Thursday, November 08, 2007

Cuz I’m In The Mood To Rant, OK?!

As if I need an excuse to invoke my inner Swearengen*; the following are things I need explained to me:

1. Dynasty? Where? If I hear one more time about how the Red Sox have a budding dynasty, I’ll declare World War III. The reflexive nature of mainstream sports media makes it such that a winner is crowned to repeat in perpetuity. The Spurs won in 2003? Then they’ll win in 2004. The Heat won in 2006? Then they’ll win in 2007. The Red Sox won in 2007? Surely nothing could ever happen that would prevent them from winning in 2008 and beyond. Right?

The Boston Red Sox won the World Series because they were the best team in baseball from start to finish in 2007. But, in case no one’s been paying attention, the last time a team repeated as World Series champions was the 2000 New York Yankees. Teams just don’t repeat in baseball anymore. Part of the reason is that the short Divisional Series makes it much harder for teams to make it through the playoffs unscathed. Part of the reason is that luxury tax and revenue sharing are providing some industrious teams the opportunity to develop and control cheap young talent for long enough to contend in short bursts (see Oakland, Cleveland, Minnesota, and Florida as examples). In short, the playoffs are a crapshoot.

So, why would they be considered a potential dynasty? Because they won a World Series a few years ago? So did the Chicago White Sox. Is it because Jon Lester was able to bounce back from cancer and pitch into the 6th inning of Game 4 of the World Series? Or is it because the team has incredible team chemistry? The Red Sox were one Cleveland Indians gut-check away (sorry Mighty & Gutsy) from going home without having their asses kissed. They’re not a perfect team in any way. After all, as everyone loves to point out about the Yankees, the Red Sox had the highest payroll of World Series winner in baseball history. And for all that money, they still only won their division by two games and needed to win three elimination games to beat the Indians.

The point is this: no one should hand the Red Sox the 2008 trophy. If they don’t repeat, they can’t even be considered a dynasty. Why are we even using the “D” word with a team that finished in third place two years after winning their first World Series in 86 years?

2. Sports Illustrated and ESPN are both spending ungodly amounts of time breaking down this weekend’s Giants-Cowbitches game. A part of the analysis was about how Eli Manning looks like he’s taken the “next step” (whatever the hell that means). Why would anyone think such a thing? Does anything in his statistical record indicate that 2007 is going better for him than 2004-2006? Let’s investigate:

First, his stats to date:

20078 Games

145-249 (Comp-Att)/ 58.2% Comp%/ 1,584 Yds/ 13 TD/ 9 INT/ 4 Fum (3 lost)/ 79.5 Passer Rating

Now his career stats prior to this season:

2004-200641 Games

690-1,276 (Comp-Att)/ 54.0% Comp%/ 8,049 Yds/ 54 TD/ 44 INT/ 21 Fum (5 lost)/ 73.2 Passer Rating

His 2007 stats look awfully close to his career numbers if you draw the 2007 numbers out over 16 games. So, where’s the maturation? Where’s this next step? How does Eli Manning look better to people in 2007? Keep in mind, this is a guy that was absolutely and totally trashed by every single person that talks about the NFL. The entire off-season was an all-Eli, all-the-time analysis of why the Giants were going to be so putrid in 2007. Well, he has been putrid. And the team’s been feasting on lousy opponents.

To put Eli’s 2007 season into context, he is the 19th ranked QB based on Passer Rating. He is a scant 1.3 points ahead of 21st-ranked Joey Harrington. So don’t tell me that Eli’s “making strides” or “taking the next step” or “almost there” because he’s not. He’s the same QB he’s always been in his career. He’s just slightly below average in a league where average QB’s only last as long as their contract enables them to play. The day Eli’s rookie contract expires is the day he ceases to be starter-worthy in the NFL.

The Giants suck for a number of reasons. Eli Manning is one of them. I can’t wait for the Giants to do their usual 2-6 routine in the second half. Then we can have another predictable ride on the merry-go-round where everyone will say that Eli sucks. And then – of course – everyone will change their minds again.

ELI SUCKS. GIANTS SUCK. Nothing more to say.

FTB.

*If anyone wants to buy me this t-shirt, I won’t say no. Damn HBO for pulling the plug on the show that taught me how to use the word “cocksucker” as a noun, a verb, an adjective, an adverb, and as part of a prepositional phrase.

No comments: