Why We Love Football

It’s always fascinated me that our favorite sport in this country is exclusive to our continent. Baseball has caught on all over the world and we’ve begun to adopt a love for soccer, but football remains localized to the U.S. and Canada. I think the reason we love football stems from the same reasons we love action and war movies. Football is more like a battle than any other sport. I don’t mean that simply because of the physical abuse the players take, but because of the strategy and formations. After all, there’s a reason that the place where offensive and defensive linemen collide is called the “trenches.”

Football is much like battle in ancient times: two teams line up on either side of a battlefield and intentionally collide, trying to advance further into the other team’s territory. Each play is a battle strategy, aiming to exploit the other team’s weakness. The battles are fought 10 yards at a time, forever in pursuit of a fresh set of downs. Nowhere else in sports, or in the world, is it harder to move forward 30 feet than it is in football. Can you imagine trying to get from the kitchen to the living room with 11 of the largest, most athletic men on the planet trying to stop you? In ancient Rome, the people enjoyed watching warriors battle more powerful animals like lions and tigers in the Coliseum. Now we watch Marshawn Lynch shed 350 pound lineman as he barrels into the end zone at Century Link Field.

The tension in football is built up in a similar way to action movies as well. Instead of watching our hero quietly creep through a building before the final firefight, we watch the quarterback lineup under center, call out the “mike” linebacker, and give the snap count in front of a hushed stadium full of 60,000 people. The difference between the action movie and the football game is the script. When the QB takes the snap, no one in the universe knows what’s going to happen next, and we get to experience it as it happens.

Another reason we love football is because it is a game of inches. A lot of sports claim to be this way, and sure, every sport has its moment where an inch or two may have decided the game, but inches decide games, seasons and careers on a regular basis in football. Don’t believe me? Ask Kevin Dyson who came just 20 some-odd inches from winning a Super Bowl, and cementing his name in history. Inches don’t just decide Super Bowls, however, they determine the length of almost every possession. How many times per game do you imagine the chains come out to measure how close the ball is to the first down marker?

Lastly, there’s the heroics. Everybody loves a hero, and every football game has one. Whether it’s Vince Lombardi after winning the first Super Bowl, Broadway Joe after backing up his impossible prediction or Willie McGinest stuffing Edgerrin James on 4th and goal from the 1, someone ends up as the hero. In other sports the heroes are usually the same: the goalie, the goal scorer, the shooting guard, the closer or the slugger. In football, the hero can be anyone. It can be the kicker who split the uprights as time expires or the kick returner who ran one back. It can be the QB who threw the Hail Mary or the wide receiver who caught it. It can be the running back who broke the plane or the nose tackle that held him just short. It can be the linebacker who strip sacked the QB or the free safety that snatched an interception. No matter who it is, the fans are guaranteed at least one hero at the end of every game.

Since February 3rd, Sundays have just been the day before Monday, the last day of the weekend. Starting this Sunday with the preseason, Sundays will go back to being days filled with tension, battles, heroics and games won and lost over a couple of inches. You want to know what I’m most excited for? 3rd and 1 with the game on the line.

Left-Handed Legend

I’ve always had a soft spot for Phil Mickelson. He’s a big, jolly man who loves his family, runs his own charity, and is a genuinely great human being. Oh yea, and he’s a lefty, like me. Star left-handed athletes are hard to come by. Names like Sandy Koufax, John McEnroe, Larry Bird, Phil Esposito and Steve Young come to mind when you think of the greatest lefties in sports. With Sunday’s win at the Open Championship, Phil Mickelson has certainly joined that list of all-time great lefties, and he might even be atop it. He’s cemented himself as one of the greatest golfers to ever live, winning his fifth major adding to his whopping 24 top-5 finishes at major championships. The Open Championship had escaped him for the entirety of his 21-year professional career until Sunday. All that remains now is a U.S. Open victory, a tournament in which he has placed second a total of 6 times. That’s more runner-up finishes than anyone else at any major.

