Pre-Superbowl Thoughts

As I've mentioned before, I need need need San Francisco to lose. In my ranking of Superbowl fun, in fact, the number 1 is for the Steelers to win (of course) and number 2 is for SF to lose! Seriously.* So even though on a normal Sunday I can't abide the Ravens, I will gleefully root for them to ruin the 9ers perfect record.

I should add the caveat that since I'm an old-school fan, my hatreds go to older teams: Cowboys and Raiders. I don't care about the Browns and Bengals, and the Oilers are long gone (ontologically, did they become the Titans or the Texans? I vote for the latter). There are teams I don't have any respect for, true: (1) Jets - who are pathetic from top-to-bottom, (2) Seattle - because they have an unfair home-field advantage, (c) the Broncos for the same reason, but I still like Elway, (d) the Saints since Bountygate. The only modern day team that I can't stand are the Patriots and that's actually only about Belichick. When he leaves, I may be able to tolerate my brother & son's favorite team.

But the Ravens? I respect them; I have laughed at the fact that they never made the big show while the Steelers did thrice, even if I can't say that now. There are things to like about them, which boil down to the things the Steelers do: (1) they recruit and scout well, all because of Ozzie Newsome and this is a lost message for NFL fans. Unless you have a superlative athlete (e.g. Lawrence Taylor or Troy Polamalu) success comes from coaching, team attitude, and astute bargain-hunting in the draft; (2) the Ravens are a ground-n-pound team with a solid defense. This is the Steelers DNA and it's not surprising the Ravens also hold that way. One way to understand NFL history is that rivals can either go in two directions, for these purposes I'll call them the Ravens or the Browns. When you have a great rival you can try to match them - like the Ravens do the Steelers - or you can basically just give up, like the Browns have done for decades.**

Anyway, I need the 49ers to lose, and once they beat the hapless Falcons (can that team ever sustain a lead??) I needed the Patriots to lose to the Ravens for two reasons: (1) SF has to lose and the Belichick Curse means the Patriots need to lose a SB for each one they cheated to win, and they have 1 more to go, so SF would've won! The second reason is more mystical, but since SF is coached by Jim Harbaugh, I felt that only a Harbaugh can beat a Harbaugh. And while I as a rule root for little brothers, in this case you go with the older brother, who's more used to creaming his little bro. Jus' sayin'.

So besides the above iron rule, there are two reasons I think the Ravens will win, besides the general feeling that any team that can march through Mile High and Foxboro and beat 2 of the best QBs ever - on the road - versus SF who almost lost to the pathetic Falcons in a dome. The two reasons are:
(1) While Colin Kaepernick is impressive, I don't trust rookie QBs in big games.*** Technically it's his second year, but he didn't start until November 19 2012! I think the gravity of the Superbowl, and the weight of Montana/Young, will be hard to handle for him. On the other side you have grizzled veterans, and especially Joe Flacco who is an underrated big-league QB who seems to have no fear (his eyes suggest serial killer, not as much as Schaub, who doesn't help matters with his skinhead crewcut and prominent Adam's apple). I think SF has gotten far with a good defense, good running, and a surprise QB, but I believe the Ravens are nastier, older, and even more physical.


The second reason is that (2) the 49ers kicker is basket case. If that persists, SF will have trouble, even in a dome. Special Teams is still underrated, and the Ravens have been superlative in that.

My score prediction (caveat: I suck at this): Ravens 21, 49ers 20.


And one comment about Harbaugh v. Harbaugh. I'm actually serious about that, a bit, because the advantage each brother has over others is that Harbaughz Iz Crazy! They do aggressive risky things, and this catches their opponents off guard. But these two idiots have been competing against each other for 40+ years! They know the others' temperament and tendencies. This is crucial, to me, because I desperately need the 9ers to lose.

How Can a Steeler Fan (Me) Root for Baltimore?

