Reports today suggest that the Denver Broncos have contacted the Philadelphia Eagles about a trade for Donovan Mcnabb. What does this mean for Kyle Orton and the Broncos?
If the rumours are true, firstly it should be noted that the Bills and Browns are also in the mix, as they are the other teams mentioned. This means that there's no guarantee by any means that either the Eagles would trade him only to the Broncos, or that McNabb would agree with Denver over Buffalo or Cleveland. However, one thing it does show is that the Broncos themselevs are not sold on Kyle Orton for next season.
Orton is a restricted free agent who the Broncos would likely be happy to keep him around at the right price. One option that will not be available for the Broncos is to place the lowest tender on Orton (around $1.01m) , for which they would have received a 4th round pick as compensation if he signed for another team. That would be relatively likely considering Orton's demonstration at the beginning of last season and in his initial stint in Chicago that he can win games in the NFL. Unfortunately, although Orton's basic salary was only scheduled to be $620,000 in 2009, he met playing time and performance incentives which mean he will likely have to be given a higher tender to meet the rule that stipulates a player in RFA must be offered a tender of 110% of his last year's salary.
A more realistic option is the higher tender of $1.54m which would net the Broncos a 2nd round pick in compensation. There is no telling what the market would be if that was the case, primarily because although he would be a good short term option for the price, the uncertainty over the potential work stoppage in 2011 may make teams wary of offering a player a long term deal in an unstable market. Remember that for Orton to move, he has to either believe that he will start in his new city, or have the long term security of a new deal. If one of the two is not in place, he could choose to hang around in Denver, even if they have moved for another QB, as he will be eligible for unrestricted free agency - and a much bigger payday - in 2011.
Some Broncos fans were sold on Orton as a franchise QB after the team's strong start this year, but the crushing disappointment of missing the playoffs after such promise has clearly left questions amongst those who are actually making the decisions. Coach Josh McDaniels attempted to swing a deal for Matt Cassel before he joined Kansas City, and he has already traded away Jay Cutler - who arguably has a great deal more talent than Orton ever will. None of this shows mych willingness on the part of the team to lock Orton up long term, and realistically that could well be the pivotal point. Orton has played almost his whole 5 year career on a tiny wage compared to what he could realitsically expect from a multi-year deal, so I would expect that even if the prospects of starting are not greatly enhanced, the increased security would be attractive for him.
One thing we can now do is chalk Denver up on the list of teams that would be interested in adding a QB at some point this offseason. I mentioned a few weeks ago that I had a list of 17 teams that would be interested in potentially be in the market for either a starter or a backup via free agency or the draft. Some are obvious (Oakland, St Louis) whilst others are dependent on a current member of the roster retiring (New Orleans, Minnesota).
There are other combinations of circumstance that could lead teams to look for a new signal caller this year, but at the very least it looks like Denver are looking for an upgrade.
Monday 8 February 2010
Saturday 6 February 2010
Snowstorm during Super Bowl week hits New York
I've long campaigned that playing the Super Bowl only in domed or warm weather climates detracts from the character of the greatest show on earth.
Think of some of the more iconic moments in the NFL over the years, and some of the greatest images come from games where the elements have come into play. From the great Bears-Packers rivalry that regularly features games below freezing, the AFC championship game between Indianapolis and New England in 2003 in the snow, and the now infamous 'tuck rule' game between the Patriots and Oakland in 2002. Hey, even Santa getting pelted with snowballs in Philadelphia - it was all part of the game, and when you watch a retrospective on any of these moments, the weather simply adds to the memories.
The NFL insists that to host a superbowl, the city must have an average temperature of 50 degrees or more - or else be played in a dome. Whilst I don't have a problem with common sense being applied, it seems a shame that so many stadiums are automatically disqualified from selection on the grounds of their location. Ok, so playing in Lambeau or Soldier Field may be a stretch in February. We all know that secretly even the Packers and Bears players would rather be in a warmer climate, but it annoys me that other cities with more moderate weather are also excluded from the list.
The most obvious example would be Kansas City, who were forced to withdraw their bid to host the Super Bowl in 2015 because Arrowhead does not have a roof, and Jackson County narrowly denied the Chiefs funding to build one in time. The temperature in Missouri at this time of year is not particularly helpful to the cause, but should that prohibit a team from hosting the game? In my view, no.
