In 2007 this division was called the AFC "Least", and I think that almost since the inception of the AFL this division has been consistently one of the weaker ones. From early AFL domination by either the Bills or the Oilers, to AFL-NFL joint era domination by Namath and the Jets, with the rest of the pack nowhere in sight at 7-7 or worse or a lot worse, to almost complete domination during the 70s by Shula's Dolphins which went into the early 80s, then after Dan Marino was exposed as a great thrower but another one of those "A-Rods" in the clutch, the East sorta tried to work itself out, winding up with a great Bills team which owned the AFC for four years, into the 90s. It seems the 90s were rudderless with all four (and yes the Colts were still in it then) teams vying for the top spot, but in the same decade all the teams had bad years as well. It was in this time that, without a TV and with a husband who could care less about football, I pretty much lost track of the NFL until the late 90s, when our son began to get interested in watching football games. Just in time to see New England become the dominant team...ironically, being named the Patriots, right after 9-11!

I have often thought wouldn't it be incredible if the 2007 standings REVERSED this year? Well, the standings will not reverse this year (although I fantasized about the Pats being last and the Fins being first), but they just might "almost" reverse...the Bills were second last year at 7-9 and they might still wind up 7-9, but that would be good for last place not second. The Pats were 16-0 last year but I can see them in third place by moving the 0 digit behind the 1 digit, then moving the dash behind the 0 and then the 6 (10-6, that is). For as impressed as I was with their win over a scrappy Seattle team, and even if the Cards who have clinched (Congrats Cards!) the NFC West do not play like they normally would which might let the Pats win, I can't see them going 11-5. Either the Raiders or Bills or Cards will beat Matt Cassel. As with the last post this would rightfully be the job of Fate:  I do not want to think the Pats (who I despise but do respect after all) would have to make the decision to let go of legendary Tom Brady! Or Cassel, for that matter (who could, upon Brett Favre's retirement, be picked up by the Jets. If the Jerseyites learned anything from letting Chad Pennington escape to the Fins, it was this:  one good turn deserves another!).

So that even if the Pats do wind up in the playoffs this year, "everybody" knows their time of dominating the AFC East is over, just a matter of telling Bill Bellichick!

Can a case be made for another team to pick up the mantle of domination? First of all, the Pats are NOT going to go into that good night easily. Several defenders are getting old and slow, but if they keep on taking players like LB Mayo in the draft, I can't see the Pats under Bellichick folding, even if they do let Tom Brady go.

As with Miami's dominating teams, it took many years for the Fins to sink to the level of doormat. Throughout the 90s they kind of took turns being either title winner or in the hunt until the last weeks. This was clearly because Dann-o could still throw it well, Shula was still coaching, and every year they drafted just enough good rookies to keep the lineup going. By studying Fins history it becomes clear that cracks in the cement began around 1998-2000: drafts got poorer, management and even ownership was changing; Huizinga had the audacity to take founder Joe Robbie's name off the stadium he built mostly with his own money and call it "Pro Player Stadium" (sounds like Huizinga's company, Blockbuster Video!), which thankfully he later changed to Dolphins Stadium. Also, the round robbin of head coaches...replacing the great Don Shula must have been difficult. It was the little things, like Brian Griese at QB, like alienating Ricky Williams, like terrible drafting from about 2001 to 2007 (more than half the players from this period of time on the 2008 team were drafted by others, including Williams by the Saints). In fact, a handful of starters only! They are (by round and year):

Ted Ginn, Jr. (1st, 2007), Samson Satele (2nd, 2007), Vernon Carey (1st, 2004), Ronnie Brown (2nd, 2005), Matt Roth (2, 2005), Channing Crowder (3, 2005), Yeremiah Bell (6, 2003) and Brandon Fields (7, 2007). Their first pick in 2006, Jason Allen, is okay but still sits behind Renaldo Hill, taken from the Raiders as a FA. In contrast, their 2008 draft sees two starters: Jake Long (1) and Kendall Langford (3), and undrafted rookies include Davone Bess (who has replaced the injured Greg Camarillo) and Dan Carpenter. Philip Merling (round 2) often steps in for Vonnie Holliday or goes in on the 4-3 defense. The rest of the squad are waivers and free agents, a number from good teams like Dallas (Ferguson, Fasano, and Ayodele).

