Rankings & whatnot

ESPN's Week 1 Power Rankings were released today. Each Tuesday afternoon the week's rankings are posted, and even though it really means nothing, it's always a very exciting time for me (believe it or not). As time allows, I'll try to post on this blog each week and let you know where the Cowboys are sitting, and I'll likely include whatever random thoughts from the rankings happen to strike me.

Dallas sits at 17 in the final rankings before the season begins. That's a 3-spot fall since the training camp rankings were released a few weeks ago. I don't have any idea what in the Cowboys' preseason looked that bad to the four ESPN voters, but I guess that's how it goes. I'll just say that I think it's a bit ridiculous to think Dallas is in the bottom half of the league. But anywho...

On a SUPER DUPER FUN AND EXCITING note: Yours Truly will be at Invesco Field on October 4 when the Cowboys take on the Broncos. It'll be my first in-person NFL game ever. And it's my two favorite teams, in my favorite sport. I don't know if I could be more excited.

X-Factors

I'm not giving up on the Cowboys or Wade Phillips for this season, but I just wanted to mention that next season, think about these head coaches that might be willing to come out of retirement to coach the 'Boys if things don't work out this season: Tony Dungy, Mike Shanahan, Mike Holmgren, Bill Cowher. Wow.

I just watched some of the Cowboys-Vikings preseason game. It was fun to watch football, but the Cowboys 35-31 win means about as much as Elizabeth beating her personal high score in her "Turkey Shoot" computer game (which is to say, not much).

I just wanted to give a quick rundown of why I think the upcoming season will be interesting, and here it is: There seem to be a BUNCH of unknowns (more than usual) headed into the season. I'm gonna rattle some off the top of my head. Let me know if you've got more.

-Tom Brady's back for the Patriots (there's no question he's one of the all-time greats, but I consider it an unknown because we don't know if his injury will have lingering effects or anything else... okay, I'm really just HOPING that they don't go 18-0 to start their season again).

-How will Brett Favre impact the Vikings?

-How will Jay Cutler impact the Bears?

-How will the Dolphins follow up their unlikely 11-5 2008 season, and will teams figure out how to stop the wildcat offense enough to stifle the Fins?

-How will rookie QBs like Matthew Stafford and Mark Sanchez impact their respective teams?

-Will there be a "sophomore letdown" in Atlanta or Baltimore with Matt Ryan or Joe Flacco?

-How will T.O. impact the Bills (by joining them) and the Cowboys (by leaving them)?

-Are the Broncos really going to be as bad as they've looked?

-How will Michael Vick perform and in what function? And will he even have to be THAT good, or will his threat simply help the Eagles because defenses will have to take him into consideration?

-Will the absence of Tony Dungy on the Indianapolis sideline create big problems for the Colts?

-Will the absense of Jim Johnson on the Philadelphia sideline create big problems for the Eagles defense?

Okay, I think that's all I've got. What are the nagging questions in your mind as we prepare to kickoff the season?

SIX DAYS UNTIL THE OPENER!!!!

Around-the-league glance

This is not even close to a comprehensive look at the upcoming NFL season (though when I read the soon-to-be-released Sports Illustrated NFL Preview issue I might do one of those posts...), but I wanted to give some thoughts on all the teams I've heard a lot about lately, and see if we can't come up with at least something to say about each division. If you read this blog last year, you'll know that I made some statements and predictions early on that sounded downright stupid after four or five weeks of the season. It's entirely possible that the same thing will happen this season. I make no claims to expertise. Just a fans ramblings...

AFC South

The only stuff I've heard about the Titans this offseason was when I watched them play the Cowboys in a preseason game last weekend. Everything I heard from the announcers was that they're at least as good, if not better than they were last year, when they jumped out to a 10-1 start and captured the #1 seed in the AFC playoffs. I don't agree with that. I don't think they're a bad team, but they're not one of the best in the league, or even in the AFC. Indianapolis will be tough because Peyton Manning is still their quarterback. The other team to keep an eye on is Houston. I have no reason to think that they'll be better than the .500ish seasons they've been having for awhile, but at some level I guess it just feels like at some point they'll get over that hump and make the playoffs.

