The National Hockey League is filled with great talent between the pipes, and you may argue who is the best goalie, whether it be Brodeur from New Jersey, DiPietro from the Islanders, Lundqvuist from the Rangers, or Miller from the Sabres in the East; or San Jose's Nabokov, Anaheim's Giguere, or Hasek from the Red Wings in the West, but theres' no doubt as to who the best goaltending tandem in the NHL is: Chris Osgood and Dominik Hasek of the Detroit Red Wings.
Since they split their playing time fairly even in Detroit, it's tough for either one of them to be on the league leader's list for wins, but they both have impressive numbers, with Osgood boasting a 23-7 record in 33 games, and Hasek's record standing at 19-7 in 30 games.
But what's even more outstanding is that the two netminders are currently ranked first and second in the league in the goals-against-average department, and that stat is a truer measuring bar because the amount of games played does not affect the statistic.
Hasek is ranked No. 1 in the league with a 2.07 goals against, while Osgood stands in the two-hole at 2.11.
Obviously they have a lot of help from their amazing defensemen, namely veterans Nicklas Lidstrom, Chris Chelios, and Brian Rafalski, but yet these stats show that Hasek and Osgood are still on top of their games.
Some people thought that Hasek may have been done when he retired a couple of years ago, and even more thought that Osgood's best days were behind him when he left the Motor City for Long Island.
Osgood has some incredibly impressive career numbers, as well. This season, he owns a GAA of 2.11, and if it holds up it would be the best of his career.
Also, Osgood, now in his 14th NHL campaign, has never had a GAA higher than 2.86 in any season he has played. His goals-against has been below 2.4 in three of his last four years, and his 23 wins this season is the most for Osgood since he won 31 for the St. Louis Blues in the 2003-'04 season.
He's been a little shaky since the All-Star break, but I would expect Chris Osgood to return to the form that he has been showing all season long.
As for Hasek, what more needs to be said about a man who has more than 380 career wins, 80 shutouts, and a career goals-against of 2.20.
And this season, with his GAA at 2.07, Hasek is making a statement that he has not lost a step and he plans to be around for a while.
There's an old saying in hockey that a goalie that gets hot in the playoffs can be ridden to a championship. Many teams have a good goalie, even a great one. Some even have a formidable backup. But no team has the 1-2 punch that the Red Wings have, and that can be scary for the rest of the NHL come April and May.
Thursday, February 21, 2008
NHL: Islanders are League's Hottest Club
Earlier in the National Hockey League season I wrote about how, at the time, the Atlantic Division was the best team in the league, and I had the stats to back up my claim.
Now, not only does that statement still hold true (just check the standings), but the hottest team in the entire National Hockey League is the New York Islanders, who sit in last place in the Atlantic, and 10th overall in the Eastern Conference.
The Islanders are winners of five straight games, and going into tonight's battle against the Tampa Bay Lightning at the Nassau Collisuem, New york owns a record of 29-25-7 and they have 65 points.
Even more impressively, since their first game of the calendar year, New York lost seven games in a row, nine of 10, and 14 of 18 contests before the current five-game winning streak.
The Chicago Black Hawks, in the Central Division of the Western Conference, are the next-best cellar-dwelling team in the NHL with a 28-26-6 record and 62 points. The Hawks are off tonight.
It hasn't been pretty, as the Islanders have outscored their opponents only 19-12 during the streak, but New York is doing the little things that they need to do to win.
In goal, Rick DiPietro has allowed just five goals in his last three games, which has more than put his club in a position to win.
Mike Comrie and Bill Guerin have done the bulk of the scoring, with Comrie putting up 18 goals and Guerin with 19. Perhaps even Miro Satan, who has been dormant for much of the season, may be waking up, as he now has two goals in his last three games for 13 on the season.
There is a tie for the seventh, eighth, and ninth positions in the East, with Boston, Philadelphia, and Buffalo all sitting at 66 points.
This should be a great second half to the Eastern Conference's second half of the season, with all of these teams throwing down for the final two or three playoff spots in the conference.
The Bruins have the advantage of the four teams, as they have only played 59 games as they trail the Florida Panthers by a 1-0 score with eight minutes left in the first period. The Flyers and the Sabres have both played 60 games, and they are both playing tonight.
