No team in the history of the National Football League is as good as the 2007 New England Patriots, not by a longshot. No team's offense can match what Tom Brady, Randy Moss and these Pats can do. No team's defense can stop them. No tackle football team that has ever played a game together was as dominant as these guys, and no team in the foreseeable future has any chance of eclipsing them (possibly not even the Patriots themselves).


Moss has reasserted himself as the premier wide
receiver in the NFL

And I'll stand 100% firm behind this indisputable fact even if they lose a game this season.

Granted, there will always be controversy if the Patriots, say, lost one of their remaining regular season games with backup QB Matt Cassell mopping things up for Brady while he rests for the playoffs. If they don't win the Super Bowl (as of November 14th, they were 1/3 odds. By comparison, the 12-1 Cowboys are 7/2), almost nobody would grant them the title of "Best Team Ever." I'll be one. Crown them now; they're unstoppable.

The 1998 Minnesota Vikings currently hold the record for most points scored in a single season at 556. Through 13 games the Patriots have scored 503 and are on pace to absolutely shatter that record as they are on pace for a video game-esque 619 points of offense. Brady will likely break every major single season passing record known to man, including the coveted touchdown pass and quarterback rating records. Moss, who if he retired right now would go down as the second best receiver in NFL history and who also played for those '98 Vikings catching 17 touchdown passes as a rookie, is having the single best season of any wideout of all times. Moss's 1264 yards and 19 touchdowns are ridiculous. The offense is achieving these numbers even with no scarcity to injuries to their running backs.

Their defense currently ranks 3rd in the AFC and 4th overall in points allowed. Defensive studs such as Rodney Harrison (suspension), Richard Seymour, and Roosevelt Colvin (injuries) have missed time. Plus, their prized defensive free agent acquisition, Adalius Thomas, only has four sacks on the year.

The Pat's average margin of victory on the season, 21.7, would absolutely destroy the 1972 Dolphin's mark of 15.3.

The Patriots have faced a tough schedule too, playing in the strength of the AFC. Sure, the Jets and Dolphins play in their division and they only have 3 wins combined, but they've beaten the suddenly surging 7-6 Bills twice. They've gone on the road and beaten the 11-2 Colts and the 12-1 Cowboys. New England has also humiliated other AFC playoff contenders like the Chargers, Browns, and most recently, the Steelers.

The only real evidence I need though is to watch the games with my own eyes. The New England Patriots are the best football team I've ever seen play.

Every once in a while there is a moment in sports broadcasting that prompts us to beg the question.

What is with the celebrity appeal in sports broadcasts? 

The most recent Monday Night Football telecast on ESPN is the latest example.  The guest in the booth, comedian Jimmy Kimmel, made a smart alec retort directed towards former MNF analyst Joe Theismann. Whether or not Kimmel and Theismann have any kind of adverse history is unclear, but the point is a moot one.  Kimmel had no business being on the air in the first place.


If I want to laugh (or more like
contemplate suicide) I'll watch his
show.  Otherwise, keep him
away from my NFL games.

ESPN has had other "guest announcers" in recent Monday Night telecasts, including NBA Hall of Famer Charles Barkley and movie star and Chicago area meatball Jim Belushi.  I couldn't tell you what these folks add to the presentation or what the clowns who are in charge at ESPN were thinking when they invited them on, but I could tell you that most football fans could do without their irrelevant comments and opinions.


Chuck knows his basketball, but there's
no reason for him to spew his mouth
about the NFL

MNF on ESPN isn't the only culprit.  NBC had singer Pink doing their introductory song in 2006, but apparently ratings weren't high enough, so this year Faith Hill gets the honor.  Anybody who has watched a Super Bowl on any network knows there is almost as much hoopla made of the commercials and halftime show than there is about the game.

Fox is guilty too.  Raise your hand if your baseball intelligence is insulted by Scooter, the talking baseball who teaches us the physics of different pitches thrown by the starting pitcher.  In football, they have those ridiculous football playing robots and celebrity analysts giving predictions on the pre-game show. 

Every single network showing college and professional football games have decided that more people tune into their relay if a past-her-prime female who knows nothing about football updates us on coaches' halftime speeches and player's injuries.  The same occasionally is true for NBA games. 

