Let's Give Credit to Bill Belichick the GM

Bill Belichick has been praised for what he's done as a Head Coach in 2013. His team won 12 games, won a division title, and secured a first-round bye despite relentless injuries to key players.

I've even heard this interesting "hot take" (which sounds like a porn term) from sports pundits: Belichick's coaching is even more remarkable and praiseworthy, because Belichick the GM puts Belichick the Coach in tough spots with questionable personnel decisions. Suddenly Belichick is two people. One is a genius coach, the other is a GM that doesn't really know what he's doing.

I disagree. I think Belichick does a great job as the GM.

There was a time when this belief was common in New England. If anything his prowess as GM was arguably overrated and certainly overhyped. Everything he did seemed correct, even if it was counterintuitive. He drafted Brady and won a Super Bowl. He signed Rodney Harrison and won a Super Bowl. He signed Corey Dillon and won a Super Bowl. He traded for Wes Welker and Randy Moss and nearly won a Super Bowl.

However, when the Super Bowl parades stopped and the parade of fan favorites leaving the team began (Seymour, Vinatieri, Samuel, Law, Vrabel, Moss, Welker, Woodhead), fans started to grumble, and question Belichick the GM.

Draft picks were scrutinized. When Belichick traded picks, Pats fans groaned and screamed in agony, like they were passing a jagged kidney stone.

The Patriots continued to make the playoffs, but failed to go all the way. And Belichick the GM was to blame. He was the one who failed to build a defensive backfield, the one who failed to draft an outside receiver, the one who failed to acquire a pass rusher.

Patriots fans let their emotions revise their favorite team's recent history.

After Belichick let Welker go to Denver, people forgot that it was a Welker drop and a Brady safety against the Giants that cost the Pats Super Bowl XLVI. In the new version of history it was the GM's fault, and the cheapness of the team he ran.

And Super Bowl XLII wasn't won by a ruthless Giants pass rush or a freakish catch by David Tyree. The GM simply didn't put together a roster with enough talent to win the Super Bowl. Or at least that's what people criticizing Belichick the GM would be forced to conclude if they took their logic a few steps further.

If Belichick is a bad GM for letting Welker go, isn't he also a good GM for acquiring him in the first place?

And have the Patriots lacked the talent to win Super Bowls since 2004? Has that been the reason? Didn't a Reche Caldwell drop in 2006 potentially cost them a trip to the Super Bowl? Were they not talented in 2007? How about 2011?

Let's return to 2013 and look at the decisions made by Belichick the GM that have put the Pats in position for playoff success:

He drafted Julian Edelman. Belichick the GM is frequently (and quite fairly) criticized for failing with his WR draft picks. Edelman is finally a success story in that department. In 2013, the 7th round pick in 2009 caught 105 passes for 1,056 yards. He also has the highest punt-return average of all time. The Pats also re-signed him this past off-season. How good is that re-signing looking?

He drafted Logan Mankins. Belichick the GM has struggled to draft receivers, DBs, and other positions. But he's been more than solid at drafting offensive linemen. Who, by the way, protect the most important player on the team. Mankins is a 6-time Pro-Bowler at left guard. And now he's playing left tackle due to injuries.

He built the RB corps. The Patriots were 9th in the NFL in rushing yards (2,065) and yards per carry (4.4). They were 2nd in rushing TDs (19). Stevan Ridley (773 yards, 7 TDs) was drafted in the 3rd round in 2011. LeGarrette Blount (772 yards, 7 TDs) was acquired from the Buccaneers for Jeff Demps and a 7th round pick. Solid deal. Brandon Bolden (271 yards, 3 TDs) was an undrafted free agent. Shane Vereen (208 rush yards, 427 receiving yards, 4 total TDs in only 8 games) was drafted in the 2nd round of 2011.

When evaluating the job done by Belichick the GM, I think people get caught up with mistakes, bad moves, and moves that made them angry. I'll get you started: Ochocinco, Adalius Thomas, Ras-I Dowling, Jermaine Cunningham, Brandon Tate. But trying to weigh the good moves against the bad moves is an inexact science. Do you judge an architect by the individual decisions he makes when designing a building? Or do you judge him by the quality and strength of the building as a whole?

The only fair way to judge a GM is to look at the teams he puts together. Are they strong, talented, cohesive, flexible, balanced? Do the pieces make each other better? And when I look at Belichick's tenure as GM, I see some great teams (2001, 2003, 2004, 2007), I see some very good teams (2006, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012), I see some above average teams (2002, 2005, 2008). So 4 great teams, 5 very good teams, and 3 above average teams. What does that say about the GM?

I see 5 teams that undoubtedly had the players to win a Super Bowl (the GM's job), and 3 of them that did it, 2 of them were a few plays short. I see more teams that had the players to do more damage, but didn't make the big plays in the big games.

The jury is still out on 2013, but I think talent-wise they have enough to win it all. Despite the injuries. And if healthier just imagine how fearsome they'd be to face.

They're a flawed team in a League of flawed teams. However, the team's strengths are stronger than most teams. And that's because it was built by a good GM.

Theo Epstein and Peter Gammons Host 14th Annual Hot Stove Cool Music Benefit Concert this Saturday at Paradise Rock Club

Theo Epstein will return to Boston on Saturday night, along with Hall of Fame journalist Peter Gammons, to host the 14th Annual Hot Stove Cool Music Benefit Concert. The concert will be held at the Paradise Rock Club at 7:00pm. Doors will open at 6:00pm. The event benefits Epstein's Foundation to Be Named Later.

Foundation To Be Named Later (FTBNL) was launched in Spring of 2005 by Paul Epstein, a social worker in the Brookline public school system, and his twin brother, former Boston Red Sox Executive VP and GM and current Chicago Cubs President of Baseball Operations, Theo Epstein. Named after the MLB trade term "player to be named later," the mission of FTBNL is to raise funds and awareness for non-profit agencies, working on the front lines, serving disadvantaged youth and families. FTBNL invests in programs that teach leadership, education, and healthy development of families.

FTBNL has given over $6 million in grants and in-kind donations to over 200 non-profit organizations and has sent approximately 4,000 children, who would not otherwise get the chance to go to a game, to Red Sox, Cubs, and Celtics home games. The Peter Gammons/FTBNL College Scholarship (named in honor of Hall of Famer and FTBNL Champion, Peter Gammons) is the signature program of FTBNL and has sent more than 36 young people with high financial needs and high educational potential to the college of their choice. Each Gammons Scholar gets an adult mentor and a laptop computer to ensure college success.

This year's Hot Stove Cool Music Benefit Concert will feature rock super group The Baseball Project, featuring members of the iconic rock band R.E.M.; rock and soul band Trigger Hippy, featuring Joan Osborne and members of The Black Crowes; indie rocker Howie Day, Boston-born Kay Hanley, and rising stars Kingsley Flood.

Gammons and his Hot Stove All-Stars will feature Paul Barrere from Little Feat, Buffalo Tom’s Bill Janovitz, Belly’s Tanya Donelly, Cubs broadcaster Len Kasper, the Upper Crust’s Chris Cote, Seth Justman from the J. Geils Band, Will Dailey, Jed Parish & Lucky Jackson from The Gravel Pit, with actor-comedian Mike O’Malley serving as emcee.

The concert will be followed by the Sports Roundtable on January 21, which will feature a candid forum about "Building and Maintaining a Winning Culture" with Gammons and a number of sports executives, players and journalists participating, including Red Sox pitcher, Craig Breslow.

VIP tickets to the concert and roundtable as well as general admission tickets for $40 are on sale now, and can be purchased at FTBNL.org

Just Put Barry Bonds and Roger Clemens in the Hall of Fame

I don't like Barry Bonds. I don't like Roger Clemens. I hate both of them and think the tremendous success they had in the late stages of their career was due to their PED usage. I also think they're both jerks. I enjoy seeing bad things happen to them.

However, they belong in the Hall of Fame. And the BBWAA has no right to act as self appointed avengers, bringing baseball "criminals" like Clemens and Bonds to justice for their sins. The BBWAA has no right. Because the BBWAA were silent partners in the PED era dominated by Bonds and Clemens.

