How Does the NFL Do?

In Part I of this three-part series, we discovered that the NBA has a 72% chance of crowning the "correct" champ in any given year. The NFL does much, much worse:

1985 (season) Chicago Bears over New England Patriots
This is the first football game I can remember watching from beginning to end. No one could figure out that 46 defense. In three playoff games, the Bears gave up just 31 first downs and 10 points (all to the Pats in that SB blowout). In fact, the Bears' Defense (16 points) and Special Teams (7) more than doubled their opponents' total (10) during the playoffs. Who was the best team? Da Bears!

1986 New York Giants over Denver Broncos
The 1986 season saw a fantastic team (Giants, led by League MVP Lawrence Taylor) hoist the Lombardi trophy. The Giants had a top 10 offense and the second best defense in the league. Only the Bears gave up fewer points during the season: 187 - 236. (As a point of reference, the '85 Bears gave up 198 points). This begs the question: what happened to the Bears? Well, injuries, specifically at quarterback. McMahon missed all but 6 games during the season, backup Mike Tomczak started 7, and third stringer Steve Fuller started 2 (the only two regular season games the Bears lost). Doug Flutie (DOUG FLUTIE?) started the last regular season and first (*only*) playoff game for the Bears. Lots of controversy here. And a swift exit to the Skins in Round 2 confirmed what everyone knew: Ditka was a motivator, not a tactician. The Bears should have been better than the Giants, but they weren't. The New York Giants were the best team in 1986.

1987 Washington Redskins over Denver Broncos
This was just an odd year. The Players' Strike reduced the season to 15 games. AP MVP John Elway had a heck of a year, but the PFWA MVP and AP Offense Player of the Year Jerry Rice had his finest season. Playing in just 12 games (again, the strike) Rice had 22 receiving TDs. That's 29 projected over a full season. MADNESS. Anyway, the 49ers (13-2) had a +206 point differential during the regular season. Cleveland (10-5, +151) and N.O. (12-3, +139) were the only other teams with a +/- of more than 100. Cleveland failed to make the Super Bowl because of "The Fumble" while the 49ers couldn't help but fall all over themselves against the Vikings in the Divisional Round (really? splitting time with Steve Young and Joe Montana?). The Skins (11-4) were good, but not great (QB Doug Williams lost the only two regular season games he started, yet somehow quarterbacked the team to a Super Bowl Victory?). The Super Bowl did not crown the correct champ in 1987.

1988 San Francisco 49ers over Cincinnati Bengals
Look at that '88 49ers offense? Just look at that thing! Pro Bowl WRs Jerry Rice and John Taylor. NFL Offensive Player of the year Roger Craig (1,500 yards rushing, 500 yards receiving). Hall of Fame QBs Joe Montana and Steve Young. How was this team 7th in points scored during the regular season? I honestly can't remember, but I suspect it was because Joe wasn't right. Nonetheless, the 49ers (10-6) took comfort in a rotund Canadian watching the game and calmly won Super Bowl XXIII. But do they win that game if John Candy isn't in the house? I don't know. But I do know that League MVP Boomer Esiason and his Bengals (12-4) were the superior team. Sure, they could have won it, but if this game is played 3 times, they win 2 of 'em.

1989 San Fransisco 49ers over Denver Broncos
Not much to say here. The 49ers (14-2) were the class of the League. Montana submitted the best season ever by a quarterback (you could still mug WRs in 1989 - not so today). Rice, Craig and Taylor had another Pro Bowl year. They lost their two games by a combined 5 points. No one else was close.

1990 New York Giants over Buffalo Bills
There are three teams in this discussion: Giants (13-3), Bills (13-3) and the 49ers (14-2). Heading into Week 12, the Giants and 49ers were 10-0. They both lost that week, then faced each other in what was still the most anticipated regular season game of the 90's. The 49ers won 7-3 in a brutal Monday Night contest that saw Jerry Rice catch one pass and Lawrence Taylor (and the whole Giants team) go sackless. Meanwhile, the Buffalo Bills were quietly putting together an excellent season with the K-Gun offense (Kelly, Thomas, Reed) and an opportunistic defense (Talley, Smith, Odomes). In fact, the Bills beat the Giants in week 15, 17-13, which only indicated to me that a 49ers-Bills Super Bowl was imminent.

Enter the NFC Championship game. Much like the 7-3 regular season match, the game was short on TDs (just one, scored by John Taylor). The 49ers and Giants pulled whatever they could to generate points. With the 49ers up 13-9 in the 4th quarter, Wilbur Marshall not only sacked and forced Joe Montana to fumble, but he also knocked the League MVP out of the game. On the ensuing Giants' possession, the 49ers forced a 4th down, but the Giants ran a fake punt, gaining 30 yards on a run by LBer Gary Reasons. Another Matt Bahr FG, and with about 5 minutes left, the game was 13-12.

As we all know, Steve Young was no slouch, but he wasn't Joe Cool, either. So the 49ers entrusted their hopes to Roger Craig on four of their five plays during the final drive (the one passing play was a 24 yard completion to Brent Jones). Craig fumbled with 2:36 left on a dive up the middle (worst case scenario without a turnover - the Giants get the ball back on a punt after the 2 minute warning with no timeouts). Taylor recovered. Bahr nailed his final FG (42 yarder) as time expired.

For fear of retribution from Badgerstyle, I won't say who the best team was during the '90 season (49ers), but I know it wasn't the G-men...