New York (or New Jersey if we are going to be pedantic) is the next city to try it's luck at a Superbowl, with the new Giants/Jets stadium widely expected to bid for the big game in 2014 or 2015. There has been a massive investment in new stadia in the league in recent years, and the idea of Jerry Jones showcasing his new stadium in Dallas whilst the home of the Giants and Jets goes without is not something that sits well with those who have funded the plan.
Unfortunately, with no roof in place, the stadium faces an uphill struggle to convince the league that it is capable of hosting a superbowl with no disruption from inclement weather in the area. The problem is not just on the field, but the logistical issues that could arise in the event of a freak snowstorm on the east coast.
One such as hit yesterday, and is expected to hit New York today?
The timing could not be worse, coming as it does at the crucial point where the majority of fans will be arriving in the host city for the weekend. Of course, in my view, some snow should not detract from the bid, but an epic storm of this scale cannot help but place another element of doubt in the owners' minds that their biggest showcase event could become a farce - or even worse, be postponed - if New York hosts the game. Even the smallest amount of chance will likely count heavily against northern stadiums, so unfortunately, I don't envisage any situation where the league allows a cold weather city to host the game outdoors in the near future.
Not unless there's an awful lot of money changing hands somewhere...
Think of some of the more iconic moments in the NFL over the years, and some of the greatest images come from games where the elements have come into play. From the great Bears-Packers rivalry that regularly features games below freezing, the AFC championship game between Indianapolis and New England in 2003 in the snow, and the now infamous 'tuck rule' game between the Patriots and Oakland in 2002. Hey, even Santa getting pelted with snowballs in Philadelphia - it was all part of the game, and when you watch a retrospective on any of these moments, the weather simply adds to the memories.
The NFL insists that to host a superbowl, the city must have an average temperature of 50 degrees or more - or else be played in a dome. Whilst I don't have a problem with common sense being applied, it seems a shame that so many stadiums are automatically disqualified from selection on the grounds of their location. Ok, so playing in Lambeau or Soldier Field may be a stretch in February. We all know that secretly even the Packers and Bears players would rather be in a warmer climate, but it annoys me that other cities with more moderate weather are also excluded from the list.
The most obvious example would be Kansas City, who were forced to withdraw their bid to host the Super Bowl in 2015 because Arrowhead does not have a roof, and Jackson County narrowly denied the Chiefs funding to build one in time. The temperature in Missouri at this time of year is not particularly helpful to the cause, but should that prohibit a team from hosting the game? In my view, no.
New York (or New Jersey if we are going to be pedantic) is the next city to try it's luck at a Superbowl, with the new Giants/Jets stadium widely expected to bid for the big game in 2014 or 2015. There has been a massive investment in new stadia in the league in recent years, and the idea of Jerry Jones showcasing his new stadium in Dallas whilst the home of the Giants and Jets goes without is not something that sits well with those who have funded the plan.
Unfortunately, with no roof in place, the stadium faces an uphill struggle to convince the league that it is capable of hosting a superbowl with no disruption from inclement weather in the area. The problem is not just on the field, but the logistical issues that could arise in the event of a freak snowstorm on the east coast.
One such as hit yesterday, and is expected to hit New York today?
The timing could not be worse, coming as it does at the crucial point where the majority of fans will be arriving in the host city for the weekend. Of course, in my view, some snow should not detract from the bid, but an epic storm of this scale cannot help but place another element of doubt in the owners' minds that their biggest showcase event could become a farce - or even worse, be postponed - if New York hosts the game. Even the smallest amount of chance will likely count heavily against northern stadiums, so unfortunately, I don't envisage any situation where the league allows a cold weather city to host the game outdoors in the near future.
Not unless there's an awful lot of money changing hands somewhere...
Tuesday 2 February 2010
Bush faces the career crossroads on Sunday
Super Bowl XLIV on Sunday will be the biggest sporting event in New Orleans history, but for one player, it will also define his career path, and possibly his legacy in the city.
The Saints have a decision to make at some point this offseason. Do they pay Reggie Bush, their number two overall pick in 2006 a whopping $8m salary next season, do they ask him to rework his contract, or do they cash in and trade him to a willing suitor in his former college coach, Pete Carroll? The good news for the Saints is that the decision rests more in what Bush does on Sunday than on his previous body of work.
Make no mistake about it, if Reggie Bush contributes in a meaningful way this Sunday, he will be back in the bayou next year. The Saints are a franchise rooted very much at the centre of their community, and it is difficult to see them parting ways with Bush if he is seen as a hero by the fans. If the Saints win, the party will last a long time, but when it is over, those tough business decisions may seem a little easier with the uncapped year ahead and fans idolising a player who helped bring the biggest prize of all to New Orleans.
