Saturday, October 03, 2009

NFL Changing Of The Guard In 2009? By John Wagner Sr. writer at large Football Reporters Online


NFL Changing Of The Guard In 2009? By John Wagner Sr. writer at large Football Reporters Online

Just three weeks into the 2009 National Football League season, it’s much too soon to draw season-ending conclusions. For proof of that, look no further than just two seasons ago when the 2007 New York Giants were shredded defensively to the tune of allowing 80 points while starting 0-2, before finishing 10-6 and riding a complete defensive turnaround to shut down the NFL’s highest scoring regular offense ever, in a Super Bowl XLII victory.

Still, there are some early signs that the final 2009 NFL standings could look drastically different than they did a year ago.

Only two (the New York Giants and Minnesota Vikings) of last year’s eight division winners thus far are leading those same divisions this year.

And, three teams (Miami, Tennessee, and Carolina) that captured division titles a season ago are each still seeking their first win in 2009.

Last year’s AFC East champions, the Miami Dolphins have run the wildcat successfully enough to rank third in the league in both rushing offense and time of possession, but as we saw in their 27-23 loss to Indianapolis in which the Colts set a league record for having the ball for the least amount of time in a victory, that formula doesn’t necessarily translate to enough points (Miami is averaging just 14.3 per game) or wins (the Dolphins are 0-3). Throw in starting quarterback Chad Pennington’s latest season-ending injury, and Miami might be poised to go from the best turn-around in NFL history (from 1-15 in 2007, to 11-5 last season) right back to where it was two years ago.

The Tennessee Titans meanwhile, have been in every game they’ve played so far this year, and they’ve had some tough-luck losses, two by a field goal (one of those in overtime), and a third by a touchdown. However, last season’s AFC South champions have remarkably gone from the NFL’s best record (13-3) after a 10-0 start in 2008, to already matching last season’s loss total with an 0-3 beginning this year. Tennessee has a lot more talent and thus hope, than Miami, to turn things around, but NFL history has been unkind to 0-3 teams making the playoffs let alone winning a division.

And then there’s the Carolina Panthers, last year’s NFC South champions, also starting this season at 0-3 after going 12-4 a year ago. The Panthers were thoroughly embarrassed against Philadelphia in their 2009 season opener at home, a place where they went a perfect 8-0 in the 2008 regular season… that is until they were upset in a blowout loss to Arizona in last year’s NFC divisional playoff game –- which also marked a sharp turnaround for quarterback Jake Delhomme and the Panthers’ offense. Over Carolina’s last four games, Including last season’s playoff loss plus the Panthers’ first three games in 2009, Carolina has lost as many games (4) and Delhomme has thrown as many interceptions (12) as the Panthers and Delhomme had respectively, throughout the entire 2008 regular season. Carolina has already been outscored by 50 points (87-37), averaging a measly 12.3 point per game this season. That’s a huge departure from the team that was the number two seed in the 2008 NFC playoffs.

Meanwhile, last season’s Super Bowl participants, Pittsburgh and Arizona, the only teams to navigate through their respective divisions with perfect 6-0 records in 2008, are each just 1-2, and each has already lost its first game within its division.

Of course, if some of last year’s division winners are struggling now, there must be others which have stepped up and taken their place, and that’s been the case so far this year in nearly every division in the league.

In the AFC East, the 9-7 Jets of a year ago have begun 3-0 to lead that division on the strength of one of the NFL’s best defenses thus far in 2009.

In the AFC South, the Baltimore Ravens were already good last year, but they fell short to Pittsburgh by a game for the 2008 division title. This year however, they look to be one of the NFL’s most complete teams en route to a division-leading 3-0 record.

A similar situation for Indianapolis in the AFC South. After losing the division by one game to the Titans in 2008, the Colts have again ridden quarterback Peyton Manning’s arm to the top of the AFC South –- for now –- where they sit at 3-0.

And, to round out all AFC divisions with new leaders at 3-0, the undefeated Denver Broncos, albeit against a soft schedule to this point, have played well, allowing an NFL-low 16 points (just 5.3 points per game).

