2011 Week two picks

Evening. Or morning. Possibly afternoon. It all depends on when you're viewing this. For me it's 04:24 ZULU, or Greenwich Mean Time as it's otherwise known. Such is the joy of being a Football fan who lives in the UK and must subsequently live a moderately anti-social lifestyle in order to indulge in a life long passion. But there you go, everyone chooses their own path and all that McGuffin.

So, today I want to do my picks for this weekend, but much depends on the need for sleep and the availability of strong coffee.

Before I do though, I want to pick up the whole Steelers/Ravens spat that has been going on this week, with the Steelers accusing the Ravens of using illegal blocks and the Ravens saying that's rubbish, everything they've done is perfectly legal. The story was picked up by ProFootballTalk.com and that's the only reason I'm interested in it myself, because I enjoy shitting on Mike Florio and proving him wrong (just purely for my own entertainment), and not because of any sympathies with irritating Steelers fans who mundanely insist their team is still dominant, despite the fact they lost the Super Bowl last February.

The story was originally reported on that site by Michael David Smith. There was a follow up post later in which Ravens Head Coach John Harbaugh explained that the blocks were;

"... 100 percent legal, and it’s 100 percent ethical, and there is no danger whatsoever in the way the block is being executed because it’s in front."

Which is a straight lie. The blocks in question were illegal and it's precisely because they were not executed in front. Of course that doesn't stop one of the biggest blowhards in the mainstream media - Mike Florio - from pitching in;

"But the Steelers, and folks like ESPN’s Merril Hoge, apparently don’t understand the chop block rule,"

Now strictly speaking, the Steelers have got the rule regarding 'Chop Blocks' wrong. But as a journalist who is attacking the integrity and knowledge of the Steelers and of fellow journalist Merril Hoge, not to mention trying to take a smug stance of superior knowledge in all things rule based, it beehoves Florio to go and watch the film and make sure there that everything is in order before commenting. Which is something even an amateur like myself did.

The problem is this; there was a foul being committed by the Ravens, it just wasn't specifically 'chop blocking'. Whether the Steelers just didn't know the correct terminology or not, they at least knew something was wrong and they were right. Still following this? While it is perfectly legal for two adjacent offensive linemen to high/low a defensive player (which is where the argument over chop blocks stems from), what those offensive linemen are not allowed to do is hit a player below the knees, from behind.

This is what is known as 'clipping'. The official explanation, according to the NFL's own website is;

Clipping: Throwing the body across the back of an opponent’s leg or hitting him from the back below the waist while moving up from behind unless the opponent is a runner or the action is in close line play.

The observant among you will jump on that last sentence about 'close line play' (the less observant should stop yacking on the phone to that person who you don't need to be talking to right now). But if you follow the link above to NFL.com and their definitions of the various terms, you'll see close line play right underneath clipping;

Close Line Play: The area between the positions normally occupied by the offensive tackles, extending three yards on each side of the line of scrimmage. It is legal to clip above the knee

I underlined the final sentence because that's what's important. Clipping is only legal in close line play when the clip occurs above the knee. Below it is still a foul. And this - friends - ok, acquaintances - is where we come to picture time. Basically the best picture I could get is taken from a clip of the NFL Networks 'Playbook' show. This is merely a screen capture of one of their videos, to which they obviously own all rights etc. All I've done is insert a red circle in order to draw your eyes to the correct location.

What you can hopefully see is Steelers Nose Tackle Casey Hampton getting his legs taken out from under him by the Ravens right guard who takes a shot at Hamptons ankles. That - my acquaintances - is what Hampton and the Steelers were complaining about. And that is indeed an illegal block.

The moral of the story? Watch the video first Florio, before you make one of your stupid, smug, sweeping assertions. Unlike a certain blogger I know. What you might also be able to see in the picture is that I refuse to use Akamai's "high quality" video service, basically on the principle that their standard quality service is shit and plagued with glitches, so I can only presume the high quality videos will be the same, they'll just be a bit sharper and take three times as long to load.

Or in other words - fuck that and on with the picks.