Of course, in such a situation, the Saints would inevitably attempt to restructure the rookie contract Bush signed, but the big problem may be that Bush would hold all of the leverage, and by playing chicken with the team, he would win that battle.
If, on the other hand, Bush is anonymous in a Saints loss, or even has a bad game and the team wins, the boot is well and truly on the other foot. Is he a bust? Not quite. he's unconventional for his position and draft slot, but he has contributed in his own fashion over the last few years. There's no doubt that he shows flashes of brilliance and changes games occasionally with a burst of speed, but until the divisional playoffs, Bush had shown little sign of being able to run between the tackles or carry much of a load from the backfield.
The truth is he just doesn't fit the mould, and rather like Josh Cribbs, that makes his contribution very difficult to evaluate. Fans may love Cribbs as a return man, but he wants to be paid as a wide receiver. Similarly, Bush is great catching swing passes and screens out of the backfield, or running back punts, but he was drafted as a running back second overall. You don't pay that type of player $8m unless he is guaranteed to contribute in more conventional terms over the course of your season. The harsh reality of business in the NFL is that you can get paid better as an average player who contributes no big plays but plays a traditional role in an offence, than a dynamic player who's value varies from team to team.
The general consensus is that at some point Carroll will look to upgrade the running back position in Seattle, and that New Orleans may be his first port of call if he believes he can swing a trade for the guy he coached at USC. If not Carroll though, who will take Bush? There will be suitors, but how many of them will pay him the $8m? That is why Sunday matters so much. It will either strengthen or weaken the market that he will use as leverage this season. Play well, and Bush can stay in New Orleans and bask in the adulation for a few more years on money that the fans will be happy to see him take. Play badly and he could be looking at a trade to whoever is desperate enough to risk big money on a player who has shown he can't carry the load. Those teams don't tend to be among the perennial contenders...
Reggie Bush enters the biggest game of his career on Sunday - in every sense.
The Saints have a decision to make at some point this offseason. Do they pay Reggie Bush, their number two overall pick in 2006 a whopping $8m salary next season, do they ask him to rework his contract, or do they cash in and trade him to a willing suitor in his former college coach, Pete Carroll? The good news for the Saints is that the decision rests more in what Bush does on Sunday than on his previous body of work.
Make no mistake about it, if Reggie Bush contributes in a meaningful way this Sunday, he will be back in the bayou next year. The Saints are a franchise rooted very much at the centre of their community, and it is difficult to see them parting ways with Bush if he is seen as a hero by the fans. If the Saints win, the party will last a long time, but when it is over, those tough business decisions may seem a little easier with the uncapped year ahead and fans idolising a player who helped bring the biggest prize of all to New Orleans.
Of course, in such a situation, the Saints would inevitably attempt to restructure the rookie contract Bush signed, but the big problem may be that Bush would hold all of the leverage, and by playing chicken with the team, he would win that battle.
If, on the other hand, Bush is anonymous in a Saints loss, or even has a bad game and the team wins, the boot is well and truly on the other foot. Is he a bust? Not quite. he's unconventional for his position and draft slot, but he has contributed in his own fashion over the last few years. There's no doubt that he shows flashes of brilliance and changes games occasionally with a burst of speed, but until the divisional playoffs, Bush had shown little sign of being able to run between the tackles or carry much of a load from the backfield.
The truth is he just doesn't fit the mould, and rather like Josh Cribbs, that makes his contribution very difficult to evaluate. Fans may love Cribbs as a return man, but he wants to be paid as a wide receiver. Similarly, Bush is great catching swing passes and screens out of the backfield, or running back punts, but he was drafted as a running back second overall. You don't pay that type of player $8m unless he is guaranteed to contribute in more conventional terms over the course of your season. The harsh reality of business in the NFL is that you can get paid better as an average player who contributes no big plays but plays a traditional role in an offence, than a dynamic player who's value varies from team to team.
The general consensus is that at some point Carroll will look to upgrade the running back position in Seattle, and that New Orleans may be his first port of call if he believes he can swing a trade for the guy he coached at USC. If not Carroll though, who will take Bush? There will be suitors, but how many of them will pay him the $8m? That is why Sunday matters so much. It will either strengthen or weaken the market that he will use as leverage this season. Play well, and Bush can stay in New Orleans and bask in the adulation for a few more years on money that the fans will be happy to see him take. Play badly and he could be looking at a trade to whoever is desperate enough to risk big money on a player who has shown he can't carry the load. Those teams don't tend to be among the perennial contenders...