Countless players were shooting up and cycling right under the noses of the BBWAA. Arm muscles grew to the sizes of leg muscles. Players recovered from injury at an inhuman pace. And the writers did next to nothing to investigate the real cause. These miracles were attributed to wondrous advances in sports medicine and training technology. The BBWAA made no effort to investigate the effects of PEDs, and then look for those effects being displayed by players. "You still have to hit the ball," was a common dismissal of the theoretical impact PEDs could have.

And even after baseball admitted it had a PED problem, moral indignation and outrage was selective. Writers and fans in Boston, for instance, were quick to attack New York players who were listed as PED users. Myself included. Those same writers and fans were just as quick to forgive and embrace David Ortiz. And we didn't question Manny Ramirez's production in Boston until he wasn't in Boston anymore.

Then there were the San Francisco "journalists" and fans who vehemently defended Barry Bonds to the bitter end. Bonds was portrayed as a victim of being disliked, a victim of reputation, a victim of envy, even a victim of racism.

Most of us wanted asterisks added to records and achievements. In retrospect the entire era deserves an asterisk, not just a few players. And how come there are no movements to add asterisks to known spitball pitchers, or those who stole signs? Red Sox fans who wanted Bonds' records stigmatized with an asterisk don't request that the same be done to the 2004 World Series, or to series MVP Manny Ramirez.

In hindsight, it would be dumb for a player NOT to take PEDs during that era. There were no consequences. The sports media and BBWAA weren't putting any serious effort into questioning the gargantuan numbers and muscles of the era. The League ignored the issue, the Players Association denied it, the teams paid for it, we the fans LOVED it. The writers also gained financially as the game's popularity boomed because of the homerun explosion.

And now we want to punish a few players for what many/most did? Who are we to judge when we loved the product? Who are the BBWAA to determine the right and wrong of something they went out of their way to avoid discovering? The biggest sports story in decades was happening right in front of them and it took years and a Congressional investigation to unearth it? What right do the BBWAA have to judge an era's morality when they were part of it?

The Baseball Hall of Fame isn't a Hall of Morality. Just look at Ty Cobb, or the violent and overindulgent Babe Ruth, or the racist Tom Yawkey. How many other morally repugnant men have been enshrined? How many cheaters? What about admitted spitballer Gaylord Perry? If the BBWAA wants the Hall to be clean, they should start with the garbage inside before focusing on the garbage outside.

Removing morality from the equation, you can only assess players by comparing them to their peers who played in the same era. You can't, for instance, compare Rogers Hornsby's 301 career homeruns to Craig Biggio's 291 and say that they're comparable. But you can compare Biggio to players who played at the same time. So if we're comparing Roger Clemens and Barry Bonds within the context of the era in which they played, they were still the best. Bonds was the best hitter of the PED era. Clemens was one of the best pitchers. There's no arguing that.

The BBWAA wants to clean something that stained the game of baseball. But the BBWAA themselves are also stained. That entire era is. It's over. It happened. The BBWAA did its part to allow it to happen. It can't be reversed or righted. Certainly not by a bunch of holier-than-thou sportswriters who enjoyed the ride and profited from baseball's return to popularity. All that can be done now is to compare the players who played in that time, choose the best ones, and send them to Cooperstown.

The BBWAA failed to do its job back when Bonds and Clemens were playing. In an illogical response to that, they've assumed even more responsibilities. They've made themselves into judge, jury, and executioner of baseball sinners. And they don't have the right or the capability to fulfill that role. They should just vote for the best players.

Grading ESPN's MegaCast

ESPN got bold Monday night with their coverage of the BCS Championship Game. They went all out. They truly went balls to the wall. And some of their efforts worked, some did not.

The Title Talk on ESPN 2 was atrocious. Imagine watching people watch something. And not like a reaction YouTube video, watching people react to Two Girls and a Cup. This was watching 2-4 astute college football fans watching a game with 3-4 moronic people. "Is the guy who snaps the ball called the snapper?" That was a direct quote from ESPN 2's Title Talk.

Jemele Hill was also there. Remember she was the one who compared rooting for the Boston Celtics to rooting for the Nazis in World War II. She's not too smart, and is habitually prone to hyperbole, which means she's one of ESPN's favorite personalities. Why be smart and appreciated when you can be moronic and controversial? Which one results in more internet hits? That's all that matters for ESPN.