Raiders @ Bills; A tricky pick right out of the gate. On the one hand you have a Bills team that went on a riot week one and destroyed the Chiefs. But you also have a Raiders team who ran the ball really well against the Broncos and are certain to not abandon the run so quickly as the Chiefs did in week one. The question then becomes - for me - whether you think the Bills can stop the run and.... I think they can. I really do. I think they've done a lot of good work drafting and preparing that defensive front since Chan Gailey took over as a Head Coach and I think their passing game is leagues ahead of the Raiders. Bills win.

Packers @ Panthers; The Cam Newton express is on display at home for the first time in the regular season and there is a lot of optimism abounding, both in the locker room, the stands and around the media. Cam Newton threw for 400+ yards in his first appearance and showed a number of desirable traits. Well that's all well and good, but I happen to believe he also showed a number of undesirable traits as well and that the Packers defense is going to be a much tougher nut to crack. Mix in Aaron Rodgers ripping up the Carolina D and I'm afraid I'm going to have to put the brakes on the Newton express for one week. Packers win.

Chiefs @ Lions; I have to ask myself one thing - do I believe that Todd Haley will finally lean on his rushing attack? The answer is no. And even then, I think the Lions D-line is good enough, just, to keep that rushing attack in check and allow Matthew Stafford to open up a lead against a vulnerable Chiefs secondary. Lions win.

Browns @ Colts; Did you watch last weeks Colts game? If you did, then you wont even need an explanation for this. Browns win.

Buccaneers @ Vikings; The Minnesota Vikings come in 2011 and they entertain a Buccaneers team that is angry over its week one loss to the Lions. I think the Buccaneers will run it more this week and frankly I don't think they'll have to do too much to beat the Vikings. The Vikings offensive line was horrendous in week one and the Buccaneers have more than enough playmakers on their defense to expose that weakness. Buccaneers win.

Bears @ Saints; Tough one. The Bears had a great start to the season, certainly way beyond the expectations I had for them. The Saints lost to an explosive Packers team, but gave the Packers D a good licking at times just to let them know they were still in the game. Honestly, I think the Bears have been skating on thin ice for a long time now and this is the game where the ice breaks, letting Drew Brees and company flood that secondary for some big points. Saints win.

Jaguars @ Jets; As impressed with the Jaguars as I was in week one, and as much as I dislike Mark Sanchez for his inconsistency, I still can't look beyond New York in this game. I just don't think the Jaguars have the offensive line to contain Bart Scott and the Jets pass rush, nor do the Jaguars have the ability to do the reverse, with their own pass rush being too weak I think to seriously hamper the Jets offense. Jets win.

Seahawks @ Steelers; Pete Carrol brings his Seahawks side east across the states to face a Pittsburgh team that is licking its wounds after being mauled by the Ravens. I can't see the Steelers giving Seattle anything less than 100% as a result. They're going to be angry in this game and much more focused during practice this week. I think the Seahawks don't have the tools in any phase of offense to do much damage to Pittsburgh and I think their defense lacks enough bite to really expose a Steelers line that was shown last week to be a bit ropey. Steelers win.

Ravens @ Titans; The Titans offense looked bad last week. Really bad. I can't see that improving against the Ravens. Ray Lewis, Haloti Ngata, Terrell Suggs and the rest of the Ravens front seven are well placed to pour the misery on Chris Johnson and Matt Hasselbeck, while the Titans defensively really don't have the speed to get after Joe Flacco, or a single player who can really contain Ray Rice. Ravens win.

Cardinals @ Redskins; Both these teams got big wins in week one, but only one team really asserted itself. The Redskins handed a butt kicking to an otherwise pretty good Giants team, meanwhile the Cardinals somewhat scraped through against the Panthers, relying on a special teams return to wrap it up. I think Rex Grossman is good enough to exploit the weaknesses in the Cardinals secondary, I think the Redskins O-line is good enough to contain the Cardinals pass rush and to overpower their rush defense, while the Redskins pass rush is well poised to exploit the Cardinals weaker O-line. Redskins win.