Reggie Bush enters the biggest game of his career on Sunday - in every sense.
Monday 1 February 2010
Pre-free agency team needs
If there's one thing that annoys me in life, it's mock drafts and the frenzy around them. I don't know if Ndamukong Suh will go to St. Louis no.1 overall, nobody does - even the Rams themselves. For now, let's just get a state of play for the 'top' three teams in the draft. These needs will change in the next few months as players are cut and free agents are signed, but they are still handy when evaluating which direction teams are likely to go both in free agency and the draft.
St. Louis Rams.
1: Defensive Tackle
2: Quarterback
3: Tight End
4: Guard
5: Cornerback
The Rams have pretty obvious needs. The interior linemen on both sides of the ball are average and need replacing this offseason if the team is to have any chance of winning next year. There are players with potential in both of those lines, but the weak links inside are hurting this team week in week out. Tight End is a perennial position of need, and I fully expect the Rams to be aggressive either in free agency or the draft at this position, especially as Randy McMichael - an average player at best - will likely not be re-signed.
Quarterback is more complicated. The top two consensus players in the draft would be Oklahoma's Sam Bradford and Notre Dame's Jimmy Clausen, but if they aren't sold enough on either to give them the big money at number one overall, maybe they'll take a chance on a project QB such as Tony Pike, who could well be ready to play at some point in 2010 should Marc Bulger either not return or play poorly.
If they don't address it through the draft, the QB free agency class is thin, with nobody the team could build a team around for more than a year or two. Perhaps Chad Pennington combined with a younger player in the draft may be the option that they settle for, or there is the intriguing option of trading for a player who has starting experience but may be available. Michael Vick is one of the few who are young enough to build a team around, though we all know that he comes with baggage. Apart from that the restricted players such as Kyle Orton, Jason Campbell and Kellen Clemens are all too patchy in their bodies of work to spend the necessary draft picks to prise them away from the tenders placed on them by their current teams.
Detroit Lions
1: Offensive Tackle
2: Defensive Tackle
3: Guard
4: Cornerback
5: Defensive End
The Lions need an offensive line desperately, and finding a guy to protect Matthew Stafford would be a sound investment. They also lack an interior rusher, which is a common theme for many of the teams at the top of this year's draft. I would class the need to partner a premier left tackle with your franchise QB as slightly higher than the need to find a big body on defence, but realistically both need to be addressed very soon. I don't see the Lions going for a veteran OT when they still have Jeff Backus, but I wouldn't be surprised if they looked at the restricted linemen that are currently slated to hit free agency.
Jahri Evans of the Saints is the standout guy who deserves to get paid this year as far as the guards go, and their are also good options at tackle in Donald Penn (Tampa), Jared Gaither (Baltimore) and Marcus McNeill (San Diego) who may be worth the compensation package that is needed to sign them as RFA's. All three have age on their side and experience in the league.
If I were to make that particular decision, I'd probably head down the route of getting an RFA in at tackle, and taking a Defensive lineman with the second overall pick. One of the crucial factors could be that many of the UFA DT's available this year are either better fits in a 3-4 scheme or they're likely to be franchise tagged by their current teams. The price for getting a player away from such a tag is too much for the Lions, who may well need every draft pick they've got as they try to rebuild from Matt Millen's era.
The secondary in Detroit deserves a quick mention too. They have been consistently one of the worst overall units in the last five years (see also: Kansas City receivers, Bears QB's) and they absolutely need an overhaul immediately. They are shambolic against the pass, and no amount of protection for Matt Stafford will stop teams scoring almost at will against this team. Louis Delmas was a start, but bringing in ageing or average veterans such as Philip Buchanon, Anthony Henry and Will James has simply compounded the problem. Eric Berry could solve their Strong Safety woes alongside Delmas, but I have to say that it's hard to put that need above the need for linemen.
Tampa Bay Buccaneers
1: Defensive Tackle
2: Wide Receiver
3: Defensive End
4: Offensive Tackle
5: Cornerback
The Bucs are not the worst team in the league by some stretch. A lot of their problems can be traced down to poor coaching and a lack of stability over the last few years. With Josh Freeman now pretty much entrenched as the starter and future of the team, look for better play without much addition next season. They lack true dominance on the defensive line, which as we all know was a hallmark of the Super Bowl winning team of 2002. They have never quite replaced Warren Sapp, Anthony McFarland, or Simeon Rice, so look for them to address either DT or DE with the number 3 pick overall. The draft is deep at those positions, and it would make more sense than trading for an established player with little to prove.