1991 Washington Redskins over Buffalo Bills
I'm not sure how the Redskins (14-2) achieved such a meteoric rise without anyone noticing. They were tops in point differential (+261; the Bills, 13-3, were second with +140). They won each playoff game handily (beating their opponents by 17, 31, and 13 points). They boasted 2nd Team All-Pros at QB (Rypien), RB (Byner), and WR (Clark) and had a couple of 1st Team members at CB (Green) and LT (Lachey). Yes, this team was very, very good. No question here: the Skins were the best team of 1991.

1992 Dallas Cowboys over Buffalo Bills
Why Washington (9-7) couldn't repeat I'll never know (Rypien). They dominated '91. They possessed the 4th pick in the draft (though if you look at that first round, you'll notice something: it sucked). And they brought everyone back. Just odd. Anyway, the 49ers (14-2, +195, both tops in the League) were the favorites heading into the playoffs. The Cowboys (13-3, +166) and Bills (11-5, +98) also merit consideration. But the Bills can be discarded both for their record, their 15th ranked (by points allowed) defense, and that they were down 35-3 in the 3rd quarter to Houston on Wild Card Weekend and somehow (Frank Reich?) came back to win in OT.

So it comes down to this: were the Cowboys better than the 49ers? Once again, we're dealing with two excellent teams. Offensively, the 49ers had the edge at QB and WRs (Young, Rice, Taylor Sherrard v. Aikman, Irvin, Harper, and Martin), the Cowboys had the superior line and RB (Smith v. Waters), while TE was a wash (Novacek v. Jones). The Cowboys (5th in scoring defense) had a younger, faster defense but the 49ers (3rd in scoring defense) featured some excellent game-changers in Tim Harris (17 sacks), Bill Romanowski (designated team training assistant), and Don Griffin (5 INTs).

The game statistics from the Championship game illustrate just how evenly matched these teams were: 24 1st downs for each team; 416 yards gained by Dallas, 415 for San Fransisco; 4 penalties for each team; 4 sacks for the 49ers, 3 for Dallas (all by Tony Casillas). Tied 10-10 at halftime, the difference in the game came down to turnovers: the 49ers had 4 while the Cowboys secured the ball. Dallas 30, San Francisco 20. Sure, the field was a mess. Sure, the officials let Larry Brown mug Jerry Rice. But in the end, these teams are too closely matched to give the edge to either - Cowboys win the tiebreaker (they won on the field) and the NFL got this one right.

1993 Dallas Cowboys over Buffalo Bills
The Bills (12-4, +87) and Oilers (12-4, +130) were the class of the AFC. The Oilers were the trendy pick heading into the postseason, as they won their final 11 games. However, the Bills beat them soundly during the season (35-7) and they had a turnover problem (-2 on the year) that was their Achilles heal.

Meanwhile, Dallas (12-4, +147) and San Fransisco (10-6, +178) were the class of the NFC. This was the season Emmitt wanted to get paid, resulting in him missing the first two games of the season during a contract dispute (both Cowboy losses). In other words, maybe they should have been 14-2...

San Fransisco didn't have the muscle to handle the Cowboy's line while the Bills defense, though formidable, couldn't handle the Cowboys' offense (which featured 8 Pro Bowl players). How about them Cowboys!?!

1994 San Fransisco 49ers over San Diego Chargers
The 49ers (13-3, +209) completely dominated this season. In fact, I believe this was the best team of the last 25 years. The team had 10 Pro Bowl players, including League MVP Steve Young and Defensive Player of the Year Deion Sanders. Sanders and Ken Norton were imported while Bryant Young was drafted, adding 3 All-Pro caliber players to the defense. Aging, but cagey, vets Tim Harris, Richard Dent, Rickey Jackson, and Charles Mann were added to the defensive line as pass-rush specialists. Dana Stubblefield ('97's Defensive POY) anchored the line. Two Pro Bowl safeties and Deion made it very difficult for opponents to pass (and Eric Davis, the "other" CB, made the Pro Bowl the following season). This team had everything. And that's without discussing the top offense in the league. The Super Bowl was inevitable as the 49ers were the top team in '94.

1995 Dallas Cowboys over Pittsburgh Steelers
Steve Young missed 5 games, yet the 49ers (11-5, +199) still led the League in point differential. They had the top offense and second best defense in the League, yet fell to our mighty Packers in the Divisional Round. Packers fans will remember Steve Young completed less than 50% of his passes (though he threw 65 times) while Brett and co. played a perfect game. Even so, if that game is played 10 times, I'm not sure that the Packers with 4 of them. San Fransisco was the better team, just not on that afternoon.

Dallas (12-4, +144) boasted the League's third best offense and third best defense. During the off-season, Deion jumped to the Cowboys, leading many to believe the tide had shifted. However, the 49ers crushed the 'Boys 38-20 during the season, forcing 4 turnovers and knocking Aikman out of the game (the 49ers were led by Elvis Grbac). Further, the 'Boys were still led by Barry Switzer, a man who made George Seifert look like Bill Walsh. Losing Deion hurt the 49ers, but not enough. The men in red were the best team of '95.

1996 Green Bay Packers over New England Patriots
Brett Favre. Reggie White. Brett Favre. Reggie White. Brett Favre. Reggie White. Brett Favre. Reggie White. Brett Favre. Reggie White. Brett Favre. Reggie White. Brett Favre. Reggie White. Brett Favre. Reggie White. Brett Favre. Reggie White. Brett Favre. Reggie White. Brett Favre. Reggie White.