Cowboys @ 49ers; As much as I would love to see my 49ers pound the Cowboys into the floor, that is patently a pipe dream. Offensively the 49ers might just be one of the worst teams in the NFL right now. It's a close run thing between them, the Manning-less Colts and the Tavaris Jackson lead Seahawks. And as much as we all like to bash Tony Romo, he did have a good start to last Sunday Nights game. That should be all he needs to put this one beyond the reach of San Francisco. Cowboys win.

Bengals @ Broncos; John Fox will trot out for a second home game with the Broncos, this time looking for a much better result with Kyle Orton still at the head of his offense, and hopefully without his fans starting up any Tebow chants. The Bengals will be looking to capitalise on a great team start to the season and impressive individual performances from both rookie quarterback Andy Dalton and his back up Bruce Gradkowski. Personally I think the Bengals running game will be a little too strong for the Broncos and that could tip the balance of an otherwise tight game. Bengals win.

Texans @ Dolphins; Despite their terrible start to the season from a scoreline perspective, the Dolphins actually did ok on offense. They certainly looked improved compared to last year. Chad Henne was more confident and the receiving corps looked a little more in tune. Is that enough to beat a Texans team that has markedly improved its defense? I'm not sure. The Dolphins O-line should stand up to the pressure a little better than the Colts did last week, but can Miami's defense get after Matt Schaub and slow the Texans passing attack? I'm going to take a punt here and go out on a limb by saying yes. Dolphins win.

Chargers @ Patriots; No doubt, Phillip Rivers is a great quarterback. No doubt the Chargers have a great offense all round, and a pretty good defense. But good enough to beat the Patriots? I mean Tom terrific? Tom Brady? The three rings Brady, golden boy of the NFL? Now that's a tough ask. The Patriots pass protection was rock solid for the most part against the Dolphins and Brady looked as good as he's ever been. The form book would say take New England and I think that's exactly what I'm going to do, though I do think the Chargers will keep this one close. Patriots win.

Eagles @ Falcons; Mike Vick returns to Atlanta, which might have been special were it not for the fact that he's already done this once since signing with the Eagles. Question is, can he come away with a win? Last week he really struggled at times throwing the football, yet still managed to generate enough big plays to push his team through to victory. The Eagles defense meanwhile was very vulnerable against the run, which means their is a mismatch in favour of the Falcons back Michael Turner. Will the Falcons keep it on the ground and chew some clock? Can their offensive line actually pass protect this week? I'm going out on another limb here and saying yes. Falcons win.

Rams @ Giants; Both had losing starts, with the Rams losing to the explosive Eagles offense and the Giants losing to Rex Grossman. No offense Rex. Now when I look at this game the first thing I see is the Giants pass rush. I see guys like Jason Pierre-Paul ripping across the line and making short work of the Rams O-line. I see Eli Manning as just good enough to expose the holes in the Rams secondary. And I see a home victory for New York. Giants win.

I'll be back either Sunday night or Monday night to share my thoughts on the weekends games. Till then, have a beer. Relax. And enjoy week two of the NFL season.