As mentioned previously, Donald Penn is an RFA, as is Jeremy Trueblood, so OT could become a position of huge need should the team lose both players. Of course, this is unlikely, but the team could still opt to address the position at some point this offseason and let one of those players leave if the right deal comes along.
The greatest position of need on offence is clearly at wide receiver, where Antonio Bryant spent much of the year injured after receiving the franchise tag in '09 and will likely leave in free agency. The roster looks like a WR graveyard, as Mark Bradley, Michael Clayton, Bryant and Maurice Stovall all attempt to prove themselves worthy of a big contract despite being first day picks at the start of their NFL careers. I think the Bucs could look to get a new player in to build chemistry with Freeman, though it should be noted that TE Kellen Winslow is as good a receiving TE as you will find in the game, so perhaps the team will attempt to retain Bryant if they don't like the very thin receivers in the draft and free agency.
St. Louis Rams.
1: Defensive Tackle
2: Quarterback
3: Tight End
4: Guard
5: Cornerback
The Rams have pretty obvious needs. The interior linemen on both sides of the ball are average and need replacing this offseason if the team is to have any chance of winning next year. There are players with potential in both of those lines, but the weak links inside are hurting this team week in week out. Tight End is a perennial position of need, and I fully expect the Rams to be aggressive either in free agency or the draft at this position, especially as Randy McMichael - an average player at best - will likely not be re-signed.
Quarterback is more complicated. The top two consensus players in the draft would be Oklahoma's Sam Bradford and Notre Dame's Jimmy Clausen, but if they aren't sold enough on either to give them the big money at number one overall, maybe they'll take a chance on a project QB such as Tony Pike, who could well be ready to play at some point in 2010 should Marc Bulger either not return or play poorly.
If they don't address it through the draft, the QB free agency class is thin, with nobody the team could build a team around for more than a year or two. Perhaps Chad Pennington combined with a younger player in the draft may be the option that they settle for, or there is the intriguing option of trading for a player who has starting experience but may be available. Michael Vick is one of the few who are young enough to build a team around, though we all know that he comes with baggage. Apart from that the restricted players such as Kyle Orton, Jason Campbell and Kellen Clemens are all too patchy in their bodies of work to spend the necessary draft picks to prise them away from the tenders placed on them by their current teams.
Detroit Lions
1: Offensive Tackle
2: Defensive Tackle
3: Guard
4: Cornerback
5: Defensive End
The Lions need an offensive line desperately, and finding a guy to protect Matthew Stafford would be a sound investment. They also lack an interior rusher, which is a common theme for many of the teams at the top of this year's draft. I would class the need to partner a premier left tackle with your franchise QB as slightly higher than the need to find a big body on defence, but realistically both need to be addressed very soon. I don't see the Lions going for a veteran OT when they still have Jeff Backus, but I wouldn't be surprised if they looked at the restricted linemen that are currently slated to hit free agency.
Jahri Evans of the Saints is the standout guy who deserves to get paid this year as far as the guards go, and their are also good options at tackle in Donald Penn (Tampa), Jared Gaither (Baltimore) and Marcus McNeill (San Diego) who may be worth the compensation package that is needed to sign them as RFA's. All three have age on their side and experience in the league.
If I were to make that particular decision, I'd probably head down the route of getting an RFA in at tackle, and taking a Defensive lineman with the second overall pick. One of the crucial factors could be that many of the UFA DT's available this year are either better fits in a 3-4 scheme or they're likely to be franchise tagged by their current teams. The price for getting a player away from such a tag is too much for the Lions, who may well need every draft pick they've got as they try to rebuild from Matt Millen's era.
The secondary in Detroit deserves a quick mention too. They have been consistently one of the worst overall units in the last five years (see also: Kansas City receivers, Bears QB's) and they absolutely need an overhaul immediately. They are shambolic against the pass, and no amount of protection for Matt Stafford will stop teams scoring almost at will against this team. Louis Delmas was a start, but bringing in ageing or average veterans such as Philip Buchanon, Anthony Henry and Will James has simply compounded the problem. Eric Berry could solve their Strong Safety woes alongside Delmas, but I have to say that it's hard to put that need above the need for linemen.