And then there is the gift from the rival Jets: Chad Pennington, without which Miami simply would not be in contention, all else being equal. In fact I will state categorically here: Chad Pennington is the "reincarnation" of Bob Griese. Griese was never the pretty boy bomb thrower a-la Namath or Stabler or Staubach or Marino; he was a dink and dunk QB with an occasional bomb to Warfield just to let opponents know he could do it. Same with Chad to Ginn or Bess. Griese was the epitome of "field general" because he called many of his own plays and had a calming effect on the other offense players, especially the next generation of Dolphin champs (Delvin Williams, Andra Frankin, Nat Moore, Jimmy Cefalo). Pennington plays a similar role with the youngster linemen, Ginn and Bess, and new FB Lou Polite, who has done well picking up 4th and 1 type plays.

Still, it is too early to tell if Miami will regain the dominant position it used to have. As I said, the Pats will not just die. No telling with the Bills: clearly with having gone 5-1 after 6 games this team does have talent and reasonably decent coaching, but I think Trent Edwards's head injury did a number on this team. The Bills defense is big and is fine, in my opinion.

That leaves the Jets. I have said it all year: as foes Favre, so go the Jets, including on defense. Everyone and his uncle who watches the NFL has wondered if the Jets really are for real having gone 0-2 since beating the Pats and Titans. These two games were monumental. Clearly the Jets peaked around these two games and after, something has taken the wind out of their sails. They were uninspired against the Broncos and downright bad against the Niners. The Broncs of course are trying to sew up a playoff birth, and you know the Broncos...they lose when they should win and win when they should lose. It is the Niner loss that is most telling. Now we have Laveranus (spelling?) Coles griping that Favre doesn't use him enough. We have Thomas Jones not looking quite like the world beater he was in the big games, and we have Favre himself looking as if he was still playing the Packer in December, you know, not quite ready for the playoffs. And Gang Green is Gang Greenhorn!

It won't get easier for the Jets, with games in Seattle (Jets are 0-3 on west coast), vs. Bills (if Edwards plays in this game this week, the Bills will play considerably better than they did against Dolphins in Toronto), and finally, the whole enchilada vs. Fins in New York. This game WILL decide the AFC East, and, to hear "everybody" say, only one AFC East team will make the playoffs because the Colts and Ravens are on a roll. In fact this game is so important, CBS is considering putting it on in their evening slot on December 28 nationally, which would make it the first time all year the Fins will be on national TV!

While the Pats have the Raiders, the division-clinching Cards, and finally the Bills (as I said the Pats will likely lose one of these games...I just don't know which one) in successive weeks, the Fins have the Niners, then the Chiefs and the Jets. Folks are saying "Beware of the Niners." The same Niners who have beaten the Bills then the Jets in the last two weeks. I think the Miami players and coaches certainly do not consider the Niners an easy gimme win at all (as expressed on miamidolphins.com and in the Miami Herald)...further, except for that aberation (the Pats blowout loss), Miami's D has been very stingy on points as well as yards. In fact, except for that Pats game, the Dolphins have been the epitome of consistent:  good offense (without all the scoring, as some TDs have been called back via penalty, vs. the Rams, Bills, and Raiders), and very good defense, top 10 in league (despite giving up all those points vs. Pats), and very very good at not turning the ball over (plus 12 differential). So that while the Niners faced a Bills team wondering what the fruit and a Jets team that still hasn't recovered from their peak weeks over Pats and Titans, they will not be facing a similar type of team this Sunday in Miami. They are facing a team which is working toward the playoffs at the right time on Dolphin Alumni Weekend. And Shaun Hill will be facing a secondary that has almost worked wonders since they let Matt Cassel run wild over them. Then the Fins go to KC Arrowhead; the Chiefs offense plays well, but Thigpen may not have his way, and the Chiefs defense should pose few problems for Pennington and Co. (Note: as the Fins get more confident and consistent, they have seldom used the Wildcat. This is a good sign they are thinking playoffs.) And, if they beat the Jets in New York in the cold, they will have proven they could play in any weather, a pre-condition for playoff caliber status.

One final note: whereas two weeks ago everyone was picking the Jets to win the division, more and more sports pundits are changing their minds. Wanna hazard a guess as to who they are picking now?

Of course it took my mother-in-law a minute to get the joke.

And speaking of jokes and bills, I probably had more Bills in my hand than Bills that showed up seriously to play football in Toronto against the Sparanos, er, the Dolphins Sunday. As I expected, Losman played poorly, Marshawn (Fox censored) and Lee Evans were barely noticeable, but the Bills D played reasonably well considering they were on the field most of the game...kinda like the 2007 Fins were!