Thursday Night Football

Time for a bit of Thursday Night pick 'em. But first, more complaining. I have a simple question; who the hell does Rodger Goodell think he is? Two of the latest fines that have caught my attention are these: Kenny Britt; fined $5,000 for wearing a towel that had "#10 VY" written on it during the Colts game. Tony Brown; fined $5,000 for wearing red cleats during the Colts game. I don't get it? How in the name of god does the NFL have the power or even the right to fine someone $5,000 (Five. Thousand. Dollars.) just for wearing a pair of cleats that aren't of an approved color? I could understand if the team itself wanted to discipline a player who had been asked not to do a certain thing (like wear red cleats) or who they felt was taking actions negative to the clubs image (with the VY towel), but even then not to the tune of $5,000. It's just getting ludicrous. The amount of control wielded by the commissioner and the way it's being wielded is absolutely absurd. What annoys me the most though is three fold: 1) Goodell's smug face. 2) Why the national media aren't doing more. 3) Why the players aren't doing more. Everyone just seems to be sitting on their God damn hands hoping that this is some aberration for the 2010 season that will blow over in time. Well it's not going to is it. What we've seen consistently is that if Goodell wants something and nobody puts up a fight, then he gets it. He's not going to back down from his current dictatorial approach unless someone applies a little pressure. Which is why I'd like to see the US media do something for a change. The analysts on NFL Network sometimes mention it in passing, or complain during a highlight reel, but I don't see an organised resistance. I don't see them banding together and making their feelings known more vociferously. And what about the other networks? Everyone complains briefly but then does nothing more. Why? As a mere blogger with a (very) limited reach, I have basically zero power to put a stop to all of this. But the big networks? They represent (or at least should do) NFL fans across the states and the world, and they have an obligation I feel to make the fans concerns known. They also have the power, if they dislike Goodell (which, judging by their comments many do) to put that message out there and make it clear that Goodell is an ass who needs to go. And the Players? I've heard some comments from a few Baltimore and Pittsburgh players, but that's it. The rest of the league..... almost nothing. Everyone seems to be happy to complain about these things on Twitter or to quietly grumble to their local rag, but where is the concerted effort to make a stand? When are these people going to grow a sack and start hitting out with a unified voice against Goodell? Yeah you might get fined a few thousand dollars. Yeah maybe the owners might look at you with a little suspicion. But that's why you all get together and go balls to the wall to make a point. That goes for the press to. They've got to stop kissing Goodell's ass and actually stand up for what's right. Just look at that weasel Mike Florio at ProFootballTalk.com. He used to be all about the fans and reporting unbiasedly about whatever issues came up. Now he's practically a step away from being Goodell's lap dog because he smells a chance to get a permanent slot on NBC television. This is precisely what free speech and free press was designed for; to allow people to hit back at dictatorial regimes like Goodell's. It's about fucking time some of these big shot media people exercised that right and told Goodell - on behalf of the fans if nothing else - where he can stuff his fines, stuff his "enhanced season" and where he can stuff his ridiculous "roughing the passer" penalties too! Ahem. What was I saying? Ah yes, Thursday Night pick! San Francisco 49ers @ San Diego Chargers: Interesting. The 49ers had a great game last Sunday, as did the Chargers. Both teams need a win pretty badly to keep alive their respective hopes of making it to the playoffs. Of course, the fact that I just mentioned the 49ers and the playoffs in the same sentence says a lot about the NFC West this year. San Francisco's hopes are alive only because of the spectacular level of mediocrity that exists in their division. They've been no better really. Or have they? After getting soundly whipped by the Seahawks in week 1, they then took the defending Super Bowl champions right to the wire. The Chiefs battered them the next week only for the 49ers to have the Falcons nearly wrapped up a week later. Only a god awful fumble allowed the Falcons to snatch victory from the Jaws of certain defeat. A week after the 49ers took the Eagles to the wire and lost by 3, then went on to beat the Raiders. Then lost, somehow, to the Panthers. They then beat the Broncos and Rams in successive games before being blown out by the Bucs'. They trounced the Cardinals, got run over a week later by the Packers, then hammered the Seahawks into the floor. All in all, something of a sketchy season for my 49ers. But they are probably a bit better than that record tells. Especially when you look at the performance of Alex Smith last week. Operating in the Shotgun and using more of a spread style look, Smith was suddenly back in his comfort zone and doing well. Well enough to beat the Chargers? That's hard to say. The 49ers defense isn't exactly the most stout in the league, despite sporting a number of very good (read; under rated) players at various positions. That kind of poses a problem against the Chargers, what with them having Philip Rivers at Quarterback. And Vincent Jackson at wide receiver. And the rest of the Chargers receivers. And Jacob Hester at Fullback. And Mike Tolbert or Darren Sproles at running back. That's before we even get to the defense. In summary; shit bags. Chargers win. Have a great day everyone.

