year for the few BC basketball fans that bother to show up to the Conte Forum each game. The Eagles were 7-16 coming into last night's game, at the bottom of the ACC standings. But those who did show up were treated with an upset win over Florida State, who were sharing the top of the standings with North Carolina.
To say this has been a rebuilding year might be overly polite to the Eagles. BC is loaded with freshmen, and this season is essentially a lengthy pre-season for the 2012-13 campaign. You can tell that coach Steve Donahue is trying to teach his team how to play the game properly, so once their skills are honed, they can contend to return to the NCAA tournament.
Which means this season's games look more like practices and scrimmages. Except when BC hits 10 of its 22 three-pointers and Florida State turns the ball over 14 times.
I think the Eagles will be respectable in a few years. This wasn't a glimpse of things to come as much as it was a statistical aberration. But it was quite fun to be there and watch it. And the 4,000 or so who showed up got more than their money's worth, and got their loyalty rewarded.
I'm not the biggest basketball fan in the world. But right now I'll grab hold of any positive Boston sports story that I can and hang on for dear life.
Paul Pierce scored 15 points last night in the Celtics' 94-84 win over the lowly Charlotte Bobcats. By doing so, he surpasses Larry Bird as the Celtics' 2nd highest scorer ever. Pierce has now scored 21,797 points in Boston. John Havlicek is the team's highest scorer with 26,395.
Not only was this game a reminder of Paul Pierce's importance to one of the most storied franchises in American sports, but it's made extra special by the current nature of the NBA. Players change teams with the drop of a hat. Free agency, the salary cap, and players wanting to play with their buddies means that stars change jerseys more than Oregon's football team.
Pierce is sort of a throwback. Drafted by the Celtics, he's been a constant presence since 1998. He was a Celtic when the Celtics were a joke. He was the key part of their Eastern Conference playoff run in 2002. He was still there when C's fans were praying for a lottery pick in 2007. He was at the podium a few months later when Ray Allen and Kevin Garnett were acquired. And of course he won a ring in 2008. As the Celtics' fortunes have risen and fallen, Pierce has been a constant presence.
That's exceptional in modern sports.
Pierce is also 15 games short of his 1,000th in a Celtics uniform.
I didn't see the Bruins game on Sunday. On Saturday, they played with some bad habits. They turned the puck over, the defense didn't play actively in the 3rd, and all the forwards seem to be slumping. The goalies are cold too.
So while I didn't see the 4-1 win against the Capitals, I think the Bruins have improved some of their bad habits. Certainly Tim Thomas' 35 saves on 36 shots is a good sign. And the forwards have once again decided to get involved on offense. Lucic, Marchand, Seguin, and Peverley scored the goals on Sunday.
The B's are in a mid-season funk. Winning 4-1 is a good way to start getting out of it.
Two plays can sum up this game. One was Mario Manningham's toe-dragging sideline catch in the 4th. The other was Wes Welker's drop, also in the 4th. Manningham was covered well yet brought his toes down, maintained control of the ball, and in one play brought his team from its own 12 yard line to just 15 yards shy of field goal range. Manningham reached his maximum potential in that moment. He made the play.
Welker's drop came with the Pats up 2, with 4:00 on the clock. Had he held on, it would have been 1st & 10 on the Giants' 22 yard line. The Patriots could have drained at least another minute off the clock and would have almost surely scored at least a field goal. And if they'd scored a touchdown, the game would be over. Welker had all 10 fingers on that ball. And it popped out. He didn't make the play.
The Giants made more plays than the Patriots. It's not rocket science, it's fairly simple.
There were plenty of times in this game that the Patriots were just a play or two away from claiming victory. They didn't make the plays. The Giants did.
It's not effort, it's execution. No sane person can question Wes Welker's effort. But when his number came up, he just didn't make the play. Mario Manningham did.
After the Pats scored to start the second half, victory was within reach. They never grabbed it.
17-9 Pats and the defense gives up a field goal. If the Pats respond with a touchdown, they're up 21-12 and in the driver's seat. Instead they went three and out.
The defense gives up another field goal. 17-15 game, Pats get the ball back, move it a bit, then on a 1st down Brady evades pressure, then throws deep to Gronkowski. He underthrows a bit, Gronk can't outmuscle the linebacker covering him and it's an interception. What was Brady thinking? Throwing a jump ball on 1st down? That was a cocky decision.
The Giants eat about 5 minutes of clock and pin the Patriots back on their own 8. That drive ended the play after Welker's drop. Punt, Manningham, a few more plays, touchdown, history.
Victory was out there. The Patriots didn't reach out and take it. The Giants did.
Looking ahead, there's little reason to despair. There is a great deal of talent on this team. There's room to improve, but there's a strong foundation to build on.
I think you'll see significant defensive retooling. As much as I blame the offense's lack of execution for this loss, the Giants did mount an 88 yard game-winning TD drive. It'd be nice to have a better chance to prevent that. A team can't be so dependent on half of its roster to win all its games and right now the Patriots are dependent on the offense to make every single play in order to win.
That needs to change. Safeties that know what they're doing. Cornerbacks that can cover one-on-one without being embarrassed. A consistent pass-rush. Maybe an OLB that can rush the passer.
Here's a weird, almost frightening thought: the Bruins are the clutchest team in Boston sports.
Vegas favors the Patriots by 2.5 to 3. Which seems a little strange. The Pats were 13-3, and were the AFC's #1 seed. The Giants went 9-7, and were the NFC's 4th seed, even though they had the 6th best record. Of course, the Giants beat the Patriots 24-20 at Gillette Stadium in early November.
I don't want to play the underdog card too much here. As I said, Vegas is favoring the Patriots. Which means people are putting their money behind the Patriots. But the fact that questions like "Would you rather have Eli or Brady?" are being asked at all seems a little weird to me.
The Giants appear to match up well against the Patriots. They have a strong 4 man pass rush that can pressure Brady but also leave 7 men in coverage. On the other side of the ball, the Patriots have the 31st passing defense, allowing 293.9 yards per game in the air. The Giants have a good QB, with a bevy of weapons for him to throw to. Victor Cruz, Hakeem Nicks, Mario Manningham, and tight-end Jake Ballard who caught a TD against the Pats in November.
As bad as the Patriots' pass-defense has been, people don't seem to be noticing how bad the Giants are at defending against the pass. The Giants are 29th in yards allowed. Opposing QBs have an 86.1 rating against the Giants. What is the QB rating for Patriots' opponents? 86.1. Isn't that funny.
And since when has Eli Manning become an elite QB? I heard one pundit say that Eli's success is due to his not making mistakes anymore. Really? Doesn't make mistakes anymore? He threw 16 picks this year, 7th most in the NFL. He threw 25 picks last year.
He's been excellent in the postseason so far, with 8 TDs, only 1 INT, and a 103.1 rating. But his whole career has been defined by inconsistency. And he was hardly dazzling back in November against the Pats.
The Patriots lost that game because Brady wasn't as good as he should have been. They lost because they made mistakes like missing a 27 yard field goal. They lost because they turned the ball over 4 times. Brady threw 2 interceptions and fumbled. Edelman muffed a punt. The Giants scored 10 points off turnovers.
Eli Manning is the best QB that the Patriots will face in these playoffs. But he doesn't scare me. The November game was actually one of the better games played by the Pats' defense. People are talking about Ahmad Bradshaw not playing in that game and how much it helps the Giants that he's back. But the Giants were 32nd in the NFL in rushing for a reason. Bradshaw rushed for 3.9 per carry this year, and never once eclipsed 60 yards in a game.