With Trent Edwards out I expected a Miami win, but I really thought the Buffalos would keep it close (or that Miami would rout the Bills...but for some ridiculous reason this doesn't seem as if it is possible, after all, the Bills aren't the Patriots, and, therefore, there is no hatred here. I wonder if the Fins hate the Jets? We'll find out in a few weeks! Will Chad get some level or revenge?)

I've been trying, as an AFC East watcher, to figure out what has happened to the Bills this year. I figured earlier in the season that (what with the Fins in a tailspin going 2-4 after big wins vs. Pats and chargers) that if Miami couldn't win the division I would have no problem with the Bills or even the Jets doing it (ABP: anyone but Patriots!)

Since CBS or anyone doesn't have the wisdom to try to put the Fins on national TV this year (quite frankly I am sick of them putting on the Steelers, who it seems are on every week!) owing to their 1-15 last season, even though thanks to the Wildcat the Fins are one of the more innovative teams this year, and owing to their "resurgence" as the NFL Network keeps saying, I have to rely on video highlights. Now the pundits keep saying Edwards can't figure out a 3-4 Defense (now whose fault is that? Edwards or his coaches?), but it was Losman who lost it. It would be convenient to blame Edwards' injury and Losman's lack of starts, but even though Losman did not play well, who called that stupid pass play at the Maimi 3? The one Allen intercepted? You know, Bills, you do have Marshawn (FOX censored) and you do have other runners in case he is covered. so why in the blue blazes did you have Losman throwing it, on the Miami 3?

Fate, maybe? I wonder. Now the Bills contracted for 10 million dollars per game to have games held in Toronto. I would like to know who decided what team would play the Bills there this weekend, and when it was decided. But don't you think it is a bit precipitous to have chosen the only AFC East team that does NOT play well in cold climates in December? The Fins haven't won in Buffalo in December in may years, and have a 2-7 recent record for games played in December in cold weather. You should have heard the crew on NFL Network's AFC Playbook Saturday night joking about how the Fins get an automatic ten points for NOT having to play the Bills in the cold! Ten points is just enough to cover that Pennington-to-Fasano TD pass and Carpenter's 50 yard field goal!

Gee, when the Fins play the Jets in New York in early January, will it be unseasonably warm? What will Fate come up with, since this WILL be the game that decides the AFC East?!?

Because the Bills are out of it. The Jets have the Bills (a win likely), the Seahawks (will the curse of the west coast continue?), then the Fins at home. The Pats have it easier with the Raiders (if they can beat the Hawks in the last minutes in Seattle, they can beat the Raiders who looked horrible thursday night vs. Chargers in Oakland), then the Cards in NE (since the Cards have clinched they won't be playing their hardest so the Pats should win), and then the Bills. The Fins have the Niners at home on Dolphin alumni weekend (which is the same event that Fate "caused" the Fins last year to get it up enough to actually beat the Ravens in OT...meaning the Niners, who are playing THE spoiler role of the year, will be prevented by Fate from winning, and besides, Frank Gore is hurt and may not play), then the Chiefs in KC (a likely win even if it is cold, because the Chiefs Defense is bad enough to cover for Tyler "world beater--NOT" Thigpen and TE Gonzales' good play, then the Jets in New York.

I will not predict a winner of the Jets-Fins finale. But consider this:

Earlier in the season matchups, the Jets beat the Fins, the Pats beat the Jets and the Fins beat the Pats.

Recently in late season, the Jets beat the Pats and the Pats beat the Fins.

Does this mean Fate dictates the Fins beat the Jets?

"Everybody knows" that the Patriots will beat the Dolphins this week, week 12, in Dolphins Stadium...and there are all sorts of reasons (some of which I can refute and some I can't, because "everybody" has a darned good reason to pick the Pats, and, if I wasn't a "stupid female" I'd pick the Pats as well...)

1. Matt Cassel just threw for 400 yards against a darned good Jets defense as he took the Pats, down 24-6, to a tie as the clock ran out with an incredible (yes I saw it) pass to Moss as Ty Law, who was brought in precisely to defend Moss, seemed to just stand there and let him catch it. Further, Cassel is NOT the doofus QB that he was in that Fins rout, 38-13, in New England. Therefore, since Cassel is so much better now (and I admit he is), the Pats will win.

