With a little more information now than in my previous blog post on this very topic, I have altered a few things in the predictions for the NFC West in the 2008 NFL season.  Some things, however, have not changed:

1 - The Seattle Seahawks (11-5) will win the division for the fifth straight season, an accomplishment only the New England Patriots and Indianapolis Colts can also currently claim

2 - The Arizona Cardinals (8-8 or 9-7) will finish 2nd in the NFC West

3 - The St. Louis Rams (6-10) are awful on the defensive side of the ball, perhaps the worst all-around defense in the NFC

4 - The San Francisco 49ers (6-10) are awful on BOTH sides of the ball

Under normal circumstances, any time a team makes a significant change at the quarterback position, one must re-review the team's personnel to see if a significant change in overall team performance will take place.

ARI: Three months ago, Im picked Arizona and the New Orleans Saints as my NFC sleeper picks.  As things stand right now, Matt Leinart is supposed to be the future of the Cardinals' offense.  Unfortunately for him, his "backup" is former Super Bowl MVP Kurt Warner, he of the leader of the "Greatest Show On Turf".  Now that Warner has been named the starter, I think 9-7 is a fair and solid prediction for the Cardinals in 2008.  8-8 seems a little low for this club without the inexperienced Leinart at QB, and Warner brings a toughness and grit to the offense.  Anquan Boldin's little contract dispute likely won't be much of a distraction for the team, as he and Larry Fitzgerald pair up to make perhaps the most explosive and potent WR duo in the NFC.  Defensively, Arizona looks pretty good, but they still need to be able to keep the offense going so the defensive starters can get better rest.  This team is close, but not quite there yet.  2009 might be their year to shine, however Matt Leinart really needs to step up and show why he was drafted by the Cardinals.  PREDICTION: 9-7, 2nd in NFC West, no playoffs

STL: Marc Bulger and Steven Jackson are healthy, and that will be a huge plus for this franchise that managed a 3-13 record in 2007.  Will their health, however, be enough to overcome a porous defense?  Well, somewhat, but not enough so as to make them a legitimate postseason sleeper or contender.  Isaac Bruce is gone, Torry Holt has lost a half-step, and Bulger is coming off a very difficult season that saw him miss time during two separate stints.  Bulger wasn't bad - his 70.3 rating was the lowest in his six-season career - but he offered little vision for the future when he was healthy.  For him to return to his 2004-2006 form, Jackson must remain healthy, the offensive line must continue to improve (Bulger was sacked 37 times in just 11 games in 2007), and Drew Bennett and Dane Looker must remain healthy and productive.  Defensively, this franchise is in deep trouble - no one on the depth chart strikes fear into anyone, and the defense has been largely ignored for what seems like an eternity.  Pairing this team's offensive capabilities with a better defense creates a much better club overall.  Sadly, this isn't fantasy football.  PREDICTION: 6-10, 3rd in NFC West, no playoffs

SF: 49ers coaches have found themselves in a tough spot: start the ever-unimpressive Alex Smith, the man with the $50 million contract, or... start J.T. O'Sullivan, Jon Kitna's former Detroit Lions backup that came over along with new Offensive Coordinator Mike Martz?  Martz has been behind O'Sullivan from day one, so if Smith feels slighted, he should - Head Coach Mike Nolan never went to bat for the man he hand-picked in the 2005 draft this offseason or training camp.  Maybe Nolan is feeling the pressure and wants to distance himself from the young man?  The 49ers ground game again figures to be solid, more reminiscent of the 2006 campaign.  Frank Gore is the starter, and DeShaun Foster (from Carolina) the new backup, and they form a good 1-2 punch out of the backfield.  This is Vernon Davis' year to put up or shut up, and the Niners are chock full of inexperienced wideouts with hopes of glory and an aging Isaac Bruce with the dream of one last push into the playoffs.  Unfortunately for them, it is not to be in 2008, as the defensive unit - as good as they can be - cannot make up for an ex-NFL Europe quarterback (O'Sullivan), an offensive coordinator (Martz) that ruined the St. Louis Rams and was well on his way in helping to further ruin the Detroit Lions before he bolted for the Bay Area.  PREDICTION: 6-10, 4th in NFC West, no playoffs

SEA: Julius Jones and T.J. Duckett were brought in to shore up the rushing attack, and as things are going thus far in the preseason, rookie Justin Forcett (California) is likely to beat out Duckett for playing time, perhaps even a roster spot.  Jones has been okay in the preseason, Duckett not good, and Forcett a firecracker.  But, the running game looks to hinge on one very unnoticed player on Seattle's roster: Maurice Morris.  Morris looks to have bulked up this past offseason, and he is hitting holes with authority and a strong stride - he may have a bit of a chip on his shoulder due to Jones and Duckett being signed to run the ball and never really being considered for full-time duties.  Even without former NFL MVP (2005) Shaun Alexander, Seattle still managed to lead all of their divisional opponents in rushing yards.  An improved running game will take a lot of pressure off Matt Hasselbeck, and he will be thankful for it, as Bobby Engram (94 receptions in 2007) is likely out until after the bye week (week 4) and Deion Branch (49 receptions in 2007) is trying to quickly return form offseason knee surgery.  The wildcard for the Seahawks is Nate Burleson, who picked up 50 catches and 9 touchdowns in 2007 after being thrust into a starting role when Branch went down with his injury (one of many).  Defensively, Seattle returns 10 of 11 starters from 2007.  The linebacking corps is top-three in the NFL, the secondary is energetic and provides the 2nd-best pass defense in the NFC, and the front line was bolstered with the draft-day additions of Red Bryant (Texas A&M) and Lawrence Jackson (USC).  PREDICTION: 11-5, NFC West Division Champions

