Hopping off the Fence/Year of the Sucker?
Ugh. After a ridiculously lucky first week, where I went 4-0, the wheels have come off the wagon, and I have skidded to 2-4 the next two weeks, so on the eve of the Super Bowl I am 6-4 for the playoffs. Since I am used to winning about 70% of my playoff picks, but don't tend to do so hot in the Super Bowl, I am a bit disappointed here.
I am also having a difficult time deciding which way to go here. The game looks like enough of a tossup that I am tempted to just take whichever team I am rooting for.
If I can figure out who that is.
I own a Shaun Alexander jersey, but that's not because I like the 'hawks. Back when they changed to the new uniforms I decided that that was a really sharp shade of blue-grey...or something. About any jersey you want is $15 in Korea, I might add. I also like the jersey because 37 is a really crappy Texas Hold-em starting hand. [I also have a Curtis Martin jersey (28), but I actually root for the Jets], and I am hoping to get my hands on a Larry Johnson jersey (27). Given that he got 1730 yards in 9 games, this has to be available soon. If anything I will probably like the jersey more if the Seahawks lose. Then everyone and his brother won't go out and buy one. For $15 this is not that unlikely over here.
I know some of the locals will be pulling for the Steelers because Jerome Bettis is from Detroit, a fact that suddenly seems more relevant now that the Super Bowl is being played in Detroit for the first time, and the Detroit area (XVI was in Pontiac) for the second.
Too bad Pugilant Mick had to ruin this by adding that Jerome also went to Notre Dame. Of course, I knew this, but Mick felt the need to mention that this, along with the Detroiter factor, were his reasons for rooting for Pittsburgh.
Last year he rooted for Pittsburgh because our Battalion Commander was going to give us a four day weekend if Pittsburgh won the whole thing. Meanwhile, I'm tempted to take the Seahawks because Matt Hasselbeck went to Boston College. Would a Seattle victory, topped off with a Super Bowl MVP award for Hasselbeck lead to BC cranking up its recruiting and turning into an ACC powerhouse? This is probably wishful thinking.
What I would really like to see is a combination of unseasonably warm Michigan weather, coupled with a huge loss by Seattle, IF that would convince the Ford family that the Lions need to go back outdoors if they seriously want to win. Dome teams, by and large, are pussies. Seattle will only confuse the issue if they win. But the Lions will never tear the roof off of Ford Field. Boston College will win multiple national championships before this happens.
Detroit is still the only northern city to host the Super Bowl. They should call it "The New Orleans of the North." Like the Saints, the Lions will never appear in the Super Bowl, but they can host one occasionally. Personally, as a local, more or less, I would love to be in Detroit for the game, even if I couldn't actually get tickets. I can just see all the fans who came all the way from Seattle wondering why their team couldn't make the big dance when the game was hosted by Charlotte or Jacksonville. I've read plenty of reports from sportswriters attending those Super Bowls who lamented that the game wasn't played in New Orleans or Miami. Detroit could make these lesser cities look more or less like paradise. Currently Detroit is 34F, Charlotte is 50F, and Jacksonville is 62F. This is not the year you would want New Orleans to host the game, but the big easy is currently a big 61 degrees. Miami is 73F.
Last year I won when the Steelers failed to cover against the Jets, then won again when they lost to the Pats. Thats what makes taking the Steelers so tough. In the past I have won good money going against these guys. They are one of my favorite sucker bets.
They are sucker bets due to the lingering of legions of Steeler fans who,-- drunkenly slobbering like St. Bernards who somehow broke into the little brandy barrels around their necks, and, having perfected their method, have now uncorked ALL the booze at the ski lodge and are running amok,-- remember the glory days of the '70's and mistakenly believe that winning is their birthright.
This is a dangerous belief.