In the NFC, the only stability from last season can be found in the NFC East and in the NFC North.

But, with the Panthers and Cardinals faltering, last season’s 8-8, last place New Orleans Saints look like the NFL’s best team so far in 2009, storming their way to a 3-0 mark, crushing their opponents by a combined 120-56 so far; and the first-place San Francisco 49ers, just 7-9 a year ago, have already won at Arizona this season, and are a Minnesota Miracle pass (a Vikings’ game-winning 32-yard touchdown pass with just :02 left) from also being perfect at 3-0.

There’s a lot of football left, and November and December in the NFL often look a lot different than September. But, so far, it looks like we should be forgetting all about 2008 and possibly getting ready for a lot of new faces as either division winners or at least, playoff contenders, in 2009.

CNN reporting on Chicago crime harmed 2016 Olympic vote

More at Zennie62.com | Follow me on Twitter! | Get my widget! | Visit YouTube | Visit UShow.com

Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, won the right to host the 2016 Olympics, beating Madrid, Tokyo, and most famously Chicago - which stunningly was dropped out of the first round of voting, even with a great bid and a visit from the President of the United States and First Lady Michelle Obama.

Here's the voting tally from GameBids.com:

Ballot 1: (95 eligible, 94 valid ballots)

Madrid - 28
Rio - 26
Tokyo - 22
Chicago -18

Ballot 2: (97 eligible, 1 abstention, 95 valid ballots)

Rio - 46
Madrid - 29
Tokyo - 20

Ballot 3: (99 eligible, 1 abstention, 98 valid ballots)

Rio - 66
Madrid - 32

Rio de Janeiro elected.


What vexes me is CNN's constant drumbeat of reports on Chicago crime - and specifically two teen murders - in the very week before the vote and leading right up to the day of the IOC vote.

It seemed like CNN was trying to influence the vote to me, even mentioning the Olympics in their segments on the Chicago crime problem. Moreover, CNN failed to mention the crime issue in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil.

Rio has a huge drug and crime problem called "critical" and puts it in direct competition if not worse than Chicago. With all this why no mention of Rio's crime problem?

CNN is an international news organization with incredible reach and thus can certainly have an impact on how the IOC voting members would see Chicago. But the simple fact that CNN failed to report the drug and crime problem in Rio calls its intentions into question in the wake of America's voting loss.

CNN should explain what it was trying to do and why it did not mention the crime problems of Olympic competitor cities. One could make the argument - I will - that CNN was trying to politically hurt President Obama. Indeed, CNN's actions were irresponsible for a "trusted news source."

Friday, October 02, 2009

2016 Olympics: Rio wins - Chicago presentation "lacked excitement"

More at Zennie62.com | Follow me on Twitter! | Get my widget! | Visit YouTube | Visit UShow.com

Rio will host the 2016 Olympics; there's a party down there that I wish were up here. Well, time to book tickets for Brazil..

Still examining the emotional wreckage from Chicago's stunning loss - ok, ass kicking - in the competition for the 2016 Olympic games, we find another gem of a GameBids.com editor report: that Chicago's bid lacked excitement and Brazil's President Luiz InĂ¡cio Lula da Silva made a plea that was so impassioned it overtook that from President Obama.

I still think that Mayor Daley comment story held away as it was only one week old, but this take is from the on-the-scene in Denmark editor of GameBids.com, Robert Livingstone, who's really done great work in this area over the years. It's a fresh unvarnished take, and may point to how hard an underdog works, Brazil, when they want to achieve something, in this case the Olympics.

Rio won. Give them credit for a job well done. The Olympics are in Brazil, now that nation's got to deliver and big time.

More on this later - got to catch a flight.

