A Dollar and 68 cents

In today's post; - More back and forth in the Labor dispute, - Jeff Fisher gets the boot... - .... as does Jim Zorn, So we'll start with the labor issue being that March is just around the corner, kind of, and the expiration of the CBA could lead to a loss of football in 2011. But commissioner Roger Goodell has laid down a gauntlet, a challenge if you will, to the heads of the NFLPA to get the deal done... by saying he'll take a pay cut in 2011 if there is a work stoppage. How much of a pay cut? From $10 million to just $1. Now the issue of paying a jackass executive like Goodell $10 million a year is a blog post in it's own. In fact I not so long ago tackled such an issue, albeit briefly (you're telling me you couldn't find someone equally skilled for say $1 million?). But taking a pay cut from such a hefty amount to just a single dollar is quite the promise. Maybe I could grow to like Goodell? (erm... no). So how did the head of the NFLPA DeMaurice Smith respond? By announcing on Twitter that he'll take a pay cut to just 68 cents.... if a deal gets done before the Super Bowl. Wait. What?? That makes no sense. The only incentive I can see in that is the unlikely event of the league rushing to the table to get a deal done just to see the tears in Smiths eyes when he realises he has to man up and take the cut. But being that the league doesn't pay his wages, the players do, I can't see them throwing away their entire position just for a bit of personal gratification. So that only leaves the incentive to Smith to get the job done. Except, if he does do a deal before the Super Bowl then he would have to take a massive pay cut. See what I mean? It makes absolutely no sense at all. If he'd said "if we don't get a deal done by the Super Bowl then I'll take a pay cut", that might have made a bit more sense. But as it stands that statement basically gives him zero reason to strike a bargain early. So the question is now; where the hell is this post leading? Well I'm glad you asked. The point is, this is the man who is negotiating for the players. This is the guy who is facing down the $10 million dollar man (for now) at the bargaining table. A guy who can't even string together a coherent and logical Twitter post. Further proof maybe that some people in this world are being grossly over paid for the services they provide? Maybe. One thing's for sure, if I was a member of the NFLPA I'd be pretty damn nervous right about now. As Kevin Mawae, their President is. On the issue of the 18-game regular season Mawae has now said that he can't see a way to sell that to the players. Remember that any deal that is reached has to be approved by a majority of the players and not many of them are keen to see an 18-game regular season. That's two more games of fast paced, dangerous football they'll have to endure. Just ask the injury racked Packers how they'd have felt about playing another two games before they made it to the play offs. The stupid thing is, the players have a secret weapon up their sleeve when it comes to the issue of the length of the season and it could even be a tool that swings some of that public support back in their direction (and man do they need some support right now). All they have to do is walk up to the negotiating table and throw in a demand that Season Tickets only cover regular season games, with an opt-in for one or more pre-season games at the buyers discretion, and that all pre-season games be reduced in price to a third of normal prices along with free parking for ticket holders and reduced prices for beer and food concessions. That's pretty much guaranteed to at least turn a few heads in the players favour. Not many. But some. Of course the NFLPA hasn't exactly helped itself in trying to win fan support, primarily because there are two major lies that they keep propagating in the vain hope that the fans will put the blinkers on and not see through them. The first is any notion of a lockout. Pretty much every NFL fan in the entire world now knows that the NFLPA holds in its hands the ability to decertify the union and prevent any lockout. If there is one, it's because the NFLPA allowed it to happen. The second is that league will get paid for not playing games. Strictly speaking, as I understand it, the owners will get the money from the TV contracts to tide them over. But having just been paid a big pile of money for producing a product (games) and then having failed to produce that product, the owners will be obliged to pay back every last cent, possibly with interest on top. While that might tide them over in the interim, it will leave them saddled with a big ass debt that needs repaying sooner rather than later. This also glosses over the fact that the league is already losing money, as we speak, and will continue to do so until the moment that it can guarantee that football will be back on. The cause of this loss is sponsorship. Simply put, nobody is going to fork out huge sums of cash to sponsor various elements of the NFL, including coverage on its own network, without there being anything to sponsor. I'm sure there are also a number of clever advertising executives, if such a thing truly exists, around the country right now applying the screw to the NFL, trying to push down the costs of future sponsorship using the "you might not even play a game this year" chip. All in all both sides need to pull their fingers out of their butts, stop throwing turds at each other through the media, and actually sit down and get a deal done. After all, Jeff Fisher needs a team to coach. It just wont be the Titans. Which it's safe to say came as quite a surprise to me. Forgive me for being dumb, but I'm pretty damn sure that Titans owner Bud Adams recently said that he was dumping Vince Young in favour of Fisher? So what happened to that promise? I'm sure more details will come out soon and there is bound to be some personal dispute at the root of this, but for now we're just left staring at the legacy that Fisher left behind. A legacy that is (or rather was) largely based around his being the longest tenure among active Head Coaches. Fisher joined the Titans in 1994, back when they were still called the Houston Oilers. Since then he's produced a Super Bowl appearance and a few AFC Championship showings, but it's been a while now since the Titans actually won a playoff game. The last two season have been particularly hard for Titans fans. Overall Fisher has achieved a reasonably consistent record, especially given the amount of time he's been the head honcho of the Titans. There are certainly plenty of names out there in the coaching world who, if they were holding a candle, wouldn't be able to hold it against Fisher's. On that odd analogous note, let's finish with Jim Zorn. Ah yes, the much maligned Zorn. Previously the Head Coach in Washington, Zorn was fired after what was a frankly rubbish 2009 season. The Ravens saw an opportunity and pounced, picking up Zorn as their new QB coach. But it appears Zorn, QB Joe Flacco and offensive coordinator Cam Cameron can't all get along and play nicely so someone has to go. In this case it's Zorn. As part of the shuffle the Ravens have announced that offensive assistant Craig Van Steeg will now assist with the quarterbacks, and that Cameron will take a much bigger role in their coaching. Not sure how happy Ravens fans will be with this, considering that many were after Cameron's head for the part he and the offense played in Baltimore's post season exit. Unfortunately for them, it looks like Zorn has once again become the scapegoat du jour.