Not dangerous the way it is dangerous for the Germans to believe that a leader will emerge to revive another reich, and lead them against the eastern hordes, of course. Heck no. That sort of thinking was dangerous for the Germans, and everyone within several hundred miles of them. Bill Cowher may have a outlandishly outdated mustache, but he's no Hitler. Steeler fans may be largely a couple generations or so away from Bavaria, and they may like a good Oktoberfest celebration--Hey, who doesn't? Most of the Irish in America would renounce their Irishness and St. Patrick if exposed to one of these Bacchanals--but lets get serious.
The Steelers don't have any panzers, they just have a bus. They don't have to beat the Russians either, just the Seahawks. That Mike Holmgren has an uncanny resemblence to Joe Stalin is a coincidence that will be noticed only by the most demented of Steeler fans.
As long as they can refrain from betting the rent money on them, Steeler fans can believe whatever they want, with no danger at all.
Ten years ago Steeler fans could even get away with believing in some sort of Ragnorak with the Cowboys, as long as they got ten points. Any sort of generousity, however, and they got taken to the cleaners. Nine points? Sorry pal. Straight up? Fuggiddabouddit.
And now the Steelers are favored by 4 against the NFC's top seed. Partly this is due to Pittsburgh's success against Cincy, Indy, and Denver. The relative weakness of the NFC certainly must shoulder much of the blame for this line as well. The Seahawks are the only NFC team I really expected to be favored against any of the AFC playoff teams. But I thought they would be favored against anyone but the Colts, or perhaps the Pats, had they arrived at the big game on a high note.
As weak as the NFC is currently, and as well as Pittsburgh has played recently, I think there is another reason for the four point spread. That reason is the phenomena I was describing earlier--the teeming hordes of Black and Gold clad Steeler fans. The oddsmakers know that with the legions of Steeler fans out there they can expect crazy action on one side of this line. Their only hope was to favor the Steelers by enough to avoid a bloodbath. If the Steelers cover the bookies are going to get killed, and with the roll Pittsburgh's been on, the bookies have to be worried. I think the "smart money" here is on the Seahawks, but you know what? Sometimes the smart money loses, and there's a good chance this is one of those times.
Last year I was 2-0 betting against the Steelers on the playoffs. This year I am 1-2 in their games--1-0 betting on them, 0-2 betting against them. I'm not so concerned with jumping on the Steelers' bandwagon as I am with getting out of the way of the Bus, so to speak. I'm not convinced the Seahawks deserve to be a 4 point dog, but I feel like I am betting against history if I don't take the Steelers.
Scars from losing picks run deep. When I picked the Raiders over the Bucs three years ago it may have been because I was impressed by their high-octane offense. But I think alot of my decision was based on their victories over the Eagles and the Redskins--in Super Bowls XV and XVIII. I got both of these wrong. Twenty years later, I was determined not to get burned by the Raiders again. Instead I got burned by the Buccaneers. This time I am worrying about getting burned by the Steelers.
When the Raiders lost to the Bucs it was a case of a slick offense getting manhandled by a tough physical defense. You could say the same thing about my Notre Dame--Ohio State pick, though, in this case Ohio State also brought alot of big-play explosiveness to the table. If I remember correctly all of their touchdowns were on plays of at least 40 yards. Looking at the game through this lens, Pittsburgh looks alot like Tampa Bay, or perhaps Ohio State, given their big-play potential. Along with Big Ben's big average yards-per-pass completion, they have a back with breakaway speed in Willie Parker. The Steelers may not be able to stop Shaun Alexander, but they may be able to contain him. Alexander is not blindingly fast. Meanwhile, a couple of slip-ups on D and Parker, Ward and Randle El could be off to the races. And I do expect the Steelers to break a couple of big plays.
But if I am going to bet based on Willie Parker's breakaway speed, I must know--Willie breakaway? (Couldn't resist the pun!) Or won't'ee? Well, of course we can't know for sure. What I DO know, however, is that this year Parker only had four runs of over 30 yards, and one pass reception for 48 yards. Against Chicago he also had two receptions for 45 yards, so it is possible one of these was around 30 yards.
