BS Readers Think ND Should Stay On The Schedule

Just closing the loop on our poll, with more than 500 responses, 63% of BS readers feel that ND should stay on the schedule and would prefer it to stay that way.

We're of the opinion that Purdue will be on the chopping block as ND tries to figure out how to fit in football powerhouses from the ACC like Duke and North Carolina.

I know, I'm as shocked as you are that BS reader opinions don't move mountains as much as they should.

Next up, in the sidebar, let's just cut to the chase as Purdue steams towards conference play. Will the Boilers' win their division and wind up playing in Indy for the Big Ten title?

There For The Taking?

Purdue fans are beginning to get excited about the possibilities for the Boilermakers this football season. Is the division there for the taking? Will you have the opportunity to high five and belly-bump with T-Mill of Hammer & Rails at the Big Ten Championship game and celebrate the appearance by tailgating to Whitesnake and Taylor Dayne? Let's think about it.

Wisconsin had yet another unimpressive victory over the weekend over the UTEP Miners and one might argue that Coach B is doing some panicking. He fired his O-line coach after the loss in Oregon and has now yanked transfer Danny O'Brien in favor of a former walk-on who only recently became a scholarship player. Stave played pretty well on Saturday and seemed to give the Badgers some life, but he's definitely untested and the Boilers, as we all know, get to take on the Badgers at home, so Stave's road mettle will be tested...though Wisky does play at Nebraska next weekend so if Stave shows no rattle in that one, it's doubtful that a 2/3 filled Ross-Ade will spook him. (Yes, that was my shot at everyone -- go to the games!)

Michigan, while not in the Leaders division, is still a conference foe and is also coming to West Laffy. Michigan was ranked until their six-turnover, stinker of a performance against apparently indestructible Notre Dame. Can the Boiler D follow the lead set by Alabama and ND (and to a lesser extent, Air Force, who only lost 31-25 to the Wolverines)? I do have confidence in this defense, particularly the line, so if they can bottle up the Denard at all, that bodes well for Purdue. Dare to dream?

Illinois got positively dump-trucked at home vs. La Tech over the weekend, 52-24. I understand that Louisiana Tech is a decent team this year, and I understand Illinois is working their way back. But they have to be better than this, don't they? They were at home, and as I tweeted Saturday night, I cannot remember a worse home loss to a non-conference team by a Big Ten program. Can you?

My point re: the Illini is that they're a divisional foe who is prone to getting hammered, both on the road (Lost at Az St, 45-14) and at home (see Tech, Louisiana).

Ohio State, while ineligible for the title game, still is a game that will count in the conference and divisional standings. And no matter what kind of fairy tale season this could turn into, it's very difficult to imagine the Boilers walking into the 'shoe and beating a ranked and potentially undefeated Ohio State team coached by Urban Meyer. 

Penn State seems to have begun to right the ship after two losses to start the season, but you never know where they'll be mentally by early November. And again, the Boilers get the Lions in Ross-Ade. While that's not a gigantic home field advantage, it does help to not have to travel to a place where the Boilers rarely win. As mentioned, the only place on the schedule like that is Columbus.

Iowa, our most hated rivals (OMHR), has now lost to both Iowa State and Central Michigan at home. I'm not saying I think any game is a lock -- esp not a road game against OMHR -- but if those teams can win in Iowa and Purdue wants to have a special season, this is the kind of game you need to win. Plain and simple.

Minnesota is tricky to figure out, because while they're 4-0 and clearly playing a lot better football under Jerry Kill, I think we need to wait to see if this is a truly improved team or more like one of those IU teams that wins non-conference games and then gets manhandled by the conference. Regardless, it's a road conference game.

Indiana is... ah, never mind. It's Indiana.

My biggest concern at this moment is the Marshall game, and not just because of the "take them one at a time" cliche. As you've heard us lament before, Purdue -- especially under Danny Hope -- always has one stinker against lesser, non-conference competition, usually at home. There's only of those left and so I find myself in fear of it. Yes, I like the makeup of this team and I like their focus. That doesn't make me any less concerned, though.