AFC East

It might be interesting to see how Miami follows up its very impressive 2008 season. It also might be interesting to see how the Matt Sanchez story unfolds for the Jets. It also might be interesting to see what impact T.O. has on the never-spectacular Bills. But it's very likely that much of that won't matter, because Tom Brady will be on the field for the Pats again, and that pretty much spells doom for everyone else.

AFC North

No reason to think that anyone will seriously challenge the Steelers for the division championship here.

AFC West

This might be one of the more dismal divisions in the NFL. The preseason hasn't given Broncos fans a whole lot of reasons to be optimistic. Orton doesn't look great, and their best receiver forgot to grow out of his three-year-old temper-tantrum phase. I think there's some confidence in Josh McDaniels' ability to manufacture some good from the season, but not many are expecting a serious playoff run. San Diego will be the frontrunner in this division as they've been for quite some time. The Raiders are still owned by Al Davis, so there's not a whole lot of good to be said about them either.

NFC West

The reigning NFC Champion Cardinals haven't done anything impressive in the preseason, so I'm not necessarily keeping them at the top of this division in my thinking. Seattle and San Francisco have both shown some promising elements, perhaps most notably would be the young, strong 49er defense. But I hate the 49ers, so we'll hope the Seahawks can take 'em down. I've told people recently, though, that winning the NFC West is sort of like being named Valedictorian of summer school. I mean, congratulations, but look at your competition.

NFC South

It seems like both the Panthers and the Buccs are more or less in panic mode. Carolina's defense doesn't seem to be able to stop anyone, and Colin Cowherd, who originally predicted Tampa Bay to go 6-10, switched his prediction to 1-15 after watching them play a preseason game last week... "and to be honest," he said, "I can't find the one game they might win." I guess that opens the door for the Matt Ryan-led Falcons or the always-in-the-hunt Saints to win that division. I'm (not-so) secretly pulling for Ryan & the birds.

NFC North

This is beginning to look like it could be quite a fight. Obviously, the talk of the offseason has been about Matthew Stafford in Detroit, Jay Cutler in Chicago, and Brett Favre in Minnesota, but if I'm choosing the North champion today, I'm picking Aaron Rodgers and the Green Bay Packers. They've looked better in the preseason than any other team in the league. Favre will help make Minnesota a contender, and I'll grant that they could be quite tough. Although Cutler has looked quite good for Chicago thus far I'm not ready to say that he'll have the Bears fighting for the division championship. And I don't see any reason to include Detroit in talks of who might win, well, anything.

NFC East

The toughest division in football will remain the NFC East for at least another season. The Giants look good, and are predicted by many to win the division. The Eagles look pretty good and are predicted by many to get second in the division and make the playoffs. The Redskins look like they've got a somewhat competent and confident quarterback which will put them right in the mix, even if most consider them merely a spoiler. And despite what everyone says, I wouldn't be surprised a bit if the Cowboys won the division. It'll serve them well not to be quite as hyped-up as they've been for a few years now.

That's all I got. What are your predictions?

For Joel

I'll try not to make this too long, but it's been awhile since I've posted, and there are a number of stories going on in the NFL that deserve some notice. We'll go one-by-one.

Brett Favre

I'll be honest, it's one of the weirdest things in the world to see a #4 Favre jersey that's purple and gold. Many if not most fans are "sick of the Favre story," what with his retiring and un-retiring saga that we've been through about three times in the last 18 months. I guess I'm not sick of it. I just want to know how it'll affect the season! So I'll say this: The Vikings were a good team last year, playing without any talent at the quarterback position. It stands to reason that they'll be very good this year. Adrian Peterson is the most explosive player in the game. But, the NFC North is going to be a tough division. The Lions will still stink, but Chicago will be better than last year, and Green Bay is apparently some kind of dark horse. They haven't gotten a whole lot of press, but that's going to be a tough team. Favre is certainly a better option for the Vikings than anyone else on the roster, but I'd like to see what the team will do in preparation for the next few years to come. The Vikings quarterback of the future is not yet on the team.

Michael Vick

Vick played in last night's Eagles preseason game, and it was the first time he's been on the field for a live game since the end of 2006. He only took a few snaps. It was enough for people to see that he didn't become fat and arthritic while in the slammer (in other words, he seems like he'll be able to handle the speed of the game okay), but not enough for us to get any kind of feel for how he'll impact the Eagles, the NFC East, or the NFL as a whole. I don't think he'll be some fantastic stand-out pro-bowl caliber player this year, but the fact that he's on an already very solid team means there's just one more factor that opponents have to prepare for when planning defensive schemes against Philadelphia. I'm glad Vick didn't end up on my team, but I'm not real happy that he's playing for another team in the East!