Here are the rankings of the defenses (vs. the run) that Willie Parker got loose against:
30. Cleveland (long: 80 yds, total 130 yds)
19. Minnesota (long: 49 yds, total 81 yds)
20. Cincinnati (long: 37 yds, total 131 yds)
22. Tennessee (long: 45 yds, total 161 yds)
Meanwhile, Seattle is ranked 5th against the run, and has allowed an average of between 50 and 60 yards per game in their last seven games. Was this against less than stellar competition? You bet. Philly(28th), SanFran(17th), Tenn(23rd), Indy(16th, but their bench), Green Bay(30th), Washington(7th), and Carolina(19th) are not exactly a murderers row. Indy played their subs, and Clinton Portis was banged up.
Will Pittsburgh gain more than 50 or 60 yards on the ground? Yes. (With their penchant for running the ball 45 times a game they had better.) But if they have trouble moving the ball on the ground they are going to have to depend on Big Ben's arm to carry them to victory. While I expect him to do great things (later if not sooner), success in the air is a whole lot easier if it is balanced by an effective running game. If Seattle can make the Steeler offense one-dimensional they should have a good chance to stop it. If Big Ben can continue to convert 3rd downs at the ridiculous rate that he has done so lately Pittsburgh may overcome this. IF...
Meanwhile, I keep hearing about how Pittsburgh will stuff Alexander, and how their zone-blitz will neutralize Seattle's west coast offense. And that's when I remember--Seattle is not the '03 Raiders, or this year's Fighting Irish. They are not just a slick west coast offensive team. They are far too good running the ball to let Pittsburgh key on the pass (unless Pittsburgh gets ahead --but don't expect either of these teams to give up on the run too soon) and the running game should keep Pittsburgh's zone blitz defense honest. I am not sure how much Seattle goes for play action passes, but it seems like a good idea right now.
So, while I was leaning towards Pittsburgh for most of the past two weeks, at this point I have decided that this was largely a pick based on irrational fear. Rationality says that Seattle has a decent chance to stop the run, and that if one team can run effectively that team should be favored. Big plays may win this game, but so far neither team has turned the ball over much, so it may come down to whoever gets an early lead and forces the other team out of their game plan.
Seattle has to be a little pissed off that they are a four point dog as well.
So in the end I'm going with Seattle(+4). I'm also considering taking the over for total touchdowns scored (5.5), and betting that someone will score after the two minute warning in the 1st half (-230, whatever that means). I'm also considering the OVER for total punts (8.5). Is this contradictory relative to my expecting six touchdowns? Maybe. If I can get Big Ben for MVP at 2-1, Alexander at 7-2, and Hasselbeck at 7-2 I might lay $20 on each of them. That way if Ben wins I break even, and I win $10 if one of the others wins....hmmm, that doesn't sound so good after all...maybe not. Maybe I'll just throw down on Hasselbeck. Or I could use a bet on Ben to hedge my Seattle pick--I strongly think that if Pittsburgh wins Ben will get MVP, unless Hines Ward has a Lynn Swann kind of game. After all my considering that this was the time to take the sucker bet, I'm going the other way. Lets see if the "smart" money holds up. (This pick has nothing to do with Matt Hasselbeck being a Boston College grad. I swear.)
Top 10 Tough Road Games
10. vs. Allies at Belgium
9. The Maginot Line ("Maginot Line? Germany over France by 14 and a half!")
8. vs. Bengals at Riverfront stadium
7. vs. Seahawks at Ford Field*
6. Devil's Night in Detroit
5. vs. RAF over Britain
4. vs. Broncos at Mile High
3. vs. Colts in Indy
2. vs. People's Army at China**
1. vs. Red Army at Russia***
* Not actually an away game, but apparently the Steelers will wear their road whites to honor their previous road success'.