So what do you think? Is your optimism skyrocketing as you see what's going on in the conference? I'm getting closer, and beating Marshall will be a big help in making me giddy going into Michigan semi-under-the-lights in two weeks.

How Long Does This Band-Aid Fix the Big 12?

Not that I particularly care what the Big 12 does, but whoring themselves out to Texas is probably not the best solution to all of this. However, what choice did Dan Beebe have? Texas wasn't blinking in the staredown and was supposedly really considering bolting for the Pac 10 and -- just as importantly -- taking half the conference with them.

So Beebe acquiesced and gave in to Texas' demands, which, basically are that the Longhorns continue to be the big dog of the conference and now have the right to have their own television network.

Yes, that's right. Not a Big 12 network -- a Texas Longhorns network. Sure, sure, the new deal engineered by the Big 12 and the University of Texas' leadership reaps money for the rest of the remaining Big 12, too, but Texas stands to make the most. Of course.

Consider this: One of the primary complaints by schools like our newest Big Ten member, Nebraska, was that Texas made things all about them. They had to be the biggest, the baddest and they wanted the Big 12 to bend at their whim. Ever since the SWAC/Big 8 days, Texas has been the bully and has minimized other programs within the conference. It was thought that Nebraska was not alone in feeling this way.

Now, with Colorado (somewhat meaningless) and Nebraska (somewhat meaningful) gone from the Big 12, isn't it reasonable to assume that other schools will eventually begin to feel the way they did...if they don't already?

How long does this honeymoon last? Yes, as Orangebloods.com points out, Texas Tech, Oklahoma State, Kansas, Missouri, Baylor, Kansas State and Iowa State will see their TV revenues double under the new deal. But Texas, Oklahoma and A&M will make 50% more than that. And then Texas will launch a Longhorns TV network, or so it appears. AND Texas, Oklahoma and A&M will reportedly get the others' share of the buyout money that Nebraska and Colorado have to pay to the conference.

So yes, everyone will be happy for a little while. But it could be a short period. Once we get to December of next year and nobody is paying attention to the Big 12 anymore because they can't have a title game with fewer than 12 teams in their conference, won't some grumbling begin? Or will they all be too busy counting their money to notice?

My point is the same thing that's been wrong with the Big 12 for years continues to be wrong with it. It's just that they've bought off the "lesser" schools for a little while. But why the pyramid with Texas at the top? Why is that okay? Are the have-nots in the Big 12 that reliant on Texas? Could they not catch on elsewhere? Perhaps that's why, but it's hard to imagine some of those schools (such as Kansas) not being appealing to a conference like the Big Ten.

I think they'll have to annex a couple of schools and get back to 12 and regain the level of significance that they had. Otherwise, it doesn't make sense. Yes, they're all making more money now, which is all that matters to them, but with a title game back in the picture, they could..... make even more money!!

This stuff sucks. Get me to football season.

Football Jambalaya -- Undeserving Edition

Okay, so last week I picked the wrong upset -- I should have taken Arizona and not San Diego. But seriously, did you know anyone who honestly thought the Cardinals were going to win outright? I definitely had a weird feeling going in because we had all written that game off to the Panthers but I never completely loved the Panthers offense. And I saw them have a lead on the Giants and fail to close the G-men out. So I should have known better. I will say this -- when it got to 20-7, I truly knew it was over. One thing I never thought the Panthers could do was come back from a big hole when they'd need to be airing it out. I like Jake Delhomme a lot but he's just not that kind of quarterback. And he proved it. Of course, who expected them to be behind by that much?

As for San Diego, what can I say? I'm just an idiot. I really thought Ben Roethlisberger would play poorly after such a serious whack to the head in his previous game. But he almost played better, didn't he? And the Steelers defense is impressive. And San Diego, in the end, was a .500 team that was only .500 at the end of the season because they got hot. So I shoulda known. Again.