And to be blunt, rushing the ball against the Patriots is doing their defense a huge favor.
This game comes down to one person. And his name is Tom Brady. How he throws, and how he's protected, and how he executes will determine if the Patriots win or lose. I know I've been saying it all year, but it is all about Brady, Brady, Brady.
The Patriots beat the Ravens without a fully effective Tom Brady. They won't be able to pull the same rabbit out of the hat twice. Brady needs to have a good game for the Patriots to win. And if he has a great game, the Patriots will win. No matter what Eli does against the Pats' defense.
One thing that unnerves me is that for the past few years Brady's tried to force the play in big games. He's thrown into double coverage with no margin for error. For example: that deep ball in the Ravens game intended for Slater. No need to try to be that perfect in one throw. He needs to realize that it's better to throw a couple good passes instead of forcing yourself to throw one absolutely perfect one. Because if a good pass is off, it's incomplete. If the attempted perfect pass is off, it's an interception.
I think Brady and the offense will execute on Sunday. At the very least, they won't turn the ball over as easily as they did in November.
Gronkowski's health will play a huge part in the Patriots' offense. He caught 8 passes in that November game. He's Brady's #1 target in the Red Zone, and he's a good receiving option to have if Brady is getting hurried. When Brady needs to press the panic button, he can throw to Gronkowski's general direction and Gronk will haul it in. If he's healthy.
Let's not forget about Wes Welker, though. Welker would have been Super Bowl MVP in 2008 had the Patriots been able to hang on. He caught 11 passes in that game. He caught 9 passes for 136 yards in November. He also had a 13 yard run. He will have a big game on Sunday.
The Giants are vulnerable against the run. They allowed 121.3 yards per game on the ground, 19th in the NFL. In November, BenJarvus Green-Ellis ran well at the start of the game, 52 yards on 12 carries. Then for some reason Ridley and Woodhead got more of the carries. They didn't do as well (combined 10 carries for 36 yards). This might have been due to Ellis' health, or might have simply been a play-calling mistake.
Look for Ellis to get the ball with regularity on Sunday. Not only do the Giants give up chunks of rushing yards, but a strong run can also slow down and wear out a pass-rush. Then of course comes play-action. Ellis can also become an outlet receiver, chipping a lineman then sitting in the middle of the field or the flat for a safe pass. J.R. Redmond style.
Brady will not look at Ochocinco unless he's clearly on the good side of a mismatch.
In the November game, Brady targeted Ochocinco 5 times. This was before we all accepted the fact that Ochocinco is not a significant part of the offense. It was Game #8. In the first 8 games of the season, Brady targeted Ochocinco 21 times. In the 10 games since then, Brady's targeted him 11 times. So from 2.6 targets per game down to 1.1.
Why is that a good thing? Because it demonstrates that the Patriots have adjusted their offense. Ochocinco was thrown to at key moments in that November game. And it didn't go well. Now, he won't be. Brady will be looking for someone else.
One thing this offense has done remarkably well this season is adjust, adapt, and evolve. Adjust to coverages, adjust to pass pass rushes, adjust to Ochocinco's inability to adjust, and so on. The Patriots didn't adjust back in 2007, they simply kept hammering away at the same thing the same way.
They've adjusted since November. The Pats have won 10 straight since that game. The Giants are 6-5 since that game. Yet somehow they've been billed as the red hot team. And give credit to them for their playoff wins. But they are prone to inconsistency.
I think the Patriots' offensive line will man-up and slow down the Giants enough for Brady to find open receivers. We can talk about schemes and strategies all we want, but football usually comes down to one group of guys outplaying another group of guys. It'll be up to the Pats' offensive linemen to protect Brady and make holes for Ellis.
I think BJGE will also slow down the pass rush and set-up a few 2nd & 2 situations. Eli will put up a few TDs, but he'll throw a pick or two. The Giants will score, and will have one or two painfully unstoppable drives. But they won't keep up with the Pats.
It's official. The Bruins are in their mid-season doldrums.
For the first time in the history of the Whalers/Hurricanes, they have swept their season series with the Boston Bruins. And that's unfortunate for the Bruins because the Canes are 14-25-9 against the rest of the NHL and 4-0 against the Bruins.
The B's have allowed 3+ goals in five straight games. They're not doing the little things. And their success is based on their ability to excel at the little things.
They're not playing physical. And I don't mean big hits and fights. I mean going into the corner for a puck and physically earning it from your opponent.
And when they do win battles, there's no puck support. Carolina's 2nd goal was scored after Marchand won a battle in the offensive zone. But it was a Hurricane that got to the loose puck and triggered a breakaway. Ference fumbling around for the puck didn't help much either.
The Bruins are in a 4-4-1 stretch and it's because of basic fundamentals. Turning the puck over. Winning battles. Puck support. Clearing the puck out of the zone. A team with less talent might be 2-7 in this stretch. But by the same token, the Bruins aren't talented enough to just show up and win. They need to execute the fundamentals, do the little things, and physically outmatch their opponents.
They haven't been doing that since that Vancouver game.
There was a story the other day about a Super Bowl being played in London. I think a bit more likely possibility is a Super Bowl being played in New England. And why not?
The reason the Super Bowl has always been played in the South or in domes is the weather. But who cares? Football is the sport that's supposed to be played rain or shine, warm or cold. Wouldn't a well fought, snowy Super Bowl go down as one of the most memorable anyway?
The NFL doesn't seem to care much about climatic complications anymore. They've staged games in cold weather cities like Detroit and now Indianapolis. And in 2 years they'll be playing outdoors in New Jersey. Foxborough is only a few degrees colder.
The NFL obviously divides the money that the Super Bowl takes in among the 32 teams. But what about all the money that gets poured into the economies of cities that host the big game. Why should Tampa Bay, Dallas, Glendale, and Miami rotate the Super Bowl between them and rake in all the cash?
So much money would be made. Hotels would be full. Restaurants and bars would be full from Norwood to Norton. People would go into Boston and take tours of Fenway Park and Faneuil Hall. They'd go to a BC basketball game or a BU hockey game. They'd eat our lobsters and drink our Sam Adams.
It happens every year. Thousands of fans and media descend on a city and spend money. So why not have it here in New England?
As a sports fan, it'd be thrilling to host such an event. And as a Massachusican, it'd be great for the economy.
How Super Bowl XLVI plays out will have a tremendous impact on the legacies of four men: Eli Manning, Tom Coughlin, Tom Brady, and Bill Belichick.
If the Giants win, and Manning does well, perhaps even wins another Super Bowl MVP, he'll be regarded as the superior Manning. At least he should be.
While Peyton has always been highly praised, and has been putting up gaudy regular season stats for years, the game of football is about playing your best in the big game. It's about performing in the clutch, capitalizing on the big moment, making that one play. More so than any other sport because other sports have best of 7 series. In the NFL, it's win or lose, live or die, all in one game on one night.
If Eli wins, he's the better big game QB. He'd have 2 rings. One more than Peyton. He'd have an 8-3 playoff record. Peyton is 9-10.
Eli would also have a much better record against the Patriots, a team that most NFL teams have measured themselves against for the last decade. Eli would have 2 playoff wins against New England. Peyton is 1-2. Eli would have a career record of 3-1 against the Patriots. Peyton, when facing the Patriots with both Belichick and Brady, is 4-8 against New England.