** Not on Germany's schedule. People's Army at North Korea also a bitch.
*** Also Czar's Imperial Army at Russia--just ask Napoleon.
I am also having a difficult time deciding which way to go here. The game looks like enough of a tossup that I am tempted to just take whichever team I am rooting for.
If I can figure out who that is.
I own a Shaun Alexander jersey, but that's not because I like the 'hawks. Back when they changed to the new uniforms I decided that that was a really sharp shade of blue-grey...or something. About any jersey you want is $15 in Korea, I might add. I also like the jersey because 37 is a really crappy Texas Hold-em starting hand. [I also have a Curtis Martin jersey (28), but I actually root for the Jets], and I am hoping to get my hands on a Larry Johnson jersey (27). Given that he got 1730 yards in 9 games, this has to be available soon. If anything I will probably like the jersey more if the Seahawks lose. Then everyone and his brother won't go out and buy one. For $15 this is not that unlikely over here.
I know some of the locals will be pulling for the Steelers because Jerome Bettis is from Detroit, a fact that suddenly seems more relevant now that the Super Bowl is being played in Detroit for the first time, and the Detroit area (XVI was in Pontiac) for the second.
Too bad Pugilant Mick had to ruin this by adding that Jerome also went to Notre Dame. Of course, I knew this, but Mick felt the need to mention that this, along with the Detroiter factor, were his reasons for rooting for Pittsburgh.
Last year he rooted for Pittsburgh because our Battalion Commander was going to give us a four day weekend if Pittsburgh won the whole thing. Meanwhile, I'm tempted to take the Seahawks because Matt Hasselbeck went to Boston College. Would a Seattle victory, topped off with a Super Bowl MVP award for Hasselbeck lead to BC cranking up its recruiting and turning into an ACC powerhouse? This is probably wishful thinking.
What I would really like to see is a combination of unseasonably warm Michigan weather, coupled with a huge loss by Seattle, IF that would convince the Ford family that the Lions need to go back outdoors if they seriously want to win. Dome teams, by and large, are pussies. Seattle will only confuse the issue if they win. But the Lions will never tear the roof off of Ford Field. Boston College will win multiple national championships before this happens.
Detroit is still the only northern city to host the Super Bowl. They should call it "The New Orleans of the North." Like the Saints, the Lions will never appear in the Super Bowl, but they can host one occasionally. Personally, as a local, more or less, I would love to be in Detroit for the game, even if I couldn't actually get tickets. I can just see all the fans who came all the way from Seattle wondering why their team couldn't make the big dance when the game was hosted by Charlotte or Jacksonville. I've read plenty of reports from sportswriters attending those Super Bowls who lamented that the game wasn't played in New Orleans or Miami. Detroit could make these lesser cities look more or less like paradise. Currently Detroit is 34F, Charlotte is 50F, and Jacksonville is 62F. This is not the year you would want New Orleans to host the game, but the big easy is currently a big 61 degrees. Miami is 73F.
Last year I won when the Steelers failed to cover against the Jets, then won again when they lost to the Pats. Thats what makes taking the Steelers so tough. In the past I have won good money going against these guys. They are one of my favorite sucker bets.
They are sucker bets due to the lingering of legions of Steeler fans who,-- drunkenly slobbering like St. Bernards who somehow broke into the little brandy barrels around their necks, and, having perfected their method, have now uncorked ALL the booze at the ski lodge and are running amok,-- remember the glory days of the '70's and mistakenly believe that winning is their birthright.
This is a dangerous belief.
Not dangerous the way it is dangerous for the Germans to believe that a leader will emerge to revive another reich, and lead them against the eastern hordes, of course. Heck no. That sort of thinking was dangerous for the Germans, and everyone within several hundred miles of them. Bill Cowher may have a outlandishly outdated mustache, but he's no Hitler. Steeler fans may be largely a couple generations or so away from Bavaria, and they may like a good Oktoberfest celebration--Hey, who doesn't? Most of the Irish in America would renounce their Irishness and St. Patrick if exposed to one of these Bacchanals--but lets get serious.