And as for the Giants, I don't even want to talk about it. It hurt enough to lose to the Eagles, but to then realize that all that stood between them and another Super Bowl appearance was a home game against the 6-seed Iggles and a home game against the 9-7, 4-seed Cardinals, well, that sucks. And interestingly, all four teams left are teams the Giants beat this season. How's that for an extra kick in the beans

Whatever, let's get on with it.

Philadelphia Eagles @ Arizona Cardinals -- Okay, it's not that they're "undeserving." They did what they needed to do to get here. But seriously, the Cardinals and the Eagles? Two 9-win teams? Whatever, they're here and that's all that matters to them and their fans. And it's all that should matter. So who wins? Well, I think both games this weekend are harder than usual to pick. Normally there's a clear favorite at this time of year, but without knowing the lines, I couldn't tell you who should be favored.

Both are obviously playing well. The Cardinals have looked more than lucky so far, too, having run up points on both their opponents -- both of whom were thought to have pretty good defenses, too. On the other hand, the Eagles honestly should have lost to Minnesota. If Westbrook doesn't break that one 71-yard screen or if Minnesota has a professional quarterback, I think that games goes the other way. And then they looked just as lifeless as the Giants until they suddenly were able to move the ball in the second half. And Samuel's pick certainly got them going in the right direction in both games. So I guess what I'm saying is the Eagles have won with some fortuitous bounces and opponents who weren't playing up to their capabilities, while the Cardinals have won because they've been clicking.

However, I just cannot imagine the Eagles letting Larry Fitzgerald dominate like Carolina did, although I know the Eagles are a blitzing team so maybe covering Fitz isn't a strength. And speaking of blitzing, I don't have a good feeling about Kurt Warner handling pressure. However, a friend of mine pointed out Warner's stats against the blitz, and they're amazing. My only thought on that is that having either Fitzgerald or Boldin as your hot route means you have two monsters able to reel in your panic-induced lasers as a blitz bears down on old Kurt.

What does all this mean? Well, I can see the Eagles winning just because as unimpressive as they've been to me, they just keep finding a way. And I can see Arizona winning because, well, they've been convincing. And they're even better at home. If they get a quick start again, it could be trouble for the Iggles.

Oh, a couple other thoughts on the Eagles... do you realize McNabb is only 32? Five NFC title games and he's just 32. And the a-hole fans in Philly were ready to run him out of there a month or so ago. Same with Andy Reid. I know the guy mismanages the clock sometimes, but this guy is a consistently good coach. And even though I know they haven't won a Super Bowl, we all know that once you're in the playoffs it's kind of a crapshoot. Getting there time after time is very impressive. And yes, it's difficult for me to compliment/defend a Philly sports team.

This truly could go either way and so I'm just going to go with the team that I think it playing better right now.

Cardinals 27, Eagles 20

Baltimore Ravens @ Pittsburgh Steelers -- One team I keep getting right is the Ravens. I, like everyone, knew they'd dismantle Noodlearm Pennington and the Dolphins in round one and I also felt confident they could beat the Kerry Collins-led Titans in round two. However, let's all cool it on anointing Joe Flacco the next fricking Joe Montana. He was 9/23 against the Fins and while he was slightly better against Tennessee, the Ravens barely let him throw the ball in the first half (I think he was 3 of 8 at halftime). That can only be done for so long. And yes, I know the Ravens defense has won them those two games, but if Tennessee doesn't turn the ball over so much last weekend, it's a different story. Maybe Flacco wins the game with his arm, but we'll never know because Alge Crumpler and Lendale White fell down and went boom.

And as for the Steelers, well, as I admitted above, they're better than I thought. I was never impressed during the year with them, seeing them lose some critical games and then only winning others (i.e., Dallas) when the other team made a critical error. And the other thing that worries me a bit if I'm a Pitts fan is that they've already beaten the Ravens twice this year. Beating a team three times is very unusual, but I do think that stat is a little overrated. Because it's a long season and they no longer need to beat the Ravens three times -- they need to beat them once. At home.