So if Eli does well and helps propel the Giants to a Super Bowl win, his legacy will surpass his older brother's.
What about Tom Coughlin's legacy compared to his former boss, Bill Parcells?
If the Giants win, then Coughlin matches the Tuna in the ring category with 2. Parcells won 303 games as a head coach, Coughlin has 256 wins. Parcells' playoff record isn't staggeringly amazing. He's led teams to 3 Super Bowls, won 2 of them, and is 11-8 in the postseason. Coughlin has been two 2 Super Bowls, won 1 of them, and is 8-7 in the playoffs.
I don't see much separation there. If I told you those numbers were some mystery coach, you might say that Coughlin is just a step behind Coach X. But Parcells' name carries the weight of his reputation as a winner. So it seems like Coughlin is further behind than he really is.
Parcells gets praised for producing lots of coaching talent. Like Coughlin, and Belichick. But that also means he's had high quality assistants helping him win. Was Parcells a great teacher? Or did he have genius students? Probably both.
I'm not saying that if the Giants win on Sunday, then Coughlin is better than Parcells. But he's at least in the conversation. Looking at just their bodies of work, there wouldn't be much separating the two.
And as for former Giants assistant Bill Belichick, a win on Sunday would put even more distance between he and Parcells. Belichick would be 96 games over .500 as Patriots head coach. Think about that. Parcells had a .570 winning percentage, and .611 with the Giants. Belichick has a .643 winning percentage, .724 with the Patriots.
Belichick has 272 career wins (31 behind Parcells, 22 behind if you include playoff wins), a 21-6 playoff record, 5 Super Bowl appearances, 3 titles. A win on Sunday would be icing on the already impressive cake of Belichick's legacy.
The same goes for Brady. If the Pats lose then both Brady and Belichick will still be considered among the best at their particular jobs. If they win, they'll be among the best ever in all of sports at anything, not just their specific positions in their specific sports. They're both already great. Winning Sunday could add an -est to the end of that word.
What would make ring #4 so impressive is that this team is completely and utterly different from the previous 3 Super Bowl champions. The Patriots won those with patient passing and a playmaking defense. Now they're trying to win with a playmaking offense and a defense that tests the fans' patience.
For a coach and quarterback to grow and adjust so dramatically over a 10 year span is impressive. Brady has become the poster boy for the passing frenzy that is the NFL. I think Belichick saw Brady's potential being underutilized in 2006, as he was forced to work with Reche Caldwell and Doug Gabriel.
That's when Belichick went out and acquired Randy Moss, Wes Welker, and Donte Stallworth.
And for 18 games, the formula worked. It just hasn't won Game #19. Yet. But if the Patriots win on Sunday, Belichick and Brady will have 4 rings, coaching and playing for 2 very different kinds of teams. Brady would have won as a "game manager" and as a "flashy" QB. Belichick would have won as an old-school defensive mastermind, and as an offensive "guru."
It's like a great actor who can do comedy and drama, who can play the hero in one movie, then the villain in another.
That kind of success puts you in the upper upper stratosphere of sports greatness.
Those are the legacies on the line Sunday. A good quarterback and a very good coach who can emerge from some shadows. And a great quarterback and great coach who can start casting even bigger shadows of their own.
Well, technically, I should say this isn't 2008 when Super Bowl XLII was played. Then again, it still isn't 2007 either. It's 2012.
Anyway, this isn't the same Patriots team that lost that Super Bowl to the Giants. Nor is this the same Giants team. Some key figures have returned. Belichick and Coughlin. Brady and Manning. Welker, Tuck, and a few others. But only 7 Patriots from that 18-1 team are still on the roster. Only 15 Giants are still on their roster.
The team's are fundamentally similar to their 2007 versions. The Patriots have a high scoring, high flying, pass heavy offense. They had 5 offensive starters named to the Pro Bowl. The Giants have a ferocious pass rush, and a QB who is now recognized as clutch, if not as flashy as guys like Brees, Rodgers, and Brady.
So will we get the same kind of game? Will Brady have 0.2 seconds to get rid of the ball. Will there be a new David Tyree? Will Devin McCourty see a ball fly just over his fingertips?
I think the game will be just as close as Super Bowl XLII. But the Patriots are different. For one thing, they have BenJarvus Green-Ellis and not Laurence Maroney. Maroney's hesitation and dance moves in the backfield frequently led to negative plays in Super Bowl XLII. BJGE will at least get to the line of scrimmage, maybe a few yards past it, and maybe he can help set-up play-action, maybe force the Giants' line to respect the run, and maybe give Brady some time.
The Patriots' offense is more dynamic than it was in 2007. It isn't just vertical passes to Moss with Welker as the outlet. Now the Patriots throw underneath to their WRs, and deep to their tight-ends. In 2008, Wes Welker caught 11 of Brady's 30 completions. Brady didn't complete a single pass longer than 20 yards, thanks to the Giants' pressure.
The passing game is more diverse now. Brady completed 0 passes to his tight-ends in 2008. That's just slightly different from what the Pats have done in 2012. It's also why Rob Gronkowski's health is such a big story this week. If Gronkowski can help Brady as an outlet, especially if the Giants send all 4 linemen at Brady, and leave Gronk covered by linebackers without chipping him at the line, the Patriots can move the ball at will.
Cartoon by Larry Johnson
But while the Pats offense is now more flexible, their defense has gotten significantly worse since 2007. They were an old crew back then. Now they're young, riddled with injuries, and loaded with subpar talent.
There are playmakers like Wilfork and Spikes. Then there is Julian Edelman playing as a slot corner, and Matthew Slater as a safety. And Devin McCourty getting neck cramps as he watches balls fly over his head to the receiver who has just smoked him. His nickname should be Parliament Light he's smoked so easily.
The Giants are no longer a surprise success story. Eli Manning is being touted as one of the NFL's clutch QBs. And it's hard to argue against that. a 7-3 playoff record is a 7-3 playoff record. And 5 of those wins came on the road. How is it that Eli and the Giants have found such playoff success, while rarely being considered elite during the regular season?
Some might say that they're clutch. I'm going to say that they're inconsistent.
The Giants are capable of brilliant stretches, like their last 5 games (all wins), or their 6-2 start of the 2011 season, or their 2007 playoff run, or their 12-4 record in 2008. But they're also capable of some painfully frustrating stretches. They lost 4 straight this year, and 5 out of 6. They lost their playoff game in 2008, after their 12-4 record. They missed the playoffs in 2009 and 2010.
Eli Manning is 7-3 in playoff games. He's had some good ones. Some bad ones. He'll be up against a porous Patriots defense that will let him accumulate yards by the dozen. But I'm not quite convinced that he's Mr. February.
There's a significant psychological difference between this Super Bowl and Super Bowl XLII: The Patriots won't have the pressure of playing for 19-0. And this season they've been playing for something a bit more meaningful, and that's the memory of Myra Kraft.
These are not the same teams that met in 2008. The Patriots' offense is more versatile. But the defense is also more bendable. So maybe the game will be just as close, only with a few more points on the board.
There was some speculation that Thomas wouldn't start last night. This speculation came from the same "experts" who concocted the Thomas trade rumors. They thought that the Bruins were so perturbed at Thomas' snub of Barack Obama that the B's would trade the reigning Vezina and Conny Smythe winner. It's amazing how much power a media fabricated story can think it has.