1997 Denver Broncos over Green Bay Packers
This season's top four teams were the Broncos (12-4, +185), Packers (13-3, +140), 49ers (13-3, +110), and Chiefs (13-3, +143). Though Denver had the League's best offense (GB was 2nd, SF 5th, and KC 6th) no one saw them coming. The Chiefs had the best defense (SF was 3rd, GB 5th, DEN 6th) but Elvis Grbac wasn't putting the fear of God into NFL defenses. Jerry Rice was lost for the year on an illegal tackle of Jerry Rice in Week 1, so the 49ers were a bit of smoke and mirrors. No, this season belonged to the Packers, only they couldn't stop Terrell Davis in the Super Bowl. I'm torn on this one, mainly because it was so utterly surprising that Denver showed up. The crushed Jacksonville on Wild Card Weekend, but the were PLAYING ON WILD CARD WEEKEND! They then beat KC by 4 and PIT by 3 before upsetting the Packers by 7 in the Super Bowl. Meanwhile, the Packers cruised past Tampa (21-7) and SF (23-10). It isn't just hometown bias, the Packers were better than the Broncos, they just stumbled on Super Bowl Sunday.

1998 Denver Broncos over Atlanta Falcons
It was a three team race in '98, with the Vikings (15-1, +260) the overwhelming favorite to take the title. Randall Cunningham (34/10 TD/INT), Robert Smith (1,200 yards 14 games), Chris Carter (78/1011/12TDs) and Randy Moss (69/1313/17) led the NFL's second-highest scoring offense of all-time (only to be eclipsed by the 2007 Pats). The defense (6th in the league) was stout. This team was unstoppable. Well, it was unstoppable until Gary Anderson missed his first FG of the year in the NFC Championship Game, as time expired (oh, and it was a bunny, too). They were much better than the Falcons, they just had some bad luck in that game.

Now, were the Vikings better than the Broncos (14-2, +192, 2nd Off, 8th Def)? I think so. Even though the '98 team was much better than the '97 version, Elway was starting to fall apart. Davis turned in a monster year (2,008 yards, 21 TDs) but this was an old defense that could not have matched the Vikings speed. '98 also got it wrong.

1999 St. Louis Rams over Tennessee Titans
This season is remembered for a lot of things, but one that's too often forgotten is the 62-7 thrashing of the Dolphins (9-7) by the Jaguars (14-2, +179) in the Divisional Round. It was Dan Marino's last game. The reason I bring it up is because the Jags were the team everyone expected to face the mighty Rams (13-3, +284) in the Super Bowl. They had the 6th best offense and top defensive unit in the League. The offense focused on ball-control (only 18 TOs and over 2,000 yards rushing) while the defense was led by no-nonsense tough guys at each level (Brackens, Hardy, Lake). But were the Jags better than the Rams? No chance.

Let's not forget that Warner had an in-his-prime Marshall Faulk to match with Bruce and Holt. They had the most dangerous punt returner in the game (Az-Zahir Hakim - who also had 677/8TDs as the deep-threat WR) and a big-play defense (17 Sacks for Kevin Carter; 6 INTS for Todd Lyght) ranked 4th overall. Though no one expected it in August, the Rams were the cream of the League in 1999).

2000 Baltimore Ravens over New York Giants
The aftereffects of the 1992 salary cap were finally felt in 2000. Parity. Lots of parity. Baltimore's (12-4, +168) defense was crazy-good, but so was Tennessee's (13-3, +155). What bothers me here is the Titans beat the Ravens 14-6 in a Week 8 game at Baltimore. The Week 11 game at Tennessee saw Baltimore win 24-23, but it should be noted that of the 38 PATs Al Del Greco attempted in this, his final season, the only one he missed was in the 4th quarter of that 24-23 loss. What would have happened in OT is anyone's guess. The fact that the Ravens won in the Divisional Round assuages my concerns, but even then, they won by two TDs, which came on a 90 yard blocked FG return for a TD and a 50 yard INT return for a TD. I cannot say the Titans were better than the Ravens, but I can't help but wonder if they were.

I'm not giving any consideration to the Giants (12-4, +82) simply because Ron Dayne carried the ball more than anyone else, despite having a 3.4 yards/carry average.

2001 New England Patriots over St. Louis Rams
The Rams (14-2. +230) were a "lock" to win it all this season (injuries to Warner and Faulk derailed their bid for a back-to-back title the previous year). The offense was tops in the League and the defense was a "strong" 7th, with veteran CB Aeneas Williams forging the unit's personality and sack specialist Leonard Little (14.5 sacks) making big plays on passing downs. This is a team that really should have been 15-1, but for a thrilling 34-31 loss to the Saints in Week 7 in which the Rams had 8 TOs (and they only lost by 3?). Indeed, during their other loss, to the Bucs in Week 11 (24-17), they had 6 turnovers. It's clear what the team's Achilles' heal was. With 44 TOs during the regular season, it can be argued that the Rams were a powder-keg waiting to happen. And it could be argued correctly, as a 3-0 TO margin in the Super Bowl allowed the Pats (11-5, +99) to win by the smallest of Adam Vinatieri margins (20-17).

Nonetheless, the Rams were the best team in '01. They were merely unlucky with the Super Bowl draw. Had the Pats lost to the Raiders in the "Tuck Rule" game, I only have to spend 2 sentences on this season. Instead, the Pats went on to beat the Steelers (13-3, +140) in a similar fashion to how they would win the Super Bowl (4-0 TO margin, 24-17 final score). The Pats were the perfect foil against the explosive Rams, as they were a conservative team focused on minimizing mistakes. And they still needed a heroic FG at the gun to win. Sorry Pats fans, but you were luckier, not better, than the Rams.