Sunday’s win at Muirfield may go down as one of the most inspired wins in the history of golf. He stepped up to the 13th tee, with six of the hardest holes on the course ahead of him, +1 on the tournament. Through the first three days, he was a total of +4 on those last 6 holes, but that all changed on Sunday. A spectacular birdie putt on the thirteenth started a chain reaction of momentum and confidence that carried Mickelson the rest of the way. He went on and birdied 14 (the course’s second hardest hole), parred 15 and 16, and birdied the par-5 17th with two of the best 3-wood shot he’s ever made (he said so himself). On 18, He sank a twisting 6-footer for birdie, and threw his hands in the air like a guy who knew he had just won. He was right. His 5-under 66 on the day was enough for him to make up the 5-stroke deficit he faced entering the day, and win the tournament by an astounding 3 strokes. He was also the only player who finished the tournament under par.

Mickelson is 43 years old now and is playing some of the best golf of his career. Having earned over 71 million dollars in prize money, not to mention the millions more in sponsorship dollars, Mickelson isn’t in it for the money. He plays because he is a competitor, and a top one at that. He doesn’t compete with the same fire and intensity that Tiger Woods does, but instead competes for the love of the game, and to prove to himself what he can still do. His 42 career PGA tour wins rank him 9th all-time in that category, and among active golfers he trails only Tiger Woods. He is behind Walter Hagen by only 3 PGA tour wins, and could claim 6th place behind Arnold Palmer with just 11 more wins.

Despite a storied career that puts him among the greatest golfers to ever play, Phil Mickelson’s career is full of “what-ifs.” The biggest question, in my mind, is this: what would Mickelson’s career look like without Tiger Woods? Throughout his career, Tiger Woods has been the most talked about, and best, golfer in the world. However, throughout that same time span, Phil Mickelson has been unequivocally the second-best player in the world. So what if Tiger hadn’t played? Would we be talking about Phil as the best of the best? I’m almost certain we would. How often do we see one of the top-ten greatest athletes in his sport essentially fly under the radar?

What makes Mickelson so easy to root for, so lovable, is that exact ability to go unnoticed. He’s been overshadowed for his entire career by Tiger, yet he doesn’t scrap for the spotlight. That quality is so admirable because most people would want some recognition for being one of the greatest golfers in the history of the game. Wouldn’t you? Phil’s answer would be “no.” He competes for his own sake, not for the fame, the money, or the attention. He quietly sits back while the cameras follow Woods, and climbs the ladder of all-time great golfers. His win on Sunday was just another rung on the ladder, and a great day for lefties everywhere.

Here’s Lefty winning the Open Championship.

Tradition: The Open Championship

The Open Championship (known to some as the British Open) is the third of four annual major championships in golf. Unlike the other three majors, the Open Championship is played overseas. Always played in the United Kingdom, this year’s Open is in Gullane, Scotland at the Muirfield links. Links, of course, is a style of golf course native to the United Kingdom. Always on the coast, or close to it, links courses are unique in many ways. Most noticeable is the distinct lack of trees. Instead of lining each hole with woods, the links course lines its fairways with thick, long fescue grass that you would expect to find on sand dunes.

Along with the thick rough, the fairways are notoriously uneven, making it rare to be hitting a ball that is even with your feet. When the ball is above or below your feet, you are less likely to hit the ball straight. If that wasn’t hard enough, the bunkers on the course are called “pot bunkers,” named for their depth. In addition to being deeper than bunkers on a non-links course, they are far more abundant. The last challenge posed by the links style course is the wind. Because of the proximity to the coast, Links courses are notoriously windy. Though the forecast is relatively tame for this weekend at Muirfield, don’t be surprised if the wind kicks up on the coast and plays a role in some of the shots made this weekend.

What makes the Open special is the history that surrounds it. Modern golf was invented in Scotland, and the links course is the oldest form of golf. The Scottish people have a deep appreciation for the game, and the fans always turn up in great numbers with high levels of enthusiasm. There is no other sporting event quite as rich with history as the Open. The links courses still resemble the ones that herds of sheep used to mow instead of groundskeepers, and men with shovels dug the bunkers instead of backhoes.