It would be ludicrous for the Bruins to trade Thomas, and silly of them to not put him in net last night, especially considering his 16-3 record against the Senators. Ottawa haven't beaten the Bruins since November 2010 and Thomas has been a key reason.
Thomas wasn't stellar, but his teammates were in the 3rd period. Once again, the B's stole victory from the jaws of a shootout or defeat, thanks to their unwavering effort in the 3rd period.
The Bruins won battles in the 3rd. They didn't turn the puck over. They once again conquered the final period, and that's been the key difference between them and all the other top Eastern Conference teams.
Bruins host the Hurricanes Thursday night. They're 0-3 against Carolina, so this could be a good test.
I've heard this game called "Revenge Bowl." And even before last weekend's Conference Championship games, I knew several Pats fans who were craving a Patriots/Giants matchup because they wanted "payback," or "revenge."
But win or lose, the Patriots can't get revenge. The team can't, the coaches can't, and the fans can't.
Even if the Patriots win, we'll never forget what could have been but wasn't in 2007. I'm sure the team and players have moved on from what happened, that's their job. They've been able to focus on playing the next game, not reliving Super Bowl XLII. But we as fans are still living February 3, 2008 over and over again.
There have been comparisons to the Red Sox in 2003 and 2004. Since the Sox won the World Series in 2004, and went through the same Yankees that defeated them in '03, we no longer feel excruciating pain when Grady Little is mentioned. We don't cringe when we think about Giambi's solo homeruns, Mussina's relief effort, or Posada's double. We don't really think of those plays at all. The memory has been mostly erased, and replaced with the euphoria of winning in 2004 and fond recollections of moments like Roberts' stolen base and Damon's grand-slam.
Would a Super Bowl win cause the same acceptance, the same selective amnesia? Would we forget Asante Samuel's near interception? Or David Tyree's miraculous catch? How about Ellis Hobbs getting burnt like toast by Plaxico Burress? If the Patriots win on Sunday, would we forget these plays?
No.
The difference between the 2003/2004 Red Sox, and the 2007/2011 Patriots is simple. The Red Sox hadn't gone 162-0 in the regular season. Their goal was a World Series title. Which they accomplished the next year, thus achieving redemption.
The Patriots were going after a perfect 19-0 season in '07, which would have been the biggest and most impressive achievement for a sports team in American history. This year, the stakes are not as high. A Super Bowl title is still an amazing accomplishment, and not to be diminished in any way. But Don Shula won't lose any sleep over it.
There is no opportunity for revenge here, not for the players (only 7 Patriots return from that '07 team anyway), or the coaches, or the fans. The Patriots cannot achieve what they came so painfully close to achieving in the 2007 season.
By the same token, what the Giants did cannot be taken away from them, for their players, their coaches, their fans. They won Super Bowl XLII, and nothing that happens in Indianapolis can change that. It's in the past and there is no chance of redemption, revenge, or forgetting it happened altogether.
The haunting memories of Super Bowl XLII will remain in Patriot fans' memories forever. No matter the outcome of this Super Bowl, they cannot be erased. But, they can be joined by new memories, positive memories. There'll be no revenge. If the Patriots win, though, the memories of pain from 2007 will be joined with fresh, happy memories. And these new memories will temper the old ones. Like dipping spicy wings in bleu cheese.
So if you're a Patriots fan, don't watch the game on Sunday thinking about "revenge" for 2007. Because even if the Pats win, you'll be disappointed. Just hope they win so you can think about a great 2011 season.
When Zdeno Chara retires as a player, maybe he should consider being a GM. His top 6 forwards in this game were Corey Perry, Jarome Iginla, Evgeni Malkin, Marian Gaborik, Marian Hossa, and Pavel Datsyuk. That's pretty impressive, even for an All-Star team.
There was also a line that featured Tyler Seguin alongside Phil Kessel. They both had an assist on Team Chara's 12th goal, scored by Maple Leaf Joffrey Lupul.
The star of the show was Ottawa's Daniel Alfredsson, who scored twice in a losing effort.
The show was slightly stolen by the Trencin Express. That's what I'm calling the combination of Hossa, Gaborik, and Chara. All three of whom are from Trencin, Slovakia. Gaborik won the MVP with 3 goals and an assist. And Chara was +7. Chara also won the hardest shot contest, once again breaking his own record with a 108.8 mph blast.
The All-Star Game is usually a torturous snuff film for goalies, but Tim Thomas held his own. He's now 4-0 in All-Star Games, getting the 'W' in all 4 he's played in. He allowed 3 goals on 21 shots, which doesn't sound great, but his 18 saves were the most among all six goalies. His .857 save percentage was also the highest. Only he and Carey Price broke the .800 barrier. And some of his saves were simply brilliant. You could tell he wanted to show off his talent as much as the forwards.
As unpolished and even awkward as he seems when answering questions from the press, he is comfortable to the utmost when between the pipes.
There was some discussion this week about a scoreboard error at Gillette Stadium which made Baltimore kicker Billy Cundiff think it was the wrong down. This not only shook up his pre-kick routine on the sideline, it also seemed to force him to rush his lining up for a 32 yard field goal. A field goal he famously missed.
There was an attempt by some to turn this into SpyGate 2.0. It's being called ScoreboardGate. And one Ravens coach (Randy Brown, the Ravens' kicking consultant) when asked about the possibility of the Patriots intentionally sowing confusion said "I don't think you can rule anything out in New England, can you?"
The story never took off, despite considerable effort from the bombastic and outlandish wing of the sports media. Outside of Boston, some people tried to make a name for themselves by spewing innuendo, and implying some scoreboard trickery. And inside of Boston, fans and media stalwartly defended their team against an attack that never really came.
WEEI.com's headline, for instance, read "Ravens blame scoreboard for missed kick." Which wasn't true at all. The Ravens didn't make any assertion. The aforementioned Brown was led to say what he said. Which was kind of stupid, but the kicking consultant is hardly the voice for the entire Ravens organization. And head coach John Harbaugh called the whole notion of foul play "nonsense." None of the Ravens made accusations. All accusations were made by sports media people, who then tried to generate a story about the accusations that they themselves made. Sort of like accusing someone of being an alien, then referring to them as an "alleged alien."
The media tried to make a story out of nothing, but their wheels never got any traction. Mainly because despite the confusion, Cundiff should have still made the kick. And also because any sensible person could realize that the scoreboard's error was due to miscommunication over a ruling on Anquan Boldin's fumble out of bounds, which brought the ball back to where he last controlled it, not where it left the field of play. Moreover, the circumstances were so weird that the notion of premeditation was absurd.
Imagine Belichick telling a scoreboard operator, that just in case the Ravens fumbled a ball out of bounds past a first down marker, to screw up on the down and distance, thus confusing the placekicker. That's a little far-fetched, even for the Arlen Specters of the world. And he's the guy who came up with the Magic Bullet Theory.
Terrell Suggs had the best dismissal of this non-story, when Skip Bayless tried to jumpstart the conspiracy theories.
I'm glad Suggs called out him out. But asking Skip Bayless not to be a douchebag is like asking water not to be wet.
Even after Bayless tries and fails to get Suggs to accuse the Patriots of cheating (using a gentle sounding euphemism like "home-cooking"), he then tries to get Suggs to badmouth his own coach. He tries to start one fire, then moves on to start another.