There are people are outraged that actual Steelers who are rooting for the Ravens. They want the good old days when you hated the rival team. What the haters don't get is that the 'team' doesn't exist in the same way after free-agency/salary cap. E.g. Rod Woodson is one of the best Steelers of all time, but he played for 3 other teams, including the hated Ravens and Raiders! After retirement he identifies as a Steeler, but the players themselves have to know it's just a business and they can move on. So I full understand why the players not only don't hate a rival team, but they can actually like 'em. I've also read that many players, when on the field and the game clock is running, would ram their own mama's if they're wearing the other jersey. This also is part of Football.

I also agree with Lamarr Woodley who said that he's hoping the Ravens win, for one reason because: "the Baltimore Raven are in our division so it makes our division look good." I agree with that wholeheartedly! I have pride in my team, my birth-city, and when it comes to Football, my division. I was proud when we had 3 teams from the AFC-N in last year's playoffs! And maybe I just think more like one of the players than the fans, but I think Woodley shows a healthy sportsmanlike attitude.

Also, if the Ravens win that means that the Steelers were able to beat that year's world champs at home with a third string Quarterback. Heh heh heh.

FOOTNOTES:
* = Number 3 is for Steelers to lose, because at least they've increased their appearances, Number 4-7 would be for the Browns, Lions, Vikings and Bills to be in and lose, unless its to one of the hated rivals (e.g. Patriots, Cowboys, Raiders etc). I think these guys getting in would be funny - Lions & Browns have never gone, and Vikes & Bills have gone 4 times and lost all of them. I guess I'm supposed to hate the Eagles, but I basically try not to think about Philly at all (which is tough now that I live in Central NJ).

** = This is part of my grand theory for why the NFC were dominant for the 13 year stretch of 1985 to 1997. The first point is context - most of this was during the era before free agency, which meant that once you built a superstar team you were able to keep those players and just dominate. That's why we had so many dynasties back then, and why none now (Patriots don't count because they cheated, period. But the closest way to get a dynasty now is to get a superstar QB, e.g. Colts under Manning). So the reason why the NFC was dominant comes down to two people (1) Bill Walsh and (2) Lawrence Taylor. The simple one first: (a) Walsh (like Newsome above) was able to both build up his team with an eye for talent (Montana, Rice, Young), and (b) he was an incredible coach who was able to drive this unchanging roster of people to their top performance (people say that Montana was not a superlative athlete but Walsh made him so, FWIW). So this is why SF was so dominant. The (2) Lawrence Taylor factor reflects the second point above about the Steelers/Ravens - LT was so incredible that he forced the other teams in his division - specifically the Cowboys & Redskins - to react. Joe Gibbs, another genius coach, could have given up and accepted that LT was going to destroy them every game. Instead Gibbs basically invented the "Hogs" - a superlative offensive-line. There were more innovations, but basically because of a great player, and great coaches, the NFC East reacted and had to become great. I don't think the AFC had this quality coach (Noll lost steam after '80... I blame Reagan) and the unfree-agency cuts both ways. A great team can dominate the conference - Bills, Broncos - but just not have the oomph to overcome the NFC's twin advantages.

*** = This years' rookies have been so hyped, it's nuts. There are two big reasons they've all been great and why I believe next year they'll crash to earth: (1) there's not enough tape on rookies, so defenses don't know all their tricks. One off-season of studying and look what happened to, e.g., Cam Newton. Rookies have that advantage of surprise and I don't give them credit for it until they can keep it up for more than a year. A second advantage is that these QBs - RG3 in DC, Wilson in Seattle, Kaepernick, is that their coaches are letting them run with the ball. The now acceptable "read option" (which was mocked when Tebow was doing it... mainly because Timmy doesn't throw a normal ball, but still it's ironic) - allows the QB to run. But as we saw with RG3, running is extremely dangerous for your expensive QB. In today's NFL, the QB is more important than any other player, and if you've got a top-notch QB you don't risk him flying down the field. If the coaches let these rookies keep running then they will all end up like RG3. People are fooled because Kapernick hasn't played enough to risk the injuries, and Russel Wilson got to hide behind his damned stadium. Anyway, the read option won't survive long in the NFL because of those two reasons - which the short-sighted sports reporters are ignoring - and also because Defenses catch up quick in the NFL.