2. Revenge. Skipping over 2007 because the Fins couldn't beat a wet noodle in 2007 (does that make the 2007 Ravens lower than a wet noodle?), going back to 2003, when the Pats won both matches, both teams have won one match each, not always at home either. In fact you have to go way back to find a year the Fins won both, and it is too far back to matter in this case. Thus, the Pats should get their revenge as well. To heck with Joey Porter's diatribe about the Pats running up the score on his team last year...the Pats ran up the score on everyone else, too, and well...Joey Porter is just being Joey Porter. Not only do the Pats NOT take him seriously, his own teammates don't either!

3. The Fins special teams bleep. FOX Sports blogs won't let me say the word I want, so what the heck, bleep. I can't remember back to when they did not have good special teams (the late 60s, maybe??). Further, this issue of opponent TDs on punt and kickoff return coverage does not seem to bother Sparano much. Why? It would have driven Shula mad! And, Tony, you DO WANT TO BE thought of as the "next Shula", don't you? Now I do like Tony Sparano. But sometimes I do think he's a bit too laid back. Miami's special team woes should be making him as determined to correct them as it would Shula.

4. "Everybody knows" the Pats, who are in the "twilight" years of a truly great team (the term "dynasty" is arguable), "need" to win this game because if they don't they may not make the playoffs, and the Pats were picked to make the playoffs, so they must...and anyway, the Fins are an up-and-comer so they don't need it as much, and the Pats are old and the Fins are young, yadda yadda yadda.

5. The Pats will beat the Dolphins because the Wildcat will not be the surprise it was when the Fins won. Further, Bellichick will have the Pats stop the Wildcat, which the Fins can't win without.

6. Sure the Pats have lots of injuries, but they have the wisdom and depth as well as the will to playoffs to take care of that problem, and, oh yeah, the Fins have had few injuries because, well, just because. Luck, I guess.

7. Bellichick needs to have his team get revenge on Bill Parcells, for some reason. In the "Bill vs. Bill" matchup, Bellichick trumps Parcells. And oh yeah, Bellichick is a better coach than Sparano.

8. "Everybody knows" the Fins secondary isn't up to stopping Cassel should Cassel have another game like he did against the Jets. I mean, if the Jets couldn't stop him....

9. The Pats were looking ahead to the Chargers, and, further, it was at home and they had no idea what the Dolphins had in store for them in that 38-13 blowout, so the Pats can be excused for blowing that game, but now they know what the Fins are capable of so they won't make that mistake again.

10. The Pats are just a better team, more experienced, especially at making runs for the playoffs, more talented, better coached, and have more incentive on top of wanting revenge, and as with the old George allen Redskins, the "time is now"...and Miami is just gonna have to wait their turn.


Well, I might as well stop at ten reasons why those who are picking the Pats are doing so, at least as far as FOX Sports blogs goes. I could put more but then I'd be repeating myself.

As I said I can refute some and can't' refute others. I will say this. Reason ten is the only reason that makes sense, and, all other things being equal, this reason alone, ESPECIALLY the one about having the experience to make runs for the playoffs (which Miami hasn't been in since the beginning of the decade), would seem to indicate the Pats will most certainly win. And, yes, Bellichick IS a better coach than Sparano, whom the jury is still out on because he's a rookie HC and he has yet to fix Miami's special teams woes as he has been fixing the offense and defense.

But I'll try to refute most of them, anyway.


1. Cassel IS a MUCH BETTER QB now than he was in the early season, more poised and more prepared, and I doubt (Porter's rants aside) that the Fins D will have similar success against him this time. The Pats OL has also improved so Cassel doesn't seem to be getting sacked quite as much. But he is still very sackable. And, those of you who are picking the Pats (which is nearly everyone on this blog, even Bolt Backer 21!), explain to me why, if Cassel is so good, he had to pull a Tom Brady in the second half of that Jets game to pull to a tie when, if he really was Brady, that would not have been necessary and the Pats would have had the game sewed up by the third quarter at least? I mean, sorry, but the Pats made the Jets look like world beaters, and now "everyone" has the Jets winning the AFC East!

I will say this: if the Jets beat the Titans this Sunday, they DESERVE to win the AFC East!

So that, though Cassel is a better QB than he was in that 38-13 clobbering, the Fins D knows one thing: he is STILL no Tom Brady, and Matt Cassel still will not intimidate them. Advantage Fins.

2. Revenge is a funny thing when you have the sometimes erudite Porter saying he wants revenge for that time last year when the Pats were up 21-7 late in the 4th quarter and, instead of sitting on the ball on the last drive of the game, the Pats used running palys instead as if (in Porter's mind) the Pats sought to run up the score even more. So what I am saying is the Pats aren't the only side wanting revenge here. Advantage even, slightly favoring the Pats, but considering Porter DOES have a lot of influence on the play of his defensive cohorts.