2016 Olympics: Chicago politics; Mayor Daley comments blamed for loss

More at Zennie62.com | Follow me on Twitter! | Get my widget! | Visit YouTube | Visit UShow.com

As I look at the emotional wreckage that is Chicago's stunning loss of the 2016 Olympics, and with Madrid and Rio remaining in the IOC vote competition, the remains reveal that Chicago politics and Chicago Mayor Richard Daley Jr.'s remarks which led to a skirmish with Rio, may have been the factors behind Chicago's first round ballot loss.

According to the Chicago Tribune, Mayor Daley has at first not promised the blanket financial guarantee the IOC wanted, then did a reverse and made such a promise, and the got Chicago alderman to vote for it 46 to 0.

But knowing this game bids issue as I personally do, I really don't think that was the problem. My gut tells me it was the story of Mayor Daley's comments regarding Rio's bid that were taken as an insult by Brazil. According to GameBids.com, the IOC has a rule against rival bidders making derogatory comments about Olympic bids. GameBid reports:

Daley was reported to have said last week that hosting the World Cup, as Brazil will do in 2014, was not the same as hosting the Olympics.

That comment, not officially recorded and appear to be from a single source from my web search, caused Rio to file a complaint with the IOC Ethics Commission.

That happened just last week and I think poisoned the water before the IOC vote. Now the question is did Mayor Daley really say that, or was it a stunt to pull off an upset vote and swing the decision to South America.

I'm thinking it was the latter.

Stay Tuned.

2016 Olympics: STUNNING - Chicago lose in first round of voting

More at Zennie62.com | Follow me on Twitter! | Get my widget! | Visit YouTube | Visit UShow.com

UPDATE: Tokyo eliminated from the Olympics bid

The news is like a brick hitting one on the head. In the 2016 Olympics vote today, it was announced by IOC President Jacques Rogge that Chicago "having received the least amount of votes" was eliminated from the running for the 2016 Olympics.

Forget Obama or anyone else, count me as stunned and disappointed. The bid was considered to be the front-runner, so just what happened I don't know. Politics? Yes.

Or, as my Mom's friend put it, they - the IOC - didn't want Obama to have the victory because he's not "for the rich" and points to the health care issue as an example.

But I don't think that was the case; I think it was media organizations like CNN constantly pushing Chicago's crime problem right before the vote today. CNN should be ashamed.

I really feel bad about this one; it's like rooting for the Cubs in the playoffs. We need to find Steve Bartman.

2016 Olympics: Obama appearance in Copenhagen boosts Chicago's chances for win

More at Zennie62.com | Follow me on Twitter! | Get my widget! | Visit YouTube | Visit UShow.com

UPDATE: Chicago's stunning loss; Mayor Daley to blame?

Twitter updates: InsideTheGames.biz on Twitter and GameBids.org on Twitter

Olympic bid Forum: GameBids.com Forum

Today, in just a few hours, the International Olympic Committee will determine which city wins the right to host the 2016 Olympics: Chicago, Tokyo, Rio, Madrid, and Tokyo.




According to GameBids.com, which tracks the progress of Olympic bids, President Obama's decision to appear in Copenhagen and give a speech to the IOC was boosted Chicago's chances for winning. This is part of Obama's speech:



GameBids.com's BidIndex was changed to include Obama's impact, causing Chicago's score to increase to 61.24, just behind the 61.42 for Rio. It's a tight race, but GameBids forgot about Michelle Obama' and this impassioned speech.



Mrs. Obama's speech, focusing on her father, is just beautiful. Really something. I think it's the difference-maker.

This is the first time in Olympic bidding history that both the President of The United States and the First Lady of The United States gave speeches in support of an Olympics bid.

As one born and raised in Chicago for much of my young life, and who has family there, I would love to see "The City With the Big Shoulders" get the Olympics. Chicago teaches one to think big and to see possibilities. That city made me and it never left me even as we moved to Oakland, Ca, which I see as very much like Chicago.

This is Chicago's 2016 Olympics video:



And this is Chicago's presentation in Milan earlier this year:


Moreover, the Summer Olympics are long overdue for a return to America. The last time was 13 years ago in 1996 in Atlanta, and that was a true success. In our poor economy, at this time, it woulc be a massive shot in the self-esteem arm to get the games.