Florio Watch

I love reading articles by Mike Florio at ProFootballTalk.com. Sometimes it's for the right reasons. Mostly it's for the wrong reasons. Not only does Florio seem to have his head firmly entrenched in Roger Goodells butt most of the time, but he also revels in attacking ESPN (nothing to do with being an NBC employee of course) and is constantly harping on about bad journalism etc. His favourite gig at the minute seems to be talking about how dirty some of the players are (especially if they play for the Steelers) for making helmet-to-helmet contact in games. Florio basically loves the new emphasis on heavy fines and suspensions for hitting defenseless receivers. He also enjoys telling everyone that they don't understand the rules. He smugly (I know the feeling) claims that everyone else is wrong and harps on about how the rules haven't changed, it's just the greater emphasis being placed on the rule etc. Which is why I found what you're about to read so very enjoyable. See, in his Monday 10-pack Florio mentioned the two big helmet-to-helmet hits that occurred this week. One he was right to complain about; the hit by Packers safety Nick Collins on Roy Williams. That hit was nothing but illegal. There was no excuse for how late and deliberate it was. But Austin Collie getting jammed between the combination of Philadelphia safeties Kurt Coleman and Quintin Mikell was a completely legitimate play. The league seems to agree, as IndyStar.com reports that the League will take no further action against them. Florio doesn't though, saying in his 10-pack article; "Still, both hits violated the rules, despite the protests of a pair of Collie's Colts teammates." I'm not sure whether he meant Collie's teammates or not, but that's not important. The rules were not broken and the league seems to understand that. Having had a private rant to myself, I put this one away in the back of my mind. That might help explain the twitching from that region which occurred when I read this article from Florio which he posted approximately 12 hours later, specifically this section: "It definitely makes no sense because it was presented with a flawed premise. When a "ball carrier" ducks his head at the last minute and absorbs a shoulder or a helmet to the head, it's not a violation of the rules. A "ball carrier" isn't a "defenseless player." A "ball carrier" therefore assumes the risk of getting hit in the head when he lowers his head just before impact. I started to write an item explaining how ESPN's chronic ignorance of the rules and their nuances is doing a disservice to the fans and, ultimately, to the game. But then it was mentioned that Commissioner Roger Goodell would be talking with Tafoya........ ......... Then came the money question. The "ball carrier" dipping his head question. The opportunity for Goodell to clarify for ESPN and anyone else who doesn't understand the difference between a helmet-to-helmet hit on a "ball carrier" and a "defenseless receiver." " (No additional smugness added) Wait a minute? ESPN's chronic ignorance of the rules and their nuances? Doing a disservice to the fans? The opportunity to clarify for ESPN and anyone else who doesn't understand the difference between blah, de, blah. Busted Florio!! Having claimed such a high horse that it could practically straddle Mount Everest, Florio then proceeded to switch places with the ass. Just 12 hours previously Florio was telling us all how bad the hit on Collie was and how it was illegal etc. The league disagreed, not fining the players in question. And by Florios very definition -- Collie had caught the ball and taken several steps -- he was no longer a defenseless receiver. He was a "ball carrier" and thus the hit was perfectly good. Having told us all in superbly arrogant fashion how chronically ignorant of the rules we all are, Florio himself appears to have missed this one. An apology maybe Florio? I very much doubt it. That might take a shred of humbleness I guess. Have a great day everyone.