The point of all this complaining is that fans watching the games are more annoyed by this than "turned on."  I'm not more likely to watch the upcoming Monday Night game between the Colts and Jaguars because I'm curious to know who the guest in the booth will be.  No, I'm going to watch the game because I want to see how Peyton Manning will fare against one of the top three defenses in the NFL and while playing on the road.  I'm going to watch because Maurice Jones-Drew is on my fantasy team.  I'm going to watch because I like football.  Period.  End of freakin' story.

In the absolute best case scenario, many fans are prone to mute the T.V. and/or listen to the play-by-play on the radio.  In the worst case, sports fans will watch "How I Met Your Mother." 

Getting back to ESPN and their Monday Night debacle, could anybody out there explain what Tony Kornheiser is supposed to bring to the table?  I enjoy him on "PTI," but he knows less about play-by-play than Mike Tirico and knows absolutely nothing about analyzing, so what are they paying him to do besides annoy listeners?

Here's hoping that one day networks will wake up and tailor their sports broadcasts to sports fans and not pray these promotional stunts grab the attention of people who don't care anyway.

The one NLDS series that is already set will pit the Chicago Cubs, who emerged from the heap of garbage that is the Central Division, against the Arizona Diamondbacks, the surprising winner of the West.  Neither team really deserves to be there.

The Cubs, who finished the season with a .525 winning percentage (85-77) played in statistically one of the worst divisions in Major League history.  The five teams that the Cubs beat out to win their division combined to finish 62 games under .500.  Playing against these pitiful excuses for baseball teams, they only managed a 45-34 record.  They went 8-4 in interleague play (which includes 5-1 against the awful White Sox), which means their record against other National League teams was only 32-39 (In case you're wondering, they went 2-4 against Arizona in 2007).


Arizona used magic to win the West

The Diamondbacks won 90 games and went 50-31 at home this year.  However, they were actually outscored 732 to 712 for the entire season.  Using the Pythagorean W-L on baseball-reference.com, they should have finished the year with a 79-83 record, an 11-game swing which would have put them in 4th place.


The Cubs bullied on terrible teams to win the Central

Predictions and Analysis

These are some remarkable statistics against two playoff teams.  They'll play against each other in the first round, and Game 1 starts Wednesday at Chase Field in Arizona.  Given the D'backs exceptional home record and their home field advantage for the series, my pick is for Arizona.  I believe that the Cub's decision to leave Jason Marquis off the playoff roster will be a costly mistake.  Manager Lou Piniella has stated that he'll use a 3-man starting rotation of Carlos Zambrano, Ted Lilly, and Rich Hill, which I agree with.  However, I am a big proponent of using the end of the rotation starters as long relief men in the playoffs.  If Zambrano or Lilly get roughed up and leave the game early, one of the first few games goes into extra innings (say 14 or 15), or if they have an injury to one of those three starters, they are in serious trouble.  Instead of taking Marquis as an insurance policy, they'll put three catchers on the roster.  I don't understand that move.  Neither Giavani Soto nor Henry Blanco will able to contain Arizona's running game and Brandon Webb will shut down the Cub's offense in Game 1, and Arizona will advance to the NLCS.

But they won't deserve to be there, either.

The Chicago Cubs are potentially on the verge of adding yet another chapter to the book of historical misery; a book of colossal collapses; a book of terribly bad luck.  As of press time (I've always wanted to say that!) the Cubs have lost 3 in a row to the last place Florida Marlins and sit 1.5 games ahead of the Milwaukee Brewers in the N.L. Central Division.  No team since 1962 has blown a lead of more than three games with a week to play in the season (Chicago's lead was 3.5 at week's beginning).

For the record, I do believe the Cubs will hold on to the lead and make the playoffs.  But if I'm wrong and the Brewers should come back, Cub Nation shouldn't consider this as one of the worst moments in franchise history. 

This is the team, after all, that in 1969 led the division by 8.5 games on August 14th and went on to miss the playoffs.  In 1984 the Cubs won the first two games of the NLCS and then dropped the next three to the Padres.  They eventually lost the Series in 7 and held a lead in games 3-5 prior to losing.  In 1998 the Cubs won a one-game, tie-breaking playoff over the Mets only to get demolished by the Giants in the first round of the playoffs.  2003?  Anybody ever heard of Steve Bartman?  They led the NLCS 3-1 over the Marlins, had arguably the two best pitchers in the National League, Mark Prior and Kerry Wood, pitching in Games 6 and 7, at home, and still lost in 7 games.  The next year, they went on a run after acquiring Nomar Garciaparra at the trade deadline, and led the Wild Card race in September before bowing out in heart wrenching fashion.  History has not been friendly to the team playing at the "Friendly Confines."