This year’s Open will be intriguing for a few reasons. The last 19 majors have yielded 18 different winners, with Rory McIlroy being the only golfer to win two in that timeframe. Of course, the streak of different winners could be extended if Tiger Woods were to win. He is still the world’s top golfer, despite taking a few weeks off to heal his golfer’s elbow (which is now healed), and is poised for a breakthrough in a major championship. The conditions at Muirfield are dry and fast, much like the conditions at St. Andrews in 2005 when Tiger won. Tiger also finished third at last year’s Open, his best result in any major last year.

The other favorites include Phil Mickelson and Justin Rose. Mickelson is playing inspired golf right now and is fresh off of a win in the Scottish Open at a links course. He came very close to winning the U.S. Open a few weeks ago, and no doubt regrets his late collapse at Merion. Justin Rose is another favorite after winning the U.S. Open at Merion, and returning home to the United Kingdom to compete on the Links courses he grew up playing. Of course there are 156 players in the tournament that have their sights set on winning, and any one of them could do it. The last Open held at Muirfield was won by Ernie Els at -6, so at least we’ll see some birdies, unlike at Merion.

Bruins Breakdown

It was only a few weeks ago that we sat and watched the Bruins dominate the top seeded Penguins in the Eastern Conference Final to earn their second trip to the Stanley Cup in three years. Even more recently, that same Bruins team was up 2-1 on the Blackhawks, just two wins away from capturing the Cup. But now we sit watching the team we know and love get dismantled by free agency and trade. Horton, Ference, Jagr, Khudobin, Seguin, Peverley: gone. Wouldn’t it make more sense to try and keep together the team that has won the Eastern Conference twice in the last three years? Of course, running a hockey team is a business, and business involves some moving pieces, but this year the Bruins’ front office seemed to go out of their way to dismantle this team.

Obviously the main priority this offseason was to re-sign Tuukka Rask, making sure that they locked up one of the league’s premier goaltenders (He just signed for 8 years, 56 million). Since the salary cap actually went down this offseason, re-signing Rask inevitably meant letting some people go. The logical choices were Ference, Jagr and Khudobin for a variety of reasons. Ference is 34, and with Krug, Bartkowski and Hamilton all playing well under the age of 25, Ference was unfortunately no longer needed on the blue line. Thus, Chiarelli told Ference that he should explore free agency, and wished him the best of luck. He signed with the Edmonton Oilers for 4 years, 13 million dollars: a perfect fit for him.

Jagr was another obvious choice to let go in free agency, mainly because he will turn 42 next season and has looked increasingly slower and slower with every year. A full 82 game season won’t be good for the aging Czech legend. He is yet to sign with anyone, though Montreal is rumored to have shown some interest. Khudobin was simply someone the Bruins couldn’t have hoped to hold on to given his quality of play. He proved this year that he could be a starting goalie in this league, and we couldn’t have kept him around as a backup. He signed with the Carolina Hurricanes for 1 year and 800,000 dollars, though he will probably be extended for more money once he has further proven himself.

Those moves, though some of them unfortunate, were all predictable this offseason. The ones that came as a surprise were the trading of Tyler Seguin and Rich Peverley and the departure of Nathan Horton. The trade was the biggest shock of the offseason, but not because it involved Seguin. Instead, the surprise was the timing and the involvement of Peverley. I first caught wind of Seguin’s name in trade talks on the day of the draft. The Bruins were rumored to be looking for a top ten pick as well as an established NHLer for our 21-year-old star. Once the first 10 picks came and went, the trade talks died down and Chiarelli addressed the media about Seguin as if he were staying. Then, on the 4th of July, the news broke that he and Rich Peverley were headed to Dallas for Loui Eriksson and four prospects.