Goodell-two-shoes

Just a few things to mull over this morning with your coffee: -- Randy Moss was claimed off of waivers by the Tennessee Titans. With their main receiver Kenny Britt done for possibly the rest of the regular season, Moss is an important addition. In fact, I think everyone wins here. Titans coach Jeff Fisher is not going to mess around and has dealt with more troublesome players than Moss in the past. The Titans get a great (and respected) deep ball threat to help alleviate pressure on their run game, which I'm sure Chris Johnson is delighted about. Moss should in turn enjoy his opportunities to go deep looking to get on the receiving end of play-action passes, as well as being a little more tucked away from the media. It looks very good on paper, but we'll have to wait till after the Titans bye week to find out how it all pans out. -- The other big name on the waiver wire was Shawne Merriman, who has now landed in Buffalo. And again, it's not a bad spot. The Bills defense -- in particular that front 7 -- needs all the help it can get. Pass rush has been a problem for the Bills this year and although Merrimans numbers have wained in recent years, a lot of that has to do with injuries. He's back now, healthy, and I think he can add a little bit of extra punch to that Bills defense. When you consider how well their offense has been playing lately, it would only take a small jump from the Bills defense to make a big difference in their wins column. Like 1. -- Finally, I've been wavering back and forth over ProFootballTalk.com in the last week or so. Spotted a bad article, then a very good one, and now.... another bad one. Mike Florio brought up an article in the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette that features Steelers safety Troy Polamalu speaking out against the new penalties and harsher enforcement of rules regarding hits on defenseless receivers. Polamalu seems to share much the same sentiments on the subject as I do (told you the guy was awesome); that big hits and physical contact are major reasons why a lot of people watch football. Troy then goes on to suggest that maybe Goodell shouldn't solely wield all the power that he does, and that maybe a series of checks and balances should be introduced into the system, much the same way as the US government operates (Executive branch; President. Legislative branch; Congress. Judicial Branch; Federal courts). What angers me (and presumably a lot of the people leaving comments on the article) is the way Florio dismisses this so off hand, as if people speaking their minds was somehow a ridiculous thing. To quote Florio: "Regardless of what Polamalu or any other Steelers player thinks, the reality is that they don't get to make the rules. Thus, objecting to the new approach to protecting defenseless receivers has the same benefit as objecting to a touchdown being worth six points." He continues: "The management and coaching staff of the Steelers are doing the team and the league no favors by fomenting this rebellion. We realize that the Steelers simply want to win games and that they've built a team premised on hitting opponents hard, but the franchise for which Mike Webster played should have greater sensitivity to the league's attempt to protect today's players from a similar consequence." So basically Florio seems to think people should just shut up and take it lying down? He also seems to be suggesting that Polamalu's sole interest is in winning games, not perhaps the enjoyment of the fans, as I understood his comments. As for not doing themselves any favours, conversely I think the Steelers are doing themselves the biggest favour possible. Unlike the commissioner or Mike Florio, they've caught the current pulse of the fans. Whether that's an honest attempt or a cynical attempt, the reality is that they're far more in touch with the people who pay high sums to watch the NFL than either Roger or Mike. And using Mike Webster in the argument? Not only does that smack a little of a cheap shot, but someone should also point out to Florio that Webster played Center. The big hoo-hah lately has been surrounding defenseless receivers. There's quite a difference between how those two types of players play and get hit. It just doesn't seem to make sense. I remember that Florio used to be just as cynical and cutting of Goodell as anybody at times. But now that he's creeping onto the mainstream TV with NBC, he's suddenly gone all Goodell-two-shoes..... Right, I have to get ready for work. Joy. Hopefully later or tomorrow, or at least sometime before the weekend, I'll go through the rookie watch list and we'll have a look at how they're all getting on. Till then, Have a great day everyone.

The Packer Sweep

Ok, rant time.

This whole "player safety" issue has gone overboard. The league has announced that it will be sending teams a video of what does and does not constitute a legal hit, along with some corporate message that they want coaches to read out. And it's starting to get ridiculous.

The main points of contention are the hits laid on Mohamed Massaquoi and Josh Cribbs by Steelers LB James Harrison, plus the hit laid by Dunta Robinson on DeSean Jackson. Personally, I don't see it. I don't get it. I've seen the hits and I don't get what all the fuss is about. Maybe on the Robinson hit you could argue "shoulder to the head of a defenseless receiver", but It's questionable how defenseless Jackson is and it's a stupid rule anyway. What are you supposed to do about a "defenseless" receiver who might be about to score a TD or get a first down? You decide, "I'll hit him low, in the chest". Then the guy ducks. Now it's helmet to helmet again.

And now the league is making a big thing out of helmet contact? Well how about you stop offensive players from ducking then? I don't know about you, but I don't think my reactions would be quick enough to avoid hitting a player who ducks at the last minute in the head. And I said helmet contact and not "helmet to helmet" contact because there have been a number of questionable calls -- including one this week in the Chargers/Rams game -- where a pass rusher has incidentally stroked a QB on the head with his forearm and drawn a 15 yard flag.