NFL Conference Championships

This is a Steeler fan nightmare. Not only did my SB prediction go kaflooey - it turns out my sports prediction is as bad as my Oscar ones - but 3 of the 4 survivors are bad news for Steeler fans. The best I can hope for is a Falcons/Ravens superbowl, and that isn't likely to happen. Every single team I've rooted against in the playoffs have won. EVERY ONE! You could set your watch, or better yet bet your watch, on my rooting interest. Gevalt!

I've said this before but it bears repeating: the Steelers are the best NFL team in the Superbowl era because they're tied for the most SB appearances (8, tied with Dallas) but have the most wins (6). See this wiki page for my data pool.

Two teams now threaten those records, one severely. As it stands, here are the records of the remaining teams, the # of SB, & their win-loss record:

Atlanta Falcons: 1 SB, 0-1 (0.000)
Baltimore Ravens: 1 SB, 1-0 (1.000)
New England Patriots: 7 SB, 3-4 (.429)
San Francisco 49ers: 5 SB, 5-0 (1.000)

Pittsburgh Steelers: 8 SB, 6-2 (0.750)

So if it's a Patriots-49er Superbowl, the most likely scenario, then it's the worst for Steeler fans, because (a) the Patriots will join the elite 8-SB club, which is OK given we share that distinction with the hated cowboys, but (b) if the 49ers win then they will not only have 6 Superbowls but will have a perfect record! AUGH!

What makes this worse is that the Patriots, if they do go to SB 47, will almost definitely lose. This is because of the Spygate Karma Rule. Ya see, I've done my own research and it's clear that Bill Belichick's cheating won the Patriots their 2001, 2003, and 2004 Superbowls. The evidence is overwhelming, albeit circumstantial given Goodall's incompetence, and I can show my data at a later time.

The Karma rule states that they need to lose a SB for every one they cheated in. They have 2 down - and both to the Giants - so they need one more. Which means if they play San Fran they will lose and thus the worst scenario for Steelers has occurred - the Patriots will tie our SB number, the 49ers will tie our wins but have a perfect record.

So even though it hurts to root for the Ravens in the AFC playoff, in the long view, it's better if they win than the hated cheating Patriots. And maybe, just maybe, the Falcons can pull it off. I'm hoping for Atlanta to pull a Bettis for Tony Gonzalez's sake.

Gonzalez is one of the best Tight Ends ever and he's never won a Superbowl. He's likely to retire at any moment. So just like the Steelers rallied to win Superbowl 40 to get Bettis his ring (which is an unparalleled story), maybe Atlanta can do that for Tony.

Note, this sounds like what the Ravens are doing about Ray Lewis except for three things: (1) Lewis won a SB already, (2) Gonzalez is a better person, and (3) the Harbaughs (both) are schmucks and deserve to lose.

Steelers vs. Giants

Despite the best efforts of the refs (no exaggeration, it was worse than the scab referees), the Steelers beat the Giants like hosanna-bundles (too obscure?).   More, possibly, later.  But here's a great pic (from the WDVE guys) to sum up the game, captioned "Terrified Eli":

Steelers Update

I think I can speak for Steelers fans in my reaction to Sunday night's win: whew. Some further thoughts, especially related to the previous post:

1. Again, like every Steeler fan, I'm sure the first quarter and a half (first 3/8ths?) of the game made your stomach grow cold. Boy was I scared. How many times do we need to (a) commit penalties on the kick-returns?, (b) drop passes?, (c) just suck on defense? It was terrible. I was having flashbacks to NY Met games. But then, somehow they got their act together about 8 minutes into the second quarter (after 2 turnovers, 3 billion dropped TDs, and being down 3 to 14).
   