Are the defenses even? They're close, I'll tell you that. I'd still give the edge to the Ravens and that is significant because as good as Roethlisberger played last week, the Chargers are no where near the Ravens defensively. Could I see Big Ben getting blasted by Lewis or Suggs and giving way to Byron Leftwich? I sure could. And could I see Ed Reed picking apart the Steelers passing game? Yes, again.

But if the Steelers can get some points on the board, I'm just not yet convinced the Ravens can match them. Flacco does have a great arm and I admit plays very well for a rookie. But we haven't seen him win the game for his team yet. If he were playing the Chargers, I'd give it more thought. But against that Steelers D, I just don't know.

Again, I can truly see either team winning and, again, I don't think that's usually the case in the title games. Usually there's a clear favorite. But I guess (hope) that just means we'll have some good games this weekend.

Steelers 16, Ravens 13

Last Week: 1-3

Overall: 3-5

Football Jambalaya! Conference Championship Edition

Green Bay's Seinfeldian Strategy Backfires as Eli Enjoys Family Matters Instead -- Says That Urkell Guy "Cracks Him Up"

Now there's the happy face of a kid who has just won his eighth-grade football championship.

See, even I can't help but poke fun at Eli Manning. He looks like a kid. And maybe that's because he kind of is. Eli was born in 1981, folks. he just turned 26 a few weeks ago. And he's in the Super Bowl four years sooner than his more-famous big brother and, yes, I think that's worth noting.

This guy was written off many times in the last few years by the New York fans and media. There were always some who said he needed more time and that they weren't going to give up on him and I was one of those fans. But even I fully admit that I never thought the Giants would seriously go anywhere with Eli at the helm... not for a while at least. I looked at him like a lot of past Giants quarterbacks, kind of like Kerry Collins. At the end of the season, the guy has twenty-something touchdown passes and 3500-4000 yards passing and you go, wow, this guy must be kinda good. And then he'd absolutely fold under the pressure in the playoffs or a big spot and you'd realize that he just didn't "have it."

I never thought Eli was bad, mind you. I always felt like we were a little harsh on the guy. He has been a full-time starter for three seasons now and he's made the playoffs all three times. Do you realize how hard that is in today's NFL? He's 29-19 over these past three seasons and 3-2 in the playoffs. And now he's reached a Super Bowl. And they'll be underdogs... again. And against a high seed for the third week in a row.

I'd like to self-congratulate myself right now because I picked the G-men to win yesterday, 24-21...and they indeed won by 3, 23-20. The game played out exactly like I thought it could/would. The Giants D kept the pressure up and the Packers couldn't plow through them like they could against Seattle. And Brett Favre did what I've been waiting for him to do all year through this sham of a "storybook" season -- he reminded us that he's still the "gunslinger" who makes terrible decisions. His first pick should have cost them the game and his second did cost them the game. Not only that, but did anyone else notice Favre throw a Hail Mary at the end of the third quarter? He threw a bomb towards the end zone where he had one possible reciever and THREE Giants d-backs. Did he think there was another halftime coming up? Imagine if THAT one had been intercepted?

Here's another thing to imagine. Imagine if it was Eli and not golden boy Favre who threw that awful pick in overtime. Imagine how Eli would be absolutely crucified by the media and fans alike. He'd be the butt of so many jokes. But with Favre, we get these kinds of excuses:

In fairness to Favre, there were a lot of reasons the Packers lost Sunday.

But the biggest was a horribly-thrown ball in overtime that allowed the Giants to get the ball at about the 30. Horribly-thrown...by Favre. "In fairness."

They couldn't run the ball as they had in the second half of the season -- running back Ryan Grant finished with just 29 yards on 13 carries after gaining 201 in an NFC divisional playoff win over the Seahawks -- and their defense allowed the Giants to control the ball for more than 40 minutes.

Yes, the defense wasn't all that impressive. Yes, Ryan Grant didn't rush for 201 yards but it's hard to blame Ryan Grant only having 13 carries on... Ryan Grant. What is he supposed to do? Steal the ball out of Favre's hands and run away?