The original explanation for the incredibly one-sided deal (in Dallas’ favor) was that Seguin was traded because it opened a lot of cap space and that the Bruins weren’t happy with his professionalism or maturity. I have three major complaints about this trade. The first is Peverley. Seguin for Eriksson and a prospect or two would have been a fair trade. Letting Dallas take a guy, in Peverley, that was a quality penalty killer and stepped in admirably at center for Kelly in the regular season and Campbell in the playoffs, was just plain unnecessary. He was one of the fastest guys on the team, always gave his best effort, and did absolutely anything the coach asked him to do, but he somehow got bundled with a player we were getting rid of for maturity reasons. That brings me to my second complaint. How can you expect a 21-year-old kid who had barely turned 18 before he was thrown millions of dollars to be mature and professional?  Sure, his output was a little low this year, but it was only his third year, and he pumped out 67 points last season. He was +23 this year with 32 points. He has superstar potential in this league. Take Joe Thornton for example. He was an 18-year-old drafted first overall in the draft (Seguin was second), and in his second year he mustered only 41 points and was a mere +3 (same number of games played). He went on to be a league MVP, tallied over 100 points in three separate seasons, and had the most points of any player in the ten year stretch from 2000-2010. Of course the Bruins traded him away too, a move they almost certainly regret.

My last issue with this trade is what we did with the cap space we gained by moving Seguin and Peverley. My first inclination was for the Bruins to re-sign Horton with that space. He told Chiarelli at the end of the season that he was going to explore free agency, undoubtedly because he saw how little cap space the Bruins had for him. However, after freeing up space for him, the Bs didn’t offer him a deal, and he signed with the Columbus Blue Jackets for 7 years at 5.3 million a year. The Bruins then signed Jarome Iginla to a one-year contract that is a 6 million dollar hit to their cap, though that money isn’t all guaranteed to Iginla.

Horton’s chemistry with Lucic and Krejci is what will be missed most. Instead of bringing him back, the Bs brought in a guy that actively turned them down this year because he didn’t think they would be contenders. Though Iginla is a class act, and will likely be humble enough to admit his mistake, it still surprises me that Horton wanted to leave Lucic and Krejci and that the Bruins didn’t try harder to keep him around.

Having said all of these negative things about the team, it’s not all bad news. Loui Eriksson is a very underrated forward that plays great two-way hockey. He’s known around the league as the Patrice Bergeron of wingers. He plays a physical style of hockey, takes care of his defensive assignments, and has been a 70 point player in each of the last three 82 game seasons. Those points can be attributed to his immense speed, quick hands, and an unbelievably accurate shot. He will fit well with Bergeron and Marchand in Seguin’s place. He also waived his no trade clause to play for Boston, so he’s clearly coming because he wants to be a part of Julien’s system.

As far as Iginla goes, there isn’t a whole lot to dislike about his game. He’s accumulated 1,106 points in 1,232 career NHL games. He has great leadership skills having been the captain of the Calgary Flames for years, and he will likely quarterback the powerplay with his 371 career powerplay points. He will fit well in Horton’s role if Lucic, Krejci, and the rest of the team can forgive him for choosing Pittsburgh over Boston this season. I’m not here to say the Bruins are in trouble this season, because they’re not. They’re certainly still in position to be contenders; I’m just surprised by the dismantling of such a successful team.

Patriots’ Offseason: The Good News

Do you remember a time when Tom Brady’s offensive weapons were named Deion Branch, David Patten, David Givens, Troy Brown, Daniel Graham, and Corey Dillon? I do. That team was assembled in the 2004/2005 season, and they won the Super Bowl. Now let me give you another list of names: Danny Amendola, Donald Jones, Michael Jenkins, Julien Edelman, Jake Ballard, and Stevan Ridley. Do you see where I’m going with this? It doesn’t matter to me that Amendola, Jones, and Jenkins haven’t made names for themselves as wide receivers in this league because Tom Brady can make their names for them.

In 2004 David Givens caught 56 passes from Brady, but in 2006, after signing a big contract with Tennessee, he caught only 5 passes in 10 games, before his career was cut short by a knee injury. In 2005, coming off of a Super Bowl MVP performance, Deion Branch caught 78 passes for 998 yards from Tom Brady. His best season in Seattle consisted of 53 catches for 725 yards in 2006, and the numbers went downhill from there. Age doesn’t explain the decline in his numbers either, however, because in 2010, reunited with Tom for the last 11 games of the season, he caught 48 balls for 706 yards, or, prorated for a full season, 70 catches for 1,029 yards. Last question: Who did Wes Welker most resemble before Tom Brady started throwing him the ball? Answer: Danny Amendola. My point here is that the guys Brady was throwing to in the past were nobodies without him, so it doesn’t matter that the current receiving core looks like a list of nobodies.