I will grade ESPN's Title Talk program with a D-. It's not a complete fail because it did what it tried to do, and have an inane conversation of ignorance. And I think NESN should learn from it and make a ThinkPink simulcast for Red Sox and Bruins playoff games in the future. The Pink Hats would love it. The rest of the real sports fans will watch the actual game.

The BCS Film Room merits an A-. It was great. Truly great. There were some small problems, like keeping pace with the live feed. However, the coaches and experts were interesting, informative, and honest. As a BC fan I gained new appreciation for Steve Addazio. And it was also cool to listen to thoughts from Texas A&aM's Kevin Sumlin, and Pitt's Paul Chryst.

The only critiques I have for the Film Room coverage is that Matt Millen monopolized conversation. Just let other people talk, man. There was so much college football wisdom and knowledge in that room among 6 people, but Millen spoke more than a third of the words. And the show was somewhat disjointed. Which is typical for the first run of shows. But by and large it was great.

The Sounds of the BCS coverage on ESPN Classic was what it was. The TV broadcast without TV broadcasters. I'll give that a B.

The BCS Command Center on ESPN Goal Line gets an Incomplete because I don't get that channel.

All the features on ESPN3 get a B- because they delivered what they promised and nothing more. And for some reason Comcast Xfinity and my computer and phone have a major disagreement. I'll call it a philosophical misunderstanding. Watching ESPN3 feeds was fun while they lasted.

I thought it worked on some levels. Title Talk wasn't for me. Not at all, not one bit. But the BCS Film Room was fan-fucking-tastic. I mean it was awesome to behold how smart football coaches are, how they can read a play with just a few frames of footage, how they viewed the game in such an holistic way. They were schooling, non-stop.

The only drawback was that Matt Millen seemed to think his contract gave him the rights to 40% of the words, even though three respected college football coaches were in the room, along with two other college football analysts. Maybe in 2015 Matt Millen will get his own channel on MegaCast, and he can dominate his own conversations.

I'd love to see stuff like the Film Room for future big games, maybe for the Super Bowl, the Final Four, the Stanley Cup and NBA Finals, and so on.

R.I.P. BCS, Anyone Who Misses You Is Either a Fool, or Someone You Made Rich

The last BCS Championship game was a classic. But let's not give credit for the quality of the game to the system. Give credit to the players on Florida State and Auburn who busted their asses to play a great game. Great games happen with and without the BCS. Auburn/Alabama was a great game and the BCS had no control over that. It was an SEC game.

The BCS system defiled college football for 16 years. It wasn't just imperfect, it was intentionally flawed. It defied logic, common sense, and fair play. And those are three things that you're supposed to be taught when you attend college.

The BCS believed that out of the 100+ programs in Division I-A football, a formula could be created that would determine the top 2. And those 2 teams would play each other for the national title. The BCS actually believed it could devise a system to make this a reality.

That formula worked exactly one time, when Vince Young and Texas beat USC in early 2005. Every other year there were flaws, and arguments against legitimacy. Undefeated teams sometimes didn't make it to the national title game. Oklahoma once made it despite not winning their own conference. Even this year, Auburn's claim seemed just as good as other 1-loss teams.

Every other college sport uses a playoff system. And every other level of college football uses a playoff system. What prevented the top level of college football from using that system was the fact that money went to good old boys (and their friends) who ran bowl games, and also guaranteed money went to conferences that couldn't always guarantee the best teams (BigTen and Pac-12).

The BCS proliferated for so long because it worked for a select few who undeservedly wielded power over all of college football. And they also collected massive sums of money simply because their predecessors had rented a stadium decades ago.

The BCS wasn't just an imperfect system. Its flaws were an intentional byproduct of its design. It was designed to funnel money and TV contracts to a handful of bowl games, and the conference friends of those games. And the prestige of those games was based on who was friends with who. One hand washes the other.

And now that system is no more. It's been replaced by another system that rewards groups of absurdly wealthy men who get together and rent a stadium in early January. And those men receive millions and billions of dollars for their not-so-risky investment in a sure thing. The system is still just as corrupt and money-driven for those involved, but at least it's more exciting for the fans. At least it's a better system for determining the best team in college football.

If people are going to make money in sketchy ways, they might as well put an entertaining product on the field for all of us to enjoy. The Playoff will be more entertaining than just a one-game BCS Championship.