But enough sob stories.  Missing the playoffs in 2007 would hurt, there is no denying that.  But it's a bruise, not a gunshot wound. 

Those Cub's teams in the past had potential.  The Cubs circa 2007 are playing in a pathetic division, and can still manage to barely stay alive in the division race.  Here's an astonishing statistic:  The opponents the Cubs have faced in their own division this year (Milwaukee, Houston, Pittsburgh, Cincinnati, and St. Louis) are a dismal 73 combined games under .500.  Any team worthy of making the playoffs would have clinched 3 weeks ago playing against that (lack of) competition. 

At the risk of using politically incorrect analogies, winning the 2007 N.L. Central is akin to being the tallest midget.  Heck, might as well be the smartest retard. 

That may have crossed the line, but that just goes to tell you how sad this Cubs team is.

Even if they make the playoffs, they'll win no more than 1 game in the Divisional round.  They'll be on the road, most likely facing the Diamondbacks who are a league best 50-31 at home. 

Had the Cubs played in any other division, not only would they have never stood a chance to make the postseason, but their record would have reflected the below average team they are.   Playing against actual Major League teams, a .480 winning percentage would have been likely.  If/When the Cubs play their first playoff game, they should be viewed as a below average and underachieving,  yet very lucky,  team, not a division champion.

They don't stand a chance of making the World Series.  Sure, you can point to the 2006 Cardinals and say that anything can happen once you make it to the playoffs.  But last year was the exception for the ages.  It was the first time in my lifetime that I can legitimately say that the best team didn't win.  The odds are severely stacked against them.  And the Brewers too, for that matter, if they overtake their southern I-94 rival. 

So, Cubs fans.  If your team should disappoint you yet again, you can look back at the season and say "Well, they wouldn't have done anything with the opportunity anyway."

2007 NFL Predictions

+Denotes Home Field Advantage
**Denotes First Round bye
* Denotes Wild Card

AFC
East
New England (13-3)+
New York (9-7)
Buffalo (6-10)
Miami (4-12)

North
Cincinnati (10-6)
Baltimore (10-6)*
Pittsburgh (7-9)
Cleveland (6-10)

South
Indianapolis (11-5) **
Jacksonville (9-7) *
Tennessee (6-10)
Houston (6-10)

West
Denver (10-6)
San Diego (9-7) explanation
Kansas City (7-9)
Oakland (7-9)

NFC
East
Philadelphia (10-6)
Dallas (9-7) *
New York (6-10)
Washington (6-10)

North
Chicago (13-3)**
Detroit (7-9)
Green Bay (7-9)
Minnesota (4-12)

South
New Orleans (13-3) +
Carolina (10-6) *
Tampa Bay (6-10)
Atlanta (5-11)

West
San Fransisco (9-7)
Seattle (9-7)
St. Louis (8-8)
Arizona (7-9)

Playoffs

Wild Card Round
Cincinnatti over Jacksonville
Baltimore over Denver
Carolina over San Fransisco
Philadelphia over Dallas

Divisional Round
Cincinnatti over Indianapolis
New England over Denver
Chicago over Philadelphia
New Orleans over Carolina

Conference Championships
New England over Cincinnatti
New Orleans over Chicago

Super Bowl
New England over New Orleans

Individual Stats
AFC Offensive MVP: Peyton Manning
AFC Defensive MVP: Adalius Thomas
NFC Offensive MVP: Drew Brees
NFC Defensive MVP: Brian Urlacher
Rookie of the Year: Calvin Johnson
Coach of the Year: Sean Payton
Declining Player (the long time good player who finally starts to show his age): Zach Thomas
Best off-season pickup: Randy Moss, Patriots
Worst off-season pickup: Norv Turner, Chargers
Rising Star: Reggie Bush

Most Passing Yards: Drew Brees
Most Rushing Yards: LaDanian Tomlinson
Most Recieving Yards: Torry Holt
Most Sacks: Shawne Merriman

Check out my 2006 predictions. I didn't do too bad!