The X-factor in that 2004 offense was something that the Patriots severely lacked for the past several years until last season: a running game. Corey Dillon, in 2004, rushed for 1,635 yards with a Y/C (yards per carry) of 4.7. Last year, Stevan Ridley rushed for 1,263 yards with a 4.4 Y/C, but he surrendered a lot of carries to guys like Woodhead, Vereen and Bolden. In fact, the Pats ranked 7th in the league last season in rushing yards, and scored more touchdowns on the ground than any other team with 25. Compare that to the 2004 season and you’ll find that the Pats also ranked 7th in the league in rushing yards, but were tied for 8th in TDs on the ground with only 15. The point is that the ground game is every bit as good as it was in 2004, without counting offseason acquisition LeGarrette Blount, a man who, in 2010, rushed for 1,007 yards with a Y/C of 5.0.

Now I’ll stop you before I hear the inevitable remark, “yea, but the difference in 2004 was defense.” Let’s go back to the lists. 2004: Asante Samuel, Randall Gay, Rodney Harrison, Eugene Wilson, Tedy Bruschi, Willie McGinest, Mike Vrabel, Richard Seymour, and Vince Wilfork. Current: Aqib Talib, Alfonso Dennard, Devin McCourty, Adrian Wilson, Jerod Mayo, Brandon Spikes, Rob Ninkovich, Chandler Jones, and Vince Wilfork. I’m doing it again aren’t I? Let me explain.

The pass defense in 2004 revolved around a shutdown corner in Ty Law, though he only played 7 games that season. That left the bulk of the duty on a young Asante Samuel and rookie Randall Gay. This year, the Patriots saddle up with a very talented, veteran corner in Aqib Talib and a young Alfonso Dennard who is coming off a great rookie season. In 2004, Je’Rod Cherry and Eugene Wilson split the duty of free safety, and neither were as athletic or as good in pass coverage as Devin McCourty is currently. Of course Rodney Harrison was the big name on defense in 2004 with his reputation of being a hard-hitting leader. Though Adrian Wilson doesn’t have the same reputation as Harrison, he has 2 inches and 10 pounds on Rodney and can get after the quarterback on the blitz, recording 25.5 sacks in his career (9.5 more than Vince Wilfork). Oh yeah, he hits pretty hard too.

The current interior linebackers, Jerod Mayo and Brandon Spikes, may lack the experience that Tedy Bruschi and Willie McGinest had back in 2004, but they make up for it in athleticism. Mayo now has four years of experience in this league and has a good handle on running the defense. With added help from veterans like Wilfork and Wilson, he should have no trouble leading the team. As for the Mike Vrabel-Rob Ninkovich comparison, do I even need to lay it out? They might as well be clones (they even wear the same number). Lastly, Chandler Jones brings the same pass rushing threat that Richard Seymour did in 2004. That year, Seymour recorded 5 sacks, compared to Chandler Jones’ 6 sacks last season.

All these similarities add up to only one conclusion: the Patriots have a Super Bowl caliber roster this year. I’m not guaranteeing a Super Bowl win or anything (I’ll leave that to Rex Ryan), but I am saying that there’s no reason to reach for the panic button. I’m expecting this year’s team to revert to the winning formula of solid defense and an offense balanced between a punishing ground game and Brady’s methodical passing attack. The one position I didn’t compare from 2004 to now is the quarterback position. Tom Brady has come a long way as a quarterback since 2004, and that’s what makes this year’s roster better. His command under center is what continually leads New England deep into the playoffs, and this year the defense might just be good enough to seal the deal with a Super Bowl win.