Tampa Bay Buccaneers
1: Defensive Tackle
2: Wide Receiver
3: Defensive End
4: Offensive Tackle
5: Cornerback
The Bucs are not the worst team in the league by some stretch. A lot of their problems can be traced down to poor coaching and a lack of stability over the last few years. With Josh Freeman now pretty much entrenched as the starter and future of the team, look for better play without much addition next season. They lack true dominance on the defensive line, which as we all know was a hallmark of the Super Bowl winning team of 2002. They have never quite replaced Warren Sapp, Anthony McFarland, or Simeon Rice, so look for them to address either DT or DE with the number 3 pick overall. The draft is deep at those positions, and it would make more sense than trading for an established player with little to prove.
As mentioned previously, Donald Penn is an RFA, as is Jeremy Trueblood, so OT could become a position of huge need should the team lose both players. Of course, this is unlikely, but the team could still opt to address the position at some point this offseason and let one of those players leave if the right deal comes along.
The greatest position of need on offence is clearly at wide receiver, where Antonio Bryant spent much of the year injured after receiving the franchise tag in '09 and will likely leave in free agency. The roster looks like a WR graveyard, as Mark Bradley, Michael Clayton, Bryant and Maurice Stovall all attempt to prove themselves worthy of a big contract despite being first day picks at the start of their NFL careers. I think the Bucs could look to get a new player in to build chemistry with Freeman, though it should be noted that TE Kellen Winslow is as good a receiving TE as you will find in the game, so perhaps the team will attempt to retain Bryant if they don't like the very thin receivers in the draft and free agency.
Breaking down Superbowl XLIV
Well I've batted at .500 since Wild Card weekend, but I most certainly can't do that this week, as there's only one game - and it's the one that matters most. New Orleans and Indianapolis travel to Miami for Superbowl XLIV. Let's take a look at some key factors affecting the game this week.
The Quarterbacks
Yes, it's official: The entire world loves Drew Brees. The New Orleans QB is so likeable that it really is hard not to root for him and the team in which he has made such a huge commitment. He is a model of how a player should deal with the 'business' side of the game, reciprocating the financial ties that the Saints forged by signing him in 2006 by devoting so much of his life to the New Orleans area. You sense that Brees looks likely to see out his career in New Orleans, one way or another.
Of course, if he wants an example of the kind of respect Louisiana has for it's favoured sons, then he can do worse than looking to his opposite number Peyton Manning's father, Archie, who led the Saints through their turbulent growing pains in the 70's. Despite his losing record and self-effacing view of his career, he is regarded as a Saints legend, and whatever happens on Sunday, it's no stretch to say that Drew Brees will join him in that all too small circle.
Peyton himself needs no hype, no introduction. The Colts' offence revolves around his decision-making and ability to read defences, so if he's on song, there is not a defence in the league that can stop him for a full game.
You have to give Manning the edge in this battle, but it is not black and white. Brees is knocking on the door of greatness himself, and I believe that he will be a hall of fame QB if he wins the big one this year. His numbers are actually not far away from Manning's, and with the exception of one year (2003) he has proved himself amongst the elite players in the league. If all that is missing is a ring, then expect a fully focused and more intense than ever Drew Brees this weekend.
Offensive weapons
Here's a key factor: Will the Saints attempt to run against the Colts, or are we looking at another potential shootout as both teams attempt to throw their way into the end zone? The dearth of receiving talent in this game is astounding. Reggie Wayne, Dallas Clark, Marques Colston, Robert Meachem, Pierre Garçon, Austin Collie, Jeremy Shockey, Lance Moore, Deverey Henderson... the list goes on. Even fringe players such as Saints tight end David Thomas are reliable receiving talents, so don't be surprised to see both teams come out throwing.
I think an interesting conundrum for the Saints is how heavily to emphasise the rush. There has been a lot made of how the Saints should play defensively, but in reality, their play may be dictated by what the Colts do. On the offensive side of the ball though, the Saints have a big advantage in that when they choose to, they can run with far more effectiveness than the Colts can. It should be noted that neither defence is very good against the run, so I like the idea of the Saints getting Pierre Thomas and perhaps Mike Bell involved early.
For the Colts, there is no doubt that the running game is a situational tool. No Colts RB has broken 100yds this season, so don't expect them to drastically change their mindset for this game. Dallas Clark is the player who I feel the Colts have gotten away from in recent weeks and I would like to see them get him involved early and often. Teams seem to be game planning more for Clark now than they did in the regular season, so the question is whether you go with experienced guys like Clark and Reggie Wayne, or continue to ride the hot hands in Collie and Garçon.
