Welcome to the salary cap era of the NFL.  This is when things happen that you would've never thought possible because no team is really that bad in the NFL, and teams aren't allowed to stockpile enough talent to be that good either.  This explains the worst to first and subsequently the first to worst trends that run so rampant in the NFL today.  It is this reason and this reason only that the Giants will beat the Cowboys in the NFL game of the week this week.

When things look like they can't happen, they do.  Take the 49ers/Rams game last week. No team had looked worse through the month of November (Oakland teams excluded) than the Rams.  They had lost four straight, and headed into a matchup with a young, upstart San Francisco bunch that had just achieved their "breakthrough" win by beating up on the conference champion Seahawks.  What happened?  Not only did the Rams win, but they mustered up the moxxy that is reserved for champions (allegedly) and pulled of a last second mirace TD to win.

Enter the Cowboys.  All but officially annointed the NFC representative for the Super Bowl based on their impressive performances in the last few weeks.  Tony Romo is brushing up on his Hall of Fame speech, while his agent is working on his prenuptuial agreement (I'm sorry, that's Jessica's agent).  Bill Parcells, the legend, the Tuna, is at the helm.  Little T. seems to be learning to share, and all couldn't be better in Big D. 

Enter the Giants.  All but officially left for dead.  Ernie Acorsi is reportedly working out Brady Quinn and Troy Smith during the week.  Shockey hates Coughlin.  Strahan hates Burress.  Burress hates losing (unless he has to break a sweat to prevent it).  Tiki hates football.  Strahan now loves Burress.  Strahan is a man.  Everybody hates Eli.  So on and so on.  The Giants can't win.  The Cowboys can't lose.

In today's NFL, this is exactly what upsets are made of.  Giants 24   Cowboys 20

I'm gonna make this short and sweet.  There are a two major keys to solving who should be #2.  First, any one loss team that lost to another one loss team cannot go ahead of that team.  Second, Michigan got its shot yesterday, and looked good, but that was their shot.  No rematch unless it comes down to Mighigan and Notre Dame as the only two loss teams.  So with these simple rules in mind, this is how it SHOULD break down:

Ranking of the contenders to play Ohio State in the order they should appear assuming that they win out.

1- USC - They will have defeated California, Notre Dame, and UCLA coming down the stretch

2-Florida - Florida would have defeated Arkansas in SEC championship game and would deserve to go as the SEC champion

3- Arkansas - Arkansas would have won @Auburn and defeated LSU and Florida on back to back weeks.  They just can't go ahead of USC because of their head-to-head loss to them.

4- Michigan - Michigan is placed here because they simply have to be ahead of Notre Dame thanks to the wood-shed special they gave them in the regular season.  Michigan may be the second best team in the country, but a rematch opens up too many problems.  Who deserves the title is Michigan wins since they are 1-1 head to head?  If Ohio State wins, We already saw OSU beat them once; are we slow learners?

SInce Michigan has no remaining games, everyone else has no shot to make it.  Sorry Notre Dame and all Big East teams.  If Notre Dame pulls their popularity play and actually beats USC and becomes #2, I will officially withdrawl my support of the BCS on the spot!  I'm not a ND hater, but it's completely ridiculous that they are even in this conversation.  Look at ND's schedule vs. some of these Big East schedules and tell me why we're not talking about West Virginia in this converstation.  If the Big East is too weak, then why is no conference better?  Michigan State, Georgia Tech, Air Force, Navy, Army, North Carolina, Purdue, Stanford, UCLA, Michigan (blowout loss), Penn State, and USC (we'll see what happens) make up a national championship caliber schedule?  Come on!

Yesterday the New York Knicks officially said goodbye to the disaster that was the 2005-2006 NBA season.  After financially settling with Larry Brown and cutting Jalen Rose, the New York Knicks are officially ready to turn to page toward Wednesday's opener against Memphis and the rest of the NBA season.

In order to fix any problem, one must first diagnose the problem.  The laundry list of Knicks problems is both long and distinguished.  However, I have narrowed the Knick problem down to three major statistics.  Today's fan love stats, well here are some that may just blow your mind, especially considering that little or nothing was done to correct these problems. 

Problem stat #! -  The Knicks are notorious for having too many "shoot now and ask questions later" guards.  There is no question that Jamal Crawford, Steve Francis, and of course, Starbury himselt fit this description to a "T".  To further this point, the Knicks only had one player rank in the top 50 in the NBA in assist-to-turnover ration.  This statistic is the single most accurate in determining a players ability (especially a point guard) to run the offense efficiently and get his teammates involved.  Stephon Marbury ranked 27 (which is still extremely low for a starting point guard getting his minutes) in the league, which was NY's only top 50 representative.    Conclusion - Someone MUST step to the plate and get this surprisingly talented roster involved without sending half of the passes to Spike Lee and friends in the stands.