I'd say good riddance to a bad system, but that bad system lives on and influences the new system.

Texas Hires Charlie Strong, Three Quick Thoughts

1. Texas can't wait a day or two? They have to announce this hiring when the college football world is focused on Florida State and Auburn?

2. Mack Brown + Charlie Strong = Charlie Brown. Good grief.

3. Texas seems to like coaches with short, powerful names. Mack Brown leads to Charlie Strong. Another coach with a short, powerful name: Rex Ryan. Is sexy Rexy next in line for the job in Austin? As an Oklahoma fan, I sure hope so. As a Patriots fan, I hope Rex stays with the Jets for life.

Patriots vs. Colts: The Only Word that Matters Is Execution

We have an entire week to look at weather forecasts, analyze statistics, view highlights and game footage, and generally convince ourselves that we have the slightest idea what kind of football game will be played on Saturday night. The Colts will be in town to play the Patriots and I have no clue what will happen. And I'm fine with that.

This season has been like riding a roller coaster blindfolded, across the NFL but especially in Foxborough. It's been an insane season. The way the Patriots-Saints game ended, the way the Broncos game ended, the way the Browns game ended. On the flip side of insanity, there was also the way the road Jets game and the Panthers game ended.

The only thing crazier than this Patriots season would be trying to predict what happens next.

I could drone on about stats, and about Andrew Luck being a good QB, and the Colts doing well against playoff teams, and the Patriots doing well at home, but also struggling in home playoff games lately. None of it matters.

The winner of this game will be the team that executes better. It's easy to say that, not so easy to do it.

Just look at the Colts. They played two different games against Kansas City. They played a good half and a bad half, and they barely won. They executed better than the Chiefs. The Patriots have been doing that all season long. One horrible half, one great half. So which team can find a way to play well for 35 or 40 minutes instead of just 30 could win this game.

Tom Brady needs to make good throws. Period. He's the best player on the team. He doesn't need to be amazing, but these overthrown and underthrown incompletions need to be reduced. He was 21st this season in completion percentage (60.5%), nestled between Alex Smith and Ryan Tannehill. Some of that was due to lack of talented receivers, lots of that was due to bad throws.

But hey, Andrew Luck was 24th at 60.2%.

The Patriots need to be productive on the ground. Especially if it rains. A good ground game allows the passing game to be more dynamic. It lets you control the clock. It gets you first downs. It lets you chew up a defensive line.

The Pats need to hold on to the ball. Stevan Ridley, I'm looking at you.

The Colts defied football logic and lost the turnover battle against KC but won the game. However the Colts had the second best takeaway-giveaway number in the AFC this year (+13). The Pats were third best (+9). Obviously, whoever wins the turnover battle on Saturday will probably win.

Unless they can't execute in the Red Zone. And that's been an issue for the Gronk-less Patriots all year. Either the offense needs to execute better in the Red Zone, or the defense needs to make some Red Zone stops. The Colts had one of the worst Red Zone defenses in the NFL. They allowed TDs on over 60% of Red Zone possessions. I suppose that's good for the Patriots.

Looks like I did mention a few stats and did some regular season analysis. Sue me. All those stats come with an "if" or a "but" or an "unless," which is why they mean nothing. They're in the past. The Colts allowed 3 touchdowns for every 5 Red Zone possessions their opponents had. Big deal. It's still up to the Patriots to execute on Saturday.

I do think this is the Patriots' game to lose. It's at home, against a dome team, against an inconsistent team. But the Patriots have hardly been consistent this year, they're 8-0 at home but that hasn't been easy. The Bengals were also 8-0 at home and lost there to a team that was 4-4 on the road. So who cares?

If I had to make a prediction, I'd say the Patriots should win 24-20. But predicting this season has been harder than predicting the weather. It's been like trying to predict the weather 20 weeks from now. You might have some general ideas based on past experience, but they mean next to nothing. You don't know. I don't know. Just count down the days and enjoy the show.

Boston Should Bid to Host the World Juniors in 2018

Yesterday Finland beat host and tournament favorite Sweden 3-2 in overtime to win the 2014 World Juniors. It was Finland's first medal in the competition since 2006, when a young Tuukka Rask carried the Finns to a bronze medal

If you don't know what the World Juniors are, it's an Olympic/World Cup style hockey tournament with national teams competing against each other. It's held annually in late December and early January, and all the players are under 20. It's sanctioned by the International Ice Hockey Federation (IIHF).