Cowboys Stadium Video Board

This is, in my opinion, one of the most ridiculous things being talked about in sports right now. If you're out of the loop I'll fill you in: The big huge ginormous high def video boards hanging in the new Cowboys stadium are 90 feet above the field. In the first preseason game that the stadium hosted last weekend one of the Titans' punters hit the bottom of the board with the ball on one of his kicks. The rules state that if that happens, the play is blown dead and repeated; a do-over of sorts. The competition committee has apparently had a couple of conference calls and meetings this week to determine what must be done about this ghastly imposition. This morning I read that they've officially decided to leave the rule as it is for this season, with the likelihood that they will revisit the dilemma after the season's over (and perhaps make a long-term change in the rules, or make the Cowboys raise the video board so that it's out of reach of kicked footballs). Now, even though the video board is about the biggest thing anyone's ever seen, it's hanging 5 feet higher than the NFL's minimum allowance for such things (which means the Cowboys fully complied with all the rules when building the stadium). Also, this isn't going to cause some kind of disadvantage for visiting teams. The Cowboys punters have to deal with the issue too. And, from everything I've seen and read, it seems like you'd almost have to be trying to hit the board in order to do it. The same rule that determines what happens when a kick hits the board also determines what happens when the ball hits any kind of obstruction over the field, including the cables that carry those "skycam" video cameras that all of the networks are using now. I don't know. I don't really care if they end up having to raise the boards a few feet, I just think there are other things viewers and analysts should be concentrating on this season.

And just so you know, I think the Cowboys will do fine this season. I'm not going to say that they're going to win the Super Bowl (yet), but they're definitely going to be tough to beat. Colin Cowherd predicted they'd go 10-6, getting third in their own division after Philadelphia and the New York Giants. I would consider that a pretty good guess. Of course, I'm hoping for something a little better than that. I think the running attack of Marion Barber, Felix Jones, and Tashard Choice is going to be quite difficult to stop, and that might make things a little easier for Roy Williams and Jason Witten in the passing game. Those are just my brief thoughts, though. I'm happy to argue with you more if you'd like!

Brandon Marshall

As a resident of Englewood, Colorado (home of the Denver Broncos training camp) I feel I must mention the Brandon Marshall drama. Marshall wanted a new contract a few months back, which the Broncos denied him. So then he asked for a trade, which the Broncos denied him. He's a whiner and a complainer who's trying to cry his way out of Denver (much like Jay Cutler did... so this is sort of the team's fault for allowing that to happen), but this time they're not going for it. This morning Marshall was suspended for a week due to "conduct detrimental to the team." If you ask me, his whole attitude is detrimental to the team. I'm glad the Broncos aren't giving in to his cry-baby demands, but this guy is NOT going to be ready for the season. I don't see any way that the Broncos make this city happy this season. They don't have a pancake schedule either. All of the NFC East teams are on it (including an October 4 visit from my Cowboys!). I think a .500 season would be shooting the moon.

What are the other major stories I'm missing? Tom Brady is back. Which is why the Patriots will be one of the best teams in the league (again).

Drought

Sorry it's been such a long drought on this blog. Unless you read Matt Moseley's blog at ESPN.com, there's really not a whole lot to report or analyze at this point. Moseley's full-time job is to write about all of the relationships going on in the NFC East teams, speculate on who will rise up this season, and everything else. I just blog when something truly interesting happens.

The first offseason power rankings @ ESPN.com

ESPN.com released its first offseason power rankings for 2009 (here). They also put out a nice breakdown of how all the experts voted (here).

The Cowboys are listed at #13, FYI.

And I just have to say, every time ESPN.com posts power rankings (each week during the season, and a few times in the offseason) it attracts more comments than just about anything else on the site. It irritates the heck out of me because everyone has something to say about how their team is ranked way too low, and their rival is ranked way too high. I just want ESPN to write a story called "Don't You People Realize That Our Power Rankings Determine Absolutely NOTHING?!?!" I mean, I think the rankings are fun, and I look at them every week during the season to see how they've changed based on that week's games. But I don't get all bent out of shape when things aren't how I think they should be. Why? Because the Super Bowl winner isn't determined from the opinions of others.