2002 Tampa Bay Buccaneers over Oakland Raiders
Another difficult season to assess. Rich Gannon was League MVP (what?) leading the Raiders (11-5, +146) to the Super Bowl with ease (they won the Divisional and Championship Weekends by 20 and 17, respectively). The Bucs (12-4, +150) and Eagles (12-4, +174) were the cream of the NFC crop. But in a season without a dominant team, the tie (once again) must go to the Super Bowl Champ, as the Bucs stomped the Eagles (27-10) and Raiders (48-21) in consecutive weeks to take the title.

2003 New England Patriots over Carolina Panthers
The Pats (14-2, +110) were the NFL's best team this season. But allow my homerism to digress to the Packers (10-6, +135). This was 4th and 26. One stop by the defense and the only thing standing in our way would have been Jake Delhomme. While we might not have stacked up to the Chiefs (13-3, +152) or defense-less Colts (12-4, +111), we were every bit as good as any NFC team. Wasted chances...

2004 New England Patriots over Philadelphia Eagles
The Patriots (14-2, +177) had their fans feeling pretty entitled by this point. But who could blame them? The 12-4 Colts (+171) still didn't have the defense to compete with the Pats. The Steelers (15-1, +121) were doing it with a rookie quarterback. The Chargers (12-4, +133) were coached by Marty Schottenheimer. And the Eagles (13-3, +126) were quarterbacked by this guy (not the kind of player you want to lead you to the title). The Pats were #1.

2005 Pittsburgh Steelers over Seattle Seahawks
I'm genuinely confused right now. I've just spent 15 minutes reviewing this season and it seems pretty clear that the Colts (14-2, +192) were the best team this season. The Seahawks were the closest (13-3, +181) but their stats look skewed by a terrible NFC West. The Colts, meanwhile, were the first #1 to lose to a #6 in the Divisional Round during the wackiest game I can ever remember watching. If you recall, of all the odd things that happened in that game, the strangest was that the Colts would have won on a defensive touchdown had he not been stabbed in the knee with a knife (by his wife) the previous day. Nope, very odd game. And season.

2006 Indianapolis Colts over Chicago Bears
In all of the years for the Colts to win their title, this was the worst. The Pats (12-4, +148), Ravens (13-3, +152), and Chargers (14-2, +189) can all lay claim to being the superior team to the Colts (12-4, +67). LdT led an excellent Chargers (1st in offense, 7th in defense) that couldn't get past the Pats (7th/2nd) in the Divisional Round. When the Pats fell to the Colts (2nd/23rd) in the Championship Game, 38-34, the only thing that prevented the Pats' 4th title in 6 years was Troy Brown turning the wrong way on a 4th down late in the game. No, the Colts got the title, but there was at least one team better than them.

2007 New York Giants over New England Patriots
Five titles in seven years. That was a realistic outcome (by my count, it should have been four titles) looking back on the aughts. The Pats (16-0, +315) destroyed just about everyone this season. The Giants (10-6, +22) just don't compare. But for one game, they played perfectly. And yet they still needed this catch to win. It makes no sense. Heck, they should have been playing the Packers (13-3, +144), but Favre missed Ryan Grant on a checkdown in OT of the Championship Game that would have put them in FG range (instead, he threw and interception).

2008 Pittsburgh Steelers over Arizona Cardinals
Tom Brady could have made this pretty easy had he not decided to fake a knee injury and skip the season. So selfish of him. Anyway, I think this one comes down to the Steelers (12-4, +124) and the Colts (12-4, +79). The Titans (13-3, +141) were the advanced statistics darlings. I just can't get over trusting that team to Kerry Collins and Albert Haynesworth. Then again, they outplayed Baltimore in the Divisional Round and lost 13-10, so perhaps they're being dismissed too quickly. /looks at Kerry Collins and his WRs... Nope, Tennessee was overrated.

The Colts' record and year-long statistics are skewed due to the mysterious knee injury Peyton Manning played through to begin the year (it seems to have affected his performance for 6-8 games). The Colts won their final 9 and promptly laid an egg at San Diego on Wild Card Weekend, losing 23-17 in OT. Without that stumbling block, though, I can't see the Colts failing to beat Pittsburgh, a team with just 3 Pro Bowl Players. It's close, but decisive: the Colts were the better team in '08

2009 New Orleans Saints over Indianapolis Colts
There is no two ways about it: the Minnesota Vikings (12-4, +158) were the best team in '09. All those Pro Bowl players. The best QB/RB combo in the game. The Saints (13-3, +169) were also excellent. But if that Championship game is played 10 times, the Vikings win 6. If it's played on a neutral field, they'd win 8. It's just inconceivable that they lost (yay!), but that's any given Sunday for you...

Final tally: 13 of 25 (52%) Yikes!

The Jets Are Going To Be Good Next Year

First of all, if the Jets aren't fired up by Rex Ryan's recent outrage at US "Football", they don't have a soul. But the number of really good moves they've made in the offseason will make them nasty. Tomlinson (he's not who he was three years ago, but he doesn't have to be; you still want him on your team), Cromartie (Patriots model, we want talent, we'll sit on him until he just acts talented on the football field on Sundays and you hear nothing else about him), and now this article suggests they're going to sign Mark Brunell and that Nick Folk is at least having moments that would make you think that he can return to his pretty decent prior regular season form.

I like Mark Brunell. He reminds me of Jeff Garcia during the five year span when everyone wondered if someone was going to sign him as a backup. And then someone did (Tampa Bay and Philly off of the top of my head) and he made everyone happy the team did. Brunell's kind of the same way. Is he old? Yes. Is he mobile? He used to be. But has he consistently helped teams do better than everyone expected? Yes.