The US is going to host the tournament in 2018, and I think the City of Boston should make a serious bid to be the host city.

Boston hosted the World Juniors in 1996 (Jarome Iginla led the competition in scoring and won gold with Canada), and it didn't go well. It was poorly attended. Probably because it was spread out across Massachusetts, not concentrated in Boston. Games were played in Marlborough, Amherst, Springfield, and Worcester. And the finals were played at Boston College, not at the brand new Fleet Center.

Three important things have changed since 1996:

1. The tournament has streamlined its format and now typically only two venues are used (example: Toronto and Montreal will use their NHL rinks when they jointly host the 2015 World Juniors). Boston could use the TD Garden and BU's Agganis Arena. Those are both within the heart of the City, both easily accessible.

2. In the 2000s Boston has once again become a hockey city. Not just with the success of the Bruins, but with the rise in popularity of high school and college hockey. Just look at what we do with Fenway Park this time of year. We turn it into a hockey rink. BC and BU have combined to win 5 NCAA titles in the 2000s. Hockey East, centered in Boston, has become one of the most powerful conferences in college hockey (9 Hockey East players were on Team USA's roster in Sweden).

3. The World Juniors has become a bigger and more well-known event. The US has hosted twice since the 1996 tournament (in Buffalo in 2011 and Grand Forks, ND in 2005) and both were well attended. The tournament being broadcast on TSN in Canada and the NHL Network in the US has contributed to its growth in popularity and prestige. I wouldn't be surprised if by 2018 (or sooner) NBC Sports buys the US broadcast rights.

The tournament would be a good event for Boston to host. No new facilities need to be built, no highways need to be expanded, no dams need to be blown up, no forests need to be torn down. What's required is a hockey rink with lots of seats (TD Garden) and one with a medium number of seats (BU's Agganis Arena is state of the art, holds 6,000, and is right on the Green Line). You also need rinks for teams to practice at (Walter Brown Arena at BU, Matthews Arena at Northeastern, Conte Forum at BC, Tsongas Arena in Lowell, Lawler Arena at Merrimack College). Boston already has the facilities and infrastructure in place to pull off this event.

And Boston is already host to several notable hockey tournaments: the Super 8 high school championship, the Beanpot, and the Hockey East Tournament. The Garden will also host the Frozen Four in 2015.

New England college hockey players have always been a strong part of Team USA in this competition. Team USA had 7 New England college players (and an 8th committed to play at BU) on their roster for the 2014 World Juniors. There were 5 New England natives on the roster.

The event would draw tourists. Thousands of Canadians fly across the world for this tournament. They'll come to Boston, see the City, go out to eat, have a good time. So will friends, family, and fans from Sweden, Russia, Finland, and the rest of the US.

And I'm sure Frozen Fenway would see a boost in attendance. The Canadians that attend the World Juniors are clinically diagnosed hockey addicts. They'll go to Fenway to see some college hockey while they're in town.

The only inconvenience would be to the Bruins and Celtics. They would have to play extended road trips while the tournament occupies the Garden. The 2014 World Juniors started on December 26th and ended on January 5th.

At the same time the Garden, owned by Bruins owner Jeremy Jacobs, would be able to open its gates to thousands of concessions buying fans, even with its two teams playing elsewhere. And Agganis Arena is always seeking additional events. They just hosted 22 Disney on Ice performances. The secondary rink in Malmö hosted 14 games for the 2014 World Juniors.

In 2011 Buffalo averaged 10,635 fans per game. For 31 games. How many between period Molsons is that? How many hot dogs and sodas? How many lunches and dinners will be consumed at the bars and restaurants off Causeway Street and on Comm Ave? How many additional tours of the Sam Adams Brewery will there be? (On a trip to Toronto, I learned that Sam Adams is one of the few American beers that Canadians respect)

Other US cities that want to host include Pittsburgh and Tampa. I think Boston is a better city than those two places, and a better hockey town. It's certainly a better hockey town than Tampa.

This is a great annual tournament, and I think Boston would be a great place for it to be held.