2. Willy Colon takes credit for getting the team back in gear. He claims that he saw the Offense be dejected and lacking the eye of the tiger (I'm severely paraphrasing) and so he decided he needed to fire them up by some brutal blocking (see below)
   
3. Before the game Roethlisberger told the Offense that they need to take the responsibility at the end of the games, especially when they were in a one-possession lead, to NOT DEPEND ON THE DEFENSE. This definitely has been the Steelers moo, and rightly so, for years.* This new attitude is both mature and smart - our offense is now our strength, so use that. And this change could be one reason why we won.
   
4. Related to that, I have to give Tomlin credit. He always says that he plays to win, not to "not lose." So in the 4th Quarter, after an awesome 32 yard run reached the Bengals 8, the Steelers didn't go for the kill. We we 7 points ahead, could have made it 14 points, but instead they went for the victory kneel-down. It wasn't greedy (and despite my comment a few days ago, it's not what the Patriots would've done). It was classy.
   
5. Ike Taylor finally did his job well. I don't think we can rely on it too much, though. While A.J. Green is a great player, and Ike did shut him down, the Bengals demonstrated what happens when a team has only 1 good receiver. If you have man coverage of that 1 guy (did they double him?) then you can shut him down. I do hope it's a trend, but I won't bet on it.
   
6. Another issue is the neutralization of Harrison. The Sunday night guys did a good analysis and showed that Harrison's knee injury has severely reduced his effectiveness (see graphic below - last year he was able to slip by tackles with a 40 degree angle; now he's reduced to a 61). If he can't get back up to form, I don't know if he'll be anything better than an average linebacker.
   
   
7. Aside from the first 3/8ths, we reduced our crippling penalties for a second week in a row.

So how did we win? Besides the above, I think of 2 main keys:

1. No Injuries = I don't know how to keep that trend going, but I believe that when there's a major mid-game injury (and with us it's always multiples) the team doesn't adjust well. In this game we had none, and that's great (and a key to winning). See the graphic, again from the SNF guys, about who is already missing.
   
   
   
   
2. Next Man Up = Starter in Waiting; so let them start. Related to point 1, I've felt for a long time that the Steelers get into big trouble when they insist on starting a fragile player, just to see him break down mid-game and since we don't adjust well on the fly (probably because of the new OC and loss of major team captains, see previous post), we fall apart. But when our Next Man starts that also means he practices and trains during the week. Which means he plays well! Look at our O-Line. We lost 2 starters last week but despite that the O-Line was spectacular against the Bengals! Despite a back-up center (who's really good but not pro-bowl Pouncey level) and a flappable rookie (Mike Adams), we had only 3 sacks and - crucially - over 100 yards rushing from our 3rd string running back! Is Dwyer better than Redman/Mendenhall? Maybe. But no RB will be good behind an uncoordinated line!
   
   I think we're going to keep making this mistake, though. Tomlin seems to want to start the "best" players (remember 2011 when Big Ben played against SF even though he was immobilized?), even if they aren't fully healed. But the Bengals game shows that practice and preparation are worth more than a wounded pro-bowler.
   

I hope the trend continues. What we can hope for is for the major injuries to sort out by the last third of the season. I.e. if Polamalu actually heals up, and if Harrison's knee gets better, and if our first-rounder DeCastro heals, then we'll have our best players for the crunch time. And like the Giants last year - the issue isn't a stellar record, but who is healthy at the end of the season.

* I was just watching a taped game from 2009, Green Bay vs. Steelers (12-20, Week 15), and the difference in defense in huge! Back then we were swarming, fast moving, smothering. In 2012 we are old, possibly wiser, but not that scary looking.

Steelers Thoughts

My beloved Steelers are playing like a bunch of sick nuns. In general, the AFC seems to be in big trouble, and I can explain that (see below) but the Steelers woes are more serious than the general malaise of the conference. I've seen every game and the offense looks robust - until they make a dozen penalties - and the defense looks porous and pathetic. What are my options as a fan?

