NFL- There's an old adage is you don't win Super Bowls in September but you do lose them. I'm sure there's some statistical probability behind it that I'm too lazy check up on but I think it's safe to once again eliminate the Browns by the end of Week 1. Still QB problems, still no playmakers (on offense) and still no offensive coordinator.
- Hmm. What to make of the Texans first ever win versus the Colts? On one hand it's the culmination of a slow building process. On the other, how long have we been hearing this is the Texans year? At minimum the win does I think say to me to keep a closer eye as maybe just maybe...this year is different.
- It seemed fitting that no matter who the QB is for the Eagles they still can't convert on short yardage plays. Bad play calling from Andy Reid doomed the Iggles against the Packers. With Kolb out with a concussion and a defense not really dominant I'm willing to eliminate the Eagles from the Super Bowl conversation as well.
College Football
- The ACC Sucks - I hate making generalizations about an entire conference but the ACC was simply horrid this past week. Miami and FSU lost definitively, G-Tech choked against Kansas, and V-Tech lost to James Fucking Madison. Let me repeat that James Madison. The ACC's futility can only harm Boise State's (or James Madison's) march to the national championship.
- Changing with the wind - That's me with Oklahoma. Initially I had them in the championship game, then after an awful week 1 I jumped ship, now after demolishing FSU..umm...not sure. Perhaps week 1 was a fluke or maybe week 2 was...they are I think headed for a collision with Nebraska to win the Big 12 and that I'll stick with...until next week...
- Western Speed - Outside of 'Bama, has any team down South looked that good? Maybe South Carolina, possibly Florida but everyone else has looked mediocre at best. The team that has stood out to me (at least in terms of speed) so far this year has been Oregon. Their offensive output the past two weeks could put them into a darkhorse role for the BCS Championship game.
Other
- Kevin Durant was the key figure in USA gold medal at the FIBA Championship. I wonder with a number of NBA stars throwing their popularity down the toilet if Durant will become immensely more popular this year
- Rumor has it that the Bulls are considering trading for Carmelo Anthony (in exchange for Noah/Deng/insert name). I hate concern trolling but I don't think this move will work out in the Bulls favor
- If your into that whole baseball thing I recommend following the NL West chase. 3 teams, .5 game (as of writing this), and I believe the losers are fed to the Rancor.
6 comments:
1) I think the Browns have a nice young TE in Evan Moore and a fast RB in Harrison. The QB and O-coordinator are terrible though, so yes, no super bowl this year for the browns.
2) I say keep an eye on the Texans! I think last time they beat the Colts they laid an egg the following week. Let's see how they focus this time around.
3) The ACC had an epically bad week.
4) Kevin Durant was absolutely dominant during the world championships. His performance in the semis (38 points in under 40 minutes) was just silly. He really should become the most popular player. Plus, unlike LeBron, he doesn't heave up fall-away jumpers just to look good. He has a great outside shot... and a great inside game!
5) I can't evaluate the Carmelo to the bulls trade until I know who's involved.
NFL:
It's way too soon to eliminate the Eagles from the Super Bowl. No, Andy Reid is still the ultimate Catch-22 coach (too good to fire, too bad to keep around) but I wouldn't read too much into a seven-point loss when the team's backup QB had to come into the game. Philly will have its challenges but at the end of the day, the NFC is wide open and the Eagles aren't any better or worse than the other handful of contenders.
College Football:
Feel free to generalize. The ACC sucks and all of their glamor teams (VT, FSU, Miami, Georgia Tech) all got humiliated. The conference is officially toast for 2010.
Other:
It's pretty hard to be popular when your team plays in Oklahoma City. It doesn't matter how good Durant might be or that he led Team USA to the FIBA championship or that the other NBA players that people used to like are now one step above Al Qaeda terrorists on the likeability scale, Durant isn't marketed by the NBA and casual fans don't pay attention to teams in tiny little hamlets like OKC.
I'll end by offering up this Simpsons-related bit of humor:
http://www.randallsimonssausages.com/cool-stuff/cool-lists/simpsons-style-nfl-preview.html
"Tiny little hamlets like OKC". Can you tell that MJ is a New Yorker?
That said, he's right on all counts. But I do think that the NBA could market Durant - he is that good - and if done well, it could raise his profile, the league's image, and the Thunder's success (surely, the league wants the team to succeed financially...right?).
Hadn't heard a thing here in Chicago about a Bulls/Melo trade. Not a word.
@MJ - That simpsons preview was pretty good. Nice find!
@MJ - I actually disagree in some aspects regarding Durant... he is good enough to generate a lot of marketing, even though he plays in OKCity. Look, if LeBron can generate as much attention as he did in Cleveland; I see no reason why Durant can't also grow to be as big.
The Melo-Bulls rumor was from espn
http://sports.espn.go.com/chicago/nba/news/story?id=5550421
not sure it's validity but figured it was worthy of discussion.
I also agree I'm not sure why Durant couldn't be marketed. Location doesn't particularly matter in this day and age...
@Hitman: Oklahoma City is the nation's 45th-largest television market. If you want to tell me that it's not a hamlet by NBA market standards, you'd be incorrect.
@Gutsy/Mighty: You should re-read what I wrote. I'm not saying the NBA won't market him because he's in a small market, I'm saying they haven't marketed him for reasons only known to NBA leadership. If the NBA chooses not to feature Durant through its promotional arm then it'll be very hard for Durant's profile to increase specifically because he's in a small market. Only the NBA can control how many people have access to Durant.
Separately, one has to question why the NBA has chosen to ignore Durant as a marketable NBA icon. He was a #2 overall draft pick and just recently won the NBA scoring title. I can't think of too many other NBA scoring champions -- the NBA's version of the HR champion in baseball -- that haven't been marketed so, for whatever reason, the NBA has decided that Durant isn't as exciting or charismatic as Kevin Garnett, Lebron James, Dwayne Wade, Dwight Howard, Chris Paul or Kobe Bryant.
Finally, Cleveland is the nation's 18th-largest television market and is twice as large as Oklahoma City's market. While Cleveland may be considered a smaller market by its own residents or the national media, in TV terms, that's not at all an accurate characterization. It's about average in size relative to other NBA cities.
Post a Comment