Bayless is a tool. And that's why he has a job. Which makes him an even bigger tool. And makes people who watch him, even if they hate him, tools. Because people do like to watch him be a douchebag, and that's why he gets paid. And that pisses me off.
I want a "Be an Analyst, Don't be a Douchebag" t-shirt. Of course Bayless is such a tool that he'd probably be the one selling them.
There's really only two interesting parts of the NHL's All-Star weekend: the draft, and seeing whether or not Chara can break his own fastest shot record. Last night was the draft, with Ottawa captain Daniel Alfredsson and former Senator Zdeno Chara picking teams.
Not surprisingly, all the Slovaks and Bruins wound up on Chara's team. All the Swedes and Senators found their way to Alfredsson's team. Carey Price will also be on Team Chara. So will Dennis Wideman. No Canucks wound up with Chara.
But Phil Kessel did. I'm so glad Kessel is not on the Bruins. He puts up impressive numbers (except against the B's), but he's such an awkward creep. Chara's assistant captain for the draft was Toronto's Joffrey Lupul, so the Maple Leaf connection saved PK81 from more shame.
So Tim Thomas, Tyler Seguin, and Zdeno Chara will be on the same team. I'm going to predict that Thomas will allow 4 or 5 goals (no defense in the All-Star Game), Chara will win Fastest Shot, and Seguin will get a hat-trick.
Rumors are flying around Boston that the Red Sox are pursuing Edwin Jackson and Roy Oswalt. They've even been offered contracts, according to these rumors. These rumors aren't flimsy whispers, either. These are the loud, shouting, firm rumors. The kind that originate from the Red Sox' Front Office through their network of leaks and anonymous sources.
Either pitcher would help solidify the Sox rotation. The Sox cannibalized their bullpen in order to fill the gaps in that rotation, and there's no guarantee that a guy like Bard will be able to cut it as a starter. The Sox could use something a bit more concrete.
Jackson won 12 games with a respectable 3.79 ERA last season, split between the White Sox and Cardinals. He's far from an Ace, but he's a guy who can throw a decent 200 innings at the bottom of your rotation.
Oswalt isn't as appealing, but he might be cheaper to get. I doubt he'll recapture much of his 2010 form, when he was 6th in NL Cy Young voting. But the 33 year old still has something to offer.
So either guy improves the rotation, provides some depth, some insurance, some solidity.
But the Sox need to sign one of them for different reasons, for off-field reasons. I got an e-mail from RedSox.com last night, telling me that a majority of tickets go on sale tomorrow.
The Sox need something to keep the fans happy, to give them hope in 2012.
This off-season started with rage and frustration and an overwhelming desire for change. And apart from getting a new manager, losing a GM, and losing a closer, the Sox haven't changed much. No big ticket free agents. No blockbuster trades. No stud prospects coming from AAA. What is there for Sox fans to be excited about? What is there to drive them to spend money on tickets?
The Sox also have to compete with the Patriots, who are going to their 5th Super Bowl in 11 years. The Bruins just won the Cup and will likely see their season extend deep into the warm months. People in Boston only have so much money to spend on sports. And those dollars are shifting away from the Red Sox.
The Sox haven't made the playoffs since 2009. Haven't won a playoff series (or even a playoff game) since '08. Their TV ratings are going down. They still have that sellout streak, officially, but we've all seen more than a handful of empty seats at a few games.
The Sox need to make some sort of noise. They need to make it at least appear as though they want to win a World Series. This weekend is perfect to do so. The Pats have a week off. The Bruins are in an All-Star break. Time to fill the sports sections of the Globe and Herald with rumors and contract offers.
That's why the Jackson and Oswalt rumors have been so widespread, so firm, and so specific. Even if Jackson and Oswalt don't sign, the Sox have made it very public that they're trying.
Sox fans need something to look forward to in 2012. They want hope, and the Red Sox need to start selling them that hope.
There are times when the Bruins seem to lose patience with the Julien system. That's when they try making passes through opponents, instead of making more conservative decisions. I think last night we saw some impatience by a few Bruins, who tried making something out of nothing, and wound up giving golden opportunities to the Caps, who took full advantage of them.
Washington's third goal came when Boychuk attempted a D-to-D pass, even though he had no space, neither did Chara, and Mathieu Perrault was hot on his heels. Perrault easily intercepted the pass and scored.
Washington's fourth goal, the game-winner, came after McQuaid telegraphed a D-to-D pass in the offensive zone. The ensuing Capitals' possession eventually resulted in a goal. Had McQuaid made a better decision, then the scoring opportunities would have never happened.
The Bruins' formula for success is a combination of intense effort and intelligent decisions. Last night, the effort was there, but the intelligence wasn't.
And no, I don't think Thomas not going to the White House had anything to do with this loss. Although, since he's going up to Canada's capital for the All-Star Game, I wonder if he'd refuse to meet Canada's Prime Minister, if invited.
Bruins don't play a meaningful game until next Tuesday, when they host the Senators.
With the Patriots winning and Paterno dying, and of course the even bigger story about Tim Thomas not going to the White House, we didn't notice a BS suspension. Andrew Ference got suspended 3 games for his hit on Ryan McDonagh. Here's Brendan Shanahan's explanation:
Well, in my opinion, McDonagh did contribute to this hit by getting in Andrew Ference's way. Shanahan describes this as a textbook example of boarding, but to me, the textbook boarding has been when someone lines a vulnerable opponent up, then strikes when the opponent CANNOT defend himself. Not when an opponent obstructs your path to the puck, then places his legs in such an awkward wide stance that he has decided not to defend himself.
Ference, a relatively clean player, now has a black mark on his record. He got suspended the same number of games as Ovechkin did for this hit:
So Ovechkin launches himself, hits an opponent in the head, and has a history of suspensions and fines. Ference boards McDonagh, doesn't hit him in the head, and has no history of dirty play. And they're suspended the same number of games?
Shanahan admits that Ference shows no malicious intent in the hit. It was perhaps reckless. In which case, a fine or one game suspension is sufficient, I think. Then if Ference develops a habit of reckless hits, the suspensions can increase.
Ference is a 12 year veteran with a clean record and he gets suspended 3 games because McDonagh braced himself awkwardly and tried to block Ference from the puck. Seems a bit harsh.
Most of the Bruins went to the White House yesterday, to be honored by President Barack Obama for winning the Stanley Cup. And by most, I mean all of them except Tim Thomas. Even Kaberle was there.
Peter Chiarelli says that Thomas informed him he wouldn't attend the event months ago, citing political differences with Obama. Thomas is a conservative, and seems like a Tea Party conservative.
I'm sorry folks, but that's his right to not go. I personally would have gone, even though I'm a conservative too. I don't like Obama, but I don't hate him. And going to the White House and meeting the President would be a cool thing to do.
Then again, if I hated Obama and the Federal government, why would I want to go through the trouble of going through White House security, just to stand behind him as he made a speech and had a photo op? That doesn't sound like a fun afternoon if you really hate the guy.
I'm getting pissed off at people criticizing him over this.
"He put himself above the team."
"He disrespected the office of the Presidency."
I don't think he put himself or his politics above the team. It's not like Thomas refused to play a game because Obama was in attendance. He didn't go to a photo op in the White House. How does that hurt the team? I don't think his teammates are going to be pissed at him. I can't imagine Shawn Thornton staring angrily at him across the locker room, saying "We needed you yesterday, Timmy. Why weren't you there for us?"
Did he disrespect the Presidency? I guess he did. He certainly didn't show an overwhelming respect for the office. Then again, it doesn't seem like he has much love for any Federal office. And can you blame him? Are we happy with our government's performance this past decade?
Here's the statement he made about not attending the event:
"I believe the Federal government has grown out of control, threatening the Rights, Liberties, and Property of the People. This is being done at the Executive, Legislative, and Judicial level. This is in direct opposition to the Constitution and the Founding Fathers vision for the Federal government.
"Because I believe this, today I exercised my right as a Free Citizen, and did not visit the White House. This was not about politics or party, as in my opinion both parties are responsible for the situation we are in as a country. This was about a choice I had to make as an INDIVIDUAL.
"This is the only public statement I will be making on this topic. TT"
You might disagree with his ideological beliefs. You might think that despite his feelings, he should have gone and been in the background of pictures of the President. But to lose respect for him because he exercised his right to free speech? That seems hyper-judgmental, and un-American.
Some people criticize athletes for not expressing their beliefs. Some criticize them for expressing them too much. Tim Tebow, for instance, was praised by millions for vocalizing his faith. He was also criticized by millions for doing so. But ultimately it's his right to say what he wants, how he wants to. It's a fundamentally important part of this country that we're free to express our beliefs.
Of course, that also means that people are free to express their dislike for what Thomas did. And I'm free to call them childish for doing so.
And if this becomes a distraction for the team, then they must not have been very focused to begin with. Knowing this team, they'll probably rally around Thomas and his right to express his political beliefs. The media has already tried turning this into a big deal, and that tends to galvanize teams, uniting them against a common outsider (the media), not dividing them.
I for one did not lose respect for Thomas yesterday. Because I don't care about his political beliefs, or how he expresses them. I don't know Tim Thomas personally, and don't care to. I like him because he's a good goalie. I respect him because as a good goalie. As for his politics, so long as he stops the puck, I don't give a fuck.
And to those who are criticizing his credentials as a teammate, all I can say is that videos speak louder than words. Here's him sticking up for Aaron Ward in 2009.
I'm pretty sure Thomas would have stuck up for Ward even if Ward had voted for Obama (of course Ward is Canadian so he probably didn't).
Tim Thomas didn't want to meet the President. Just because Obama is the President doesn't mean that people should accept every invitation he extends. Thomas doesn't like the Federal government in general, so why should he spend a day with the head of the government if he doesn't want to? This has become a much bigger deal than it really is. I think Obama has moved on and has other things to worry about. I think the Bruins are focused on their game in Washington tonight. The only people harping on this are the media looking to rake some muck, and judgmentalists who like saying what other people should and shouldn't do.
Joe Paterno lost his battle with lung cancer yesterday. I don't mind the outpouring of grief on the Penn State campus. I fully understand the praise he's getting for all the good he's done throughout his lifetime. After all, when someone passes, it's human nature to remember them fondly, and focus on their positive aspects.
But there's a line between grief and blind fanaticism. There's a line between emphasizing his positives, and denying that he had any negatives. And some have crossed that line. Todd Blackledge essentially spray-painted it blue and white. Here's what he had to say:
"I know the cancer took its toll. The treatment took its toll and had a part to play in it. His age and his frailty had a part to play in it. But I think as much as anything else, Joe Paterno died of a broken heart today. And I think there were a lot of people that had a part to play in that. Whether it be the Board of Trustees and the way they handled his situation. Even the media, and the way they covered everything over the last several months. I just think that was as much a part of him dying today as anything else. And that hurts my heart."
At least he admits that the 85 year old guy died partially due to cancer.
This is one word short of accusing the Penn State trustees and ESPN of being accessories to murder. These blind supporters of his can't even admit that his death was a normal human death.
Jordan Norwood called him "one of the most influential men in our nations history [sic]."
Wasn't it Martin Luther King Day last week? And don't we celebrate Washington and Lincoln's birthdays soon? I know these guys didn't win any national titles in the 80's, but maybe Paterno's impact on national history is small, even trivial.
Mike Ditka called him a "true hero," which was echoed by a Penn State student on ESPN who said quite simply "He's a hero."
Don't we have men and women in our armed services fighting and dying for us? Don't we have firefighters and cops? Don't we have people who call the cops when they hear about old men taking showers with young boys?
Paterno was not a hero. Even without the recent scandal, he was never a hero. He might have been a great leader and teacher, but not a hero. Heroes risk something. Heroes sacrifice.
He could have been a hero to some kids, but he decided that informing his AD was sufficient heroism for one day.
"It's kind of tragic that they [Penn State] weren't able to do something nice for him before he passed. It's kind of a shame..." That's what a fan on SportsCenter said.
It's kind of tragic that Paterno wasn't able to do something nice for some kids before their lives were ruined. It's a shame that even in death, he is still worshiped as a demigod, and not a man. His contributions deserve praise, and the people he's affected should mourn him. One mistake cannot define a man. It's okay to grieve him and emphasize the positive. But to address and summarily dismiss the negative is asinine, ignorant, and annoying.
I wouldn't mind if guys like Blackledge ignored the scandal in their time of grief. But to attribute his death to the Board of Trustees and the media is simply moronic.
I'm very happy that the NHLPA rejected the proposed realignment that would have reduced the number of times the Bruins play teams like the Devils, Rangers, and Flyers. Not only are these good Eastern seaboard rivalries for fans, but the hockey is simply fantastic to watch.
Starting with the Rangers game, it was a good, close-checking, hard fighting playoff style game. For the Rangers, who are looking to prove something to themselves as well as the League, it was a playoff game.
The Bruins needed to get more from their Power Play unit. Not necessarily scoring. They only got 2 shots on goal in 4 PP chances. That's not good enough. At the very least, you have to generate some opportunities, make the goalie work to kill the penalty.
Another thing the B's did was take too many shots that were clearly going to get blocked. It's one thing to shoot through traffic and have a defenseman block the shot down low. But when forwards are pressuring the point as much as the Rangers' were, it's inevitable that the shot won't get to the goalie. So don't take the shot.
One positive from the Rangers' game was how productive the defensemen were. Andrew Ference has become a sniper (and a thug, according to the NHL. More on that later).
The Flyers game saw more special teams struggles. The Bruins allowed 3 PP goals. There were some weird bounces that favored the Flyers. But the B's also allowed Hartnell to repeatedly set himself up in the middle slot. A hat-trick resulted.
The officiating was interesting. It seemed like the Flyers would hit a Bruin up high, there'd be some drama, an odd number of penalties issued, and the Bruins would wind up being shorthanded. Apparently, checks aimed at the head aren't as severe as standing up for a teammate.
That's the game, though. It can't be easy for a ref to keep a lid on these kinds of games.
I know the NHL wants to make sure that teams like the Bruins, Rangers, and Flyers visit every struggling market in the NHL, from Columbus to Phoenix to Nashville to Miami. The NHL wants these markets to have some games they can promote and sell out. But it's hockey welfare, redistributing wealth to markets that don't care much about the game.
It's not worth losing multiple games between the Bruins and Flyers, between the Bruins and Rangers. If anything, the Bruins should be playing these teams more than 4 times a year. Because these were some very exciting games, with good atmospheres generated by passionate fanbases.
How often do you see a natural hat-trick and a Gordie Howe hat-trick in the same game AND have it occur in front of fans who know what those terms mean?