0-6 to 10-6?

So, can the Tennessee Titans really claw their way back from an 0-6 start to a 10-6 finish? Let's have a look.... First off, look at the secondary. Chris Hope, Cortland Finnegan and Michael Griffin all went to the Pro Bowl last year. All are now fit and healthy, returning the Titans defense back to the dominant form it found last year. Next, check out the running back tandem. Chris Johnson and Lendale White are getting involved again. And by involved, I mean the coaches in Tennessee are once again realising that last year it was largely these two guys who carried their offense to the playoffs. Johnson in particular has come into his own. The guy showed in his rookie season that he had speed. Now that has been complemented with a season's worth of experience in the NFL and he looks like arguably the most dangerous back in the land. In the passing game, his quick feet, agility and body control make him a great underneath receiver. And normally when you're talking about a QB making checkdowns, everyone sees it in a derogatory light. When you're checking down to Chris Johnson however, it's seen in a whole new light. And no, we can't talk about the Titans without bringing up Vince Young. In college, Young drew national attention because of his athletic ability and his high passer rating, largely a result of keeping the ball safe and using his checkdown receivers (that's what they're there for after all). This guy can burn you through the air, or on the ground. And he is just about a perfect fit for the current Titans team. The key is, he doesn't take silly chances, he controls the ball, and gives his offense every opportunity to break out on a big play. Defenses are in bind. On a rushing play, you have to factor in the QB as a threat, something that defenses in this league are not used to doing. You're getting Option plays that NFL teams haven't seen before. When Young drops back to pass, someone has to spy on Young and make sure he doesn't break out of the pocket for a run. And all the while the Titans are playing keep away, holding the ball and burning the clock. Any turnover against the Titans now can be crippling. And finally, we have to look at their schedule. They play Houston on Monday which they should win. Then they have, in order; the Cardinals, the Colts, Rams, Dolphins, Chargers & Seahawks. There are potential banana skins in there, don't get me wrong. But the way the Titans are playing right now, they are a match for any of those teams. The Titans have pulled the winning formula out of the bag just at the crucial moment. Can they finish 10-6? I think they can. What's more, I think they can go all the way to the promised land and book a date in Miami against the NFC's Minnesota Vikings. But you know me, I don't crown Superbowl champions in November......

Running off my mouth.