... And Why The Seahawks Get Overlooked...

The New England Patriots, winners of three of the last five Super Bowls, have been awarded for their success with the easiest NFL 2008 schedule amongst all 32 teams.  Their opponents combined for a 2007 winning percentage of .387, by far the lowest opponents' winning rate in the league (San Diego gets opponents that amassed a .422 winning percentage in 2007).

Strangely, with all of the talk about how weak the NFC West is and has beeen, the AFC East and AFC West teams' combined strength of schedule are both .439, by far the easiest in the NFL (notables in parentheses).

AFC East: 450-574, .439 (New England - .387)

AFC West: 450-574, .439 (San Diego - .422)

AFC North: 574-449, .561 (Pittsburgh - .598)

AFC South: 576-448, .563 (Indianapolis - .594)

NFC East: 534-490, .521 (Dallas - .523)

NFC West: 490-534, .479 (Seattle - .479)

NFC North: 552-472, .539 (Minnesota - .551)

NFC South: 474-550, .463 (New Orleans - .449)

If NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell is going for parity, then he has a very long journey ahead of him in regards to the schedule.

New England only plays four division winners from 2007 - Seattle, Pittsburgh, San Diego and Indianapolis.  No NFC East or NFC North teams.  Only the Colts and the Steelers play in regularly-acknowledged tough divisions; San Diego gets the benefit of the weakest overall NFL division; Seattle plays in the NFC West, the 2nd weakest division in the NFC.

Talk about having an easy schedule.

Conversely, Pittsburgh - who won the AFC North in 2007 with a 10-6 mark - has a S.O.S. of .598, the biggest opponents' winning percentage in the NFL.  Indianapolis has the 2nd-toughest with a .594 opponents' 2007 mark to overcome.  Jacksonville and Minnesota, two teams expected to challenge for their division titles in 2008, have .559 and .551 opponents' marks, respectively.  Those four teams have the toughest S.O.S. to overcome, and New England and San Diego have the two easiest to march through.

The NFC West, however, has a combined S.O.S. mark of .479, the 5th-ranked divisional S.O.S. in the NFL - the AFC East, AFC West and NFC East all have lower S.O.S. ratings.

The Seattle Seahawks schedule includes the New York Giants, Dallas Cowboys, Green Bay Packers, Washington Redskins, New England Patriots, Indianapolis Colts and Tampa Bay Buccaneers, all NFL division winners from 2007 that combined for an 83-29 record in 2007 for a winning percentage of .741 - and the NFC West is weak?  If so, then why the difficult schedule?  Why is Seattle playing six of seven division winners if the NFC West is so weak?  Will national sports writers and so-called "NFL experts" relax on the weakness of the NFC West if Seattle survives their schedule to post a 10-6 or 11-5 mark in 2008?  No, Seattle doesn't have a particularly difficult schedule (.477 S.O.S.), but they do play some very good teams this season.

How do the Saint Louis Rams, 3-13 in 2007, get a tougher schedule (.488 S.O.S.) than division winners New England (.387), San Diego (.422), Seattle (.477) and Tampa Bay (.469)?  Why is Baltimore, 5-11 in 2007, saddled with the 4th-toughest NFL schedule in 2008 (.551 S.O.S.)?  The NFL has no parity, and the S.O.S. ratings prove that point beyond any shadow of any doubt.

NOTE: The Seattle Seahawks and Chicago Bears game Saturday night ended 29-26, Seattle winning in OT on Brandon Coutu's field goal.  In national press, Chicago was credited for scoring so many points against the Seahawks, who gave up the 3rd fewest total points (291) in the NFC last season.  But, let's take a closer look at the Bears' scoring, shall we?

The Bears' defense scored a safety (2 points), and interception returned for a touchdown (6 points) and a punt returned for a touchdown (6 points) - of the Bears' 26 points, 14 came from the defense, along with two extra points from the defensive TD's.  Seattle's defense allowed a total of 10 points and 205 total yards.  The Seahawks won - nay, dominated - the time of possession 39:31 to 23:57, almost a 2-to-1 margin.  Seattle allowed just 51 yards rushing on 20 carries for a 2.6 average for the Bears.  By contrast, Seattle outgained the Bears on the ground by 190 yards (241 total rushing yards) for a 5.4 yard average on 45 rushing attempts.