Buffalo is at Toronto and holds a 1-0 first-period lead, and Philly trails the Sharks at home by a 1-0 score after one. The Islanders and Tampa are scoreless after one, with New York holding a 15-10 shots advantage.
There's a lot of hockey left to be played in the regular season, and the race to the playoffs in the East should have a very entertaining finish.
Now, not only does that statement still hold true (just check the standings), but the hottest team in the entire National Hockey League is the New York Islanders, who sit in last place in the Atlantic, and 10th overall in the Eastern Conference.
The Islanders are winners of five straight games, and going into tonight's battle against the Tampa Bay Lightning at the Nassau Collisuem, New york owns a record of 29-25-7 and they have 65 points.
Even more impressively, since their first game of the calendar year, New York lost seven games in a row, nine of 10, and 14 of 18 contests before the current five-game winning streak.
The Chicago Black Hawks, in the Central Division of the Western Conference, are the next-best cellar-dwelling team in the NHL with a 28-26-6 record and 62 points. The Hawks are off tonight.
It hasn't been pretty, as the Islanders have outscored their opponents only 19-12 during the streak, but New York is doing the little things that they need to do to win.
In goal, Rick DiPietro has allowed just five goals in his last three games, which has more than put his club in a position to win.
Mike Comrie and Bill Guerin have done the bulk of the scoring, with Comrie putting up 18 goals and Guerin with 19. Perhaps even Miro Satan, who has been dormant for much of the season, may be waking up, as he now has two goals in his last three games for 13 on the season.
There is a tie for the seventh, eighth, and ninth positions in the East, with Boston, Philadelphia, and Buffalo all sitting at 66 points.
This should be a great second half to the Eastern Conference's second half of the season, with all of these teams throwing down for the final two or three playoff spots in the conference.
The Bruins have the advantage of the four teams, as they have only played 59 games as they trail the Florida Panthers by a 1-0 score with eight minutes left in the first period. The Flyers and the Sabres have both played 60 games, and they are both playing tonight.
Buffalo is at Toronto and holds a 1-0 first-period lead, and Philly trails the Sharks at home by a 1-0 score after one. The Islanders and Tampa are scoreless after one, with New York holding a 15-10 shots advantage.
There's a lot of hockey left to be played in the regular season, and the race to the playoffs in the East should have a very entertaining finish.
Friday, February 15, 2008
MLB: One and Done is the Only Answer
If the Major League Baseball Player's Association wants anyone to take them seriously when it claims that they want to get rid of the steroid epidemic in their game, there is only one way to do it: baseball needs a policy of one strike and you're out, not three.
Under the current collective bargaining agreement, the first time a player fails a steroid test, he gets 50 games off. The next time, the penalty is more severe, 100 games. Only if a player fails the test three different times is his career then in jeopardy.
This agreement has got to go. All this did was appease the owners that there was some type of testing and consequenses in place.
Donald Fehr says that he and the players want to put an end to this problem.
I say that all of them need to put their money where their mouths are and institute a "one and done" policy.
Under the terms of this agreement, if a player fails a test for steroids or HGH JUST ONCE, he will be banned from baseball for life.
No "extra chances", no milking the system for as long as you can until you get busted a second time. You will take it seriously from the start, and you will know going into professional baseball that you only get one shot. Then, and only then, will players take each and every screening test seriously.
Of course, there will be room for error. Some people say that you can't do that because what if the test has been tampered with.
OK, I'll give you that, there is that possibility. But more than likely, that instance would only happen once. To think that a test could be botched twice on the same player is unrealistic. So, if a player's test turns up positive, he is to be called in IMMEDIATELY for another sample. If he's truly clean, the second test will reveal that result.
But, if a player comes up dirty a second time, that's it. He obviously is doing something wrong, and he should know that he tossed a multi-million dollar career out the window.
Let's face it folks, the public, the people who are paying the exorbitant ticket prices and buying all of the jerseys, T-shirts, jackets, hats, and everything else with their team's logo on it, deserve - and demand - to know that these players that they are coming out to see are not just playing by the rules, but by the law. Let's not forget that first and foremost, steroids and HGH are illegal, plain and simple. So, using them isn't just breaking a policy or a league rule, it's breaking the law.
The fans deserve better than this, and it's time that the league and the union got on the same page and showed the world that they are seriously doing something to eliminate the problem.