The Steelers don't have any panzers, they just have a bus. They don't have to beat the Russians either, just the Seahawks. That Mike Holmgren has an uncanny resemblence to Joe Stalin is a coincidence that will be noticed only by the most demented of Steeler fans.
As long as they can refrain from betting the rent money on them, Steeler fans can believe whatever they want, with no danger at all.
Ten years ago Steeler fans could even get away with believing in some sort of Ragnorak with the Cowboys, as long as they got ten points. Any sort of generousity, however, and they got taken to the cleaners. Nine points? Sorry pal. Straight up? Fuggiddabouddit.
And now the Steelers are favored by 4 against the NFC's top seed. Partly this is due to Pittsburgh's success against Cincy, Indy, and Denver. The relative weakness of the NFC certainly must shoulder much of the blame for this line as well. The Seahawks are the only NFC team I really expected to be favored against any of the AFC playoff teams. But I thought they would be favored against anyone but the Colts, or perhaps the Pats, had they arrived at the big game on a high note.
As weak as the NFC is currently, and as well as Pittsburgh has played recently, I think there is another reason for the four point spread. That reason is the phenomena I was describing earlier--the teeming hordes of Black and Gold clad Steeler fans. The oddsmakers know that with the legions of Steeler fans out there they can expect crazy action on one side of this line. Their only hope was to favor the Steelers by enough to avoid a bloodbath. If the Steelers cover the bookies are going to get killed, and with the roll Pittsburgh's been on, the bookies have to be worried. I think the "smart money" here is on the Seahawks, but you know what? Sometimes the smart money loses, and there's a good chance this is one of those times.
Last year I was 2-0 betting against the Steelers on the playoffs. This year I am 1-2 in their games--1-0 betting on them, 0-2 betting against them. I'm not so concerned with jumping on the Steelers' bandwagon as I am with getting out of the way of the Bus, so to speak. I'm not convinced the Seahawks deserve to be a 4 point dog, but I feel like I am betting against history if I don't take the Steelers.
Scars from losing picks run deep. When I picked the Raiders over the Bucs three years ago it may have been because I was impressed by their high-octane offense. But I think alot of my decision was based on their victories over the Eagles and the Redskins--in Super Bowls XV and XVIII. I got both of these wrong. Twenty years later, I was determined not to get burned by the Raiders again. Instead I got burned by the Buccaneers. This time I am worrying about getting burned by the Steelers.
When the Raiders lost to the Bucs it was a case of a slick offense getting manhandled by a tough physical defense. You could say the same thing about my Notre Dame--Ohio State pick, though, in this case Ohio State also brought alot of big-play explosiveness to the table. If I remember correctly all of their touchdowns were on plays of at least 40 yards. Looking at the game through this lens, Pittsburgh looks alot like Tampa Bay, or perhaps Ohio State, given their big-play potential. Along with Big Ben's big average yards-per-pass completion, they have a back with breakaway speed in Willie Parker. The Steelers may not be able to stop Shaun Alexander, but they may be able to contain him. Alexander is not blindingly fast. Meanwhile, a couple of slip-ups on D and Parker, Ward and Randle El could be off to the races. And I do expect the Steelers to break a couple of big plays.
But if I am going to bet based on Willie Parker's breakaway speed, I must know--Willie breakaway? (Couldn't resist the pun!) Or won't'ee? Well, of course we can't know for sure. What I DO know, however, is that this year Parker only had four runs of over 30 yards, and one pass reception for 48 yards. Against Chicago he also had two receptions for 45 yards, so it is possible one of these was around 30 yards.