Anyone who watched the game saw a defensive struggle for 2-1/2 quarters - the score was 9-5 at halftime in favor of the Seahawks, fer crissakes.  And, anyone watching saw Rex Grossman fleeing for his life against a strong 4-man and 5-man pass rush for Seattle.

I give the Bears' backups and defense credit for making a good game out of what was an absolute snooze-fest for the first 38 minutes of regulation.  Beyond that, however, the Bears got outplayed, out maneuvered, out coached, and out classed by a superior Seahawks squad.

Well, folks, the end of an era has come to pass.  The Seattle Supersonics are no more.

Franchise majority owner Clay Bennett and City Of Seattle officials reached an 11th-hour setllement yesterday afternoon which provides the city with as much as $75 million in cash payments - $45 million due now, and another $30 million due in 2013 should the city/state approve plans by the end of 2009 to renovate Key Arena and the NBA cannot secure Seattle another NBA franchise.

On paper, this is a good deal for the city.  It pays off the remainder of the previous loan from ten years ago to renovate Key Arena.  It allows Bennett to move the team to Oklahoma City, which is where he wanted it to begin with.  It allows the state legislature and Seattle City Council a only year and a half - a blink in political terms - to secure $300 million in approved renovation funding for Key Arena in their efforts to receive that $30 million additonal payment.

However, with a little digging, it's not difficult to discover that millions of people - taxpayers who have approved and paid for arena renovations in Seattle - have been hornswaggled, fleeced, had the wool pulled over their eyes.

David Stern, NBA commissioner, said a year and a half ago that should Seattle lose its NBA franchise, the NBA would not look to Seattle as a possible location for an expansion (not likely) team or a possible relocation destination for a long time to come, and that Key Arena, regardless of renovations, was not an NBA-class facility..  Yesterday, Stern stated that Key Arean, with those $300 million in renovations, is an NBA-class facility, and that if the funding is approved, then the NBA will work on getting Seattle another team right away.  Well, which is it, Mister Commish?  The good people of Seattle are threatened by the Sonics' owner, then by the NBA commissioner?  And now, some two years later, it has been revealed that, a) Bennett and the rest of the owners had no intent whatsoever to keep the team in Seattle, b) No 'good-faith' effort was made by the ownership group to coordinate and negotiate with government and civic leaders for either the renovation fo Key Arena or the construction of a new facility, and c) there are emails and documents that show these truths.

In terms of a timeline, it took Bennett and Stern two years to steal an NBA team from a city with a rich 41-year history of professional basketball, and how.  But, the question of why is what nags at us all.

Why was Bennett allowed to make such a thing happen?  Why didn't the other NBA owners deny Bennett?  Why didn't Stern ever say "No"?  Why didn't the state or city or county leaders ever step up and propose something that would work for all parties involved?  How did Greg Nickels allow this to happen?  Where was Christine Gregoire?  The saving of the Sonics in Seattle was left to the fans, a small group of die-hard loyalists who identify with the city partly because of the Sonics' and their tenure in Seattle that spanned five decades.  Why was this the case?

Simple: greed.

Greed, avarice, wanting.  Call it what you want, all the officials and owners and representatives and yadda yadda yadda are greedy and wanting for money.  If it wasn't only about money to the city - the $75 million buyout is a fair sum, considering the lease contract that was in place prior to the settlement agreement - then why didn't anyone ever propose public ownership of the Sonics, a la the Green Bay Packers?  The FANS own the Packers, and there is a limit as to how many shares any one fan can own.  They are a solvent, profit-making professional sports team, and there is no reason at all that a similar structure would not work in Seattle with the Supersonics.  If it wasn't only about money to the owners - they DO own the franchise, after all - then why did they pay such an exorbitant sum for a franchise in such disarray if their intentions all along weren't to move the team to a new location?  If it wasn't only about money to former owner Howard Shultz - he sold the team to the highest bidder - then why is he now suing Bennett and the rest of the owners for breach of contract because of their failure to negotiate with government leaders in good faith?

There are many unanswered questions floating around right now, and a great deal of anger is rising from the fans of the Sonics.

Unfortunately, the people in control of the entire situation, from start to finish, showed only one thing above all else: apathy.

So, Seattleites, you and yours are worth $75 million.  How does it feel to be deceived, stomped on, and then spit upon by the NBA and city leaders?  How does it feel to be so sadly undervalued and so easily dismissed?

None of this should surprise any of us, anyway.  The NBA is going the way of the WWF.  Entertainment for entertainment's sake.  Big money right now, and thanks for the tax breaks.  Build me a new arena or we're moving to [fill in the blank].  Oh, sure - the refs are honest.

Since all of the people involved who brought this horrible day upon us all aren't ashamed of themselves and their actions, it is up to us to be ashamed for them.  It's no consolation, of course, but at least it's righteous, and that is a lesson to be learned by everyone who had a hand in the Supersonics leaving Seattle.