For me, it's getting close to the "quit point"; that is, the moment in time when you decide it's not worth the hassle of watching. You know you'll only get frustrated and worked up about something that doesn't really matter. So you just tune out. For me the "quit point" in soccer came last year after the world cup. I was sick of watching the England teams millionaire "superstars" (really need to lay off the quotation marks) bottoming out to teams made up of part-time players. The annoyance and frustration was superseding any semblance of fun and ultimately that is why we watch sports.

Someone should really tell Roger Goodell that. I think he believes that if he can just remove all the hitting from the game and any notion of defensive play, then people will come flocking in to watch. I think instead Mr. Goodell should try reading the comments section of a few posts on some of the various news outlets. What he would find is an army of die hard football fans who are approaching their own "quit point".

Football is football. It's a violent game. That's the reality. Boxing is violent to. It's also another big sport. Except in boxing they've already thought about safety. They make amateur boxers wear helmets and the bouts are scored based on clean hits with the glove on the head. If you're a boxing fan it can be ok to watch, to see whose is coming up through the ranks. But nobody is going to pay Pay Per View money for an amateur bout.

It's not the skill factor that's the problem. If anything, amateur boxers tend to be very highly skillful. It has more to do with the same reason people pay more money to watch heavyweights than they do flyweights. It's because they want to watch two grown men punching the living daylights out of each other. That's a fact.

That's also a big reason why people watch football. Now I know there will be coaches reading this who will be jumping out of their chairs to bemoan the fact that they watch football for the tactics and the strategy etc. That's certainly true. But a big reason for that is because you, me and many other people understand a little deeper about the inner workings of a football team and how strategy and tactics operate in relation to football. The average fan whose never been exposed to this has a slightly less well developed understanding, but can still appreciate it.

But let's be real. People watch football because at heart, it is a violent, crunching sport. They -- as do I -- enjoy the collisions. We enjoy watching a good defensive hit as much a beautifully spiralled pass into the end zone. It's one of the key factors in the enjoyment of the game. If you take it out, it ceases to be football. You can market it as some other sport, but it's not football and never will be, no matter how hard you try to call it that.

And as for the players and players safety? Find a different sport.

The main argument I have against the "player safety" crowd (which currently appears to consist of Commissioner Roger Goodell, and Mike Florio from ProFootballTalk.com) is simply that nobody is forcing the players to play. They won't get paid the millions if they leave, but then that's tough. The reality is that NFL players are like strippers (possibly the kind that you would find in a back street of Bangkok).

Like strippers, Players get paid only so long as they continue to do the things that people are willing to pay money to watch. If a stripper came onto the stage one day and announced that she refused to remove her clothes because she felt it was demeaning and degrading to women and that she was making a stand for the equal rights of the feminine half of the human race, that's fine...... but she would be booed of the stage, penniless.

Ergo, if NFL players wish to earn millions of dollars then they must dance to the sound of the public purse strings. If the public wants hits to the head, then they must have hits to the head. If they want to see a reasonably violent sport where players get injured and beaten up on a routine basis, then so be it. Anyone who doesn't want to play, merely has to step down and go and play somewhere else. If Goodell wants to turn football into a non-contact sport then that's fine, but just don't expect the millions of the past to tune in and pay to watch.

The players union and the league are currently locked in a CBA battle over hard dollars. At this rate, the next CBA will be over who gets the leagues sole dime and the remaining contents of the coffee machine.

-------

Now for something completely different. This will probably appeal more to football coaches and those who take an interest in the deeper workings of football, but basically I stumbled across a video on YouTube of Vince Lombardi doing a bit of coaching. Nothing major. So I contacted the YouTube user who posted the video and with much persuasion managed to convince him to dig out his old VHS tapes and have a go at posting some of the other material. What he came up with is a true historical gem. Vince Lombardi, one of the greatest coaches in the history of professional football, coaching the famous "Packer Sweep". With thanks to LuckyLaRue17, enjoy.








Have a great day everyone.