IOC Olympics voting process


According to GameBids.com, this is how the voting process will work:
Each city will give final presentations to the voting International Olympic Committee members. The drawn order of the presentations is Chicago, Tokyo, Rio and Madrid. Each city will have 70 minutes including a period for questions and answers.


Chicago will present at 8:45 AM Tokyo will follow at 10:45 AM. Next is Rio de Janeiro at 12:05 PM, then Madrid at 2:15 PM.


After the presentations, the Evaluation Commission will review their report with the IOC members.


Voting will commence a 5:10 PM local time in Copenhagen - it will be by secret electronic balloting.


Any city requires 50% +1 votes to win a ballot. If no city receives enough votes to win, the bid with the least amount of votes is dropped from the ballot and the remaining cities are added to a new ballot. There could be as many as three ballots.


There are currently 106 IOC members. Members representing countries with a bid city on the ballot may not vote. There are two members from the United States, two from Japan, two from Brazil and one from Spain. These members may vote in subsequent ballots if their city is eliminated.


There is one suspended member who may not vote and the IOC President Jacques Rogge will not vote. In total, there are 97 eligible votes on the first ballot. This number may be reduced if any voters are excused.


If there is a tie vote on he final ballot - the IOC President can cast a tie-breaking vote.


After each ballot the IOC President will announce either that a winner has been declared or he will name the city that is eliminated from the next ballot. After the final ballot, the name of the winning city is sealed until the annoucement ceremony at 6:30 PM local time.


After the announcement, the host city contract signing will folllow at 7:30 PM.

Games good for America


To me, opposing the games for America is just plain un-American, a tag that could rightly be put on conservatives like Glen Beck, Sean Hannity and Michelle Malkin, who really want to see President Obama fail, and would obviously undercut America's best interests to make that happen.

I'm not saying they can't have an opinion, but why go against America when its competing around the World for the Olympics? If Bush was headed over there, they'd be all for the Olympics, and they know it.

You can't claim to love your country and do what they're doing. When it matters most, America needs all hands on deck. Beck, Malkin, and Hannity know nothing of urban planning or public sector economics to make an informed comment about Olympic bids. As one who's formed the bid to bring the 2005 Super Bowl to Oakland, I do. Their opposition is purely political.


Go Chicago! Go USA!

Thursday, October 01, 2009

Oakland Raiders vs. Houston Texans Preview - CBS' Pat Kirwan on JaMarcus Russell

More at Zennie62.com | Follow me on Twitter! | Get my widget! | Visit YouTube | Visit UShow.com

NFL.com and CBS Sports Pat Kirwan knows his football and since we meet at the 2006 NFL Draft..



..I've had a number of personal conversations on everything from Vince Young and the Spread Offense to then-New England Offensive Coordinator and now Denver Broncos' Head Coach Josh McDaniels passing attack. I don't always agree with Pat and today's another example of why.

Pat's views on the upcoming Raiders v. Texans game are below:



Kirwan's comment that the Raiders..

JaMarcus Russell is struggling as much and they're trying to protect him and they're very sensitive about what anyone says about him. But I said as much when I went to camp and I'll say it again, the guy was not making decisions fast enough to have an effective passing attack.

Where I totally disagree with Pat is that he focuses on JaMarcus Russell rather than how he's coached and the design of the passing game. Maybe it's the rule of one coach (as Pat has been) not criticizing another coach, or something. But my issue is with the Raiders passing attack design, which I've discussed before.

In other words, any quarterback would struggle in that system.

I also take issue with Pat's look at the Texans. Pay says they can't stop the pass. The Houston Texans have one problem: they can't stop the run and haven't been able to since preseason which means its a scheme problem. They averaged 5 yards a carry on defenseagainst Jacksonville last Sunday; with stats like that, the Raiders won't have to worry about JaMarcus Russell, they'll just hand off.

My prediction: Raiders 20, Texans 17.