Under the current collective bargaining agreement, the first time a player fails a steroid test, he gets 50 games off. The next time, the penalty is more severe, 100 games. Only if a player fails the test three different times is his career then in jeopardy.
This agreement has got to go. All this did was appease the owners that there was some type of testing and consequenses in place.
Donald Fehr says that he and the players want to put an end to this problem.
I say that all of them need to put their money where their mouths are and institute a "one and done" policy.
Under the terms of this agreement, if a player fails a test for steroids or HGH JUST ONCE, he will be banned from baseball for life.
No "extra chances", no milking the system for as long as you can until you get busted a second time. You will take it seriously from the start, and you will know going into professional baseball that you only get one shot. Then, and only then, will players take each and every screening test seriously.
Of course, there will be room for error. Some people say that you can't do that because what if the test has been tampered with.
OK, I'll give you that, there is that possibility. But more than likely, that instance would only happen once. To think that a test could be botched twice on the same player is unrealistic. So, if a player's test turns up positive, he is to be called in IMMEDIATELY for another sample. If he's truly clean, the second test will reveal that result.
But, if a player comes up dirty a second time, that's it. He obviously is doing something wrong, and he should know that he tossed a multi-million dollar career out the window.
Let's face it folks, the public, the people who are paying the exorbitant ticket prices and buying all of the jerseys, T-shirts, jackets, hats, and everything else with their team's logo on it, deserve - and demand - to know that these players that they are coming out to see are not just playing by the rules, but by the law. Let's not forget that first and foremost, steroids and HGH are illegal, plain and simple. So, using them isn't just breaking a policy or a league rule, it's breaking the law.
The fans deserve better than this, and it's time that the league and the union got on the same page and showed the world that they are seriously doing something to eliminate the problem.
Clemens: Much ado About Nothing (for MLB)
Roger Clemens appeared before a congressional panel this past Wednesday in an attempt to clear his name in the whole Mitchell Report/steroids affair.
Few questions were answered in the four-hour long hearing, but perhaps some new questions were raised.
Right off the bat, Brian McNamee's credibility comes into question because of not only his part in this whole torrid situation, but because he lied on several occasions before the hearing or the Mitchell report.
McNamee presented "physical proof" that he injected Clemens by turning over a used syringe and some gauze that he believes will show that Clemens' DNA is on them.
To me, this only presents another question.
First of all, Clemens has already admitted to being shot up by McNamee, but the two differ on just what the substance was that was in the syringe. McNamee, of course, claims that it was steroids or human growth hormones. Clemens insists that it was a B-12 shot.
My question is even if they do find the DNA of Roger Clemens on the syringe or gauze, how does that prove what the needle contained? Unless there is some type of residue on the inside of the syringe, how can they prove that it was steroids? And, even if they do find steroid or HGH residue in the needle, who's to say that McNamee didn't plant the residue inside it? So, to me, the "proof" is really no proof at all.
The next question is where was Andy Pettite during this hearing? If Pettite does believe that Clemens admitted to him that he did something illegal, then why didn't McNamee's attorneys see to it that Pettite was there?
And, as Clemens suggests, if Pettite misinterpreted what was said during this conversation that the two of them had, why haven't Clemens and Pettite ironed out what was exactly said so that Pettite could have showed up in Roger's defense?
This is the most troubling question to me. With all that Clemens is going through to try to prove his innocense, wouldn't he want his best friend, a man that everyone involved agrees is an honest man, and would therefore be perhaps the most credible witness in this mess, there to help clear his name? To me, Pettite's testimony is the key to this whole circus.
Third, one of the congressmen held up a large poster-board that had pictures of Clemens throughout various stages of his career, and it was pretty much agreed upon that whether he was pitching for Toronto, the Yankees, or Houston, there was no obvious change in the build of Clemens' body.
To me (and others that were watching), that suggests that there was no steroid use in this time period, which was more than 10 years long.
Now, you could say that none of those pictures were from his Boston days. That is true, but if you consider that Roger Clemens built the bulk of his reputation, and had quite a good deal of success, with the Sox, that obviously it was talent, not steroids, that made him the pitcher that he was in those days.
I have yet another unanswered question. Roger Clemens has been pitching in the major leagues for more than 20 years. From what I have heard, there is somewhere between three and five different dates, or time periods, that are in question. Even if Clemens is guilty of taking something illegal on these dates that are in question, can those few instances be given the credit for a 20-plus year hall-of-fame career? I think not.