To understand Favre's impact on the game, all you have to know are his stats before and after halftime. He completed 10 of 18 passes for 163 yards and a touchdown in the first half. He completed just nine of 17 passes for 73 yards with two interceptions in the second half and overtime.

I love this stuff. 90 of those 163 first-half yards came on one pass to Donald Driver. So take that away and he had exactly the same yardage in both halves. And did anyone else see why Driver was wide open? Because after he and his cornerback locked up, Driver flung the corner to the ground and sprinted downfield. That's actually not allowed but since it was in Green Bay I guess that rule was suspended. (Officiating was overall pretty piss-poor, by the way, and it's good that the officials didn't cost anyone the game.)

And this following line I can't quite follow... is the author trying to sort of semi-imply that the INT wasn't all Favre's fault?

In fact, he actually thought the pass was in trouble from the moment it left his right hand. Wide receiver Donald Driver was supposed to run a "shake" route on second-and-8 from the Packers' 28-yard line, but Favre's pass sailed behind the receiver after Driver made his out cut.

Hard to say.

And the piling on Eli even hasn't stopped. They even compared Favre's pick to something Eli would do, since he's, you know, such a f-ckup:

He got a reprieve in overtime after Corey Webster intercepted a struggling Brett Favre -- the kind of mistake Manning often has made before his recent turnaround.

Actually, Eli's never thrown a pick that deadly in the playoffs so knock it off.

The other guy I'm most happy for is Tom Coughlin. Tom has been under a lot of scrutiny as well, and again by the NY media and fans. And, like Eli, it's unjustified. Coughlin has taken the team to the playoffs three straight years, which is impressive, I don't care what happens after that. And Coughlin has survived near mutinies by his teams and he's also outlasted Tiki Barber. Ah, Tiki, the jerkwad who said he'd still be playing if not for Coughlin and who said Eli's attempts at leadership were "comical".... thankfully, the Giants were free of Tiki leadership and they've meandered their leaderless way to the Super Bowl! So good for Coughlin. He's a good man and a good coach. So he's a little intense. At least we got to see him smile yesterday. And who doesn't love smiles?

My last comment on the Giants-Pack game was the weather. I love how everyone assumed it was a huge advantage for the Packers. My wife even said, "I think the Giants are going to lose because the Packers are used to this weather." And that shows that that kind of thinking was girl thinking. See, everyone, both teams have to play in the same weather. It doesn't matter that it was the Packers home field. It was subzero for both teams and human beings get cold -- I don't care where they live. And as far as being used to it... well, this was the third-coldest title game ever so I doubt any of them have experienced this level of cold. And not only that, most games at Lambeau aren't played in mid-to-late January so it's hard to imagine it's ever typically that cold in, say, November. No, the weather doesn't matter, especially when you're playing a team from a somewhat cold, Northern locale like the Giants.

Some pics from the Giants-Pack game follow.

Brr! It's cold, ya'll! I guess you won't have to read stories for the next two weeks about how back in Kiln, Mississippi I sand down balsa wood using nothing by my manly whiskers! Yeehaw!

Archie Manning hugs Tom Coughlin. I guess Archie decided to use his "incognito Indiana Jones" disguise.

Lawrence Tynes leads the way to the bratwurst and jacuzzi tubs.

Patriots Win, But In Boring-Ass Game

Was it just me or was that a really boring game? I was honestly expecting the Pats to come out and bomb the Chargers back to California. I was thinking it'd be like 28-3 at the half. But the Chahjuhs defense definitely held firm and worked Brady over. Three picks, Tommy? Three? That's not so good. Try doing that against the Giants and see how it works out. He won't, of course, because Brady never has consecutive bad games, but if he did, it would hurt the Pats. Mainly because the Giants can score touchdowns and the Chargers couldn't do anything but knock some field goals through.