The Defences
In many ways the Saints and the Colts are relatively similar as far as how their defences are perceived. I think both have huge holes that can be taken advantage of, yet both manage to come up on just the right side of big games thanks to their playmaking ability. Both teams have savvy veterans and have improved on their traditional frailties, but I consider it somewhat of a falsehood that these are two defences are playing to a particularly high level.
Neither team is impressive against the run or the pass, and the recent weaknesses (The Saints against the pass, the Colts against the run) still remain. I think interestingly they face probably the worst teams they could hope to come up against, in that the players matched up against their weakest facets are quite capable of exploiting them at will.
I loved what the Saints did against the Vikings. I haven't seen a QB look so genuinely shell-shocked since... well whenever the last time I watched Detroit play was. Really though, that was excellently implemented by a team that knows if it allows a player to sit in the pocket, they are not capable of stopping the passing game. Will they go after Manning in the same way? Of course, and it will be the ultimate game of chicken. Can the Saints get there before Manning exploits the gaps they have left, or will they fall just short and allow him to beat them with a quick out to some of the best route runners in the league?
My money is on Manning. Favre was pretty close to doing exactly that last week, and my gut tells me that just as the Saints seemed to tire and become slightly more conservative when the game hinged on them maintaining the pressure that got them a lead, the same could well happen in Miami. The Colts - despite their anaemic rushing attack - will be sure to hold onto the ball after seeing the Vikings come within a whisker of beating the Saints, despite coughing the ball up more times than Victoria Beckham's dinner.
If Gregg Williams has any sense, he will make sure that there is no let up in the defensive strategy and that the team doesn't become over-awed by the fact they are playing against Manning and the Colts.
Prediction
I hate predictions. Do you ever make predictions because you feel like the points you've made are somehow invalid if you don't guess the outcome correctly? It goes back to my feelings about the draft. If a player goes in the first round, but you had him pegged as a third round talent, does that make him a first round talent? Only time can tell you that, but it doesn't mean that either side is 'wrong' per sé.
My suggestion is for you to enjoy what I believe will be more than a match for the excellent Superbowls we've seen over the last couple of years. The last time two no.1 seeds made it this far was after the 1993 season when Buffalo played Dallas. It has become something of a trend that the playoffs throw up so many surprises that you rarely get the chance to see the two teams with the best records in the NFC and AFC face off in the Superbowl, so relish the prospect.
Not only have they made it to Miami, but both teams have managed to be successful without becoming disliked by the majority of opposing fans in the way that the Patriots and Cowboys perhaps polarise opinions. If you want something to root for, then root for Pierre Garçon and the people of Haiti, or root for Sean Payton's Saints and a franchise that needed literally and figuratively rebuilding when they arrived in New Orleans after Hurricane Katrina in 2006.
Me? I'm rooting for Drew Brees, not because of his friendly nature, his charisma, his quarterbacking ability, or his role in that rebuilding process... no, I'm going with the guy who suffers the same intolerance to wheat and gluten as me, a guy couldn't be in a Wheaties advert even if he tried.
The Quarterbacks
Yes, it's official: The entire world loves Drew Brees. The New Orleans QB is so likeable that it really is hard not to root for him and the team in which he has made such a huge commitment. He is a model of how a player should deal with the 'business' side of the game, reciprocating the financial ties that the Saints forged by signing him in 2006 by devoting so much of his life to the New Orleans area. You sense that Brees looks likely to see out his career in New Orleans, one way or another.
Of course, if he wants an example of the kind of respect Louisiana has for it's favoured sons, then he can do worse than looking to his opposite number Peyton Manning's father, Archie, who led the Saints through their turbulent growing pains in the 70's. Despite his losing record and self-effacing view of his career, he is regarded as a Saints legend, and whatever happens on Sunday, it's no stretch to say that Drew Brees will join him in that all too small circle.
Peyton himself needs no hype, no introduction. The Colts' offence revolves around his decision-making and ability to read defences, so if he's on song, there is not a defence in the league that can stop him for a full game.
You have to give Manning the edge in this battle, but it is not black and white. Brees is knocking on the door of greatness himself, and I believe that he will be a hall of fame QB if he wins the big one this year. His numbers are actually not far away from Manning's, and with the exception of one year (2003) he has proved himself amongst the elite players in the league. If all that is missing is a ring, then expect a fully focused and more intense than ever Drew Brees this weekend.