And this is on a team with Mark fucking Sanchez as their #1. The whole team is Rex Ryan's attempt to demonstrate that you don't really need a good quarterback to have a good team. If you have Brick, Mangold, Greene and Tomlinson, and a few wide receivers who are at least worth covering, we'll just shove it down your throat all game. If Sanchez plays subpar, the Jets win (which they will), and the season starts to come down to it, put in Brunell. I'd rather have Brunell in Mangold's ass instead of Sanchez if not for the development factor. But an unconventional quarterback in that offense could do wonders.

Another pickup for Badgerstyle's (now) 2011 Super Bowl champions.

The Modern Sports Echo Chamber

*Updates below*
Modern sports "news" has become a stupid game you used to play at summer camp. What starts as a mere fart in the wind on some dude's blog gets gobbled-up by bigger blogs, which is then further amplified by The Sports Blog aka Deadspin. Once on Deadspin, you've got the attention of the AP, which will reclaim the story as their own, failing to credit the original authors, or even Deadspin for that matter. A day or two later, news aggregates feature it, such as ESPN or Countdown with Keith Olbermann, again without mentioning who started it.

The recent story of a small child allegedly drinking beer at a Phillies game illustrates this process. Watch how this works:

The story begins with a fan watching a game on TV. Something interesting happens and inspires the fan to post their DVRed video to YouTube. Then, either the same fan, or another fan that saw the same thing, posts the YouTube video on their blog. In the case of our boozing toddler, the Phillies blog The Fightins is first on the scene.

Enter Deadspin. A loyal reader likely tips Deadspin to the story, or perhaps it is the folks at The Fightins. Either way, Deadspin disseminates to the masses. Honorably, Deadspin cites The Fightins, giving them the traffic-boost reach-around.

Extra innings on a brutally humid Philadelphia afternoon isn't easy to sit through. One tyke with a bright future discovered how Daddy makes it through the day, and why Daddy is mean to Mommy sometimes. [via The Fightins]

This is the point of the story where our innocent little drunk finally becomes News. With Deadspin on the radar of the national news outlets, it's only a matter of time before an AP writer with writer's block lands an easy buck. They take our little blog turd and polish it into Journalism that will end up on The Leader. Look, here is our infant getting hammered story on ESPN! Note: they don't even throw Deadspin, or more appropriately The Fightins, a goddamn bone.

Clip shows boy with beer bottle
Associated Press

PHILADELPHIA -- A video snippet from a Philadelphia Phillies broadcast appears to show a little boy in the stands taking a drink from a beer bottle, but the team thinks it was probably empty.

The fuzzy video making the rounds online shows the child putting the bottle to his lips at Sunday's Phillies-Padres game at Citizens Bank Park. No one nearby appears to be paying attention to him when he does. It's not clear whether the bottle has anything in it.

Phillies spokeswoman Bonnie Clark says the team hasn't been able to identify the boy. She says it appears to be "a very brief event, probably involving an empty bottle."

Police say they are not investigating.

Phillies fans have brought unfavorable publicity to the ballclub this year. In April, a drunken fan intentionally vomited on an 11-year-old girl. In May, a police officer used a Taser on a teenager who ran onto the field.

Copyright 2010 by The Associated Press

And that's how the modern sports fan gets information about stupid shit that's marginally sports-related. Yay Journalism! The Sports Media Elite are nothing but a bunch of glorified Digg wannabees.

Cartoon credit: Sodahead

Update: The AP article on ESPN now contains 30% more Journalism! Here is the updated version:

PHILADELPHIA -- A video snippet from a Philadelphia Phillies broadcast shows a little boy in the stands appearing to take a swig from a beer bottle, creating a fresh headache for a ballclub whose fans have been drawing almost as much attention as its players.

The fuzzy video, which began making the rounds online and on TV on Monday, shows the child, who appears to be about 4, putting the bottle to his lips at Sunday's Phillies-Padres game at Citizens Bank Park.

No adults nearby appear to be paying attention to him when he does. It's not clear whether the bottle has anything in it, but the boy is seen easily hoisting it to his mouth with one hand, suggesting it could have been empty.

In April, a drunken fan intentionally vomited on an 11-year-old girl. In May, a police officer used a Taser on a teenager who ran onto the field.

Phillies spokeswoman Bonnie Clark said the team hasn't been able to identify the tot or the adults next to him. She said it appears to be "a very brief event, probably involving an empty bottle."

"Obviously, the Phillies, like everyone else, would not want a child to be permitted to consume any alcoholic beverage," she said. "We are confident that our employees and our fans would not allow this to happen if they were aware of it."

The video was posted on local and national blogs. Some thought the incident was overblown, others called for charges against adults if the bottle contained beer.

"This is most likely not as it seems, but let's see how many national New York-based media outlets jump on this one. THESE ARE ISOLATED AND UNRELATED INCIDENTS! WE ARE NOT ALL LIKE THIS!" stated one person on The Philadelphia Inquirer's website.

Others joked that the recent slide of the Phillies was driving even toddlers to drink.

Neither the Philadelphia police nor the city's child-welfare agency said it was investigating.

"If there was a report of neglect, we would investigate it. We have not received a report," said Alicia Taylor, spokeswoman for the city's Department of Human Services.

**Update 2: Here is the "drinking toddler" story on Salon. To their credit, they give due props to The Fightins.

In Response to Oberon: A Thought About Maybe Using Statistics

And that's all it is, a thought, and it isn't particularly directed at Oberon's nice post below. But it kind of is. I read that and thought about going through each team's statistics over the last 25 years using some sort of brilliant algorithm to use statistics even recoverable from the 1980s to model the "best" team in the league that year, and see if they won the championship. The same model will be applicable to the other sports, and we can make likey time on this blog.