Patriots’ Offseason: The Bad News

Part one of a two-part mini series on the Patriots’ tumultuous offseason

Needless to say, it’s been an interesting offseason for the New England Patriots. I’m sure you’re aware of the headlines by now: Welker to Denver, Gronk’s 4 surgeries, signed Tim Tebow, and, of course, Aaron Hernandez charged with the murder of Odin Lloyd. What hasn’t been talked about as much are the additions of Danny Amendola, LeGarrette Blount, Adrian Wilson, Leon Washington, Jake Ballard, Donald Jones, Aaron Dobson and Michael Jenkins. There have been both positive and negative steps for New England in the past couple months, but the media has focused solely on the negatives. I’m here to say take a breather, let me break this down for you in a two part mini-series of what’s gone wrong, and why the Pats will be just fine this season.

Let’s start with the bad news. I know it feels like it’s been ages since this was news, but by far the worst thing that has happened to the Patriots this offseason is the loss of Wes Welker. Since I already touched on this subject in March (in my post entitled The End of an Era), I will keep this explanation brief. Over the last six seasons, Wes Welker was the most productive receiver in the NFL. In fact, no one in league history caught more passes in six seasons than Welker did with the Patriots. He was Tom Brady’s go-to guy and best friend for those six seasons. All of that is a thing of the past, however, as Wes and the Patriots parted ways after the Pats offered him a bizarrely small contract. The Denver Broncos then snagged him for 2 years and 12 million dollars, in what might turn out to be the biggest steal since Tom Brady fell to the 199th pick of the draft in 2000. It will certainly be weird to see Welker catching passes from number 18 in orange instead of number 12 in blue.

Now let’s talk Gronk. Since November 18th when he broke his forearm late in a blowout against the Colts, he has undergone four surgeries on that arm and a subsequent surgery on his back. His timetable for return is unclear, though it is known that he won’t be 100% by training camp, thus he won’t be 100% for week one of the regular season. In my non-medical opinion, 5 surgeries in 8 months can’t be good for his ability to remain in shape. Even if the bones in his forearm and the discs in his back are fully healed, he won’t be in top physical shape due to the amount of conditioning he has missed. My expectation, and the general consensus from what I’ve read, is for him to miss the first few weeks of the regular season, and be back by week six at the latest. That means the Patriots will have to run their offense to start the season without their largest, and most dynamic weapon.

One guy we can all be certain won’t be returning is Aaron Hernandez. In case you’ve been under a rock, or on some sort of technology cleanse, here’s his situation: he’s currently in custody charged with the murder of Odin Lloyd, and is also being investigated in a double homicide from July of 2012. Now, he hasn’t been convicted of anything yet, but the Patriots released him less than two hours after he was in handcuffs, and he subsequently cleared waivers, so there’s very little chance he’ll be playing football at all this season, much less for the Patriots. I won’t say more on this topic because it feels disrespectful to talk about football while the Lloyd family mourns the death of their loved one, thus, our thoughts and prayers are with them.

With all of these guys gone, along with the departures of Brandon Lloyd, Deion Branch, and Danny Woodhead, Brady will be without 5 of his top 7 receivers from last season, and a sixth (Gronk) will be missing due to injury. In fact, of Brady’s 401 completions last season, 354 of them went to those six guys, or 88%. Now, Gronk will be back, but he caught only 55 passes last season, so Brady will still be missing 75% of his offensive production from last season. This offseason will mean everything for the success of the Patriots because it is Tom’s chance to try and build chemistry with all of the new faces around him. If he doesn’t gel with his new receivers, it could mean a long winter in New England.

Lastly I’ll talk about Tebow. I couldn’t decide whether to put Tebow in the good news or the bad news part of this mini-series, but I ultimately chose the bad news section because I’m guessing most of you are like me, and didn’t initially like the idea of signing him. He is by far the most over-talked about athlete in all of sports. What I mean by that is he has had at least 10 times more impact on the media in the last 2 years then he has had on the football field. The good news for the Patriots is that he is smart, works hard, and his contract includes no guaranteed money. There is no chance Tebow will take any snaps away from Tom Brady, so it will be interesting to see what Bill Belichick has planned for Tebow, if he makes the team at all.

Part two, the good news, of this Patriots’ Offseason mini-series will be up on Wednesday.