Offensive weapons
Here's a key factor: Will the Saints attempt to run against the Colts, or are we looking at another potential shootout as both teams attempt to throw their way into the end zone? The dearth of receiving talent in this game is astounding. Reggie Wayne, Dallas Clark, Marques Colston, Robert Meachem, Pierre Garçon, Austin Collie, Jeremy Shockey, Lance Moore, Deverey Henderson... the list goes on. Even fringe players such as Saints tight end David Thomas are reliable receiving talents, so don't be surprised to see both teams come out throwing.
I think an interesting conundrum for the Saints is how heavily to emphasise the rush. There has been a lot made of how the Saints should play defensively, but in reality, their play may be dictated by what the Colts do. On the offensive side of the ball though, the Saints have a big advantage in that when they choose to, they can run with far more effectiveness than the Colts can. It should be noted that neither defence is very good against the run, so I like the idea of the Saints getting Pierre Thomas and perhaps Mike Bell involved early.
For the Colts, there is no doubt that the running game is a situational tool. No Colts RB has broken 100yds this season, so don't expect them to drastically change their mindset for this game. Dallas Clark is the player who I feel the Colts have gotten away from in recent weeks and I would like to see them get him involved early and often. Teams seem to be game planning more for Clark now than they did in the regular season, so the question is whether you go with experienced guys like Clark and Reggie Wayne, or continue to ride the hot hands in Collie and Garçon.
The Defences
In many ways the Saints and the Colts are relatively similar as far as how their defences are perceived. I think both have huge holes that can be taken advantage of, yet both manage to come up on just the right side of big games thanks to their playmaking ability. Both teams have savvy veterans and have improved on their traditional frailties, but I consider it somewhat of a falsehood that these are two defences are playing to a particularly high level.
Neither team is impressive against the run or the pass, and the recent weaknesses (The Saints against the pass, the Colts against the run) still remain. I think interestingly they face probably the worst teams they could hope to come up against, in that the players matched up against their weakest facets are quite capable of exploiting them at will.
I loved what the Saints did against the Vikings. I haven't seen a QB look so genuinely shell-shocked since... well whenever the last time I watched Detroit play was. Really though, that was excellently implemented by a team that knows if it allows a player to sit in the pocket, they are not capable of stopping the passing game. Will they go after Manning in the same way? Of course, and it will be the ultimate game of chicken. Can the Saints get there before Manning exploits the gaps they have left, or will they fall just short and allow him to beat them with a quick out to some of the best route runners in the league?
My money is on Manning. Favre was pretty close to doing exactly that last week, and my gut tells me that just as the Saints seemed to tire and become slightly more conservative when the game hinged on them maintaining the pressure that got them a lead, the same could well happen in Miami. The Colts - despite their anaemic rushing attack - will be sure to hold onto the ball after seeing the Vikings come within a whisker of beating the Saints, despite coughing the ball up more times than Victoria Beckham's dinner.
If Gregg Williams has any sense, he will make sure that there is no let up in the defensive strategy and that the team doesn't become over-awed by the fact they are playing against Manning and the Colts.
Prediction
I hate predictions. Do you ever make predictions because you feel like the points you've made are somehow invalid if you don't guess the outcome correctly? It goes back to my feelings about the draft. If a player goes in the first round, but you had him pegged as a third round talent, does that make him a first round talent? Only time can tell you that, but it doesn't mean that either side is 'wrong' per sé.
My suggestion is for you to enjoy what I believe will be more than a match for the excellent Superbowls we've seen over the last couple of years. The last time two no.1 seeds made it this far was after the 1993 season when Buffalo played Dallas. It has become something of a trend that the playoffs throw up so many surprises that you rarely get the chance to see the two teams with the best records in the NFC and AFC face off in the Superbowl, so relish the prospect.
Not only have they made it to Miami, but both teams have managed to be successful without becoming disliked by the majority of opposing fans in the way that the Patriots and Cowboys perhaps polarise opinions. If you want something to root for, then root for Pierre Garçon and the people of Haiti, or root for Sean Payton's Saints and a franchise that needed literally and figuratively rebuilding when they arrived in New Orleans after Hurricane Katrina in 2006.
Me? I'm rooting for Drew Brees, not because of his friendly nature, his charisma, his quarterbacking ability, or his role in that rebuilding process... no, I'm going with the guy who suffers the same intolerance to wheat and gluten as me, a guy couldn't be in a Wheaties advert even if he tried.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