The Bruins are in Washington Tuesday. They'll also meet the President. I'd like to hear a conversation between Marchand and Obama. "You got big ears, eh?"
The defense won this game. The defense and Billy Cundiff. It certainly wasn't the offense that won this game for the Pats. While I don't think Brady "sucked pretty badly," he wasn't good. The Patriots lost the turnover battle, Flacco in many ways had a better game than Brady, the Ravens accumulated more yards, and held the ball longer. But the Pats defense made some big plays in big moments and that's why the Patriots are going to the Super Bowl.
The defense did allow a pair of token touchdown drives, struggling to contain Rice and giving up chunks of yardage in the air.
But when Woodhead fumbled a kickoff return on the 28, the defense held Baltimore to a field goal (which gave the Ravens a 4 point lead instead of an 8 point lead). Spikes' interception might have been a big play if Brady didn't throw a pick a few seconds later.
In the 4th, the Ravens had a 3rd and 3 on the Patriots' 30 (48 yard field goal range). Wilfork stuffed Ray Rice for a 3 yard loss, and Baltimore was forced to go for it on 4th and 6 instead of kicking a field goal. The Pats did not allow the Ravens to convert that 4th down thanks to good coverage and pressure from the aforementioned Wilfork.
The offense had a chance run out the clock late but went 3 and out. The defense did allow a big 29 yard Anquan Boldin reception, which put the Ravens in field goal range. Then Sterling Moore saved the game by breaking up a pass in the end zone, then deflected the next pass. So at the very least, the defense preserved a tie.
Billy Cundiff did the rest.
The Patriots' offense wasn't bad all game. They just couldn't come up with many big plays. They struggled in the Red Zone, the Ravens got timely pressure on Brady, then there were the turnovers. Brady threw 2 picks, he also had one called back because of an illegal contact penalty, and he threw another one after an encroachment flag. He was not that sharp. He also missed a wide open Gronkowski and what would have been a touchdown in the 1st quarter. He missed a number of passes, and frequently threw into double coverage.
The Pats' best player had his worst game of the season, but because of Wilfork, Spikes, Moore, and Ellis, the Pats still won. And Brady will get a chance to redeem himself against the Giants.
This is the 6th time the Pats have been in the AFC Championship in the Belichick-Brady era. Think about that. 6 times since 2000. Before the B-B epoch (1960-1999), the Pats had reached the AFC/AFL title game a total of 3 times.
Last week, the Patriots were fortunate enough to face the #12 seed in the playoff tournament. They also played the worst QB in the playoffs. And maybe that good fortune has extended into the AFC Championship game. Joe Flacco is the worst QB remaining in the playoffs. 20 touchdowns and 12 picks in the regular season. An 80.9 rating, which puts him 18th in the NFL, between Kevin Kolb and Carson Palmer.
But you don't need a great QB to win a playoff game. Just ask Drew Brees and Aaron Rodgers. Or ask the Ravens, for that matter. The Ravens have an excellent chance in this game, although it all depends on one thing. Can they get to Brady?
The Ravens were tied for 3rd in sacks with 48. Suggs had 14 on his own. They can get pressure on Brady. Which means the Patriots will have to rely on guys like Welker and Gronkowski to get open quickly. They'll also need that offensive line to play one of its best games of the season.
If the Ravens do get pressure on Brady and keep the Patriots' offense in check, they can run the ball, they can play possession football, and they can squeeze out a win.
It's tough to respect Flacco, though. It seems like if the Patriots go up by even 4, then Flacco will find some way to screw up.
This game will be tough for Brady and the offense to rack up an absurd number of points. But it'll also be tough for Flacco and the Ravens to do similar. I think the Patriots will win this in a tight contest.
The Bruins have an uncanny ability to turn up their intensity, focus, and dominate the 3rd period of games. If games only had 2 periods, the B's would be in the middle of the pack in the Conference. But thanks to their 3rd period play, they're one of the best teams in the NHL.
It was more of that last night. The Bruins recorded the first 10 shots on goal. Thomas didn't have to make a save until about 10 minutes into the period. And by then, it was 3-1 Bruins.
Ference had a snipe that Brodeur couldn't see thanks to his own teammate trying to clear Paille out of the slot. Horton had a tip in after some nice wing to wing to wing passing on the Power Play. And Campbell's goal came after a cross-corner dump in, a Jersey turnover, and a flurry of shots and rebounds off Brodeur.
This year the Bruins have pounced on teams when there's blood in the water. They've scored 2 goals in 1 minute 14 times this year. That's absurd. Last season, they'd score a goal and then play defensively, even relaxing a little bit. This year, they score one goal, and the next line wants to add to the total.
It must be demoralizing on an opponent.
Kelly added an ampty-netter. He has 14 goals this year. His career high is 15.
It wasn't a clean game, but it was a well-deserved win. The Bruins played it tight all game, then pulled away in the 3rd period. And Tim Thomas looks to be back to his A-Game.
Now they get to host the Rangers, whose owner is already talking about his team winning the Cup. Don't think that hasn't caught the attention of the Bruins.
The only reason I consider this worthy of writing about is that Captains in the NHL All-Star Game pick their teams. Daniel Alfredsson, of the hosting Ottawa Senators, will be the opposing Captain.
There are a few people that might not make Zdeno's team:
Phil Kessel
Daniel Sedin
Henrik Sedin
Jason Pominville might also not be one of Chara's favorites.
The only Canadien on the team is goalie Carey Price, and I can see Chara selecting him if Tim Thomas is not available.
Unfortunately, the Senators and Toronto Maple Leafs dominate the rosters. There are 7 representatives from the Ontario teams. All 5 of the players voted in by fans were on either team. I love Canadian fan's passion for the game, but their devotion to their team skirts the boundaries between passion and psychologically treatable levels of irrationality.
In a span of 4 days, the Bruins have lost to the 4th and 5th place teams in the Southeast Division. These are the 14th and 15th teams in the Eastern Conference. The Bruins, an elite team, lost because they were outworked. It's that simple.
What makes the Bruins elite is that they play within a system, and they work just as hard, if not harder than their opponent. Remove the work, and they're not elite.
I'm sure they'll turn things around within the next few games. They always have under Julien. They go through stretches of bad play like this. Stretches when Lucic's passing is as accurate as Tim Tebow's. Stretches when only two or three forwards look like they know how to do anything. Stretches when they commit silly penalties in the offensive zone.
I'd like to see more Tuukka Rask for the next few games. Thomas hasn't looked bad, but he hasn't looked great. Tuukka's been red hot, and the B's should take full advantage of it.
As I said, I'm sure this stretch is just a stretch. We've seen this team struggle then suddenly turn things around. I'm pretty sure that in a few months, I'm not going to be remembering the January 17th loss to the Lightning.
Bruins play the Devils in Jersey on Thursday. Then they host the Rangers and visit the Flyers on the weekend. That's the 6th, 1st, and 4th place teams in the Conference right there. That should be enough to wake the B's up from this winter slumber.
Disclaimer: this post contains numerous references to the works of William Shakespeare. If unfamiliar with said works, you will not get the jokes. And I really don't care that you don't get them.
Yes, that's Eddie George playing Julius Caesar. The Heisman winner and former Tennessee Titan is appearing as the title character in the Nashville Shakespeare Festival's production of Julius Caesar. I have to say it's a pretty smart move for the production. Good or bad, having Eddie George on the stage will sell tickets and create a buzz. And Eddie George seems like the type that would enjoy the unique experience.