In Roger's defense, it has been well documented for years and years how much of a gym rat he is, and how much time he invests in working out. It has even been said that on days that he pitches, he spends an hour riding an exercise bike after the game.
And on top of all of this, he has given countless speaches to high school and college student-athletes where his message has been that there are no shortcuts to success, it's all about hard work, and that it has been proven that steroids will break your body down in the long run.
I think that if Roger Clemens was a 'roid head, he would have never achieved the success in baseball that he has, and his body certainly would not have stayed as strong as it has over the course of his career.
I'm not saying that Clemens is innocent, but there are a lot of reasons to believe him. And just one known liar that is trying to give us reasons not to.
And, through it all, what will all of this prove? What will be the penalties for those involved? As for now, if Clemens is lying, of course he could be facing perjury charges and jail time.
But, aside from that, from a baseball vantage point, what are the consequenses? Major League Baseball knows that it can't prosecute someone for doing something before it was against the rules. So, what does it all mean?
I think that even if they find Clemens took steroids, that there is little that MLB can or will do about it.
What Congress does about it is a different story.
Few questions were answered in the four-hour long hearing, but perhaps some new questions were raised.
Right off the bat, Brian McNamee's credibility comes into question because of not only his part in this whole torrid situation, but because he lied on several occasions before the hearing or the Mitchell report.
McNamee presented "physical proof" that he injected Clemens by turning over a used syringe and some gauze that he believes will show that Clemens' DNA is on them.
To me, this only presents another question.
First of all, Clemens has already admitted to being shot up by McNamee, but the two differ on just what the substance was that was in the syringe. McNamee, of course, claims that it was steroids or human growth hormones. Clemens insists that it was a B-12 shot.
My question is even if they do find the DNA of Roger Clemens on the syringe or gauze, how does that prove what the needle contained? Unless there is some type of residue on the inside of the syringe, how can they prove that it was steroids? And, even if they do find steroid or HGH residue in the needle, who's to say that McNamee didn't plant the residue inside it? So, to me, the "proof" is really no proof at all.
The next question is where was Andy Pettite during this hearing? If Pettite does believe that Clemens admitted to him that he did something illegal, then why didn't McNamee's attorneys see to it that Pettite was there?
And, as Clemens suggests, if Pettite misinterpreted what was said during this conversation that the two of them had, why haven't Clemens and Pettite ironed out what was exactly said so that Pettite could have showed up in Roger's defense?
This is the most troubling question to me. With all that Clemens is going through to try to prove his innocense, wouldn't he want his best friend, a man that everyone involved agrees is an honest man, and would therefore be perhaps the most credible witness in this mess, there to help clear his name? To me, Pettite's testimony is the key to this whole circus.
Third, one of the congressmen held up a large poster-board that had pictures of Clemens throughout various stages of his career, and it was pretty much agreed upon that whether he was pitching for Toronto, the Yankees, or Houston, there was no obvious change in the build of Clemens' body.
To me (and others that were watching), that suggests that there was no steroid use in this time period, which was more than 10 years long.
Now, you could say that none of those pictures were from his Boston days. That is true, but if you consider that Roger Clemens built the bulk of his reputation, and had quite a good deal of success, with the Sox, that obviously it was talent, not steroids, that made him the pitcher that he was in those days.
I have yet another unanswered question. Roger Clemens has been pitching in the major leagues for more than 20 years. From what I have heard, there is somewhere between three and five different dates, or time periods, that are in question. Even if Clemens is guilty of taking something illegal on these dates that are in question, can those few instances be given the credit for a 20-plus year hall-of-fame career? I think not.
In Roger's defense, it has been well documented for years and years how much of a gym rat he is, and how much time he invests in working out. It has even been said that on days that he pitches, he spends an hour riding an exercise bike after the game.
And on top of all of this, he has given countless speaches to high school and college student-athletes where his message has been that there are no shortcuts to success, it's all about hard work, and that it has been proven that steroids will break your body down in the long run.
I think that if Roger Clemens was a 'roid head, he would have never achieved the success in baseball that he has, and his body certainly would not have stayed as strong as it has over the course of his career.
I'm not saying that Clemens is innocent, but there are a lot of reasons to believe him. And just one known liar that is trying to give us reasons not to.