Which is why when the Pats went up 21-12 early in the fourth, me and the guys I was watching with said, "That's the game."And Mrs. Money said, "Wait, why is that the game? There's like almost a whole quarter left. I don't get why you guys say that." And I then explained why we all felt that way -- the Chargers didn't look like they could possibly pump in two touchdowns in the final quarter so there was no way they were coming back. It really was foregone at that point. And it turned out to be true.

I don't have much else to say about this game because we all knew how it was going to turn out. I do give a lot of credit to the banged-up Chargers for getting this far and to Norv Turner for actually not appearing to be a terrible coach at all. Tomlinson, you're a sissy... saying you're 90% all week and then playing one series. Solid, man. Was it too cold for you in those mean Patriots' house? What a waste.

Pics from the fun in Foxboro...

Tom Brady reads a note left by last year's AFC champ QB Peyton Manning: "I still punked your ass last year, bitch."

The Pats are so good they give themselves challenges to keep the game interesting. Here, RB Kevin Faulk rushes with his eyes closed to give the Chargers at least a fighting chance.

More Proof That ESPN.com Polls Are Dumb

ESPN.com has a thingie up right now where you click on your favorite team and then vote for who you're pulling for in the Super Bowl. This is kind of clever but I'm not sure people get it.

I clicked on the Giants and it says, "Giants fans: Which team are you rooting for?" Now, shouldn't Giants fans be rooting for the Giants? One would think. And they pretty much are. But I was expecting it to say 98% for the Giants. No, after I voted, it showed 81.2% are rooting for the Giants and 18.7% for the Pats. What? What Giants fans are rooting for the Pats? If you're rooting for the Pats to have a perfect season, well, then you're not a Giants fan and I officially revoke your credentials.

Candidate For The Dumbest Thing I've Seen on Fox's Pregame Show:

Before the game started, we got to see the Fox team looking like frozen imbeciles (instead of room temperature imbeciles) because they thought it made sense to broadcast from the field at Lambeau. Somebody please explain to me what the point of this is. Do we care any more about what they're saying if they say it from inside Lambeau? Are they more credible? It's the same reason I think it's so stupid when a television field reporter is reporting on a hurricane and they go to the place where it's making landfall and stand in the storm. What's the point?

But no, just them being there wasn't the dumbest thing I saw. No, the dumbest was when Jimmy Johnson poured water from a bottle into a glass and said, "We'll see what this is like after the game!"

What? It's water, Jimmy. And we've already established that it's -2 outside. So it'll freeze. What's the point? To prove that water freezes below 32 F? Didn't we all learn this in Earth Science class? How frickin' stupid.

Candidate For The Dumbest Statistic I've Ever Heard:

After the game, Fox actually told us that the Giants were "the first team to reach the Super Bowl by beating three Super Bowl winners."

Wha?? The Bucs won their Super Bowl...when, in Jan 2003? Five years ago? With different players? The Packers won their last one, when, a decade ago? And the Cowboys won their last one even longer ago than that. Absolutely brilliant, Fox. You've found the statistic with the least meaning ever.

Stupid Michael Jordan-esque "Nobody Respects Us" Quote Of The Weekend:

After the Pats beat the Chargers to go to the Super Bowl and advance to 18-0 this season, super-sized idiot Rodney Harrison was interviewed after the game and said things about how "it's not bad for a group of over-30, washed-up, can't-run guys, huh? Not bad."

Yeah, um, Rodney? Come over here a sec. Yeah, nobody has ever said the Patriots defense is washed up. Nobody said it, nobody thought it, nobody thinks it, nobody would even dream of it. Your team is 18-0. You cannot -- I repeat, cannot -- play the "Nobody respects us" card. You simply can't. Everyone respects you. Everyone is afraid of you. Your team is a more than two-TD favorite in the Super Bowl. So shut the hell up.

----------------------------

That's all for now.... but you know there will be more.

Do You Realize What Eli Could Do On Sunday?

I'm not sure you understand what could happen on Sunday if Eli Manning and the Giants win one more game and move on to the Super Bowl. I know, I'm as surprised as you are that Eli's one win from the Super Bowl, especially considering the way this season began. But here we are. And if the Giants win Sunday, the following happens:

-Eli Manning has taken a team the Super Bowl. (Read that again.)