Give Up:
Steelers fans are generally used to winning. That's not why I'm so loyal (I'm a Met fan too), my allegiance comes from my attachment to my birthplace. I've moved around so often in my life (upwards of 20 moves) that I think my Steeler fanaticism is my way of maintaining a consistent identity. And I like Black and Gold.

Anyway, we're used to winning. We're tied for most Super Bowls appearances (8), and we have the most wins (6). What's also impressive is that the Steelers have been to more conference championships than any team (15! runners up are Cowboys with 14, 49ers with 13, and Raiders with 11). And 20 Division championships AFC Central: 1972, 1974, 1975, 1976, 1977, 1978, 1979, 1983, 1984, 1992, 1994, 1995, 1996, 1997, 2001 AFC North: 2002, 2004, 2007, 2008, 2010 (all data, and links, thanks to Wiki).

However, we've had our losing streaks. The late-Noll era, especially 1984-1992, is especially bleak. But even in the Roethlisberger era, when we went to the Superbowl 3 times in 6 years, we've slumped every third year. And that's this year. So I can be fatalistic and say we're due.

Another response is to recognize a few structural problems

1. The whole NFL is in trouble because of the referee-strike.

As I said in the previous post, I have no sympathy for the NFL owners. They screwed up spectacularly with the referee union. As a result the first 3 games of the season were not a reflection of each team's abilities.

Yeah, I can hear the yahoo say that it was the same for each team, or that official stats are the way they are, and that I'm just making excuses. To rebut this idiocy, I will remind y'all about the 2000 presidential election.

We all know, and presumably hate, that the 2000 win was given to George W Bush, but the facts said that Al Gore won. Bush "won" because he gamed the system, played the refs - as its called - and was able to sneak past the finish line. Yes, it's a win, but it teaches nothing about how politics normally (and ideally) works... since Bush cheated.

Anyone who looks at the lead-up to the election to learn from GWB about how to win is making a mistake because everything he did before election day was bad enough to make him lose. The only lesson for people who want to win is to know that you can make all sorts of mistakes and then cheat at the critical moment.

For example, if you use 2000 data to try to predict poll-number prediction for eventual victory, then you should use the data as if Gore won - because he did. To do otherwise is to fundamentally not understand cause and effect.

So here we are in week 6 and many pundits are saying how the AFC is bad because only 2 teams are above 500. Yet 3 is half of 6, and those 3 games are not acceptable data. So we really have no idea how good any of the teams are here in the early weeks because everyone's record is too loaded with noise. Wait a few more weeks, so to dilute the 3 games, and we can get a better picture of each team.

2. That said, the Steelers are pretty bad on the road.

We've played 2 games since the referee's have been reinstated and we lost to a "bad" team, the Titans. True, they could actually be pretty good, given the 3 week problem (dagnabit data) but probably not. This is why we fans are scared. I felt this way all last year but we still managed to finish 12-4 (and lost 2 of the first 4 games). However, it was the offense that was bad last year (bye bye Arians) and the defense kept us alive all year. Yet, by the playoffs, our defense disintegrated. The loss to Tebow was on the hands of the defense, O did fine.

I can make excuses. Out of the 5 games we played, there's an excuse for each bad performance:
1-3: refs
4: rusty from the bye
5: short week (thurs night game).

I can also bring up the catastrophic string of injuries. Yeah, all teams suffer, but gevalt! The Steelers are old, yeah, but one reason is because we lose so many people. In preseason we lost our 2012 round 1 and 3 draft picks to injury and every week we lose a pro-bowler or key starter. It's downright scary.

We would have won last week, seriously, if we didn't lose - in one game - our pro-bowl Center, 2 other O-lineman, and our 2 starting Running backs. ONE GAME! We already were missing our hall-of-fame Safety (Troy Polamalu) and the key matchup of Batman-Robin (aka Harrison and Woodley)

Most commenters (e.g. Bleacher) ignore the above factors or dismiss them as whining (cf. 2000 election above).

However, nobody has mentioned something we were all talking about just few months ago. Again, we want to know why there's been so many penalties - ascribed to lack of discipline - and inconsistent defense.