And, through it all, what will all of this prove? What will be the penalties for those involved? As for now, if Clemens is lying, of course he could be facing perjury charges and jail time.
But, aside from that, from a baseball vantage point, what are the consequenses? Major League Baseball knows that it can't prosecute someone for doing something before it was against the rules. So, what does it all mean?
I think that even if they find Clemens took steroids, that there is little that MLB can or will do about it.
What Congress does about it is a different story.
Thursday, February 14, 2008
The 1972 Miami D(sgusting)olphins
I have been a sports fan for some 30-odd years now. In that time, I have seen many records in sports come and go.
I watched Hank Aaron hit home run No. 715 off of Al Downing of the Los Angeles Dodgers in 1975. I remember seeing the Pittsburgh Steelers win four Super Bowls - the first team to accomplish such a feat - until Joe Montana and the San Francisco 49ers came along and won five (not all five with Joe, of course). I saw Wayne Gretzky pass Gordie Howe as the all-time leading scorer in NHL history. Mark Maguire beat Roger Maris' record of 61 home runs in a single season. Emmitt Smith became the NFL's all-time leading rusher, passing one of my all-time favorites, Walter Payton. And, more recently, Barry Bonds surpassed Aaron by becoming the all-time home run king, steroids or not.
In watching many of these records about to fall, there has always been a common thread, especially in baseball.
Usually, the person whose record is about to be broken is on hand at the game to congratulate the new record-holder's accomplishment.
That, folks, is what sports is all about. It's about watching the younger, stronger, faster players that come into the game take over the record books.
Gordie Howe congratulated Gretzky when he broke Howe's long-time-standing record. The Maris family was in St. Louis, anticipating Maguire's new record, and they took part inthe celebration. Even Hank Aaron, who was more than a little stand-offish when Bonds was at the threshold of the record, finally took the high road and congratulated Bonds for his feat.
Then, there are the 1972 Miami Dolphins.
As an Oakland Raiders fan in the early 70's, Miami was a perennial playoff foe of Oakland's.
Back then, there were basically three powerhouses in the AFC that took turns representing the conference in the Super Bowl - Miami, Oakland, and the Pittsburgh Steelers.
With Franco Harris making the (illegal) immaculate reception to knock the Raiders out of the playoffs in my cousin's rookie season, the Steelers quickly became one of the teams that I would despise in the NFL.
Miami went on to defeat Pittsburgh and went to the Super Bowl, but for some reason I liked the Dolphins. I didn't hate them like I did the Steelers. I had respect for them, and I thoroughly liked Bob Griese, Larry Csonka, Paul Warfield and other players.
Being a New York sports fan, I very rarely root for any team from Boston. That's just life in major league sports between the two cities. We just don't like each other. There would have to be something pretty bad to make me root for a team from Boston.
Hence, we have the '72 Dolphins.
To go back to my point at the beginning of this piece, records are meant to be broken. And good sportsmanship suggests that the old welcomes in the new.
This '72 Miami club has provided us with the worst case of sportsmanship possible.
Instead of wishing luck to whatever team could match their record of an undefeated season, these crotchety old men - Nick Buoniconti, Mercury Morris, et al., sit around in their homes every season and follow the NFL until there is just one undefeated team left. At that point, they get together on Sundays at Buoniconti's house, or whoever's, maybe even Don Shula's, they put a bottle of champagne on ice, and root for the undefeated team to lose. Once the last undefeated team has lost, and Miami's perfect 17-0 record remains in tact, they pop the cork on the champagne and celebrate.
I guess these miserable old men have such empty lives that they feel that they would be worthless without the record. It's simply the most disgusting case of poor sportsmanship that I have ever witnessed out of so-called "professionals."
So, with the Giants struggling through much of the season, and with me having many doubts about how successful the 2007 campaign was going to be, I actually didn't mind the fact that a team from Boston was going for perfection. I just wanted some team, any team, to finally make that stupid bottle of bubbly go flat on those annoying old men.
Also, Giants fans hate the Cowboys. With Dallas looking as though they were going to represent the NFC in the Super Bowl, I started to root for the Patriots.
Of course, I wasn't rooting for them against Big Blue, but once they beat the G-men, I figured what the heck, let's see some history.