Problem stat #2 -   Jamal Crawfork averaged .5 steals per turnover last season.  That ranks 45th in the NBA in that stat.  Sound bad?  It is, especially when you consider that he actually led the Knicks in this stat.  This tell us many things about the offense.  First is that big men are turning the ball over way too much.  A solid big man should have good numbers in this category, not because of his high number of steals, but his low number of turnovers.  For example, some of the names ahead of Crawford are:  Shawn Marion, Rasheed Wallace, Shane Battier, Rashard Lewis, Antawn Jamison, Kevin Garnett, Chris Webber, Michael Redd, Stephen Jackson, and Andrei Kirilenko to name a few.  Not necessary people known for steals (some are), but rank high in this category due to a lack of turnovers.  Conclusion - the Knicks have to maximize on stealing the basketball to capitalize on the open-court talent that they have while limiting the turnovers that obviously plague them severely.  Basketball is more like football than one might think here.  The team that wins the turnover battle usually wins the game.

Problem stat #3 - Somethings in basketball take little effort and can be mastered by people who have the work ethic to make it happen.  To me, blocked shots are one such stat.  Eddy Curry led the Knicks in blocks last year.  I know what you're thinking!  "Curry doesn't play any defense."  You're right!  Fourty-five players in the NBA blocked more shots per game than did Curry, unfortunately none of those 45 play their home games in Madison Square Garden.  This screams to a lack of defensive hustle and effort.  Solution - The Knicks must get more serious about defending their own basket.  They did address this somewhat with the acquisition of Jared Jeffries, but he's out until December so someone else will have to step-up until then.

Outlook for the Knicks.  People that are enthusiastic about the Knicks this season rationalize that by saying that the Eastern Conference is so bad that New York can "talent" its way into playoff contention.  That's a dangerous line of thinking because people who say that are underestimating how bad the Knicks can be at times.  Others believe that the Knicks would love nothing more than to rub a playoff run right into Larry Brown's $50 million face.  While this maybe true, Isiah Thomas doesn't exactly lead to insomnia to any opposing coach I've heard of.  The 2006-2007 Knicks will be better than last year simply because they can't be worse.  Will they be good enough to make the playoffs or at least contend?  I think they might.  Why you ask?  That's the question I can't answer, but if they turn the ball over less, steal and move the ball more, and get more aggressive on the defensive end, they will be the story of the upcoming NBA season. 

Are we now to the point in college football where the player legitimizes the Heisman more than the Heisman legitimizes the player? You don't understand the question? Well, Reggie Bush won last year's Heisman trophy, and Matt Leinart before him. So right now the American sports fan is pretty pleased with the Heisman. Leinert looks as good as a rookie QB can, in Arizona anyway, and no one questions the talent of Reggie Bush. Therefore the public sentiment is that the Heisman truly is a legimate award. My question is, why does NFL success, a.k.a. the player, dictate the legitimacy of the Heisman?

The list is long and distinguished of Heisman winners who did not live up to their previous standard of success in the NFL. Heisman-lovers who double as NFL fans tremble when they hear names like Danny Wuerfful, Gino Torretta, Rashan Salaam, Andre Ware, Eric Crouch, etc. They seem to feel as if they must have made the wrong decision or cast the wrong vote because of their lack of success in future endeavors. This is what we do with politicians isn't it? So why doesn't it work with football players?

The reason is that future data doesn't answer a previous question. For example, we all remember that 12 year old baseball player who all of the other parents swore was 16 during the all-star tournaments. This 5'10, 175 lbs. monster of a child was hitting home runs and no-hitting kids on a Ruthian pace. All of the sudden, five years later, that same kid is 5'11, 185 lbs. and warming the varsity bench while the same parents don't even recognize him. Circumstances change, level of competition changes, and most importantly, the context in which the athlete performs changes.