So this model. I have a trust for point differential, so start there, but the problem with straight-up point differential is blowouts. This is assuming that "clutch" doesn't exist, because theoretically a "clutcher" team would win more games with close point differentials, and become more valuable than their point differential suggests, but to pacify Oberon I will go right into a consideration of point differential.

To accurately calculate the aggregate win probability for the NBA teams each year, you'd want to find the team who was winning the most games by the largest margin. All blowouts. Because standard deviation is a negative point-related quality when the total points are already taken into account, perhaps (point differential) - (std div [point differential]).

But fuck, that's far too much work. Especially for a blog that nobody reads ever and on an issue that's really just a response to Oberon's mind dump. This story is probably the best illustration of why I never get anything done.

The True Champion?

ESPN had a recent poll that was quite interesting: Which league's championship is most likely to produce a champion that was actually the best team for the season? Of the three major leagues - NFL, NBA, and MLB, voters overwhelming picked the NBA first, with MLB and NFL following. At first glance, I would rank them NBA, NFL, and MLB. But I'd rather do some research and analysis and get to the bottom of this. Therefore, we bring you the first of a three part article where we examine the last 25 years of Champions in each sport to try and determine which league's championship gives us the best and most accurate champion in each respective season. I chose 25 years because that's as far back as I can remember, and it would be useless for me to only evaluate W/Ls and other statistics without some relevant knowledge of what actually happened on the field/court. Let's start with the NBA:

1985 NBA Los Angeles Lakers over Boston Celtics

This was the year I fell in love with basketball. Michael Jordan entered the League and changed the way we all thought about hoops. But the Bulls didn't make the playoffs so I won't make this about them, even if I'd like to. No, the the Showtime Lakers (62-20) took the title. They did not have the best record in the League. The Boston Celtics (63-19) won that honor. They did not have the MVP (Bird) or sixth man of the year (McHale). No, Boston won those honors too. It's safe to say the best two teams in 84-85 were the Lakers and the Celtics. The top two records in the League. Both teams had defensive stoppers (1st Team All-D Cooper for LA; 2nd Team All-D Johnson for BOS). The 1st Team All NBA included Magic and Bird, while the 2nd Team had Abdul-Jabbar. Parish and Johnson joined Bird on the All-Star team. These teams were LOADED. They split during the regular season (each team winning at home) and the Lakers won 4-2 in the Finals, despite not having home-court advantage (LA won 2 games in Boston). LA won the head-to-head. Boston lost more games (4) in the first three rounds than LA (2). LA had a higher point differential during the regular season. I think it's close, but LA was the best team during the 84-85 season.

1986 NBA Boston Celtics over Houston Rockets

The Lakers (62-20) didn't show up for the rematch, losing to the Rockets (51-31) in five. This Celtics team (67-15) is considered one of (if not THE) best teams in NBA history - they brought Bill Walton off the bench for goodness sakes. No doubt about it: the Celtics owned the 85-86 season.

1987 NBA Los Angeles Lakers Boston Celtics
Was it boring or exciting to be an NBA fan during this stretch? Same teams, year after year. LA (65-17) ran away with the regular season (Boston was second, with a 59-23 record) and blew through the first three rounds (11-1) before beating the Celtics in six. Magic finally wrestled the MVP trophy from Bird and each team boasted 3 All-Stars. But the difference really lay in the bench: the Celtics were hit hard by injuries and their depth evaporated. LA was 86-87's finest.

1988 NBA Los Angeles Lakers over Detroit Pistons
Aaaaaaand the Celtics didn't show up for the rematch. Boston (57-25) fell to Detroit (54-28) in a brutal Eastern Conference Finals. This was not fun to watch. And it wasn't good basketball. I've never liked the Lakers (62-20), but I rooted for them pretty hard in this series, which was a seven game slugfest. The best team won, but it was a preview for how a slightly less talented team (Pistons) could bend the rules to equalize the talent level of their opponent.

1989 NBA Detroit Pistons over Los Angeles Lakers
This is the first truly difficult decision. The Pistons (63-19) had the best record in the league (LA was 57-25) but not a single player worthy enough to make the All-NBA team (there were 15 players on the All-NBA team). Further, only Isaiah Thomas made the All-Star Team. At the time, I looked at the Pistons and all I saw was a team of brutes who kept games close and had a great finisher (Thomas) take over at the end. This was completely and utterly effective, of course. In fact, just looking at the stats (best record, lost just 2 games in the playoffs, swept the Finals) this should be a no-brainer. But it isn't. They get the nod because this is the year Kareem fell off a cliff and LA couldn't rebound, but these teams were closer than you'd think.

1990 NBA Detroit Pistons over Portland Trail Blazers

This is another odd season. Who must we compare to the Pistons (59-23)? The Lakers (63-19) were shocked by the Suns (54-28) in the second round. The Blazers (59-23) had an excellent team. And the Bulls (55-27) were a year away from owning the League. I think it's the Bulls. They had the best player (MJ) at the peak of his powers (27). Grant and Pippen rounded out the best 2,3,4 in the League, bar none, including the most versatile and athletic (they were ahead of their time). The Bulls played Detroit closer (3-4 in the Eastern Conference Finals) than anyone else. And they lost Game 7 under suspect circumstances (Pippen came down with migraines and played poorly, especially in Game 7). This where you have to wonder: if Pippen is healthy, do I even write more than one sentence here? No, I don't. That's why I have to say that the Bulls were better than the Pistons this year, even though they did not win the title.