Ok so today I'm gonna look at running the football, and why there's a chance it might become en vogue once more. First of all I'd like to clarify that I'm not talking about Miami's 'Wildcat'. The reason is simple. Without a true QB in there they lack any immediate passing threat. Their passing game basically consists of long, drawn out plays involving plenty of play action. And teams are learning quickly that if you can force the edges with your cornerbacks and play two deep safeties, you can shut the Wildcats pass attack down. No, what I'm talking about is true power running. "I" formations and the like, with a fullback in the backfield leading the way. Pulling guards and pounding the rock. Every team in the NFL seems to have packages for this (accept maybe New England and Indianapolis). But few teams do it often and do it properly. Two teams that stand out are the Tennessee Titans and the Carolina Panthers. Last season these two teams went 13-3 and 12-4 respectively for a combined tally of 25-7. They both bombed in the playoffs. And that's actually a point worth noting. During the regular season they both ran the ball. A lot. They leaned on their respective two headed rushing attacks to get the job done for them. Then in the playoffs both teams made a cardinal error. They tried to pass to win. Both teams asked their QB to win it for them and both failed. Miserably. Scary thing is, it's been a running theme again for them this season (no pun intended). Neither team looked at it's mistakes. Neither team has sat down and thought to themselves "Hey, we did great running the ball last year, why are we throwing it this year?". As a consequence, they now have a combined record of 4-10 having played 14 games between them. They've also managed to generate 21 INT's between their starting QB's. The moral of the story? Play to your strengths, and in both cases, that's power running. So what is it about running the football that's so great? Firstly, you don't turn the ball over anywhere near as much. I know some teams (or rather their running backs) have problems with ball retention, but as I mentioned yesterday, a lot of that is down to poor technique. It's easily fixable. To get a look at how it's done properly, turn to Cardinals WR Larry Fitzgerald and look at his ball control technique. Anytime he feels pressure he wraps that ball up tight. The result is that in 83 games, with a combined tally of 489 touches, he's fumbled the ball just 5 times. Kerry Collins or Jake Delhomme have produced more turnovers individually in just one season. Now consider the question of clock and ball control. You run the football, you get tackled, the clock keeps running. This means that gradually throughout the course of the game you leave less and less time available for a high scoring pass offense like the Patriots or the Saints to put points up on the board against you. They can't score 35 or 40 points because they don't have the time or the sufficient number of possessions to do it. And then we look at 3 and outs. The beauty of running the ball is that even if you're run play gets stuffed close to the line of scrimmage, chances are you can at least get a yard or two. Conversely every incompletion on a pass play gets you nothing, zero, zlich. And that's before we even get started on the number of runs that are stopped for big losses versus yards lost through sacks. Ultimately what it adds up to is more manageable down and distance situations (3rd & 2 as opposed to 3rd & 8). "But what about big plays? What happens when your team gets behind and you need to score?" I hate this supposed argument. So far this season the leagues running backs have combined for 30 runs of 40 or more yards. If it wasn't for Tennessee and Carolina (amongst others) being so pre-occupied with their QB's, the tally would be even more. It just boils my blood to listen to the notion that running the football can't produce explosive plays. Because it does. And if teams ran the ball more against the fabled 'prevent' defenses, that are designed to stop the pass by removing linebackers and introducing more defensive backs, then I'm sure you'd see more big plays. If you want a good example, just go back to the last game ever played in Texas stadium, which was last years Week 16 clash between the Cowboys and the Ravens. The Cowboys gave up rushing touchdowns of 77 and 82 yards on back to back Ravens possessions. And of course, running the football attracts 8 man boxes. It attracts safeties looking to stuff the run. Which creates opportunities for play action passes going deep down the field. Just ask the Saints. The difference maker in their season so far has been points scored on defense and the fact that this year they actually run the football. In fact, they've almost chalked up as many rushing touchdowns as they have passing (14 rushing to 16 passing). And if you still don't believe me, ask Brett Favre and Carson Palmer. With Peterson of the Vikings and Benson of the Bengals producing so well on the ground, both Favre and Palmer have seen a lot more 8 man boxes and cover three looks. And for them, that's bread and butter. They will, and have, picked such coverage apart all season long. Even Jake Delhomme did last year (!!!), as teams respected the Panthers rushing attack so much (and with good reason) that it created one on one matchups for Steve Smith on the outside. Conversely, teams that don't run the ball as much get into trouble far more often than teams that don't pass as much. Look at the Dolphins blowing their huge lead over the Saints a few weeks ago, or the Jets giving the ball away passing against the Bills despite having dominated on the ground all day. The Eagles lost to the Raiders purely because they couldn't, or wouldn't run the ball. They gave the Raiders ample opportunities to break up passes, get sacks and gave them plenty of clock to play with. And we all know what's happened to the Panthers and Titans this year..... So in summary, if you wanna win football games at this level it's best to have a balanced attack. Run the ball to set up the pass. If you're QB isn't that great run it a little more. If your defense isn't great, run it a little more. If you want to hold onto a lead, run it a little more. Gradually we're starting to see teams with strong run games dominate football games. Last year the Steelers and the Ravens, who both exemplified this theory, contested the AFC championship game. The Steelers went on to win the Superbowl. Look for the trend to continue and for more teams to turn to power football as a way to make it to, and through, the post season.