Here are the rankings of the defenses (vs. the run) that Willie Parker got loose against:
30. Cleveland (long: 80 yds, total 130 yds)
19. Minnesota (long: 49 yds, total 81 yds)
20. Cincinnati (long: 37 yds, total 131 yds)
22. Tennessee (long: 45 yds, total 161 yds)
Meanwhile, Seattle is ranked 5th against the run, and has allowed an average of between 50 and 60 yards per game in their last seven games. Was this against less than stellar competition? You bet. Philly(28th), SanFran(17th), Tenn(23rd), Indy(16th, but their bench), Green Bay(30th), Washington(7th), and Carolina(19th) are not exactly a murderers row. Indy played their subs, and Clinton Portis was banged up.
Will Pittsburgh gain more than 50 or 60 yards on the ground? Yes. (With their penchant for running the ball 45 times a game they had better.) But if they have trouble moving the ball on the ground they are going to have to depend on Big Ben's arm to carry them to victory. While I expect him to do great things (later if not sooner), success in the air is a whole lot easier if it is balanced by an effective running game. If Seattle can make the Steeler offense one-dimensional they should have a good chance to stop it. If Big Ben can continue to convert 3rd downs at the ridiculous rate that he has done so lately Pittsburgh may overcome this. IF...
Meanwhile, I keep hearing about how Pittsburgh will stuff Alexander, and how their zone-blitz will neutralize Seattle's west coast offense. And that's when I remember--Seattle is not the '03 Raiders, or this year's Fighting Irish. They are not just a slick west coast offensive team. They are far too good running the ball to let Pittsburgh key on the pass (unless Pittsburgh gets ahead --but don't expect either of these teams to give up on the run too soon) and the running game should keep Pittsburgh's zone blitz defense honest. I am not sure how much Seattle goes for play action passes, but it seems like a good idea right now.
So, while I was leaning towards Pittsburgh for most of the past two weeks, at this point I have decided that this was largely a pick based on irrational fear. Rationality says that Seattle has a decent chance to stop the run, and that if one team can run effectively that team should be favored. Big plays may win this game, but so far neither team has turned the ball over much, so it may come down to whoever gets an early lead and forces the other team out of their game plan.
Seattle has to be a little pissed off that they are a four point dog as well.
So in the end I'm going with Seattle(+4). I'm also considering taking the over for total touchdowns scored (5.5), and betting that someone will score after the two minute warning in the 1st half (-230, whatever that means). I'm also considering the OVER for total punts (8.5). Is this contradictory relative to my expecting six touchdowns? Maybe. If I can get Big Ben for MVP at 2-1, Alexander at 7-2, and Hasselbeck at 7-2 I might lay $20 on each of them. That way if Ben wins I break even, and I win $10 if one of the others wins....hmmm, that doesn't sound so good after all...maybe not. Maybe I'll just throw down on Hasselbeck. Or I could use a bet on Ben to hedge my Seattle pick--I strongly think that if Pittsburgh wins Ben will get MVP, unless Hines Ward has a Lynn Swann kind of game. After all my considering that this was the time to take the sucker bet, I'm going the other way. Lets see if the "smart" money holds up. (This pick has nothing to do with Matt Hasselbeck being a Boston College grad. I swear.)
Top 10 Tough Road Games
10. vs. Allies at Belgium
9. The Maginot Line ("Maginot Line? Germany over France by 14 and a half!")
8. vs. Bengals at Riverfront stadium
7. vs. Seahawks at Ford Field*
6. Devil's Night in Detroit
5. vs. RAF over Britain
4. vs. Broncos at Mile High
3. vs. Colts in Indy
2. vs. People's Army at China**
1. vs. Red Army at Russia***
* Not actually an away game, but apparently the Steelers will wear their road whites to honor their previous road success'.
** Not on Germany's schedule. People's Army at North Korea also a bitch.
*** Also Czar's Imperial Army at Russia--just ask Napoleon.
posted by roQQ | 7:14 PM
|
0 comments