We all believe in system players. This explains why some poor loser drafted Mike Bell in your fantasy draft this year. "He's a Denver runner so he's automatically better than Frank Gore!" this guru proudly exclaimed.  This phenomenon is the standard in college football.  Texas Tech's QB is the prime example, and would explain many of the above listed "bust" winners (Nebraska QB in the option era, Spurrier QB, Miami QB in the glory years, etc.).  Unfortunately for us as college football fans, the Heisman voters are tired of having their selection criticized for being "illegitimate" or a "Heisman bust". So what do they do now? I truly believe that they, on occasion, take NFL projection into consideration. How else could Carson Palmer have beaten out Larry Johnson, who despite NFL success, was not as highly touted as he is now. Why else would Oklahoma's Adrian Peterson be considered. His stats weren't nearly as impressive as many other backs in the country before his injury.

In this election year, I'd like to ask the Heisman voters to take their vote seriously. The Heisman is an award for one year of excellence. It's not a lifetime achievement award. If you think Troy Smith is the best player in college football, then please vote for him. However, if you truly believe that the best player plays for a small school like, I don't know, Northern Illinois, then don't hold his schedule against him. If you think the best player is a defensive player or offensive lineman, then please, don't let their positions hold them back. The best is the best. This trophy doesn't have to go to the best player on a great team. It's supposed to go to the best player. Regardless of team, position, ranking, competition, etc. Please, vote for the best college football player period!

With so much going on in the last 72 hours, I feel like a guy with a big bag of Lay's potato chips in his lap.  I can't eat just one.  

Taylor vs. Wright fight - What a fight on Saturday night!  Extremely entertaining with the two contrasting styles of fighters.  I would've given the fight to Taylor if I had to pick a winner.  Calling it a draw was justified however.  If there is a rematch, look for Taylor to be more mindful of protecting himself against the jab.  That will lead to a clear-cut Taylor win. 

Stanley Cup Finals - We know that nobody is watching this so I'll spare you the "while you were sleeping" joke.  Edmonton has come out of nowhere to grab all the momentum in this series going into Game 7 tonight.  It should be a law that sports fans must watch any game 7 regardless of sport or interest.  The NHL always provides the best game 7's anyway.  Look for Carolina to turn the tide tonight on their home-ice and take the cup to . . .Raleigh?!?

U.S. Open - Is it really that surprising to everyone that an Open defined by the course would see someone in the clubhouse take home the championship because someone was defeated by the aforementioned course?  I was surprised at the winner, but not at how it took place.  This was still not as bad as Vandevelde!  Personally, I love to see the course get the best of these guys.  Every course gets the best of me.  Payback baby! 

World Cup - I want to say that I don't care so bad I could scream.  However, whenever nations are involved, I want the U.S. to do well.  Having said that, the dream is over.  There is no way that everything happens that needs to happen for the U.S. to advance.  Watch if you want to on Thursday, but I'm telling you its not worth it.  After all, it is just soccer.

I also have grown tired of soccer fans who say that because its the world's favorite game , we Americans are unenlightened because we don't "get it".   I don't get it.  I don't want it.  You can have Ronaldhino.  I'll take Tom Brady.

NBA Finals - Last but not least, the main event.  These finals have been incredible!  I would tell you that the Heat will win in six, but if you haven't heard that pick from me yet then you just weren't listening.  If you didn't know how big the NBA playoffs were, let me clue you in to what we've learned.

The NBA season ending with a 6 man race for MVP.  With that confusion comes the natural debate of who the best player in the league is.  There were people in the corners of Kobe, LeBron, D-Wade, Duncan, Nowitzki, Nash, maybe Garnett.  Now we are down to two.  I don't know anyone that has watched these playoffs that does not believe the two best players in the NBA are LeBron and D-Wade. 

Wade is performing on a level only seen in my life by the all-time greats.  How a man can shoot as poorly as he did for three quarters, then "flip the switch" like he had been red hot the whole game, and carry his team to a huge game 5 win is what legends are made of.  Great players don't have to score 50 every game.  They have to get the buckets when their team is in the most deperate need of them.  This was obviously D-Wade's major at Marquette. 

Dallas fans, please save the drama of the timeout, Stackhouse suspension, and phantom foul on Wade.  The timeout was obviously called by Josh Howard on the floor.  Period.  End of discussion.  Stackhouse should not have been suspended for the game.  The NBA must find a way to punish the officials who make a mistake instead of the players who benefit from the mistake.  The NBA presently does everything except change the final score in this regard.  Terrible.  Finally, Wade wasn't fouled.  However, Wade gets that call.  So does Dirk.  Tell your guy to go to the basket with the tenacity and passion that Wade does, and he'll be in that position to.  However, something tells me Dirk would've choked and missed the free throws.  I don't know why I feel that way?  

For the record, again, Heat finish the deal in Dallas in game six.  Can you still dig it?