Touchdown!!!!

DAY ??: I've lost count. It's been about a week. No real exercise has been conducted. I've conceded that I'm pretty much just too lazy. On a positive note, I have made a right step in another direction. I'm a huge fan of American Football and have been for something approaching 15 years. Recently I've just managed to get a role as a coaching assistant for a University team here in the UK. Which is great. But I've also spotted that there is a gap in the market when it comes to football. And that is for someone who loves the game, to make intelligent comments on it. And by intelligent comments I mean not crowning a Superbowl champion in October (not even crowning the divisional champions!). I mean not writing off Tom Brady and The Patriots as a bust just because they didn't put 40 points on the board in every game. And I mean not calling for Jeff Fischers head in Tennessee just because they're 0-6. The fact is, Tennessee have been rocked by some serious injuries to their pro bowl secondary. Now granted Chris Johnson is struggling because he is asked to carry too much of the load (especially up the middle which is the territory of LenDale White). But as for Kerry Collins, nothing is wrong with him. The fact is he's never been that exceptional at Tennessee and wasn't supposed to be. They're supposed to run the ball and play great D, leaving Collins to fill in the gaps. To ask him to magically transform into Bret Favre is like asking the Raiders management to trade JaMarcus Russell. It's simply not gonna happen. Should they now play Vince Young? Yes. Next year the guy will be sinking his teeth into a large sum of money and they need to know now whether he has the capability to carry this team through difficult times. As for their opponents last Sunday, The New Engalnd Patriots, it's rock and roll time. Kind of. Yes they put 59 on the board. But it was against a depleted and defeated looking Titans. Hopes that they will blaze through the NFL undefeated from here on in may be a touch premature. But a key component of their offence is back and established; Wes Welker. Because while Randy Moss streaks down the field and makes the eyes of Madden video game makers light up, it's still Welker who wins games for the Patriots. Yes, Wes Welker. Without him, the reality is that Brady and Moss are just another one-two passing combo, like many in the league. And another combination, the tried and tested blitz + double coverage, can take them away just as easily as the rest. The key is that instead of a running game to supplement, the Patriots have Welker. Safe hands, toughness on the underneath routes and an eye for gaps in the zone make Welker the cog that keeps the machine running. Now he's back, it's fun times all round in New England. For now at least. Am I crowning them as Superbowl Champions? Nope. Divisional champions? Nope. What about the Saints in the NFC South? Nope. "But they beat the GIANTS!!! For Gods Sake Chris, what else do they have to do prove they're good enough to win a Superbowl ?!!!" Uhm, win a Superbowl. Yes they beat the Giants. The same Giants who hadn't faced a team with a winning record all season. And the same Giants who practically handed them the game. Now, don't get all upset on me. Yes I do think the Saints are a good team. Brees is an excellent QB. But I'm not ready to jump on the bandwagon just yet. Let's go back to Sunday and the Giants game. Saints jump to a quick 14-0 lead. No arguments there. Nice to see Shockey get a TD against the Giants. But then with 11 seconds left in the 1st quarter, Manning chucks the rock downfield to the endzone looking for Steve Smith and he ...... drops it! Well, to be more precise he just cant quite reach it properly. Either way, that could have been a nice score for the Giants and might have changed the game a little. Next Saints possession they come right back and score a touchdown. Their was an opportunity for the defender to make a play in the endzone and if he does that's a pick and the ball goes back the other way. Still credit to Brees and Meecham (I don't know how to spell his name. Unlucky.) for hooking up. So Saints up 20-3 (failed conversion) when the Giants comeback and get a touchdown (credit now to Ahmad Bradshaw, great RB). 20-10 Saints. But now it gets interesting. Brees throws from around midfield down to the 10 incomplete. But wait! That little yellow saviour comes out for the Saints as what appears on replay to just be incidental contact suddenly becomes pass interference and the Saints are on the 10. From that they nail a TD and now the game is 27-10. That's pretty lucky. Giants come back and hit a TD themselves so now it's 27-17. Saints get the ball, drive down field... but get stopped and turnover on downs. And now the Giants give it away again. Out of timeouts they fail to run a clock stopping play and have to rush to get a play off. Manning sacked, ball loose, Saints recover and convert the possession into a TD. 34-17 Saints at halftime. Now again, to reiterate, it's not the Saints fault that New York dropped some serious clangers. But it is worth looking at. Without those mistakes the game changes. The score is tighter, the pressure mounts a little. Credit where it's due to the Saints for taking full advantage of the opportunities. But just don't expect the same sort of favours in the post season. And certainly not in the Superbowl.