-Eli and the Giants will have won three straight road playoff games.

-Eli and the Giants will have knocked off the top two seeds in the NFC.

-Eli and the Giants will have won a playoff game at Green Bay, where it's supposedly so mythical and Brett Favre is such a legend, that the ghost of Vince Lombardi decided to change television programming to disrupt Eli.

-Eli will have beaten Saint Favre, the patron saint of ill-advised, forced passes that turn into interceptions.

-Eli will have taken his team to a Super Bowl four years sooner than his brother Peyton did.

So, seriously, would you have believed any of those things were possible at the start of the season? Let alone all of them being possible at once with one more victory?

This all probably means the Giants will flop spectacularly. But if we're going to take cosmic forces out of it, I think the Giants have a really good chance.

The Giants are playing well right now. Not "on fire" as a lot of media types would have you believe... just "well." They aren't doing anything brilliantly -- rather, they're just doing a lot of things well and they're not making mistakes and giving the game away. Eli isn't throwing picks. They aren't fumbling. They aren't missing opportunities to score when they should score. Nobody's playing out of their minds, though, and that's a good thing because it means getting here hasn't been a fluke. The Giants are just solid enough and with a talented enough defense to sneak past one more team.

The Packers, by the way, are not as good as everyone seems to want to believe. I know it's a fun storybook season for Favre and seeing him go back to the Super Bowl would be neat-o. But, remember, then we'd be subjected to endless stories about aw-shucks Brett Favre and how he's such a "gamer" and how he's so down-home and how he's from Mississippi and how he's able to eat lightning and crap thunder. Please. Spare me.

He's a great QB who belongs in the Hall of Fame. BUT -- Brett Favre has thrown a lot of terrible picks in his career and made many bad decisions. Sure he has the all-time lead in passing yards and TDs but this is as much a product of his impressive (and some might say, detrimentally stubborn) longevity as anything else. He's a QB who passes a lot and who has played every game since 1992. 60,000 passing yards happens that way. So does more than 200 picks.

But I don't mean to rail on Brett Favre. Brett Favre is indeed awesome. I, like many, just get tired of the not-so-concealed mancrushes that every sportswriter and broadcaster has on him. But if Brett went back to the Super Bowl against golden boy Tom Brady, I admit that would be pretty nifty, and a whole hell of a lot better than Rex Grossman being led to slaughter against the Colts last year, for example. I admit, even a cynic like me would enjoy the Brady-Favre matchup.

That said, I don't want it to happen because I like the Giants. They're my team. And these kinds of opportunities don't come along often. And it would be so great to see Eli continue to shut people up by giving them nothing to criticize. And if you want a good Super Bowl, you really should be rooting for the Giants. They threw everything they had at the Patriots and lost 38-35. And Eli had a devastating interception in the second half in that game. What if he plays mistake-free against them? Can we at least agree that it's possible that the Giants can play the Pats tough? Good.

And since we're all about transitive properties around here (huh?), remember what happened to Green Bay when they played Dallas? They got smoked. And how did Dallas fair against the Pats? They got super-smoked. And who has beaten Dallas and played the Pats tough? The Giants.

I forget the original point here. But I know that all year I've felt the Packers were overrated. They played a marginal schedule and lost three games -- once they were trounced by the Cowboys and twice they were beaten up by the Bears. Sure, they beat the Giants in Week 2, but those first two games don't count because the Giants defense still thought it was training camp, I think.

Point is, I feel good about this game. The cold doesn't worry me. Lambeau doesn't bother me. I think the Giants defense will get after Favre and if he starts making dumb decisions, the Giants defense will make him pay far more than Seattle's. And speaking of Seattle, did anyone notice that they were up 14-0 on the Pack last weekend? If they Giants get a 14-0 lead, Green Bay will be in a world of trouble.