3. I will give no argument here as I am not happy with the Fins giving up all those TDs on punt/kickoff return coverage, almost one per game this year. Big advantage to the Pats.

4. I'd say this one is even, because "twilight years" or not, I can't think of a better reason for winning than being 1-15 last year and having won 4 straight. Advantage Fins.

5. This one doesn't wash, because, as I said in a previous post, Bellichick "wrote the book" on the Wildcat/single wing formation for the NFL, so that, if he couldn't defend against it (or, at least, make some adjustments during that 38-13 game, but he couldn't though he knew what he was up against), he had no excuse. And what makes "everybody" think he will be able to stop it Sunday? And, for that matter, do the Dolphins even NEED the Wildcat? Can it be assumed that they MUST use the Wildcat? Or that they will even USE the Wildcat? Oh, and BTW: the Fins lost to the Texans as well as the Ravens despite using the Wildcat, but they also beat the Broncos without it! (Note: So the Bronco defense is a wash? Then what so you call the Pats defense in that first half against the Jets, and the overtime?) Advantage none or even.

6. Here is the reason the Fins have had so few injuries this year: Tony Sparano's tight fisted training program combined with the fact that (as under Shula) the players don't mind playing injured. Turning it around to winning does that. Advantage Fins.

7. I won't even comment on this BS. Advantage none or even.

8. You can't make this claim because one has no idea IF Cassel will have that kind of game against the Fins he had against the Jets. And as long as we're at it, can one say that the Pats will be able to stop Ronnie Brown if Ronnie Brown has another game like he did against the Pats in week 3? So, this kind of argument is false. Advantage none or even.

9. As far as I'm concerned the Pats have NO EXCUSES for losing IN NEW ENGLAND, 38-13, to a team that went 1-15 the year before and had already lost their first two games, one by a blowout. This point of "the Pats didn't know what was coming" is especially ironic considering some of those who are making this claim also have made the claim that Bellichick is a CHEATER! So, which is it? Advantage Fins.

10. On paper, the Pats are a better team, but, as they say, games aren't played on paper but on the field. The game will be a here and now event and one can pretty much throw history out the window (which is funny for me to admit this because my picks usually have some history to back them up), because as they say this game is vitally important for both teams. In "must win" situations, with talent levels fairly even, good coaching on both teams, and both teams expected to rise to the occassion, is there really an advantage here? (I mean, why would the Fins NOT rise to the occassion? They were 0-2, beat the Pats and then the Chargers, another playoff expectant team...then lost ot the Texans and Ravens, and have beaten the Bills, Broncos, Seahawks and Raiders in sucession....all of which they could have lost! Thus they have been "rsing to the occassion" for at least four straight weeks! Why would they stop now?) As I said in the title, the Jets game was also a must win game, and the Pats lost (true, they had the bad luck of not winning the coin toss, but then again they could have stopped Dustin Keller on 3rd and 15, but they didn't.) Oh, and, BTW, this is also a must win game for the Dolphins, and it's in Miami. Advantage Fins.

So, that gives the Dolphins a 5-2 advantage with 3 even. And it is those "evens" that could determine who wins, so we might have a close one here.


If I missed anything or if readers can come up with some darned good reason why the Pats will win after all, let me know.

Does anyone actually believe Donavan McNabb, a several year NFL vet, didn't realize that at the end of an overtime period if the score was tied, that's how the game ended? The Bungles, who flubbed a possible game winning FG, surely knew, so what was McNabb's and Reied's excuse?

 

Did anyone actually expect (who saw the game, that is, cos I only saw highlights) that the Steelers, who had huge offensive yardage, would win by the improbable 11-10 and that officials regarding that forward lateral are now saying the TD should have stood?

 

The Packers beating the Bears 37-3??? We are not in the year 1938 are we (well, some say we are in terms of the economy...I'd say 1930 might be more like it)

 

Amd who doesn't think the Cowboys beat the Redskins ONLY because Romo was back and Portis was out?  The two of you, let me know.

 

Did anyone really think the Jags really would beat the Titans? Does anyone really think the Jets will next weekend? As a fan of the 1972 Dolphins, I'd like to think someone will!

 

The Cards-Hawks, Niners-Rams, Panthers-Lions, and Colts-Texans games went about as expected. Some games had to!