1991 NBA Chicago Bulls over Los Angeles Lakers

1992 NBA Chicago Bulls over Portland Trail Blazers

1993 NBA Chicago Bulls over Phoenix Suns

There's no need to waste space here with entries on each of these years. The Bulls had the best player, one of the best teams ever ('92 - 67-15), lost just two playoff games in '91, and weren't threatened in '93 until they ran into the Suns, who Jordan promptly eviscerated with the greatest Finals performance of all-time (he was properly motivated when the media foolishly awarded the regular season MVP to Charles Barkley). During MJ's prime, he was simply unstoppable. This is why any comparison to him is foolish (MJ doesn't allow his team to win 34, 45, and 42 games during his prime, even if I'm starting next to him... *cough* *Kobe*). The Bulls owned these years.

1994 NBA Houston Rockets New York Knickerbockers

The strange thing is, the Rockets (58-24) weren't the best team. And neither were the Knicks (57-25). The Bulls (55-27) should have beaten the Knicks in Round 2, but for a TERRIBLE call on a desperation shot by Hubert Davis (you aren't a great team if Hubert Davis is taking that shot). But even the Bulls weren't the best team that season (no MJ, though they somehow had 3 All-Stars). No, the best team was the Seattle Supersonics (64-18), a team that had a ridiculously good 9-man rotation that was somehow knocked out in the first round by the Denver Nuggets (42-40). No 8 seed had ever beaten a 1 until this series. The Sonics won handily in games 1 and 2, but were crushed in Game 3. They lost on questionable calls in games 4 and 5, both of which were OT victories for the Nuggets. At the time, I couldn't have been happier (I loved how Mutombo talked and Ellis' game). Looking back, it opened the door for the Rockets and Olajuwon's meteoric rise in NBA lore (his career is evaluated much, much differently if Mutombo doesn't take Kemp out of this series).

1995 NBA Houston Rockets over Orlando Magic

I'm speechless on this one. The Nick Anderson game. The dismantling of the Next Great Dynasty before it got started. How did it happen? The Rockets (47-35) were on their last legs as a 6th seed in the Western Conference. Olajuwon and Drexler (both 32) carried the team during the regular season, but in the playoffs they succeeded because of huge games by Sam Cassell (9.5 ppg reg season, started one reg season game) and Robert Horry (10 ppg reg season). The Magic (57-25) boasted Penny Hardaway (1st Team All-NBA) and Shaq (2nd Team All-NBA). Facing the Rockets with Olajuwon (loan All-Star and 3rd Team All-NBA) didn't seem that imposing. Heck, I'm not sure how the Rockets beat the Suns (59-23) in an epic 7 game series in Round 2. In fact, the Rockets went 11-7 in the playoffs before reaching the Finals. I don't want to have to pick the best team (though I'd probably go with the Suns - Danny Manning made that team very, very good) but I do know one thing: the Rockets weren't the best team of the 94-95 season.

1996 NBA Chicago Bulls over Seattle Supersonics

1997 NBA Chicago Bulls over Utah Jazz

1998 NBA Chicago Bulls over Utah Jazz

Once again: No one was beating MJ. The Bulls won 72, 69, and 62 games during these seasons. Only Utah in 1998 (62-20) equaled them in wins. Nonetheless, despite what some people will tell you, EVERYONE knew the Bulls were winning the title these years. There never was any doubt, even when Pippen's back flaired up at the end of the run, everyone knew MJ would do anything to win. Since MJ could do anything, the Bulls would win the title.

1999 NBA San Antonio Spurs over New York Knickerbockers

A fluky season that forced Jordan's hand into a second retirement. A 50 game season that allowed the team that showed up in the best shape (San Antonio - 37-13) to take the title. Unsurprisingly, Utah (37-13) also finished the "regular" season tied with the Spurs for the best record (Malone and Stockton, Utah's stars, were known for being workout freaks). The Spurs rolled through the postseason (15-2) with a physical style that few teams could match (again, they were all out of shape). It didn't hurt that the Spurs' best player (Duncan) was in his second year in the league and, at 22, couldn't get out of shape if he had tried.

2000 NBA Los Angeles Lakers over Indiana Pacers

Shaq's best season. The first season Kobe put it together. Phil. (You gotta love Phil Jackson - here his is yelling at Chris Rock last night for reminding Kobe that he couldn't beat Eddie Jones out for a starting spot when he entered the League). The Blazers should have defeated the Lakers in the Conference Finals (very VERY fishy referee work in Game 6), but the Lakers were the better team, overall, that season. While we're here:

2001 NBA Los Angeles Lakers over Philadelphia 76ers

This wasn't even close. Yes, the Bucks (52-30) had a shot , but they weren't beating the Lakers even if they had gotten the calls in the 76ers series.

2002 NBA Los Angeles Lakers over New Jersey Nets
The Nets were not good. In fact, the entire Eastern Conference was atrocious. But the West... Sacramento (61-21) had the perfect team to beat the Lakers: a talented PF (2nd Team All-NBA Chris Webber), a SF that could shoot the lights out (All-Star Peja Stojakovic), a sweet shooting PG who could penetrate (Mike Bibby), a lock-down defender (SG Doug Christie), and 18 fouls to throw at Shaq (C Vlade Divac, BU-C Scott Pollard, and Webber). This team also had two excellent scorers off the bench (Bobby Jackson and Hedu Turkoglu). I absolutely thought they were beating hte Lakers (58-24). Nope. Lost in 7 (more referee issues, though). Sacramento was the better team, and best team in the League. The Playoffs got it wrong this season.