I know you don't care, but here's what I think:

Giants 24, Packers 21

-----------------------------------------------

There's another game this weekend and it's in the AFC. I know I was talking about the Giants-Pack game at length and I kept making comments that made it sound like the Patriots have a bye into the Super Bowl. And the reason it seemed like I felt that way is because I do feel that way. Sure, I gave the Chargers no chance against the Colts but, really, is it so hard to fathom the Colts losing a home playoff game with ticky-tack mistakes (like Peyton's picks and Marvin's fumble)? If you take out last season, the Colts lose in the playoffs a lot. And just two years ago, they lose the divisional weekend to the Steelers at home. So a team can gameplan for them and beat them and, to their credit, that's what the Chargers did. It certainly didn't hurt SD that in their two wins over Indy this year, Peyton had eight interceptions. Hey, it's football, it happens.

But the Patriots at home are not the Colts at home. At least not this season. The Patriots are fully healthy and have been for most of the season. They've taken everybody's best shots and fended them off. Most people -- myself included -- thought that the Jags last weekend might have been one of the few teams that could have been good enough to a) catch the Pats napping and b) actually hang with them for four quarters. We were all wrong. As good as the Jags are -- and losing to them by 11 in Foxboro isn't bad -- they clearly weren't enough. And I said it last week -- I thought all along that the Colts would be the team with the best chance to beat the Pats and more because of their lack of fear of the Pats than any sort of talent advantage. But now they're off the board, too. Seriously, does anyone look like they could even give the Pats a game? I know I argued in favor of the Giants but the last game of the regular season in Giants Stadium is one thing... the Super Bowl is another.

And the Chargers? Well, they hate the Pats. New England has de-pantsed the Chargers twice in the last calendar year. Once in the playoffs last year and once to kick off this season. LaDanian Tomlinson famously got all pissy at the Pats last year for "disrespecting" the Chargers a-hole, steroid-abusing, preening prick, Shawne Merriman, by doing his "sack dance" after knocking off the Chargers last year. I don't have any love for the Patriots but that was hellishly funny -- both them mocking that stupid dance and the reaction by the Chargers. LT accused the Pats of having no class and he lumped their head coach in with that. Which is really, just, so funny. And I hope when the Pats are done thumping the Bolts that they all put on dark visor helmets and watch a Vizio TV to be creative in mocking LT. Because he deserves it.


Has any game had so many reasons to root against both teams? I mean, the Chargers have always been likable in my memory. Dan Fouts back in the '80s, Flipper Anderson catching passes, warm weather, cool unis, etc. What's not to like? Then in the '90s they had a mini-resurgence, reaching the Super Bowl in 1994 with Stan the man Humphries at quarterback and Natrone Means rushing. It was a likable team and always has been. Now they've got the aforementioned jackass Merriman, the frat boy-level obnoxious Rivers and LT, who I used to kind of like but now I realize is a whiner. When things don't go his way he yells at teammates and coaches and, as I said, got pissed at the Pats last year.

Then of course there are the Patriots. I don't dislike Tom Brady, actually. And as I've said before, it's cool to witness history. And the way that offense churns through games is simply amazing to watch, whether you like them or not. But as I've said before, if they go 19-0, we will all have to hear about it... forevah!

So yes, I'm pulling hard for the Chargers. Not just because it would be cool to see Rivers against Eli in the Super Bowl (the guys traded for each other on draft day) but because it would screw up everything that ESPN is practically already having an orgasm over -- Brady versus Favre.

Alas, there's no way any sentient human being can truly think the Pats aren't going to win and win big. Rivers might not even play and LT has been marginally effective and was hurt for a lot of the Indy game last week. So unless Rivers unleashes a particularly effective Laserface (thanks to KSK for that frickin' hilarious reference, towards the bottom of this post) or LT brings a weapon in like Billy Blanks in Friday Night Lights, I think we're looking at the Patriots in the Super Bowl.

If the Chargers win, I will take a dare from our readers and do whatever they can come up with, within reason, and it will be worth it because the Pats and their fans will be down for the count. And that would be wonderful.

But the pick from me is as follows:

Patriots 33, Chahjuhs 6