A London Super Bowl

In the last few days I've read two different stories about the possibility of the Super Bowl being played in London within about the next decade. You can find the stories here and here. The first is a debate between two ESPN bloggers on whether or not a London Super Bowl is a good idea. The second is a pretty brief story from SI.com on how much sense the idea makes for the NFL.

I find this idea to be pretty irritating, and the best way I can think to express how bad of an idea it is is to respond to what's said in those two stories from the two guys who support it. I'll repeat some of the arguments from the anti-London Super Bowl blogger, and I'll also respond personally to the main points.

A London Super Bowl would grow the sport economically throughout Europe, and it can't really get any bigger here in the States.

So? A London Super Bowl would also deprive an American city of its own huge economic growth. The movie industry can't really get any bigger here either, and no one's saying we should tear down Hollywood and move Sony Pictures to Oslo.

The people who go to the Super Bowl aren't usually common fans anyway. They're corporate types who can afford outrageously priced tickets.

That's largely true, but this is hardly an argument for exporting the world's biggest sporting event to another continent. The few true fans who do spend their life savings in order to travel to the Super Bowl city and get a ticket would be completely left out. As Paul Kuharsky says, "Is it worth alienating people who buy jerseys and tickets and paint their faces in an attempt to soften up foreign populations?" I don't think so.

Game time could be a compromise: an evening game in London could start about 3:30 pm ET, and people will watch the game on TV no matter when it's played.

People will absolutely watch the game on TV no matter when it's played, but they won't be nearly as happy about an early game time. 3:30 pm ET is half past noon on the west coast. For the party event of the year, that's just not very appealing. By itself maybe it's not a big deal, but added to all of the other little irritations it starts to make some fans pretty bitter.

Londoners are fascinated with all things American, and they're ready to embrace something like this. They may not understand a 3-4 defensive scheme, but they'll come out for a show, and that's what the Super Bowl is.

I guess all I can say here is that just because London is fascinated by the Super Bowl doesn't mean it should be played there.

You have to look at the NFL as a business. It's as big as it can get in the U.S., and the room for growth is across the pond.

Fans look at the NFL as fans. I understand that it's a business, and that Roger Goodell and others would love to see it become a global sport, but none of that affects me, the fan. 32 teams made up of two conferences with four 4-team divisions is perfect. The game is a blast to watch and analyze and cheer for. If Europe and eventually the world ends up with their own leagues that's fine with me too... but it better not interfere with the way I love to watch the game right here at home.

The vast majority of NFL fans in the U.S. wouldn't be affected at all by a London Super Bowl, "assuming issues like weather, field conditions, and kickoff time can be worked out."

Well, those are some pretty big assumptions. That's like saying, "The vast majority of 24 fans in the U.S. wouldn't be affected at all if the show went Japanese, assuming issues like acting, studio time, and English subtitles can be worked out." (This is probably my worst argument here... but I'm saving my big gun quotation for the final comments below. Besides, how do you "work out" an issue like the weather?)

FINAL COMMENTS

Even though it may seem like it, I don't think a London Super Bowl would be the end of the world. In fact, since this wouldn't likely happen in the next five or even ten years it's entirely possible that my mind will completely change before it does, and maybe the arguments in favor of the idea take into account the fact that Americans may be more open to the idea once it finally rolls around.

Having said that, it just seems wrong to me. The biggest reason comes from Paul Kuharsky once again: "Average February weather in London is a high of 47, a low of 36 and the month has an average rainfall of 1.34 inches. If I'm Nashville or Charlotte -- or even New York, Washington, Philadelphia, or Baltimore -- I'm asking why the league's willing to play in that weather outdoors across the pond, but not at home. And I am beginning to clamor for  Super Bowl in my stadium, which was paid for, built and is regularly filled by Americans who buy the tickets and merchandise and provide the TV ratings." So there you have it. London would likely not fall into a list of cities qualified to host a Super Bowl if it were here in the U.S. because of its weather. So it just doesn't seem very fair that it can basically take the game away from U.S. cities. That's all I've got. Feel free to share your own thoughts!