 

Well, the Broncos, who would be the Bengals if they were a losing team, did it again! Everyone and his grandmother expected the horses to go down to the Ryan-Flyin' Falcons, plus Turner-Burner! BUT NOOOOOOO!  Folks, the Broncos are one of the biggest reasons I don't do the "stupid female" picks anymore...they lose when they should win and win when they should lose, and, what with the Chargers loss, it looks like the Broncos are likley to pull off winning the AFC West. That;s too bad because they don't play like a playoff team consistently enough.

 

So, that, with Carolina over the Detroit crew and the Bucs over the Vikes, it looks as if the Falcons will now have their work cut out for them. That the Bucs stopped Adrian Peterson, though, is impressive. As for the Saints and Chiefs, all that biz about Thigpen (what a name for a QB!) must have had a lot of folks thinking the KC'ers would win it, despite their bad defense.

 

Speaking of bad defense, I think the Raiders showed their D isn't so bad after all, getting Mr. Sore Foot down for a safety (serves them right for passing that bull biscuit story along! Sore foot, huh...Chad sure didn't look like he had one out there the way he played, especially that last drive). Now, if the Raiders had a decent offense they probably would have won the game. The Fins had close to 400 yards of offense and only 17 points? Guys, YOU'RE GONNA HAVE TO DO BETTER THAN THAT NEXT SUNDAY AGAINST THE PATS!!! And for pity sake, WORK ON THOSE DARNED PUNT-KICKOFF RETURN TEAMS! There is NO WAY Oakland should have gotten a TD! But that was to be expected (?) with the Raiders having one of the better special teams and Miami one of the worst.

Oh well, at least they won, are now 6-4, a game behind the Jets and a game in front of the Bills. Did anyone actually think at this point in the 2008 season the Fins would be anywhere but last, and by that I mean DEAD LAST? And if I read ever again by Marvez or any of the other FOX Sports pundits that the Phins have the worst receiver corps in the league, or that Ted Ginn Jr. can't take a hit...

As for that Ravens-Giants game, I have no sympathy for the plight of the Ravens. Now I'd liek to see how well the Titans would do against the Giants...no, Titans, you will not go undefeaed! Get with the Pats about that for a clue.

And my dad up in heaven is smiling....

Which brings me to the Browns-Bills. Good for the Browns, who I have no opinion over, ever, and barely even acknowledge their existence theyre so mediocre, as usual. Except that it is the Browns who, after all, beat the Giants, and were in some quarters favored to beat the Bills. Weather was no factor as Buffalo and Cleveland are winter weather soul mates with the Lake Effect. It is clear now that Brady Quinn will be THE Browns QB for years to come. It is also clear that the Bills have only a prayer left to make the playoffs...their last four games are Dolphins, Jets, Broncos,and Patriots. Except for the Fins game and the cold weather factor (against the Fins in Buffalo), I expect the Bills to lose the rest and wind up 8-8, assuming they beat the Chiefs and Niners the next two weeks.

 

Ad for my next trick, I'll show that it is very possible that the Dolphins can win the AFC East...but next time!

 

 

Just read this on Fox Sports "news"....Fins QB Chad Pennington has a "sore foot" but was probable for Sunday vs. Raiders. Funny this is coming out just now, when everyone and his uncle has plopped down God-knows-how-many bucks on a sure Dolphin blow out, minus 8 or 9 or whatever it is now, seeing as how the Raiders can't seem to average more than 12 points a game (sounds familiar with a certain team last year!)!

Sorry, but I, a "reformed NFL bettor," thinks this looks suspicious. I wonder if Parcells has ever been involved with this sort of possible conspiracy...and anyway, it is even funnier that if this is a conspiracy, it is being done to Mr. NFL Conspiracy, Al Davis! Or, Tony "Soprano" Sparano? ;-)

For instance, back in 1970 something I put down, on the Saturday before the game, a fairly large (for me) amount of dollars, on the Chiefs vs. the Raiders on the spread plus about 10 points or so (the Chiefs were mediocre to bad that year, under Hank Stramm) because it was announced Kenny Stabler had a sore arm or something but was "Probable"...naturally, Stabler played and it was "what sore arm?" and covered the spread to boot.

But Al Davis used to pull this nonsense all the time so that for me it was getting so I wouldn't even touch a Raiders game spread-wise!

Is it me, or do others think the Sparanos (likely NOT trying to influence betting at all) think that at least the Fins are playing a mind game on the Raiders, a la the old Al Davis?