I am still riding on a high from the Giants' win last week. It's just surreal to me to think about the frustrations of not just starting 0-2, but nearly starting the season at 0-3. I think about the four picks against the Vikings, with three of them returned for touchdowns, and I can't believe that that is the team that took on the league's best and prevailed. They made history by preventing it, and they took down the closest team to perfection in 35 years.
That says quite a bit. They beat all of the odds, and all of the doubters. I couldn't be happier to see my team win the Super Bowl. It's just a shame that the greater Miami gray-hair-and-denture club will be chilling another bottler for next year. What a sickening display.
I watched Hank Aaron hit home run No. 715 off of Al Downing of the Los Angeles Dodgers in 1975. I remember seeing the Pittsburgh Steelers win four Super Bowls - the first team to accomplish such a feat - until Joe Montana and the San Francisco 49ers came along and won five (not all five with Joe, of course). I saw Wayne Gretzky pass Gordie Howe as the all-time leading scorer in NHL history. Mark Maguire beat Roger Maris' record of 61 home runs in a single season. Emmitt Smith became the NFL's all-time leading rusher, passing one of my all-time favorites, Walter Payton. And, more recently, Barry Bonds surpassed Aaron by becoming the all-time home run king, steroids or not.
In watching many of these records about to fall, there has always been a common thread, especially in baseball.
Usually, the person whose record is about to be broken is on hand at the game to congratulate the new record-holder's accomplishment.
That, folks, is what sports is all about. It's about watching the younger, stronger, faster players that come into the game take over the record books.
Gordie Howe congratulated Gretzky when he broke Howe's long-time-standing record. The Maris family was in St. Louis, anticipating Maguire's new record, and they took part inthe celebration. Even Hank Aaron, who was more than a little stand-offish when Bonds was at the threshold of the record, finally took the high road and congratulated Bonds for his feat.
Then, there are the 1972 Miami Dolphins.
As an Oakland Raiders fan in the early 70's, Miami was a perennial playoff foe of Oakland's.
Back then, there were basically three powerhouses in the AFC that took turns representing the conference in the Super Bowl - Miami, Oakland, and the Pittsburgh Steelers.
With Franco Harris making the (illegal) immaculate reception to knock the Raiders out of the playoffs in my cousin's rookie season, the Steelers quickly became one of the teams that I would despise in the NFL.
Miami went on to defeat Pittsburgh and went to the Super Bowl, but for some reason I liked the Dolphins. I didn't hate them like I did the Steelers. I had respect for them, and I thoroughly liked Bob Griese, Larry Csonka, Paul Warfield and other players.
Being a New York sports fan, I very rarely root for any team from Boston. That's just life in major league sports between the two cities. We just don't like each other. There would have to be something pretty bad to make me root for a team from Boston.
Hence, we have the '72 Dolphins.
To go back to my point at the beginning of this piece, records are meant to be broken. And good sportsmanship suggests that the old welcomes in the new.
This '72 Miami club has provided us with the worst case of sportsmanship possible.
Instead of wishing luck to whatever team could match their record of an undefeated season, these crotchety old men - Nick Buoniconti, Mercury Morris, et al., sit around in their homes every season and follow the NFL until there is just one undefeated team left. At that point, they get together on Sundays at Buoniconti's house, or whoever's, maybe even Don Shula's, they put a bottle of champagne on ice, and root for the undefeated team to lose. Once the last undefeated team has lost, and Miami's perfect 17-0 record remains in tact, they pop the cork on the champagne and celebrate.
I guess these miserable old men have such empty lives that they feel that they would be worthless without the record. It's simply the most disgusting case of poor sportsmanship that I have ever witnessed out of so-called "professionals."
So, with the Giants struggling through much of the season, and with me having many doubts about how successful the 2007 campaign was going to be, I actually didn't mind the fact that a team from Boston was going for perfection. I just wanted some team, any team, to finally make that stupid bottle of bubbly go flat on those annoying old men.
Also, Giants fans hate the Cowboys. With Dallas looking as though they were going to represent the NFC in the Super Bowl, I started to root for the Patriots.
Of course, I wasn't rooting for them against Big Blue, but once they beat the G-men, I figured what the heck, let's see some history.
I am still riding on a high from the Giants' win last week. It's just surreal to me to think about the frustrations of not just starting 0-2, but nearly starting the season at 0-3. I think about the four picks against the Vikings, with three of them returned for touchdowns, and I can't believe that that is the team that took on the league's best and prevailed. They made history by preventing it, and they took down the closest team to perfection in 35 years.