Let's remember that this past Spring the Steelers fired: (1) the offensive coordinator (deservedly) and (2) all three player captains! Offense captain Hines Ward, Defense captain James Farrior, and special teams captain Arnaz Battle.

With leadership gutted (plus major starters injured, especially on defense) no wonder it's taken so long to get disciplined! A new OC can take a long time to get a handle on things; Farrior was a leader and the defense play-caller.

I wonder if leadership is the cause of the massacre of injuries. Bad coaching can lead to safety ignorance or something, especially on the O-Line (Sean Kugler has now had 3 years of annihilated O-Lines! I'm suspicious)

Culture Problem

Another major issue is that even if we keep our current players un-injured, we probably won't make it to the playoffs. The defense is too old and our cornerback problem is acute. Our running-backs are mediocre and they won't go anywhere with the craptascular O-Line we seem cursed with Ironically, the only part of the team which is superb is the passing attack. We've got a top-5 QB, 3 great WR, and a great TE. Logic says we should emphasize our strengths. Ah, but then there's Steeler Culture.

We've always been known as a top-notch defense plus a grinding running attack. And, to be honest, that's how I like it. It's old-school, yadda yadda. To do the opposite, to be a gun-slinging team, is to become the Patriots!

Sadly enough, we may need to become the Patriots until we can draft or buy new players for our key problems (e.g. corners, Nose Tackle, O-Line).

I have to admit, though, that even that may be too much. I have to admit that our offense could be so successful because other teams haven't had time to analyze our new OC's style. Haley seems to change his tactics based on his personnel, so our opponents haven't been able to predict him yet. By the last third of the season, our offense could unravel like our special-teams and defense.

Maybe the first option above (accepting the 3rd-year slump) is really the most plausible.

NFL Thoughts

I ask myself (so you don't have to) how I can be an NFL fan despite all the injuries and other related scandals. Well, I'll answer it.

1. I must be clear that I am a fan of the National Football League, not football itself. I have actual disinterest to antipathy for high school and college football. NFL is a job; football for HS and college is a dangerous and even nihilistic perversion of institutions of learning. Colleges and HS should be about education and not sports. The only silver lining - so I've heard - is that sports are fund-raisers for the school... but there's a reason why we've outlawed child labor.

One can argue that the NFL relies on HS and college players to feed the team rosters. I counter-argue that if nobody played football until they were an adult, and were playing it as a job (with risks-benefits) and not the virtual-servitude of NCAA, then it'd be fine for me. Let kids play basketball until graduation and then try to learn the NFL as rookies. The system can change.

2. NFL injuries are a concern, however since I'm in the upper middle class I can separate my entertainment prodution from consumption. My cohort will never be football players and so I put the players in the category of blue-collar workers.

3. I thus consign the injuries to the fact that most blue collar jobs are dangerous, which is why we assign it so much nobility, and people seem to go into the jobs with eyes open. While the military is a solid comparison, it is unseemly to compare any job with the sacred defense professions (no joke) of (a) military, (b) police, and (c) firefighting.

But compare football to coal-mining, iron working, etc and I see the threat level to be the same.

4. What I am concerned with are: (a) injuries to children playing football, which has been exacerbated by the (b) complete indifference to injuries by the white-collar administration at every level. I'm a Democrat because I'm a second-generation Jewish-American which means my grandparents were blue collar (and big Union people) so I have little sympathy for NFL owners, college football, etc.

5. The problem with football hasn't been the terrible injuries as much as the way (a) the owners force the players to ignore the injuries in order to keep their jobs and (b) the owners then discard injured players, without health-care or pension, when they are no longer useful.

My description is not skewed, I think all would agree the facts are accurate, yet when I put it this way, it makes the NFL (and their disgusting clones in the college and HS world) sound like sweatshop owners of 100 years ago. And they are.

So I watch the sport because I support the class of blue-collar workers to get paid for their skills and I decry the owners who treat them terribly. I also wear clothes made in China.