Eddie George's post-NFL career has been busy and positive, which is refreshing. He's opened restaurants in Nashville, and Columbus, OH. He's all over television with appearances on reality shows and his own show on the Big Ten Network. And he's earned his MBA at Northwestern.
But his latest endeavor sparked a thought in my mind. What other Heisman winners could play characters from Shakespeare?
Doug Flutie would be a good Puck, a diminutive elf always up to mischief. Eric Crouch's confused indecision could make him a decent Hamlet. "To play safety for the Rams or not to play safety for the Rams?" Shylock's greed would suit Reggie Bush. Ricky Williams' decadence makes him a perfect John Falstaff. The religious Tim Tebow could play Angelo from Measure for Measure. I can't decide if OJ Simpson would be better as Othello or Brutus. Either way, I'm sure he'd give a killer performance.
The Bruins have dominated most of the Eastern Conference this season, going 11-2-0 within the Northeast Division, and 6-1-0 against the Atlantic. But the Southeast has given them problems. The B's were 4-4-0 against that division before starting this trip.
The Hurricanes have been the most troublesome, even though they're struggling to stay in the playoff picture. They beat the Bruins twice earlier in the year, and completed the hat-trick on Saturday night.
The Canes are fast. The Bruins struggle against such speed. It's not that they can't keep up, it's that they underestimate how quickly these fast opponents can close passing lanes, get to loose pucks, and make plays.
On Saturday, for instance, Gregory Campbell thought he had all the time and space in the world to skate with the puck in his own defensive zone. A fast Hurricane caught up to him, took the puck, and eventually the puck found its way into the net.
In that same game, the B's frequently panicked in their own zone and flicked the puck into space. That's rarely a good thing to do, and it's even worse when facing a speedy opponent who will inevitably get to that loose puck first and make a play.
Ultimately, the Hurricanes outworked the Bruins. The B's were a bit too comfortable, a bit too complacent, and Carolina didn't ease up and let them come back and win it in the 3rd.
The Bruins rarely lose a 3rd period, but they did Saturday night in Raleigh. So I expected to see them come out firing in the 1st last night. They didn't disappoint. Bergeron scored 80 seconds after the puck dropped.
Then more bad habits reappeared kept the game interesting. The Bruins struggled with their entry, frequently losing possession at their offensive blue-line. If not for Rask bailing them out, this game could have been ugly.
Krejci, Seguin, and Bergeron eventually gave the Bruins a lead on a 5-on-3. Krejci won a puck battle, then Seguin circumnavigated the entire zone. It was refreshing to see the Bruins moving bodies on the Power Play, not just playing connect the dots by standing still and passing the puck around. Seguin's shot/pass was adeptly tipped in by Bergeron, who was unnoticed lurking in the slot while the Panthers were mesmerized by Seguin's orbit.
But the lead was short-lived. Florida scored on a post-PP breakaway. And if it weren't for Rask, the Bruins might have lost this game in the 3rd.
Rask kept them in the game with 38 stops. Krejci eventually scored the shootout winner. So while officially his point-streak is over, he still won the game by shooting the puck into the net. Odd how that works out.
The Bruins play the Lightning tonight. Tampa Bay are dead last in the Southeast and have allowed more goals than any team in the NHL.
I tried finding an appropriate 3:63 Bible verse (Brady threw for 363 yards), and the best I could find was: Look at them! Sitting or standing, they mock me in their songs. (Lamentations 3:63). And maybe that can be about how much hype Tim Tebow got leading up to this game, and how much people forgot that Tom Brady is a pretty good QB.
All season, the Patriots have won and lost based on the performance of their offense. Their defense isn't good enough to win games when Brady struggles or turns the ball over. On the other hand, the offense is potent enough to win games on its own, even when the defense is terrible. Saturday night, the offense was at its best.
Brady was nearly perfect. His one interception was the only blemish on his performance. 5 touchdowns in the first half, 6 overall. He completed over 3/4 of his passes. He had fewer incompletions (8) than Tebow had completions (9).
One amazing stat struck me. The Patriots were 3 of 6 on 3rd down. What amazes me is that the Patriots got to 3rd down only 6 times. They got 31 first downs. That means that 25 times they didn't even get to 3rd down before getting a new 1st down (they got 3 1st downs from penalties). In other words, even if the Pats had been playing with CFL rules and only getting 3 downs per series, they'd have still moved the chains with regularity.
The line protected Brady all night. 0 sacks. That was a huge reason for Brady's monster stats. When Brady did have some pressure on him, he wasn't able to fully step into his throws, and that's the only time the Patriots' drives sputtered and stalled. For the most part, though, the line gave him time to find open receivers, and space to step into throws.
If not for Brady, Aaron Hernandez would have been the clear star of the game. He caught 4 passes for 55 yards and a TD. He ran for 61 yards. And he had a tackle. That's a diverse night. He left the game early but all reports say that he's alright.
Using him as a runningback was ingenious in its simplicity. When an opponent sees no RBs in the Patriots' huddle, they might go with a lighter personnel package with more DBs, and fewer big guys up front. Then Hernandez lines up in the backfield and the Pats run the ball against a defense designed to stop the pass. So simple, which is why it's so smart.
Hernandez did lose a handle on the ball twice, which makes me nervous. He juggled an exchange from Brady, and lost a ball after being downed by contact. His ball control isn't 100%. He's not Tiki Barber in the early 2000s, but it's something to note.
Gronkowski should endorse a line of vacuum cleaners. Everything that enters his airspace gets sucked in. Bibi Jones can be in the commercials with him for similar reasons.
The defense did well. The only touchdown they allowed came when the Broncos got the ball on the Pats' 24. But let's not compare this unit to 2003 and 2004. The Patriots' offense shot out to a big lead, and the Broncos have one of the worst passers in the NFL. When down by two touchdowns, simply not throwing interceptions isn't good enough.
How do you stop Tebow from his miraculous 4th quarter comebackes? You start the 4th quarter with a 42-10 lead.
The Patriots demonstrated why the option is not a viable NFL offense. Defenses are too fast for the backs to turn the corner. And they're too disciplined and coached too well to make mistakes. They know their assignments and containments.
The Pats' D-line got excellent penetration up the middle, as well as even pressure on each flank. That prevented Tebow from rolling out, which is when he's most dangerous. It also meant that when the Broncos ran the option, they couldn't cut back because Wilfork was already through the line and chasing the play from behind. Tebow was sacked 5 times, the Pats had 10 tackles for a loss, plus that 1st quarter strip-sack.
The effect of negative plays is always harsh on an offense. But on an offense that struggles to move the ball as much as Denver's, negative plays are murder.
The Pats played much better than they've played in their past two postseasons. There were no fake punts. In fact the Patriots' special teams executed very well. There were a few mistakes, but they were quickly atoned for.
Nobody's perfect. But Brady came pretty close.
The Pats face the Ravens next week. The other two offensive juggernauts - the Saints and Packers - are out. The Pats are unique among the NFL's final four. Which means either that they're the best of the offense-heavy teams, or were fortunate to play the Denver Broncos.
How weird is this? The Pats are in the AFC Championship and they still haven't beaten a team with a winning record.
Pats vs. Ravens, Sunday afternoon at 3. I'm excited. Let's party.