That says quite a bit. They beat all of the odds, and all of the doubters. I couldn't be happier to see my team win the Super Bowl. It's just a shame that the greater Miami gray-hair-and-denture club will be chilling another bottler for next year. What a sickening display.
Eli Hushes the Critics
Eli Manning has had to endure much criticism the last couple of years as the starting quarterback of the New York Giants.
New York football fans were content to give him a season or two to flourish, with most noting that big brother Peyton didn't exactly set the league on fire in his first season or two as a starter, either.
Peyton started full-time as a rookie in 1998 at 22 years old. First off, the '98 Colts had a better offensive line and a more solid coaching staff than the '04 Giants did for Eli.
Peyton went into the '98 season knowing he would be the starter, and in his first 16 games with the Colts, he threw 26 touchdowns, which is definitely impressive, especially for a rookie. But, he also threw 28 interceptions, which will kill a lot of scoring drives.
Eli began his rookie season on the bench behind starting quarterback Kurt Warner. After several games had already been played in the '04 season, Eli was thrown into the fire cold at 23 years old. He only threw six TD's, but he also threw just nine picks.
Peyton's numbers improved over the next few seasons, with his completion percentage continually rising, and his interceptions continually on the decline.
Eli's critics began to speak about his regression in '06, when he threw for fewer yards, the same amount of TD's (24), and one more INT than the previous year.
I can not say these things without adding that I was one of Eli's biggest critics.
I spoke openly about how he looked confused on the field, was not becoming the leader that the Giants need, and how basically he was costing the Giants football games.
With that said, let's just say that I'm glad that I am not the Giants General Manager.
Giants' management, whether it was the front office or the coaching staff, continued to believe in Eli, although there were many times that I wasn't quite sure why.
As we all saw, it was the right choice to make. Eli proved myself and a lot of others wrong when we called for his head. He stood tall through it all and stunned the world, literally, when he drove the Giants down field and threw what would be the winning touchdown of Super Bowl XLII, making history by stopping history, as the then 18-0 New England Patriots were finally defeated.
Unfortunately for the Pats, they are going to go down as probably the worst 18-1 NFL team ever. Because the one loss was the biggest game of the year - the game that should have been their coronation of a perfect season. Especially when you consider that the Patriots were not met by the NFC favorites. In fact, it was a Wild Card team, a team that had to go on the road and beat first Tampa Bay, and then on to the cities that were boasting the two best teams in the NFC: Dallas and Green Bay.
In the games against Dallas, Green Bay, and New England, the critics' picks were lopsided against New York each week.
Each week on ESPN, Fox Sports and CBS, most of the so-called "experts" picked the Giants to lose.
First, they said that the Cowboys were the best team in the conference.
Then, they said that it was Brett Favre's year. That with all of the records that he broke this year, and the fact that he took his team further than anyone would have guessed, suggested a win for the Pack, especially on the frozen tundra of Green Bay.
So, the season seemd to be on Favre's side. Throw in the week 2 game between the two teams where the Giants looked terrible at the Meadowlands and fell to 0-2, and it was basically a no-brainer that the Packers would win. Or, so one would have thought.
Instead, New York took the Packers to the brink, with the game being decided in overtime by the foot of Lawrence Tynes, another Giant who had his ups and downs this year.
The Super Bowl was the next stop for Eli and the boys. Again, few in the media gave the Giants any serious chance at all to win.
The Patriots were 18-0, and cruised through the season. They also beat New York in week 17, another point that was supposed to be in their favor.
It was supposed to be destiny for the Pats, the first time in 35 years that a team went into the Super Bowl with the chance to play an undefeated schedule.
To write a movie with those circumstances and have the Giants win the game, people wouldn't believe it. It wouldn't make a dime at the box office because it would be looked at as corny and predictable.
But Eli did just that. He watched his defense completely dominate what was supposed to be the best offense in the NFL, and make them look like a flag football team.
He moved his team strategically down the field, and even though they fell short a few times in the first half, when they should have been up by at least 14 points, Manning did not lose his confidence one bit.
Manning did what he had to do when he had to do it. He bounced back from a 14-10 deficit with less than three minutes remaining in the game and drove his team down the field for the winning touchdown.