2003 NBA San Antonio Spurs over New Jersey Nets

The West was so loaded during this period that it's staggering to look at today. The Nets (49-33) don't deserve the time of day, but the Mavs (60-22) and the Kings (59-23) do. The Kings brought everyone back, even getting an additional boost off the bench from Jim Jackson (don't ask, but he was pretty good). The Mavs vaulted into the elite with Nowitzki's breakout season (2nd Team All-NBA). In fact, it really was Nash's breakout year, too (3rd Team All-NBA). Throw in Finely (19ppg) and Van Exel off the bench (12.5ppg) and you had a squad you could go to war with. Unless you consider that Shawn Bradley started 39 games at center.

So what about the Spurs (60-22)? David Robinson's last dance. MVP Time Duncan. Tony Parker taking the reigns and running with it. Not an easy road to the Championship (16-8) but they made it (no series went seven games). The part I don't like about this team is it was in flux; Stephen Jackson took all the big shots because Manu was a rookie and wasn't playing yet. So, whether you think the Spurs were better than the Kings or the Mavs really comes down to how you feel about having Stephen Jackson taking all the big shots for you at the end of big games. That, and they won 3 games in Dallas to win the West. I'll take the Spurs here, in a nail-biter.

2004 NBA Detroit Pistons over Los Angeles Lakers

An Emphatic NO. The Pistons (54-28) were NOT the best team this season. The Lakers (56-26) were miles above everyone else, but the Shaq/Kobe drama eclipsed everything else. Injuries killed this team, too. They ended the year on a 14-3 run after beginning the year on an 18-3 run. But they had putrid stretches (end of December w/o Shaq and Malone: 1-6) when key guys were out. And, again, Shaq/Kobe feud. Heck, the Garnett/Cassell/Sprewell T-Wolves were better than the Pistons. The Playoffs got this one wrong.

2005 NBA San Antonio Spurs over Detroit Pistons

I'd have preferred the Suns (62-20) over the Heat (59-23), as both were superior to the teams they lost to in the Conference Finals. The Pistons (54-28) were down 3-2 and stormed back to win in Game 7 of the Eastern Conference Finals due to some great (rough) defense on Wade and Jones and getting a huge game from Rasheed Wallace. Meanwhile, the best Suns team of the "7 Seconds or Less" Era (each starter averaged at least 15ppg) suffered a terrible Joe Johnson injury that allowed the Spurs (59-23) to win in five. Again, the playoffs got it wrong.

2006 NBA Miami Heat over Dallas Mavericks

The Heat (52-30) made up for their crushing defeat in '05 with a win over a solid Mavs team (60-22). The Suns (54-28) were without Amare all year (microfracture surgery) and were forced to trade Joe Johnson. Nonetheless, Nash won his second MVP and the Suns made another deep playoff run, losing to Mavs in six in the Conference Finals. The Mavs, though, were the favorites heading into the Finals. If the Heat are to be compared to any other team that year, the Mavs are the team to compare them to. Now, there's a lot of hand-wringing over the officiating during the Finals, and with good reason. But more than anything, Miami's finisher (Wade) was better at the end of games than Dallas's finisher (Nowitzki). Enough said: Miami was the best team in 05-06.

2007 NBA San Antonio Spurs over Cleveland Cavaliers

2008 NBA Boston Celtics over Los Angeles Lakers
2009 NBA Los Angeles Lakers over Orlando Magic
In the interest of time (mine, not yours), we'll handle it this way: no (Suns), yes, yes. We were one terrible rule (leaving the bench = suspension) away from a Suns/Cavs Finals. I'm convinced. Damn you, Stern!

Final tally: 18/25. 72%. Not bad. Will the NFL or MLB do better?

Obama Wants LeBron In Cleveland

"That's a town that has had some tough times," Obama exclaimed, right before David Stern fined him three stealth bombers and a night with Michelle for tampering with free agents.

That Was a Crazy Night

So I had a few friends over last night to watch the NBA Finals. The problem was: the Finals don't begin until tonight. Memorial Day completely screwed me up. And I'm an idiot. So, instead, we watched the Brewers handle the Marlins, 7-4. But we were absolutely flabbergasted by the discussion Brian Anderson was having in the top of the 7th. There isn't anything posted on youtube or mentioned in any of the articles I've read, so allow me to summarize what transpired in the booth when Gallardo came up to bat:

Anderson: "You know, they're bringing Yovani back to pitch in the bottom of the 7th. He's just the kind of pitcher who could knock one out of here and tie this game up. He's done everything else tonight." Pitch to Gallardo. "And there's a drive. Way back. Home run!" /Lots of laughter from Schroeder and Anderson.

He freakin' called a home run by a pitcher. I shouldn't have to note how awesome that is.

Later, the game ends (Brewers win!) and what do we see? Immediate highlights of a blown perfect game by umpire Jim Joyce. Armando Galarraga was throwing a perfect game, with two outs in the 9th, when Jason Donald hit a slow grounder to first. The ball was handled by Miguel Cabrera and tossed to Galarraga for a seemingly routine last out in the third MLB perfect game in 24 days (there had been 18 in the history of baseball prior to May of this season). Nope. Joyce called the runner safe. The runner was decidedly not safe. After the game, Joyce apologized:

"It was the biggest call of my career, and I kicked the shit out of it. I just cost that kid a perfect game."

Yes, yes you did.

So, this was my night: My first NBA Finals "party" without having the Finals actually on. One of the most delightfully random announcer calls I've ever heard firsthand. A "this is too perfect to not be scripted for a movie" ending to a (non) perfect game. I love sports.