Eli may have been inconsistent for some, or even most, of the season. But he played in the clutch so well, and produced such fantastic results, that he truly showed the mark of a champion.
Eli Manning is a Super Bowl champion and MVP, and that's enough to shut everyone's mouth.
New York football fans were content to give him a season or two to flourish, with most noting that big brother Peyton didn't exactly set the league on fire in his first season or two as a starter, either.
Peyton started full-time as a rookie in 1998 at 22 years old. First off, the '98 Colts had a better offensive line and a more solid coaching staff than the '04 Giants did for Eli.
Peyton went into the '98 season knowing he would be the starter, and in his first 16 games with the Colts, he threw 26 touchdowns, which is definitely impressive, especially for a rookie. But, he also threw 28 interceptions, which will kill a lot of scoring drives.
Eli began his rookie season on the bench behind starting quarterback Kurt Warner. After several games had already been played in the '04 season, Eli was thrown into the fire cold at 23 years old. He only threw six TD's, but he also threw just nine picks.
Peyton's numbers improved over the next few seasons, with his completion percentage continually rising, and his interceptions continually on the decline.
Eli's critics began to speak about his regression in '06, when he threw for fewer yards, the same amount of TD's (24), and one more INT than the previous year.
I can not say these things without adding that I was one of Eli's biggest critics.
I spoke openly about how he looked confused on the field, was not becoming the leader that the Giants need, and how basically he was costing the Giants football games.
With that said, let's just say that I'm glad that I am not the Giants General Manager.
Giants' management, whether it was the front office or the coaching staff, continued to believe in Eli, although there were many times that I wasn't quite sure why.
As we all saw, it was the right choice to make. Eli proved myself and a lot of others wrong when we called for his head. He stood tall through it all and stunned the world, literally, when he drove the Giants down field and threw what would be the winning touchdown of Super Bowl XLII, making history by stopping history, as the then 18-0 New England Patriots were finally defeated.
Unfortunately for the Pats, they are going to go down as probably the worst 18-1 NFL team ever. Because the one loss was the biggest game of the year - the game that should have been their coronation of a perfect season. Especially when you consider that the Patriots were not met by the NFC favorites. In fact, it was a Wild Card team, a team that had to go on the road and beat first Tampa Bay, and then on to the cities that were boasting the two best teams in the NFC: Dallas and Green Bay.
In the games against Dallas, Green Bay, and New England, the critics' picks were lopsided against New York each week.
Each week on ESPN, Fox Sports and CBS, most of the so-called "experts" picked the Giants to lose.
First, they said that the Cowboys were the best team in the conference.
Then, they said that it was Brett Favre's year. That with all of the records that he broke this year, and the fact that he took his team further than anyone would have guessed, suggested a win for the Pack, especially on the frozen tundra of Green Bay.
So, the season seemd to be on Favre's side. Throw in the week 2 game between the two teams where the Giants looked terrible at the Meadowlands and fell to 0-2, and it was basically a no-brainer that the Packers would win. Or, so one would have thought.
Instead, New York took the Packers to the brink, with the game being decided in overtime by the foot of Lawrence Tynes, another Giant who had his ups and downs this year.
The Super Bowl was the next stop for Eli and the boys. Again, few in the media gave the Giants any serious chance at all to win.
The Patriots were 18-0, and cruised through the season. They also beat New York in week 17, another point that was supposed to be in their favor.
It was supposed to be destiny for the Pats, the first time in 35 years that a team went into the Super Bowl with the chance to play an undefeated schedule.
To write a movie with those circumstances and have the Giants win the game, people wouldn't believe it. It wouldn't make a dime at the box office because it would be looked at as corny and predictable.
But Eli did just that. He watched his defense completely dominate what was supposed to be the best offense in the NFL, and make them look like a flag football team.
He moved his team strategically down the field, and even though they fell short a few times in the first half, when they should have been up by at least 14 points, Manning did not lose his confidence one bit.
Manning did what he had to do when he had to do it. He bounced back from a 14-10 deficit with less than three minutes remaining in the game and drove his team down the field for the winning touchdown.
Eli may have been inconsistent for some, or even most, of the season. But he played in the clutch so well, and produced such fantastic results, that he truly showed the mark of a champion.
Eli Manning is a Super Bowl champion and MVP, and that's enough to shut everyone's mouth.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)